Metaliterate digital content creators. Using open pedagogy and metaliteracy to support integrated learning

15 Sous la direction de Florent MICHELOT et Simon COLLIN Préface de Daniel Peraya La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif Regards croisés et perspectives internationales Sous la direction de Florent MICHELOT et Simon COLLIN La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif Sous la direction de Florent MICHELOT et Simon COLLIN Préface de Daniel Peraya La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif Regards croisés et perspectives internationales Catalogage avant publication de Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec et Bibliothèque et Archives Canada Titre : La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif : regards croisés et perspectives internationales / sous la direction de Florent Michelot et Simon Collin. Noms : Michelot, Florent, 1982éditeur intellectuel. | Collin, Simon, 1982éditeur intellectuel. Collections : Formation à distance (Presses de l’Université du Québec) ; 15. Description : Mention de collection : Formation à distance = Distance Learning ; 15 | Comprend des références bibliographiques. Identifiants : Canadiana 20240025369 | ISBN 9782760561465 (PDF) Vedettes-matière : RVM : Technologies de l’information et de la communication pour l’éducation. | RVM : Connaissances en informatique. | RVM : Technologie éducative. Classification : LCC LB1028.43.C635 2024 | CDD 371.33/4—dc23 Révision Michèle Beaudoin et Riham Alkhakaf Conception graphique Marie-Noëlle Morrier Mise en page Florent Michelot Image de couverture iStock Dépôt légal : 4etrimestre 2024 › Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec › Bibliothèque et Archives Canada © 2024 – Presses de l’Université du Québec Tous droits de reproduction, de traduction et d’adaptation réservés Imprimé au Canada N6146-1 [01] C ha p it r e 13 Metaliterate Digital Content Creators Using Open Pedagogy and Metaliteracy to Support Integrated Learning Trudi E. JACOBSON Dimensions covered Producing content via digital technology; developing and mobilizing information literacy; collaborating via digital technology; mobilizing digital technology for personal and professional empowerment Keywords Metaliteracy; open pedagogy; metacognition; learner as producer School levels covered Postsecondary education Summary The challenge of implementing the Digital Competency Framework (DCF) lies in providing consistent opportunities for learners to become competent in the areas it encompasses. While individuals might gain some familiarity with a subset of the twelve dimensions in scattered classes or on their own, they need to be introduced to these sub-competencies in a thoughtful, integrated, and supportive manner. This chapter will focus on four of the DCF’s dimensions, with one of them, Producing Content via Digital Technology, as the foundation for this analysis. It examines two pedagogical approaches, open pedagogy (OP) and metaliteracy, explores the connections between them and the four DCF dimensions, and suggests their potential value in providing a learning environment that can support integrated learning. The chapter concludes with an example from one of my own courses, in which students learn how to contribute content to Wikipedia. This overview from praxis provides a sense of what students might learn and accomplish when elements highlighted in the DCF, metaliteracy, and open pedagogy are combined. This approach suggests that students may need scaffolding to work successfully on complex projects that address the goals of these dimensions, scaffolding that can be provided by the application of metaliteracy in an OP environment. Résumé La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 268 Le Cadre de référence de la compétence numérique (ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur [MEES], 2019 ; ci-après « le Cadre »), comprenant douze dimensions (sous-compétences) d’importance capitale, a été élaboré en tenant « compte des dernières recherches et pratiques innovantes en éducation » (MEES, 2019, p. 8). Chaque dimension comprend deux exemples concrets de la façon dont elle pourrait s’intégrer à une situation pédagogique, l’un illustrant ce que ferait la personne apprenante, et l’autre, la façon dont un instructeur ou un professionnel approprié pourrait faciliter le développement de la dimension par les personnes apprenantes. Ces exemples constituent un point de départ pour générer des idées adaptées à toute une série de disciplines. Cependant, le défi consiste à fournir aux personnes apprenantes des occasions constantes de devenir compétentes dans ces domaines. Bien que les personnes puissent se familiariser avec un sous-ensemble des douze dimensions dans des classes dispersées ou par elles-mêmes, elles doivent être initiées à ces sous-compétences d’une manière réfléchie, intégrée et encourageante. En outre, cette introduction doit reposer sur des pratiques pédagogiques qui restent constantes grâce à des activités d’apprentissage étayées. Idéalement, les douze dimensions devraient être regroupées de manière à permettre aux personnes apprenantes de s’immerger dans des expériences holistiques à mesure qu’elles se familiarisent avec les souscompétences et acquièrent de la confiance dans celles-ci. Le Cadre note que les compétences peuvent être combinées et que « le cadre doit pouvoir s’adapter à l’innovation technologique » (MEES, 2019, p. 8). Il insiste également sur la nature