Koseoglu, S. (2019). Open and networked scholarship: Affordances and barriers. In C. Rowell (Ed.), Social Media in Higher Education: Case Studies, Reflections and Analysis (pp. 61-70). Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers, 2019
If we are to learn on the web and with the web, how can we respond to the barriers for meaningful... more If we are to learn on the web and with the web, how can we respond to the barriers for meaningful participation in a constructive and ethical way and nurture a more inclusive space for all? In this chapter, I explore these issues in the light of the work of scholars who have inspired me and my own professional practice in educational technologies.
Uploads
Papers by Suzan Koseoglu
This is an independent, open access project.
Veletsianos, G. & Koseoglu, S. (2022). Introducing Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy. In G. Veletsianos & S. Koseoglu (Eds.), Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy: An Open Book. Equity Press. https://equitypress.org/feminist_digital_ped/introducing_feminist
citation:
Kuhn H., C., Havemann, L., Koseoglu, S., & Bozkurt, A. (2021). Three lenses on lurking: Making sense of digital silence. In J. Hoffman & P. Blessinger (Eds.), International perspectives in online instruction (p. 83-93). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120210000040006
ISBN: 978-1-80043-673-2, eISBN: 978-1-80043-672-5
education can be paradoxical in girls’ education. On one hand, socio-economic conditions, health issues, and geographical
distance are noted as some major barriers to girls’ educational attainment. One of the most disadvantaged groups is out-ofschool
children who cannot continue their formal education for different reasons including armed conflict and war, poverty,
and social discrimination. In that sense, distance education plays a significant role in creating access to education as a
human right. On the other hand, from the perspective of feminism and social reproduction theory, distance education may
reproduce and perpetuate existing inequalities. For example, if education is confined to homes with distance education, this
may reinforce or even legitimize the idea of females living in isolation, away from public spheres. Taking these issues into
account, we highlight some ethical issues in the provision of distance education for girls’ education through a qualitative
analysis of reports and peer-reviewed articles.
Keywords: Ethics, feminism, gender inequality, K-12, open and distance learning, social reproduction
Our work builds on the project My Story (Bozkurt & Büyük, 2018), which explored the experiences of students enrolled in Anadolu University Open Education Faculty programs. In the project, students were asked to share their stories leading to open and distance learning (ODL) via an online survey. 2700 stories were collected from students studying in higher education programs from a distance. Out of these stories, 70 stories that could inspire other students were curated in an edited book (2018). These narratives demonstrate that, given the right conditions, ODL can be an agent for social justice, as it has the power to break down barriers to education and, consequently, democratize societies.
In this work, we highlight the voices of 16 women in the edited book using found poetry (Patrick, 2016; Prendergast, 2006) as a methodological and pedagogical tool. The approach is useful to show some common threads in the narratives, in particular, the oppression of women in traditional and patriarchal communities. The women in the selected stories have had remarkably similar experiences in their struggle for education, characterized by a never-ending fight for education, strong desire for equal opportunity, and dedication to study amongst childcare, housekeeping and other domestic duties. As the audience hear the struggles and aspirations of the women in their journey to education, what lessons can be drawn for ODL in general, what connections can be made with women in other contexts, and what actions can be taken globally in open education to help women in their shared struggles?
Methodology
The data we collected in this study revealed a powerful, descriptive language in how it portrayed the experiences of the participants. The raw data were in Turkish, and two of the researchers coded and exchanged their findings to identify common themes across the different narratives. While thematically coded as a traditional qualitative analysis, we recognized that the voices of the participants were of such strength that they warranted a more performative explication in keeping with their power and form once they were translated to English. In this way, Research Found Poetry was used to enable the researchers to partner with the data and represent data consistent to the essence of the participant experience being represented (Patrick, 2016; Prendergast, 2006). The words of the participants were poetically presented to both exemplify the thematic findings while remaining true to the power in the texts themselves. In this manner, the researchers adopted a “positionality of artful scientist” (Patrick, 2016, p. 2) by conveying the central messages in a creative expression that utilized the words of the participants through the shared understanding of the researchers (Faulkner, 2007; Lahman et al., 2010; Lahman & Richard, 2014).
The final found poem represents the following themes: (1) the oppression of women in traditional and patriarchal communities, (2) women’s never-ending fight for education, (3) their strong desire for equal opportunity, (4) dedication to study amongst childcare, housekeeping and other domestic duties, (5) experiencing a break from mainstream education due to external pressures/power structures, (6) socio-economic conditions leading to drop out, (7) feelings of confinement, hopelessness, (8) dedication to study in the face of economic struggles, (9) commitment to learning, (10) reaching the goal, success. The Turkish version is linguistically faithful (taken directly from the qualitative data) to participants’ original comments; however, the English version is lightly modified where needed to better convey cultural and contextual meanings.
References
Bozkurt, A., & Büyük, K. (2018). Benim hikayem. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi. ISBN: 978-975-06-3251-8 Available at http://ekitap.anadolu.edu.tr/#bookdetail162516
Faulkner, S. L. (2007). Concern with craft: Using ars poetica as criteria for reading research poetry. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(2), 218–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406295636
Hurston, Z. N. (1942). Dust tracks on a road. New York: HarperPerennial.
Lahman, M. K. E., Geist, M. R., Rodriguez, K. L., Graglia, P. E., Richard, V. M., & Schendel, R. K. (2010). Poking around poetically: Research, poetry, and trustworthiness. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800409350061
Lahman, M. K. E., & Richard, V. M. (2014). Appropriated poetry: Archival poetry in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(3), 344–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413489272
Patrick, L. D. (2016). Found poetry: Creating space for imaginative arts-based literacy research writing. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 65(1), 384–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/2381336916661530
Prendergast, M. (2006). Found poetry as literature review: Research poems on audience and erformance. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284601
Preliminary analysis of resources demonstrated two major strands of OEP research in the educational literature: those who explore OEPs in relation to OERs only and, to a lesser extent, those who discuss OEPs in a broader context including networked and open scholarship. The first paper on digital open educational practices was published in 2008 (n = 1) and peak publication points were reached in 2014 (n = 6), 2015 (n= 6) and 2016 (n = 8), which suggests a slow but steady increase in papers related to OEPs. Of all the 91 different keywords that were used in the papers, open educational resource[s] (n = 32), open educational practice[s] (n = 27), higher education (n = 5), professional development (n = 4), open education (n = 3) and public open scholar (n = 3) were the most frequently used ones. During the session, common trends and patterns based on geographical location, source and education level will also be discussed.
Based on the findings, and building on the works of Ehlers (2011) and Mays (2017), we call for a need to conceptualise open education as a pluralistic model that embrace open educational practices as a pedagogical approach. The result of this relationship can be artefacts such as OERs and MOOCs; however, using Cronin’s (2017) four dimensions of open shared by open educators, we can possibly see implications in “closed” settings as well. We also argue that although many practices such as teaching a MOOC or becoming an active member of an educational hashtag community are examples of OEPs, as a descriptor, the term itself is under-recognized in the broader educational literature.