The Interdependence of Technology, Pedagogy, and Epistemology: a Self-Study of My Pedagogy of Technology Teacher Education
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Interdependence of Technology, Pedagogy, and Epistemology: A Self-Study of My Pedagogy of Technology Teacher Education by Andrea Sator M.A., Simon Fraser University, 2010 B.A., Simon Fraser University, 2000 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Educational Technology and Learning Design Program Faculty of Education © Andrea Sator 2019 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Fall 2019 Copyright in this work rests with the author. Please ensure that any reproduction or re-use is done in accordance with the relevant national copyright legislation. Approval Name: Andrea Sator Degree: Doctor of Philosophy Title: The Interdependence of Technology, Pedagogy, and Epistemology: A Self-Study of My Pedagogy of Technology Teacher Education Examining Committee: Chair: Allan MacKinnon Associate Professor Shawn Bullock Senior Supervisor Associate Professor Kevin O’Neill Supervisor Associate Professor Michael Ling Internal Examiner Senior Lecturer Susan E. Elliot-Johns External Examiner Associate Professor Schulich School of Education Nipissing University Date Defended/Approved: October 16, 2019 ii Ethics Statement iii Abstract This research investigates teacher candidates’ theories of knowledge in a technological environment and a post-secondary teacher educator’s pedagogy of technology teacher education. This dissertation attends to the pedagogical interdependence of purposeful technological environments with a view to narrowing the epistemic gap between students and teachers through the design of educational technology within an undergraduate course. The research uses self-study methodology to investigate and improve my pedagogy of technology teacher education and simultaneously advance the fields of educational technology and learning design and technology teacher education. Self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (S-STTEP) is a type of educational research methodology that is concerned with the understanding and improvement of one’s practice and the relationship between teaching and learning in teacher education. A four-part analytical framework in this self-study is used to provide an account of my practice as a technology teacher educator through an analysis of my espoused theories (Argyris & Schön, 1974) (the explicit reasons we give for our actions) and my theories-in-use (Argyris & Schön, 1974) (implicit theories that explain how we behave). The analytical framework coalescences my professional knowledge in an epistemology of practice to help me articulate my assertions for actions as a technology teacher educator using maker pedagogy and experiential learning as technological and educative learning environments. The study of practice as an epistemic source of knowledge supports accesses to one’s authority of practice, which is an ontological lens used to study what resides in knowing-in-action. An authority of practice is the warrant that leads to an understanding of professional identity and professional knowledge, and how it develops and is reframed. The epistemic study of practice in this research makes contributions to educational research in the professional development of the teacher educator through the self-study of educational practices and actions. Keywords: technology education; teacher education; self-study of teaching and teacher education practice methodology; Q-methodology; epistemology of practice; maker pedagogy; experiential learning iv Dedication I dedicate this to my loving mother and father, beautiful sister, and my dear friend Chris. Thank you for your consistent support and your belief in me. Your love allowed me to reach this goal. I love you endlessly. I did this for you. v Acknowledgements Many wonderful people have and continue to inspire me along my academic and career journeys. I feel infinitely fortunate to carry out my work with great thinkers, innovative minds, and collaborative people. An important acknowledgement goes to my senior supervisor, Dr. Shawn Bullock, for always listening, supporting, shaping, guiding, and providing me with opportunities to learn and grow. Dr. Bullock, you have made this work possible. I am inspired by your curiosity and embrace it in the work that I do. Another formative mentor and friend is Dr. Nancy Johnston, whom I wish to thank so very much for her never-ending support, deep conversations, guidance, and for offering me so many opportunities to do the work that I love. There are so many people that I admire and enjoy working alongside. Please know that I deeply appreciate each and every one of you and acknowledge the contributions you have made to this work. vi Table of Contents Approval .......................................................................................................................... ii Ethics Statement ............................................................................................................ iii Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iv Dedication ....................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ vi Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... vii List of Tables .................................................................................................................. xi List of Figures................................................................................................................ xii Chapter 1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 1.1. A Way Forward ...................................................................................................... 2 1.2. The Study .............................................................................................................. 3 1.3. Overview of Research ........................................................................................... 4 1.4. Outline of Dissertation ........................................................................................... 5 1.4.1. Chapter 2: Literature Review ......................................................................... 5 1.4.2. Chapter 3: Research Design, Methodology, and Analytical Framework ......... 5 1.4.3. Chapter 4: Theory of Knowledge in Technological Environments .................. 6 1.4.4. Chapter 5: Identification of Authorizers in the Self-Study Data ....................... 6 1.4.5. Chapter 6: Professional Knowledge in an Epistemology of Practice .............. 6 1.4.6. Chapter 7: Conclusions ................................................................................. 7 Chapter 2. Literature Review ..................................................................................... 8 2.1. Definitions.............................................................................................................. 8 2.1.1. A Definition of Technology ............................................................................. 8 2.1.2. A Definition of Educational Technology ....................................................... 13 2.1.3. A Definition of Maker Pedagogy .................................................................. 14 Making and the Maker Movement .......................................................................... 15 2.1.4. A Definition of Experiential Learning ............................................................ 17 2.1.5. A Definition of Technology Teacher Education ............................................ 18 2.2. Philosophy of Technology .................................................................................... 19 2.2.1. Philosophy of Educational Technology and Learning Design ....................... 21 2.2.2. Social Shaping of Technology ..................................................................... 22 2.3. Educational Technology and Learning Design ..................................................... 26 2.3.1. Theoretical Heritage .................................................................................... 26 The Cognitivist Tradition......................................................................................... 27 The Constructivist Tradition .................................................................................... 27 2.3.2. Movements in the Field ................................................................................ 29 1980s ..................................................................................................................... 29 1990s ..................................................................................................................... 30 2000s and Today ................................................................................................... 32 2.3.3. Research in Educational Technology ........................................................... 35 2.3.4. Myths in Educational Technology and Learning Design ............................... 37 vii Myth #1: Technology can lead to dramatic changes in education ........................... 38 Myth #2: Innovation is good, and technology controls the outcomes in education .. 39 Myth #3: Technology will take the place of the teacher .......................................... 41 The Persistence of