individuelle et itérative du développement continu des compétences (MEES, 2019). he Digital Competency Framework (DCF) includes twelve vitally important dimensions (sub-competencies) and was developed taking “into account the latest research and innovative practices in education” (MEES, 2019, p. 8). Each dimension includes two concrete examples of how it might fit into a pedagogical situation, one illustrating what the learner would do and the other how an instructor or appropriate professional might facilitate learners’ development of the dimension. The examples provide a starting point for generating ideas suitable for a range of disciplines. Yet the challenge lies in providing consistent opportunities for learners to become competent in these areas. While individuals might gain some familiarity with a subset of the twelve dimensions in scattered classes or on their own, they need to be introduced to these sub-competencies in a thoughtful, integrated, and supportive manner. This introduction should rest on pedagogical practices that remain consistent through scaffolded learning activities. Ideally, the twelve dimensions would be grouped in ways that allow learners to become immersed in holistic experiences as they gain familiarity and confidence with the sub-competencies. The DCF notes that competencies can be combined and that “the framework must be able to accommodate technological innovation” (MEES, 2019, p. 8). It also stresses the individual, iterative nature of continuous competency development (MEES, 2019). There are two pedagogical approaches that can provide the milieu for such integrated learning to take place: open pedagogy (OP) and metaliteracy. Open pedagogy has the potential to provide a consistent immersive educational experience that blends learning opportunities with real-world applications. Abstractions become vivid through the need to put concepts into practice. T Chapitre 13 / Metaliterate Digital Content Creators 269 This chapter will focus on four of the DCF’s dimensions that I have found to combine well, with producing content via digital technology serving as the foundation for this analysis. I link that dimension with three others: Collaborating via Digital Technology, Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy, and Prioritizing Digital Technology for Personal and Professional Empowerment. Hegarty’s conception of OP (2015) will be used to introduce the core elements of OP, consider how OP might help to achieve DCF’s goals (labelled elements) and emphasize the importance of scaffolding for this potentially unfamiliar and initially challenging instructional approach. Metaliteracy is the third core component of the examination. Metaliteracy is an overarching literacy for today’s online, collaborative information environment, but it is more than that. It is also a model for becoming an effective, reflective learner and participant – in the widest sense of the term – in the information environment (Mackey & Jacobson, 2011, 2022). It scaffolds both the DCF and OP while offering important new insights. At the end of the chapter, all the elements considered here are explored in the setting of an undergraduate course. The DCF focuses on digital competency – “a set of skills necessary to the confident, critical, and creative use of digital technologies to achieve objectives” – that is applicable to work, personal life, and civic settings (MEES, 2019, p. 7). It identifies particular attributes of digital competency that need to be developed: adaptability to new technological innovations, the importance of digital competency for professional development and lifelong learning, and its contribution to citizens’ autonomy in judging and using digital technologies (MEES, 2019). The DCF rests on two of the twelve dimensions: Ethical Citizenship and Technological Skills (MEES, 2019). It is designed to accommodate technological innovation, allow for the blending of competencies, and be iterative in its implementation (MEES, 2019). It is adaptable to a variety of disciplines. The four framework dimensions that are emphasized in this chapter are: ● 4. Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy. This dimension mixes the traditional conception of information literacy in the sense of bibliographic instruction, being able to find appropriate sources and organizing those sources with newer components appropriate to an updated digital focus. These newer components include understanding the effects of information overload and filter bubbles. This dimension also directly incorporates metacognition: “Adapting a reflective attitude toward information and its uses, cognizant of the context in which it has been produced and acquired as well as of the purpose for which it is being employed” (MEES, 2019, p. 16). ● 5. Collaborating via Digital Technology. This dimension includes individuals looking for chances to collaborate and co-create through the auspices of digital platforms, using the most appropriate digital collaboration tools, and having the ability to work well with others (MEES, 2019). ● 7. Producing Content via Digital Technology. This dimension looks for individuals to create and/or co-create digital content. It emphasizes the need to select the best tools for the purpose, and to act ethically when creating content (MEES, 2019). ● 9. Mobilizing Digital Technology for Personal and Professional Empowerment. This element of the competency involves being aware of and able to use appropriate