OP in the AEC

Since beginning my teaching career at NC State in fall 2019 – and since participating in the inaugural Open Pedagogy Incubator in 2020 – I’ve made several changes to each of my courses to incorporate open online tools that help students develop professional skills, build community through co-created knowledge – and give me a way to award points for expected effort. I integrate a suite of open tools – Hypothes.is, BioRender, and MURAL – across my classes. Each has distinct, specific utility/value and ways to give students points for effort, while building professional skills and scientific knowledge.

• Hypothes.is (online social annotation platform) enables students to parse, scaffold and discuss assigned readings asynchronously with other students. Their conversations increase confidence (self-efficacy) and community ^[1] – dramatically enhancing the cognitive depth of in-class conversations, and decreasing the time it takes for experts to reach consensus prior to jigsaw exercises. I think these positive outcomes result from my integrating annotations as an assignment: because I award 5 points for 5 annotations, students actually do the reading.
• BioRender (science illustration software) ^[2] provides a creative outlet for effective visual and written communication of scientific concepts, that enhances student learning^[3].
• MURAL (infinite whiteboard) provides structure and predictability as a single digital home / landing pad for documenting knowledge / understanding in a shared space. I create a giant table to organize the same set of assignments applied across topics for the first 9 weeks of the semester, so students know exactly where to go and what we are doing every week. That predictability (together with consistent due dates / times) frees up bandwidth so students can focus on deep dives into complex concepts. And again, because I ask students to respond to prompts in MURAL, I can award points to students for thinking about the concepts. (This is more structured and informative, and less ambiguous, than conventional grading based on participation.)

I concurrently re/designed open activities and assignments to make them more relevant, meaningful, and motivating. Open assignments appeal to me as an instructor because they keep coursework fresh across multiple iterations – and students’ submissions reflect their interests, as well as the interactions I have with each cohort. Students appreciate course materials and products that have a life and purpose beyond the classroom, too! I’ve actually taken to calling these “living” materials, because they grow, adapt, and change in response to each cohort of students. The dynamic nature of the learning materials enhances students’ sense of ownership, value and validity – and reflects the dynamic complexity of the subjects I teach, and the way that I teach them.

While considering how to write this chapter, I reflected on the changes and interventions I’ve made as well as activities that are not currently fully open, but present future opportunities to further implement Open Pedagogy (OP). Naturally, this led me to consider…

What even is Open Pedagogy?

• • student-created
  • public sharing
  • renewable

David Tully was kind enough to engage in some philosophical ponderings (fueled by a fresh wash of imposter syndrome as I drafted ideas for this chapter). Due to the open-ended nature of the hallmarks of OP, and the broad spectrum of ways in which each aspect can be interpreted and may manifest across contexts, I sometimes get caught up in the nuanced distinctions between different pedagogical approaches. For example – I would like to identify community members, agencies, and park managers as partners to inform the development of students’ independent research projects in Field Ecology and Methods (AEC 460). If student research has a defined home and purpose, our work can enhance local management and conservation. Similarly, I would love to share students’ executive summary reports (written in a similar format to those used by the Department of Environmental Quality) with stream restoration experts at NC State and beyond. However, while those ideas represent valuable service learning opportunities, they would not qualify as OP unless we shared our research results with the broader public.

That discussion was hugely helpful for articulating (and reaffirming!) my understanding of OP – and also helped me to think more carefully about future OP opportunities across my courses. Below I’ve shared current examples of OP across my courses, including the evolution and adaptations of my OP approaches over time; and I also discuss opportunities for expanding / revising other activities, to make them OP.