Becoming an open educator: towards an open threshold framework
In this article, we propose a cross-pollination of two prominent lines of educational thought: open education (OE) and threshold concepts (TCs). Open education has gained an increased profile through the growing popularity of open educational resources (OER) and massive online open courses (MOOCs). Educators who create or make use of such resources, or employ related open educational practices (OEP), are often suggested to have a transformative impact in educational settings. In recent years, educational research has increasingly discussed learning as a process of attaining or crossing certain conceptual thresholds, which involve such a significant shift that the learner eventually achieves a different and deeper understanding of core disciplinary knowledge, even a new identity. Of the eight characteristics of TCs identified in the core literature of this theory, we consider that three in particular offer the maximum potential for understanding the evolution of teachers towards the open educator identity: transformative, troublesome and liminal. This work presents a theoretical framework that includes the transformative impact on identity in the process of becoming an open educator, the troublesomeness inherent in this evolution and the liminal space through which the evolving teachers progress. It is argued that a focus on the development of open educator identity aligns with current reflective approaches to working on teachers’ professional identity, and at the same time supports a focus on teachers’ commitment to a democratic approach to education, which is necessary in neoliberal times.
Amiel, T. & Soares, T. C. (2016) ‘Identifying tensions in the use of open licenses in OER repositories’, International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 122–137. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2426
Andrade, A., et al., (2011) Beyond OER: Shifting Focus to Open Educational Practices: OPAL Report 2011, Available at: http://duepublico.uni-duisburg-essen.de/servlets/DerivateServlet/Derivate-25907/OPALReport2011_Beyond_OER.pdf
Area, M. (2006) ‘Veinte años de políticas institucionales para incorporar las tecnologías de la información y comunicación al sistema escolar’, in Tecnologías Para Transformar La Educación, Akal, Madrid, pp. 199–232.
Baillie, C., Bowden, J.A., & Meyer, J.H.F. (2013) ‘Threshold capabilities: threshold concepts and knowledge capability linked through variation theory’, Higher Education, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 227–246. doi: 10.1007/s10734-012-9540-5
Barradell, S. (2013) ‘The identification of threshold concepts: a review of theoretical complexities and methodological challenges’, Higher Education, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 265–276. doi: 10.1007/s10734-012-9542-3
Beddoe, L. (2013) ‘Health social work: professional identity and knowledge’, Qualitative Social Work, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 24–30. doi: 10.1177/1473325011415455
Beetham, H., et al., (2012) ‘Open practices: a briefing paper’, JISC, Available at: https://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/58444186/Open%20Practices%20briefing%20paper.pdf
Biesta, G. (2013) ‘Receiving the gift of teaching: from “learning from” to “being taught by”’, Studies in Philosophy and Education, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 449–461. doi: 10.1007/s11217-012-9312-9
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015) ‘The role of beliefs in teacher agency’, Teachers and Teaching, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 624–640. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325
Bozkurt, A., Koseoglu, S., & Singh, L. (2019) ‘An analysis of peer reviewed publications on openness in education in half a century: trends and patterns in the open hemisphere’, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 78–97. doi: 10.14742/ajet.4252
Bradbeer, J. (2006) ‘Threshold concepts within the disciplines: a report on a symposium at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow’, Planet, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 16–17, [online] Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.11120/plan.2006.00170016?src=recsys
Burtis, M. (2016) ‘Making and breaking domain of one’s own: rethinking the web in higher ed’, Hybrid Pedagogy, [online] Available at: https://hybridpedagogy.org/making-breaking-rethinking-web-higher-ed/
Conole, G. & Brown, M. (2018) ‘Reflecting on the impact of the open education movement’, Journal of Learning for Development-JL4D, vol. 5, no. 3, [online] Available at: http://www.jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/314/345
Cousin, G. (2006) ‘An introduction to threshold concepts’, Planet, vol. 17, no. 4–5, [online] Available at: https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/Cousin%20Planet%2017.pdf
Cronin, C. (2017) ‘Openness and praxis: exploring the use of open educational practices in higher education’, International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, vol. 18, no. 5, doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3096
Cronin, C. & MacLaren, I. (2018) ‘Conceptualising OEP: a review of theoretical and empirical literature in Open Educational Practices’, Open Praxis, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 127–143. doi: 10.5944/openpraxis.10.2.825
Cuban, L. (1986) Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology since 1920, Teachers College Press, New York.