technologies to integrate into the workforce, able to be adept La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 270 with digital technology in one’s work or career, and the ability to stay current with developments in technology. This last component is aligned with the ability and desire to be a self-directed learner (MEES, 2019). Together, these dimensions of the competency paint a picture of effective learners as ethical, collaborative, informed digital information producers. This set of abilities and dispositions do not necessarily come easily to all individuals, and the DCF considers methods for introducing aspects of the dimensions into teaching and learning situations. It is vital that there be holistic learning experiences rather than approaching the dimensions as discrete elements. There are many ways to develop activities and assignments to address combinations of different dimensions. However, students may need scaffolding to work successfully on complex projects that address the goals of these dimensions. The digital competency in question Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy 1. In what ways is information literacy more than simply a set of skills? 2. What does metacognition contribute to this literacy? Collaborating via Digital Technology 3. Why does metaliteracy emphasize collaboration in our digital environment? 4. Which of the metaliterate learner roles play an important part in collaboration? Producing Content via Digital Technology 5. How does awareness of the metaliterate learner roles help individuals become effective information producers? 6. The learning domains of metaliteracy are also important in becoming an ethical information producer. How does each domain components of metaliteracy? Mobilizing Digital Technology for Personal and Professional Empowerment 7. What elements of metaliteracy align with lifelong learning? 8. How does editing Wikipedia tie together metaliteracy, lifelong learning, producing content, and effective information use? 1 Background I taught a university-level information literacy course from 2000 through 2021. The course naturally underwent numerous revisions during that time, with the inclusion of core components of metaliteracy (Mackey & Jacobson, 2011) being one of the primary drivers of change. It was vital to us that students expand their conception of the academic focus of information literacy to the knowledge, abilities, and self-awareness needed to navigate a world driven by information (accurate and not) and collaborative content creation. In 2019, I completely revised the course, implementing key elements of open pedagogy and metaliteracy to encourage students to take on the role of an information producer in a collaborative environment. Producing information that only Chapitre 13 / Metaliterate Digital Content Creators 271 I would see did not introduce students to the real-world environment in which they would be, or already were, creating content. Our goals were for students to recognize themselves as content creators and to become more reflective as they did so, both individually and collaboratively. I would like to clarify that although the DCF was not explicitly a core foundation for my course (I taught in New York State), the four framework dimensions specifically included in this chapter provided the backbone of the course, as is evident in these goals. While the details of this course, provided at the end of the chapter, are particular in that the focus is Wikipedia editing, this model of integrating elements from the DCF, metaliteracy, and OP might be combined in a number of different ways applicable to a variety of disciplines. More information is provided in the OP in the Praxis section of this chapter. The other DCF dimensions may also be considered in the light of metaliteracy and OP but were not the focus of the course. 2 Metaliteracy’s Connections with the Digital Competency Framework Metaliteracy enhances learning experiences to develop digitally competent citizens in two ways. First, metaliteracy is a pedagogical model that empowers learners as information producers in collaborative digital environments (Mackey & Jacobson, 2022). The goals and learning objectives of the approach emphasize the roles and characteristics that learners take on as they develop a metaliteracy mindset. The second purpose is the scaffolding that it provides when OP is used. It helps learners to become aware of their responsibilities and the potential available to them – not just in a learning situation but in life more broadly. It also involves four learning domains, each of which plays an important role in learning. Metaliteracy evolved from information literacy at a time when information literacy was still characterized as skills-based, as defined in the Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (American Library Association, 2000). Conceptions of information literacy around 2010 did not integrate multiple information formats nor consider the impact of the evolving aspects of the social Web. Metaliteracy recognizes that “[i]nformation is not a static object that is simply accessed and retrieved. It is a dynamic entity that is produced and shared collaboratively” (Mackey & Jacobson, 2011, p. 62). Compare the following characterization of metaliteracy with the DCF’s focus on the four dimensions of learners being considered in this chapter: “[t]his is an important shift in emphasis from consumer to producer that challenges