Pushing for Definitions along the Fuzzy Boundaries of Hybridity
Last week in our Brittain Fellow research seminar on Hybrid Pedagogy, we discussed definition and documentation. What would an Encyclopedia of Hybrid Pedagogy look like? What kinds of entries would be necessary? These were the questions that prompted our discussion.
We brainstormed a list of possible entries for an Encyclopedia of Hybrid Pedagogy including types of tools one might employ; the differentiation between hybrid classrooms, lessons, and pedagogies; considerations of assessment; and suggestions that might help answer that all important question: what do I do in the case of a tech failure with my hybrid project?
From here, we acknowledged that one important aspect of definition and documentation is research (this should be unsurprising in a research methods seminar!). We responded to Davida Charney’s oft-cited and useful “Empiricism Is Not a Four-Letter Word (CCC 1996). She notes that an “overreliance of qualitative studies and repeated disparagement of objective methods is creating a serious imbalance” in research, an imbalance that continues. That said, we considered that a researcher’s choice of methodology—to use entirely qualitative data, entirely quantitative data, or a mix methodology with both quantitative and qualitative data—depends on the research question(s), the research situation and population, and the epistemology and intellectual preferences of the researcher.
Three grounding components of research are part of this week’s TECHStyle post (part of the virtual replacement for our FTF meeting): (1) Provide the citation and annotation for an article about hybrid pedagogy. Our imaginary encyclopedia needs to contain scholarly resources for others who wish to research the same topics. (2) Complete your IRM certification and comment on the professional/ethical responsibilities entailed in conducting IRB-approved research. (3) Tell a story from the “field”—which may be your own classroom. Just as important as theoretical discussions about the philosophies behind hybrid pedagogy are the experiences (good and bad) of those of us integrating hybrid practices in various ways. So, this week’s TECHStyle post asks readers to comment with their research, complete and comment on IRB certification, and tell their stories, in order to aid our definitional project in ways that are both quantitative and qualitative.
To help us in this endeavor, Robin has created a google doc for our annotated bibliographies. We look forward to reading your comments to this hybrid techstyle post (composed by Rachel and Rebecca) for next week’s FtF meeting.