Ertmer, P. A., et al., (2012) ‘Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: a critical relationship’, Computers & Education, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 423-435. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
Foley, B. (2014) ‘Engineering problem solving: uncovering a threshold experience and triggering a meta-learning response’, in Threshold Concepts: From Personal Practice to Communities of Practice: Proceedings of the National Academy’s Sixth Annual Conference and the Fourth Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, eds C. O’Mahony, A. Buchanan, M. O’Rourke & B. Higgs, Cork, Ireland, pp. 51–55.
Fortune, T., Ennals, P., & Kennedy-Jones, M. (2014) ‘The hero’s journey: uncovering threshold barriers, dispositions and practices among occupational therapy students’, in Threshold Concepts: From Personal Practice to Communities of Practice: Proceedings of the National Academy’s Sixth Annual Conference and the Fourth Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, eds C. O’Mahony, A. Buchanan, M. O’Rourke & B. Higgs, Cork, Ireland, pp. 56–61.
Gee, J.P. (2000) ‘Identity as an analytic lens for research in education’, Review of Research in Education, vol. 25, pp. 99–125. doi: 10.2307/1167322
Gourlay, L. (2009) ‘Threshold practices: becoming a student through academic literacies’, London Review of Education, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 181–192. doi: 10.1080/14748460903003626
Green, L. & Gary, K. (2016) ‘Pedagogy for a liquid time’, Studies in Philosophy and Education, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 47–62. doi: 10.1007/s11217-015-9470-7
Havemann, L. (2016) ‘Open educational resources’, in Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory, ed M. A. Peters, Springer Singapore, Singapore, doi: 10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_218-1
Havemann, L. (2020) ‘Open in the evening: openings and closures in an ecology of practices’, in Open(ing) Education: Theory and Practice, eds D. Conrad & P. Prinsloo, Brill, Leiden, pp. 329–344. doi: 10.1163/9789004422988_015
Humphrey, R. & Simpson, B. (2012) ‘Writes of passage: writing up qualitative data as a threshold concept in doctoral research’, Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 735–746. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.678328
Keefer, J. M. (2015) ‘Experiencing doctoral liminality as a conceptual threshold and how supervisors can use it’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 52, pp. 17–28. doi: 10.1080/14703297.2014.981839
Kiley, M. (2009) ‘Identifying threshold concepts and proposing strategies to support doctoral candidates’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 293–304. doi: 10.1080/14703290903069001
Kiley, M. & Wisker, G. (2009) ‘Threshold concepts in research education and evidence of threshold crossing’, Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 431–441. doi: 10.1080/07294360903067930
Kiley, M. & Wisker, G. (2010) ‘Learning to be a researcher: the concepts and crossings’, in Threshold Concepts and Transformational Learning, eds J. H. F. Meyer, R. Land, & C. Baillie, pp. 399–414, Sense, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Kingsbury, J. M. & Bowell, T. A. (2016) ‘Thinking critically about beliefs it's hard to think critically about’, in Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, eds P. Bondy & L. Benacquista, OSSA, Windsor, ON [online] Available at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/88
Korthagen, F. (2004) ‘In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic approach in teacher education’, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 20, pp. 77–97. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2003.10.002
Land, R., et al., (2005) ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3): implications for course design and evaluation’, in Improving Learning Diversity and Inclusivity, ed C. Rust, Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford, England.