learners to not only acquire these vibrant forms of content but also create them actively as individuals and in collaboration with other participants” (Mackey & Jacobson, 2022, p. 3). Before explaining the components of the metaliteracy model in more detail, consider these quotes from undergraduate students in a course, described in more detail later in the chapter, that combined information literacy, metaliteracy, and OP. The course project was to enhance a Wikipedia article. The learning curve was steep, as students only had seven weeks to become familiar with the two literacies and the extensive Wikipedia rules before applying them in most public environments. This student quote illustrates how metaliteracy informed the OP project: Metalitera[c]y is kind of like learning about how we learn. In today’s age of technology, metalitera[c]y tries to give us a framework that helps us [to] La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 272 understand ourselves as learners and [. . .] to navigate the ever-changing landscape that is information sharing and learning. This idea is something that actually helped us when it came to finding information for our articles as well as editing them. By being aware of myself as a learner, I was able to look outside of myself as just a student and see that I am also a researcher, a participant, a translator, a teacher and a producer of information. As a result, I was more aware of what my roles were and how I learn and was able to comprehend things easier. This helped me with my article because I was able to have a better understanding of the information I was reading or looking for and comprehend it better. (Devin Ogden, personal correspondence, February 26, 2021) The author of this quote is aware of himself as a metaliterate learner. His knowledge of the varied roles impacts his understanding of the responsibilities in this OP learning situation. Seeing oneself in all these roles transforms students – they no longer are primarily inhabiting the role of student. Their outside responsibilities propel them into roles they may continue to inhabit throughout their lives. It is clear from this student’s words that metaliteracy is not only a subject to study but also a supportive structure during the learning experience. A second student recognizes that the content he is creating is improved by the quality of the research process and that there is value in learning as he creates meaningful content. He also notes a mind shift based on an understanding of metaliteracy and information literacy. The most exciting part about going through the weeks is just enjoying the process of creating new information. It has been exciting to go through the extensive process of finding legitimate sources, finding where an article needs the most work, receiving/giving feedback through peer review, and ultimately, just trying to produce the best content possible on a topic. It is always exciting to learn new things as well. Previously, I had not known the exact term for the things I do on a daily basis in my everyday life (information literacy and metaliteracy). Being aware of these terms and understanding the implications, it is exciting to take on information from a whole different perspective. (Benjamin Aviles, personal correspondence, February 27, 2021) It is insufficient when striving for digital competence that one simply creates information. One must produce quality information. While creating information supports learners to gain digital competence, learners must produce quality information, especially for open spaces such as Wikipedia. They must also reflect on the roles and responsibilities that all authors, regardless of format, have, considering their own motivation, their audience, their approach, and more. The DCF recognizes that it is not just a matter of what one knows (cognitive learning domain) and is able to do (behavioural). It acknowledges the need for learners to feel confident in what they are doing. This aligns with the affective, or feeling, learning domain emphasized by metaliteracy. The inclusion of lifelong learning as a goal upholds the position that learners need to assess what they do and do not know and what they need to know beyond their current abilities and knowledge. This is a component of the reflective or metacognitive learning domain. These four learning domains – affective, behavioural, cognitive, and metacognitive, are all key to metaliteracy, as are learner roles, characteristics, and learning goals. Combined, they Chapitre 13 / Metaliterate Digital Content Creators 279 assignments, ideas for technological platforms, and broader practices. It encourages growth and self-reflection by instructors. It also encourages creativity by instructors as they adapt shared OERs to meet the needs of their own courses and students (Hegarty, 2015). All of these approaches provide a stronger learning experience for students. This OP attribute facilitates many of the DCF’s dimensions, particularly providing additional concrete examples that could be adapted in a variety of teaching contexts. It also promotes a Collaborative Setting and Community and will strengthen Personal and Professional Empowerment and, from beyond the four dimensions under consideration, Innovation and Creativity. Connected Community. Hegarty notes that “a connected community is not only essential for collaboration and sharing resources but also it is an indication of a participatory culture,” one