S/R3 Amalgamating Teacher Identity in Bayne's "Teacher Experiences and Academic Identity: The Missing Components of MOOC Pedagogy"

Bayne, S, et. al. “Teacher Experiences and Academic Identity: The Missing 

           Components of MOOC Pedagogy.” Journal of Online Learning and 

           Teaching, vol. 10, no. 1, pp.57-60. Accesses 19 Jul 2018.

Summary

In this reflection of their own experiences with digital pedagogy, Bayne and crew grapple with the predetermined identities of teachers on digital platforms, which differ from teacher identities in higher education—those centering on academic discipline, the institution of affiliation, and the sense of the profession—as explored by Henkel’s Academic Identities and Policy Change in Higher Education, ca. 2000. Teacher identity on digital platforms depends, according to Bayne, on whether the MOOC is an xMOOC (Massive Open Online Course highly structured with automated feedback like quiz grades) or a cMOOC (“connectivist” in nature where dialog takes precedent over measurable growth or assessment). Bayne and co. claim, based on their own blog over the course of several MOOCs, that neither is capable of producing the complexity of true educator identity within a digital sphere and proceed to discuss the methodology of their own approach to MOOC instruction in hopes of spurring further discussion of the nuances of teacher identity in the digital age.

The preconceived notions of teacher identity on digital platforms are limited and thus unhelpful according to Bayne, et al. In an xMOOC, teachers fall into only one discernable identity: the “rock star” lecturer. Rock star lecturers conduct a “highly structured, content-driven course, designed for large numbers of individuals working mostly alone, guided by pre-recorded lectures, assessed by automated or peer-marked assignments” (59). These teachers receive a large portion of their identity from the implicit authority granted to their image “through affiliation with elite educational institutions” (ibid) and consequently remove themselves from the educational relationship at the moment of upload. Their identities as educators only serves what Freire coined the “banking” epistemology. But the xMOOC is not necessarily the greater of two inadequacies. 

Unfortunately, while the cMOOC teacher’s identity offers more opportunity for growth, it inadvertently undermines some of the key aspects of the traditional teacher persona. Although connectivist MOOCs “express the goal of education differently from xMOOCs—not access to expert knowledge, but [the facilitation] of self-directed learning” (60), one of their effects is the removal of most if not all of the authority implicit in the traditional teacher role: critique as correction, guidance as curriculum, determination of quality. And, this outcome raises questions for the legitimacy of courses with this pseudo-structure. Specifically, it is un realistic goal for MOOC teachers to preserve their perceived role, one "in which they are always present, never demanding, and endlessly adaptable” (61). The risk of spreading what I call "completion" disease as educational normalcy takes center stage. 

Bayne and company believe, because neither attempt to neatly dichotomize digital teacher identity is either adequate or tenable for the progression of digital online platforms, that a much richer vein of methodology should be tapped. Enter EDCMOOC (E-Learning and Digital Cultures Massive Open Online Courses):

            EDCMOOC is neither an xMOOC nor a cMOOC, but draws its
approach from the commitments, experiences, and expertise of its teachers.
It has much more in common with its sister program, the MSc in Digital
Education, than it does with any other MOOC that the team has
encountered. It does not attempt to be all things to all people, but takes
a very particular stance on digital education and on MOOC design and
delivery. It is a product of the academic identities, in all their complexity
and contradictions, of its teachers. This means that we must accept
responsibility for our decisions and be prepared to explain and justify
our choices. [EDCMOOC] design, like all course design, is “philosophy
and belief in action” (Ross et al.).
(63)

Response

            What had escaped my attention was that automated digital courses that use the immediate feedback structures Bayne’s team discussed directly challenge the paradigm most educators today swear by—transaction over transmission. Yet, I know for a fact that most online tutoring sites, and many undergraduate online options use this very method of depositing knowledge (to invoke Freire) into the receptacles sitting at an illuminated screen. The irony of Damon’s Will Hunting rings true in this case, and I’ve said as much to my high school juniors: “Nothing I’m showing you here today can’t be found on the internet for free” (Me).

*And yes, I just quoted myself. I’m that guy*

Pedagogy online seems an impossible thing to reconcile coherently. When dealing with the perspective of others on a digital platform, where can one begin other than the creator identity? One has to create. It simply is such. But once that identity runs its course, what choice does the teacher have other than to push the first domino and simply become the observer? If the system track is designed well, then all the dominoes will fall as planned and the teacher fades into obscurity as nothing more than a bystander. If the dominoes stall and the teacher “gets” to reengage, then a self-reckoning must be addressed in that the design didn’t work. Teacher identity between no-longer-needed and well-that-didn’t-work rests upon the edge of a knife.  

The divergence that occurs between rockstars and connectivists doesn’t necessarily need to, however. Teachers who already have academic identities can assume the role of Sherpa within the machine. Like the Sherpa that meticulously plans the route yet relies on her immense knowledge and skill set to guide while en route, the EDCMOOC instructor can increase the expectation and rigor of the course material so that students depend on feedback, guidance, correction, and connection. Essentially “learning must go beyond formal teaching situations, which are inadequate for the ‘digitally saturated and connected world in which we live’ (100) [because] too many teachers fail to understand how technology is changing society” (63). Just as social identities impact one another, the identity of the digital teacher must be constructed in concert with the identity of the online course and its participants. As the hammer drives the nail, so wears the nail on the hammer. And like the implement, the teacher’s identity is not created until engagement with its counterpoint softens the rigidity of the relationship and allows for mutual transference.