Land, R., Rattray, J., & Vivian, P. (2014) ‘Learning in the liminal space: a semiotic approach’, Higher Education, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 199–217. doi: 10.1007/s10734-013-9705-x
Larke, L. R. (2019) ‘Agentic neglect: teachers as gatekeepers of England’s national computing curriculum’, British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 1137–1150. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12744
Marginson, S. (2011) ‘Higher education and public good’, Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 411–433. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2273.2011.00496.x
Marsh, J.D. & De Luca,R.J. (2016) ‘Transformative insights: a synthesis of threshold concept theory and graduate attributes’, Waikato Journal of Education, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 175–188. doi: 10.15663/wje.v21i1.208
Meyer, J. & Land, R. (2003) ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines’, Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses, Occasional Report 4, [online] Available at: https://www.colorado.edu/ftep/sites/default/files/attached-files/meyer_and_land_-_threshold_concepts.pdf
Meyer, J. & Land, H. (2005) ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning’, Higher Education, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 373–388. doi: 10.1007/s10734-004-6779-5
Meyer, J. H. F. (2012) ‘Variation in student learning’ as a threshold concept’, Journal of Faculty Development, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 8–12, [online] Available at: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/nfp/jfd/2012/00000026/00000003/art00002
Meyer, J. H. F. & Land, R. (2006) ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: issues of liminality’, in Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge, eds J. H. F. Meyer & R. Land, Routledge, London, England, pp. 19–32.
Mott, J. & Wiley, D. (2009) ‘Open for learning: The CMS and the open learning network’, In Education, vol. 15, no. 2, [online] Available at: https://ineducation.ca/ineducation/article/view/53/529
Nascimbeni, F. & Burgos, D. (2016) ‘In search for the Open Educator: proposal of a definition and a framework to increase openness adoption among university educators’, International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 1–17. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v17i6.2736
Neylon, C. (2013) Open Is a State of Mind [Web log post], Available at: http://cameronneylon.net/blog/open-is-a-state-of-mind/
Ng, W., Nicholas, H., & Williams, A. (2010) ‘School experience influences on pre-service teachers’ evolving beliefs about effective teaching’, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 26, pp. 278–289. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.010
O’Brien, M. (2008) ‘Threshold concepts for university teaching and learning’, in Threshold Concepts within the Disciplines, eds R. Land, J. H. F. Meyer & J. Smith, pp. 289–305, Sense, Rotterdam, Netherland.
Perkins, D. (2006) ‘Constructivism and troublesome knowledge’, in Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge, eds J. H. F. Meyer & R. Land, pp. 33–47, Routledge, London, England.
Perkins, D. (2008) ‘Beyond understanding’, in Threshold Concepts within the Disciplines, eds R. Land, J. H. F. Meyer & J. Smith, Sense, Rotterdam, Netherlands, pp. 3–19.
Peter, S. & Deimann, M. (2013) ‘On the role of openness in education: a historical reconstruction’, Open Praxis, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 7–14. doi: 10.5944/openpraxis.5.1.23
Pomerantz, J. & Peek, R. (2016) ‘Fifty shades of open’, First Monday, vol. 21, no. 5. doi: 10.5210/fm.v21i5.6360.
Quinlan, K.M., et al., (2013) ‘Methodological challenges in researching threshold concepts: a comparative analysis of three projects’, Higher Education, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 585–601. doi: 10.1007/s10734-013-9623-y
Ricaurte, P. (2016) ‘Pedagogies for the open knowledge society’, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 13, no. 32. doi: 10.1186/s41239-016-0033-y
Sanders, K. & McCartney, R. (2016) ‘Thresholds in computing: past, present and future’, Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, ACM, New York, pp. 91–100. doi: 10.1145/2999541.2999546
Shlomo, S.B., Levy, D. & Itzhaky, H. (2012) ‘Development of professional identity among social work students: contributing factors’, The Clinical Supervisor, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 240–255. doi: 10.1080/07325223.2013.733305
Smyth, R., Bossu, C., & Stagg, A., (2016) ‘Toward an Open Empowered Learning Model of pedagogy in higher education’, in Open learning and formal credentialing in higher education: Curriculum models and institutional policies, IGI Global, Hershey, PA, pp. 205–222.