that requires social media or another technological system (2015, p. 9). The idea of collaboration is common in OP, the DCF, and metaliteracy. The DCF dimension is labelled Collaborating via Digital Technology. It encourages collaboration through the robust use of digital environments and further emphasizes developing interpersonal skills to serve the community. It also highlights co-creation. Metaliteracy’s Collaborative and Civic Minded characteristics and the Collaborator role mirrors the DCF’s emphasis on the Participatory characteristic that aligns with Hegarty’s Participatory Culture attribute. This connected, collaborative community needs to be built carefully and requires care for the People, Openness and Trust attribute grouping. Learner-Generated OP. Learner-Generated OP is built on the idea of allowing learners’ choice, “opening up the process to empower students to take the lead, solve problems, and work collectively to produce artifacts that they share, discus, reconfigure, and redeploy” (Hegarty, 2015, p. 9). Encouraging students to engage in such activities helps to prepare them for the DCF’s Mobilizing Digital Technology for Personal and Professional Goals. This dimension addresses digital technology autonomy in the workplace, for meeting professional aspirations, and for lifelong, continuing education (MEES, 2019). It is natural that the DCF’s lens is more narrowly focused on digital competence. The goal of OP encompasses problem-solving, decision-making, and content creation. This wider scope is a critical area for metaliteracy. Goal 4 addresses developing learning strategies to meet one’s own goals. There are nine learning objectives within this goal, and they encompass all four learning domains. These two examples from metaliteracy objectives connect well with an emphasis on Learner-Generated OP attribute. They provide evidence of metaliteracy’s wider lens: i. value persistence, adaptability, and flexibility in lifelong learning (M); ii. adapt to new learning situations while being flexible about the varied approaches to learning (A, B). If teachers were to use open pedagogical practices in their courses, they would be empowering students in a manner that exceeds that of the DCF. Metaliteracy provides the scaffolding that allows learners the space to grow and fail at times. A metacognitive learning objective from goal 4 is very pointed about this: “Recognize that learning is a process and that reflecting on errors or mistakes leads to new insights and discoveries” (Jacobson et al., 2018). This metacognitive objective leads to the last of Hegarty’s open pedagogical attributes, which she labels Reflective Practice (since Peer Review was incorporated into People, Openness and Trust for my purposes). La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 280 Reflective Practice. The importance of reflection is found in OP, the DCF, and metaliteracy. In the four dimensions of the DCF considered in this chapter, this learning domain is listed as an element of the dimension Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy, which asks that learners adopt “a reflective attitude toward information and its uses, cognizant of the content in which it has been produced and acquired a well as of the purposes for which it is being employed” (MEES, 2019, p. 16). Metaliteracy places reflection throughout its model, with it being incorporated into 11 learning objectives out of 34. It is also a characteristic to be reflective, particularly in regard to learning and information. For example, from goal 1, which concerns evaluation, one objective is “Reflect on how you feel about information or an information environment to consider multiple perspectives” (Jacobson et al., 2018). 5 Open Pedagogy in Praxis The Digital Competency Framework includes concrete examples for implementing the twelve sub-competencies. Each of these includes one example in a learning context and one in a teaching context. These examples naturally focus on the dimension under consideration. However, it is important not to compartmentalize each scenario and each dimension. They need to be viewed holistically with learning opportunities where the different sub-competencies come together, a model that is to be found in the idea of a metaliterate learner (Mackey & Jacobson, 2022). Reeves, Herrington, and Oliver (2022) consider authentic, constructivist student activities that involve a complex task that is the focus of the course rather than a supplement to it. Based on a review of educational theory and research, they define ten characteristics of authentic activities. Instructors might consider these characteristics in the light of open pedagogy, scaffolded by metaliteracy, as they are of value when designing learning opportunities that address the DCF. i. have real-world relevance ii. are ill-defined iii. are complex, requiring a sustained period of time iv. provide students with the chance to apply different perspectives, using a variety of resources v. provide the opportunity to collaborate vi. provide a chance to reflect vii. can be integrated and applied across subject areas and lead beyond domain-specific outcomes viii. are seamlessly integrated with assessment ix. create polished products valuable in their own right x. allow competing solutions and diverse outcomes (Reeves, Herrington, and Oliver, 2002) While their paper does not specifically reference open pedagogy, the overlap in characteristics and goals between authentic