Communities of practice for open education in post-secondary contexts can provide a productive space for dialogue and exploration of emerging open teaching and learning models. However, in the presenters’ communities there is a tendency to attract like-minded and functionally similar participants such as instructional designers, librarians, and administrators. The primary stakeholders of post-secondary open education, teachers and learners, are significantly missing. Who else might we be missing?
This workshop focuses on Jess Mitchell’s (2018) call for more active inclusion in open communities exemplified by her concept that “diversity is a number, inclusion is a process, and equity is an outcome” (slide 33). The presenters will provide an active exploration in partnership with participants. The presenters will also frame their communities using Neo and Chua’s (2017) discussion of inclusion and exclusion in a community garden context, and Allman’s (2013) view of inclusion and exclusion from a sociological perspective.
We invite participants to explore with us how our communities of practice might become more effective with a wider spectrum of voices. When there are people missing from our conversations, what is being left unsaid, or unlearned as a consequence? In this 60-minute workshop participants will reflect on one of their communities of practice, consider who might be missing, and put together a short term goal and action plan as a shift toward inclusion as a process.
Anticipated participants = 28 (seven groups of four)
Format: Participants will work individually and participate in groups to reflect on their own communities. They will use a concept map to represent participation and inclusion/exclusion in a community of practice. Participants will modify their map to reflect a planned process of inclusion.
At the end of this active session participants will have reflected individually and as part of a group on their communities of practice considering who they include, who they might be leaving out, and how they might increase diversity.
60 minutes total, structured as follows:
10 minutes: Presenters introduce their existing Communities of Practice and describe their concerns about their processes of inclusion
5 min: Individual participant reflection: Who is missing? Why is access limited? What are the things we are missing? Using concept maps for conversations.
10 minutes: Group discussion: Who is missing? Why is access limited? What are the things we are missing?
10 minutes: One member from each group shares their answers with the full room of participants
10 minutes: Individual call to action: How can my community be more inclusive? One concrete goal in the short term.
15 minutes: Sharing completed concept maps as desired
Allman, D. (2013). The sociology of social inclusion. Sage Open, 3(1), 1-16. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244012471957
Mitchell, J. (2018). Tolerance for failure: Open education and the ethical edges [Slideshare presentation]. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/jesshmitchell/tolerance-for-failure-open-education-and-the-ethical-edges?qid=abb35f88-2457-4390-91f5-0ee66fe5df96&v=&b=&from_search=2
Neo, H., & Chua, C. Y. (2017). Beyond inclusion and exclusion: Community
gardens as spaces of responsibility. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 107(3), 666–681.
nbaker joined the session Who are we missing? Closed-open communities. [O-039] 4 months, 1 week ago
anjalorenz joined the session Who are we missing? Closed-open communities. [O-039] 4 months, 1 week ago
paola corti joined the session Who are we missing? Closed-open communities. [O-039] 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Martin Hawksey joined the session Who are we missing? Closed-open communities. [O-039] 5 months ago