Tan, E. & Pearce, N. (2012) ‘Open education videos in the classroom: exploring the opportunities and barriers to the use of YouTube in teaching introductory sociology’, Research in Learning Technology, vol. 19, pp. 125–133. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v19i3.7783
Thomas, L., et al., (2014) ‘A broader threshold: including skills as well as concepts in computer science’, in Threshold Concepts: From Personal Practice to Communities of Practice: Proceedings of the National Academy’s Sixth Annual Conference and the Fourth Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, eds C. O’Mahony, A. Buchanan, M. O’Rourke, & B. Higgs, National Academy for Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning, Cork, Ireland, pp. 154–158.
Trafford, V. & Leshem, S. (2009) ‘Doctorateness as a threshold concept’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 305–316. doi: 10.1080/14703290903069027
Trent, J. (2010) ‘From rigid dichotomy to measured contingency. Hong Kong preservice teachers’ discursive construction of identity’, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 26, pp. 906–913. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.031
Turner, V. (1979) ‘Betwixt and between: the liminal period in rites de passage’, in Reader in Comparative Religion: An Anthropological Approach, eds W. A. Lessa & E. Z. Vogt, Harper and Row, New York, USA, pp. 234–243.
Turner, V. (2011) The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure, Aldine Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ.
van Gennep, A. (1960) The Rites of Passage, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Veletsianos, G. & Kimmons, R. (2012) ‘Assumptions and challenges of open scholarship’, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 166–189. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1313
Waite, M., Mackness, J., Roberts, G., & Lovegrove, E. (2013) ‘Liminal participants and skilled orienteers: learner participation in a MOOC for new lecturers’, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 200–215, [online] Available at: http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/waite_0613.pdf
Weller, M. (2014) The Battle for Open: How Openness Won and Why it doesn’t Feel like Victory, Ubiquity Press, London. doi: 10.5334/bam
Wenger, E. (1999) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
Wisker, G. (2015) ‘Developing doctoral authors: engaging with theoretical perspectives through the literature review’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 64–74. doi: 10.1080/14703297.2014.981841
Wisker, G., Kiley, M., & Aiston, S. (2006) ‘Making the learning leap: research students crossing conceptual thresholds’, in Quality in Postgraduate Research: Knowledge Creation in Testing Times, eds M. Kiley & G. Mullins, Centre for Educational Development and Academic Methods, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia, pp. 195–201.
Wisker, G. & Robinson, G. (2009) ‘Encouraging postgraduate students of literature to cross conceptual thresholds’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 317–330. doi: 10.1080/14703290903069035
Yeomans, L., Zschaler, S., & Coate, K. (2019) ‘Transformative and troublesome? Students’ and professional programmers’ perspectives on difficult concepts in programming’, ACM Transactions on Computing Education, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1–27. doi: 10.1145/3283071
Zeichner, K. (2010) ‘Competition, economic rationalization, increased surveillance, and attacks on diversity: neo-liberalism and the transformation of teacher education in the U.S.’, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1544–1552. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.004
Zepke, N. (2013) ‘Threshold concepts and student engagement: revisiting pedagogical content knowledge’, Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 97–107. doi: 10.1177/1469787413481127
1Matthew Flanagan maintains a list of disciplines that have been addressed through the TC lens, and among which there has been little crossover with open education: https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/thresholdsT.html#oer
2Based on the complete list of disciplines addressed through the TC lens: https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/thresholdsT.html#oer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Authors contributing to Research in Learning Technology retain the copyright of their article and at the same time agree to publish their articles under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, for any purpose, even commercially, under the condition that appropriate credit is given, that a link to the license is provided, and that you indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.