activities and OP’s renewable or nondisposable assignments is high. Seraphin et al. defined non-disposable assignments (NDAs) as an activity that: • students are asked to engage in as part of an organized course • promotes student learning through the completion of the assignment Chapitre 13 / Metaliterate Digital Content Creators 281 • affords assessment of students’ learning of course objectives • provides impact or value outside of the traditional student-teacher dyad (Seraphin et al., 2019) They also note other requirements. NDAs require information collaboration and exchange, ongoing communication, and sharing beyond the teacher. They cite research that indicates that NDAs enhance intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning (Seraphin et al., 2019). The OP literature provides a number of examples of learning opportunities that incorporate many of the ten elements of authentic activities. These courses move away from assignments meant solely for the teacher’s eye to renewable assignments meant for the benefit of a large group (Jhangiani, 2017). NDA OP assignments can take many forms, a number of which address some or all of the four DCF dimensions included in this chapter. While this list provides a range of examples of NDAs used in psychology courses, they might be adapted for courses in a wide range of subjects: • debate • YouTube video • podcast • Twitter infographic • public presentation of a student’s research findings to the public using one of a number of platforms • serve as a research consultant for a community organization (Seraphin et al., 2019) Katz and Van Allen provide a framework for designing non-disposable assignments. They provide an example of a pre-OP assignment followed by a redesigned version (Katz & Van Allen, 2020). Included here is an example from one of my own courses, in which students learn to contribute content to Wikipedia. There are a number of Wikipedia-related OP articles that cover a range of disciplines, student levels, and approaches. This overview gives a sense of what students might learn and accomplish, but many other approaches with and beyond Wikipedia offer multifaceted learning situations that will address multiple dimensions of the DCF. Numerous articles have been about using Wikipedia editing in OP learning situations (Aibar et al., 2015; Ball, 2019; Bilansky, 2016; McKenzie et al., 2018; Oregon State University et al., 2022). There are a number of reasons for this. Wikipedia: • is familiar; • is omnipresent; • provides unlimited opportunities to contribute to collected knowledge; • engages students in an online community; • is seeking more diversification in the writers and the scope to be a more balanced source; • allows students autonomy in article selected. It also has a mixed reputation, providing the opportunity for students to learn to assess several categories of information, that which they are discovering as they engage in research for their article, that which they find in Wikipedia, and that which they are La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 282 creating for the use of others. And very importantly, the Wiki Education program is available to post-secondary educators in Canada and the US. This program (https://wikiedu.org/) has created a helpful platform, training modules, and a dashboard that helps to make such participation possible for educators and students alike. The course I taught was required for philosophy majors and offered under the auspices of the Information Literacy Department of the University at Albany Libraries. It was taken primarily by senior philosophy majors and a smaller number of juniors and seniors from other disciplines. The course was online, asynchronous, and lasted just seven weeks. It was challenging for students to learn about core elements of information literacy, metaliteracy, and Wikipedia editing in such a fast-paced course. However, the components were closely aligned, which allowed students to see the holistic nature of the course. Table 2, “Information Literacy, Metaliteracy, and a NonDisposable Assignment in an OP Course,” provides an overview of how the pieces fit together and build to the final assignment. Table 2 Information Literacy, Metaliteracy, and a Renewable Assignment in an OP Course Course component Metaliteracy Information literacy Wikipedia Importance of information Evaluation of information online resource Information has value frame Quality research Online tutorials to increase capabilities Wikipedia training Assuming new roles Questions connected to roles Information creation as a process frame Overcoming unease with new roles Affective learning domain Wikipedia editing Wikipedia training Information ethics Giving credit online resource Plagiarism 101 tutorial Wikipedia training Peer review Individual creation of online resource Wikipedia training Publication of new content learning domains Wikipedia resources Reflection on learning Metacognitive learning domain Information has value discussion revisited Connections and reflections discussion The syllabus also contained the following text to inform students of some of our expectations. I have designed this course around the following course and personal attributes: • cultivating a growth (rather than a fixed) mindset; • enhancing curiosity, inquiry, and perseverance; • accepting challenges; • encouraging “not-yetness”. In other words, making space for learning opportunities that Chapitre 13 / Metaliterate Digital