Participatory action research in the age of social media: Literacies, affinity spaces and learning

Machin-Mastromatteo, Juan-Daniel Participatory action research in the age of social media: Literacies, affinity spaces and learning. New Library World, 2012, vol. 113, n. 11/12, pp. 571-585. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[img]
Preview
Text
NLW_2012_Machin_PAR-DORIS_open-access.pdf - Accepted version

Download (1MB) | Preview

English abstract

This article summarizes the developments, methodological design, and some of the theories framed within a PhD research about the integration of social media in higher education. Its aims are to determine significant issues, challenges and opportunities that emerge when social media are integrated into learning environments in higher education. ‘Doing Online Relearning through Information Skills’ (DORIS) is proposed as a research framework to address the aims, objectives, and research questions of this study. It was conceived from a Participatory Action Research perspective. This approach is intended to help discover and reflect upon teaching and learning practices in a technologically mediated educational setting. Furthermore, the concept of affinity spaces is discussed, together with its distinction from the concept of communities of practice. The data collection methods planned to conduct the study are: diagnostic questionnaire, blog, social learners' input and reports, a second questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews. The theory of affinity spaces offers a powerful way of thinking about teaching and learning processes mediated by different technologies. The heuristics that will focus the data collection and analysis are: a) on the function of content, and b) on the function of participants’ interactions with the content and/or with one another. DORIS is proposed as a powerful way to organize learning interventions through the structure of information literacy skills. It is grounded on action research and on constructivist, blended, and problem based learning. Researchers, librarians or educators can adapt this model for teaching, learning and researching about and with social media or for other technologically mediated learning environments, or could be adapted for information literacy programs.

Spanish abstract

Este artículo resume los desarrollos, diseño metodológico, y algunas de las teorías donde se ubica una investigación doctoral sobre la integración de las redes sociales en la educación superior. Su meta es determinar problemas significativos, retos y oportunidades que surjen cuando las redes sociales son integradas en entornos de aprendizaje específicos de la educación superior. ‘Reaprendiendo en Línea a través de Habilidades Informativas' (ó 'Doing Online Relearning through Information Skills’, DORIS) se propone como un marco metodológico para investigar la mencionada meta, los objetivos, y las correspondientes preguntas de investigación de este estudio. El mismo fue concebido desde una perspectiva de Investigación-Acción Participativa. Se prevé que este enfoque ayude a descubrir y reflexionar sobre las prácticas de enseñanza y aprendizaje dentro de un entorno educativo que se encuentra mediado por la tecnología. Además, e discute el concepto de espacios de afinidad, junto con su distinción del concepto de comunidades de práctica. Los métodos para la colección de datos que se plantean utilizar son: un cuestionario diagnóstico, un blog, los aportes y reportes de los 'aprendedores sociales', un cuestionario de seguimiento, y entrevistas semi-estructuradas. La teoría de los espacios de afinidad ofrece una manera poderosa de pensar sobre los procesos de enseñanza y aprendizaje que son mediados por distintas tecnologías. La colección y análisis de datos estará conducida por un análisis heurístico que consta de: a) la función contenido, y b) la función de las interacciones de los participantes, tanto con el contenido como entre ellos mismos. DORIS se propone como una manera efectiva de organizar intervenciones de aprendizaje a través de una estructura de habilidades informativas. Se basa en la investigación-acción y el aprendizaje constructivista, mixto, y basado en problemas. Distintos investigadores, bibliotecarios, o educadores pueden adaptar este modelo para la enseñanza, el aprendizaje y la investigación 'sobre y con las redes sociales' u otros entornos de aprendizaje mediados por la tecnología; o puede ser adaptado para programas de alfabetización informacional.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: social media, higher education, teaching, learning, participatory action research, literacies, information literacy, digital literacy, new literacies, affinity spaces
Subjects: C. Users, literacy and reading.
G. Industry, profession and education.
L. Information technology and library technology
Depositing user: Juan-Daniel Machin-Mastromatteo
Date deposited: 16 Jan 2013 14:57
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:24
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/18141

References

"SEEK" links will first look for possible matches inside E-LIS and query Google Scholar if no results are found.

Bayne, S. (2008). Higher education as a visual practice: Seeing through the virtual learning environment, Teaching in Higher Education 13, pp. 383–394.

Cousin, G. (2005). Learning from cyberspace. In R. Land and S. Bayne (Eds.), Education in Cyberspace, (pp. 117–129). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Fals-Borda, O. (1973). Reflexiones sobre la aplicación del método de estudio-acción en Colombia. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 35 (1), pp. 49-62.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Gee, J. P. (2001). New Times and New Literacies: Themes for a Changing World. In Eighth International Literacy & Education Research Network Conference on Learning (pp. 3–20). Presented at the Eighth International Literacy & Education Research Network Conference on Learning, Spetses, Greece.

Gee, J.P. (2007). Good video games and good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning and literacy. New York: Peter Lang.

Hemmi, A., Bayne, S. and Land, R. (2009). The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25 (1), pp. 19-30.

Herr, K. and Anderson, G.L. (2005). The action research dissertation. a guide for students and faculty. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Illeris, K. (2003). Towards a contemporary and comprehensive theory of learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22 (4), pp. 396–406.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2006). Digital Literacy and Digital Literacies: Policy, Pedagogy and Research Considerations for Education. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 1 (1), pp. 12–24.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2007). Researching new literacies: Web 2.0 practices and insider perspectives. E-Learning, 4 (3), pp. 224-240.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and social learning. Third Edition. Maidenhead & New York: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.

Lau, J. (2006). Guidelines on information literacy for lifelong learning. Veracruz: IFLA.

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2 (4), pp. 34–46.

McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Sage Publications, Inc.

McTaggart, R. (Ed.). (1997). Participatory action research: International contexts and consequences. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Machin-Mastromatteo, J.D. (2011a). Exploring users' information behavior in social networks: A contribution to the understanding of the use of social networks. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.

Machin-Mastromatteo, J.D. (2011b). Raamatukogunduskogemusi Venezuelast: Infopädevus ja infoteadus. Raamatukogu, 6, pp. 32 - 34.

Machin-Mastromatteo, J.D. (2012). The mutual shaping of social media, learning experiences, and literacies: The methods revisited, paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries (QQML 2012), 22-25 May 2012, Limerick, Ireland, available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/bitstream/10760/16885/6/qqml2012_machin_ver%202.pdf (accessed 2 September 2012).

Mikkelsen, H.B. (2001). Methods for development work and research: A guide for practitioners. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Shapiro, J.J. and Hughes, S.K. (1996). Information technology as a liberal art: enlightenment proposals for a new curriculum. Educom Review, 31 (2) pp. 31-35.

Smith, M.K. (2009). Communities of practice. infed.org The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. available at: http://www.infed.org/biblio/communities_of_practice.htm (accessed 2 September 2012).

Tuominen, K., Savolainen, R. and Talja, S. (2005). Information literacy as a sociotechnical practice. Library Quarterly, 75 (3), pp. 329–345.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Virkus, S. (2003). Information literacy in Europe: A literature review. Information Research, 8 (4), pp. 8–4.

Wenger, E. (2006). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. Communities of Practice, available at: http://www.ewenger.com/theory/ (accessed 2 September 2012).

Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind ‘How do I improve my practice?’ Cambridge Journal of Education, 19 (1): 137–53.

Whitehead, J. and McNiff, J. (2006). Action research: Living theory. London: Sage.

Zurkowski, P.G. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities. Washington: National Commission of Libraries and Information Science [USA].


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item