Content Creators 283 • promote creativity and exploration; • allow connections and personalization. There are components of these desired attributes alluded to in the DCF, but because these items are not specific to the digital environment, they are broader in scope than the twelve DCF dimensions. However, other elements of the course do connect more directly with one or more of the DCF dimensions, as seen in table 3. Table 3 Digital Competency Framework Aligned with OP Course Containing a Renewable Assignment Course Component DCF Dimension Importance of information Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy Quality research Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy Assuming new roles Mobilizing Digital Technology for Personal and Professional Empowerment Overcoming unease with new roles [Metaliteracy as Scaffolding] Wikipedia editing Collaborating via Digital Technology Developing and Mobilizing Technological Skills Information ethics Exercising Ethical Citizenship in the Digital Age Peer review Collaborating via Digital Technology Communicating via Digital Technology Publication of new content Producing Content via Digital Technology Reflection on learning Developing and Mobilizing Information Literacy The students appreciated the opportunity to learn more about Wikipedia, to determine how much they should use it, and how to make this determination. They found the elements connected with metaliteracy and information literacy to elucidate their course project and add depth to it. It was important to them that they had some choice in selecting a topic to work on. This allowed students to assume the teacher role because their topic choice was one about which they had some knowledge. Throughout the course, there were discussions in which students were required to reflect on their learning process, including the domains and the roles they had been introduced to. This is but one example of how metaliteracy and open pedagogy might work together to advance a selection of DCF dimensions. It shows, though, that a carefully designed course structure and attendant learning activities using these learning models have the potential to meet the competency approach that drives the Framework, while at the same time going even further. When instructors introduce it early in a course, it helps learners to reflect on their contributions as digital content creators, researchers, and collaborators, and to grow into these new roles that are central in open pedagogical environments and in their lives as citizens. Conclusion The goals of the Digital Competency Framework are notable not just for students, but for all learners. Reaching students is the most feasible way of impacting large numbers of people, and those who are able to put these new abilities into practice early in their lives. OP offers many benefits to learners in their quest not only for knowledge but La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 284 also for the mindset and abilities to succeed in a world that demands fluency in online and collaborative environments. There may be some trepidation in engaging with these new expectations. Metaliteracy is poised to provide the scaffolding needed for OP and the DCF through its goals and learning objectives, learner roles, characteristics, and four learning domains. Helping learners to develop a metaliteracy mindset and the tools to be self-directed learners, with and beyond the use of digital technologies, is a powerful way to develop ethical and responsible citizens. Trudi E. Jacobson: How does digital competency play a role in my professional life? I have gone through the same journey that I ask my students to undertake. I have long collaborated in professional contexts, which perhaps not all students have done, but new technologies have streamlined and expanded such collaborations and provided great scope for new ways to create and share content. I would not ask my students to contribute to Wikipedia if I had not already learned how to tackle this new type of collaboration. My metaliterate roles and the learning domains I encounter have expanded, just as I ask students to reflect on these same things. I want to make sure that I engage in lifelong learning, and thus, I have to recognize what the stumbling blocks might be for me. References Aibar, E., Lladós-Masllorens, J., Meseguer-Artola, A., Minguillón, J., & Lerga, M. (2015). Wikipedia at university: What faculty think and do about it. The Electronic Library, 33(4), 668-683. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2013-0217 American Library Association. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. https://alair.ala.org/handle/11213/7668 Ball, C. (2019). WikiLiteracy: Enhancing students’ digital literacy with Wikipedia. Journal of Information Literacy, 13(2), 253. https://doi.org/10.11645/13.2.2669 Barnhisel, G., & Rapchak, M. (2014). Wikipedia and the wisdom of crowds: A student project. Comminfolit, 8(1), 145-159. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2014.8.1.158 Bilansky, A. (2016). Using Wikipedia to teach audience, genre, and collaboration. Pedagogy, 16(2), 347-355. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3435996 Bonica, M. J., Judge, R., Bernard, C., & Murphy, S. (2018). Open pedagogy benefits to competency development: From sage on the stage to guy in the audience. The Journal of Health Administration Education, 35(1), 9-27. DeRosa, R., & Robinson, S. (2017). From OER to open pedagogy: Harnessing the power of open. In R. S. Jhangiani & R. Biswas-Diener (Eds.), Open: The philosophy and practices that are revolutionizing education and science, 115-124. Ubiquity Press. https://doi.org/10.5334/bbc.i Fulkerson, D., Ariew, S., & Jacobson, T. E. (2017). Revisiting metacognition and metaliteracy in the ACRL framework. Communications in Information Literacy, 11(1), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2017.11.1.45 Hegarty, B. (2015). Attributes of open pedagogy: A model for using open educational resources. Educational Technology, July-August, 3-13 Hogan, P., Carlson, B. R., & Kirk, C. (2015, April). Open educational practices’ models using open educational resources. Open Education Global Consortium Conference, Banff, Canada. https://commons.nmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1 &article=1064&context=facwork_conferencepapers Jacobson, T. E., Mackey, T., O’Brien, K., & O’Keeffe, E. (2018, April 11). Goals and learning objectives: Developing metaliterate learners. Metaliteracy. https://metaliteracy.org/learning-objectives/ Chapitre 13 / Metaliterate Digital Content Creators 285 Jhangiani, R. S. (2017, February 2). Excellence in teaching essay: Ditching the “disposable assignment” in favor of open pedagogy. E-Xcellence in Teaching (Society for the Teaching of Psychology). https://teachpsych.org/E-xcellence-in-Teaching-Blog/4583103 Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1990). Using cooperative learning in math. In N. Davidson (Ed.), Cooperative Learning in Mathematics, 103-125. Addison-Wesley. Katz, S., & Van Allen, J. (2020). Evolving into the open: A framework for collaborative design of renewable assignments. CUNY Academic Works. Konieczny, P. (2014). Rethinking Wikipedia for the classroom. Contexts, 13(1), 80-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504214522017 Lubicz-Nawrocka, T. M. (2018). Students as partners in learning and teaching: The benefits of co-creation of the curriculum. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3207 Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2011). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, 72(1), 62-78. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl-76r1 Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2022). Metaliteracy in a connected world: Developing learners as producers. ALA Neal-Schuman. McCusker, S. (2014a, March 6). Teaching in the new (abundant) economy of Information. MindShift. https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/34294/teaching-in-the-new-abundant-economy-of-information McCusker, S. (2014b, April 7). Teachers’ most powerful role? Adding context. MindShift. https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/34799/teachers-most-powerful-role-adding-context McKenzie, B., Brown, J., Casey, D., Cooney, A., Darcy, E., Giblin, S., & Ní Mhórdha, M. (2018). From poetry to Palmerstown: Using Wikipedia to teach critical skills and information literacy in a firstyear seminar. College Teaching, 66(3), 140-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2018.1463504 Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (Eds.). (2002). Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups. Praeger. Ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur. (2019). Cadre de référence de la compétence numérique. Gouvernement du Québec. https://www.quebec.ca/education/numerique/cadre-reference Moog, R. S., & Spencer, J. N. (Eds.). (2008). Process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL), (994). American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2008-0994 Ossiannilsson, E. (2018). Ecologies of openness: Reformations through open pedagogy. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 103-119. Park, D., Bridges, L., & Oregon State University. (2022). Meet students where they are: Centering Wikipedia in the classroom. Communications in Information Literacy, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2022.16.1.2 Paskevicius, M. (2017). Conceptualizing open educational practices through the lens of constructive alignment. Open Praxis, 9(2), 125. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.9.2.519 Paskevicius, M., & Irvine, V. (2019a). Open education and learning design: Open pedagogy in praxis. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2019(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.512 Paskevicius, M., & Irvine, V. (2019b). Practicalities of implementing open pedagogy in higher education. Smart Learning Environments, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0110-5 Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. In: HERDSA 2002 Quality Conversations, July 7-10 2002, Perth, Western Australia, 562-567. Reynolds, R., Gibbs, L., & Zemke, S. (2015, February 24). Eight qualities of open pedagogy. Next Thought. https://nextthought.com/thoughts/2015/02/ten-qualities-of-open-pedagogy Seraphin, S. B., Grizzell, J. A., Kerr-German, A., Perkins, M. A., Grzanka, P. R., & Hardin, E. E. (2019). A conceptual framework for non-disposable assignments: Inspiring implementation, innovation, and research. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 18(1), 84-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725718811711 Smyth, R., Bossu, C., & Stagg, A. (2016). Toward an open empowered learning model of pedagogy in higher education. In Blended Learning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, 2196-2214. Information Resources Management Association.