Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.

Browsing by Subject "lived experiences"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Balanced Curriculum For Student-Oriented Learning In Art + Design Education: Toward Community-Based Participatory Design Research
    (2020-06) JEKAL, MEE
    This study started from my own experiences as a Korean international student living in a different culture and studying in a different higher education system within the U.S. Asking why my previous knowledge and learning of arts-based top-down design processes (ABTD) in South Korea are different from learning engineering-based bottom-up design processes (EBUD) in the U.S., guides this study of different cultural norms and educational systems in South Korea and the U.S. Through my own stories of art + design education in these different settings, I draw upon critical pedagogy (CP) (Freire, 2000; Kumashiro, 2004), culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) (González, 2005), and Dewey’s (1934, 1938) philosophy stressing the value of lived experiences, to research student-oriented creative learning in art + design. My research addresses the clash of cultural and pedagogical issues in higher education design programs. Through a comparative accounting of different art + design education approaches in South Korea and the U.S., I explore what a balanced culturally relevant curriculum development process looks like if students’ lived experiences are valued and critical pedagogy leads to reflexive and creative student-oriented learning in art + design education. My research questions ask: 1) How do international students from South Korea adapt to different teaching and learning approaches in a U.S. art + design education program? 2) How do lived experiences affect Korean students’ response to U.S. art + design education practices? and 3) How would Korean students improve the educational environment for student-oriented learning in art + design education? The study used arts-based research methodologies (ABR) including poetry to address and explore cultural issues in the emotional aspects of social life, lived experiences, and identity work, within an autoethnography. My qualitative in-depth interview process also added autoethnography to support personal perspectives in art + design education. Through the multi-layered data collected from the study, I could generate three themes: 1) Students with diverse funds of knowledge and lived experiences are struggling with flatten curriculum and would like to learn diverse design approaches in studying art + design education. 2) Lived experiences inside and outside the classroom influence creative design thinking, learning and the teaching process in art + design education. And 3) Art + design educators play a role in encouraging students to learn about cultural differences inside and outside the classroom, and how creative design abilities contribute to our society and students from diverse communities. Based on these three themes, I confirmed the value of balancing curriculum for student-oriented learning toward community-based participatory design research (CBPR). Through the iterative process of the research, I confirmed autoethnography, as ABR, can expand one’s view of inquiry in art + design education and allow researchers to address diverse cultural issues, expressing emotional feeling and interweaving multi-layered data kinds. On the research, I could acknowledge how my teaching philosophy was improved through self-study, and how I could grow as an educator beyond being a good designer. I express my long journey becoming an art + design educator via several poems and conversational stories with my colleagues.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Teachers’ Construction of Technology Integration Practices Within a Technology Supported Environment
    (2019-07) Chang, Yeng
    Students have more access to technology, but teachers have identified “ineffective professional development” as an obstacle to integrating technology into classrooms (Schoology, 2017). This interpretative case study responds to the need to change current technology integration professional development practices by building upon teachers’ lived experiences. I foreground the voices of teachers who are doing the learning in order to inform the design of professional development. The study took place in a small, first-ring, suburban district with five teachers who taught in a 1:1 setting. I collected participant artifacts, interview data, and field observations and subsequently analyzed the data through coding and three-dimensional narrative inquiry space. The following research questions framed the focus of the study: 1) How do teachers construct technology integration practices in a technology supported environment? 2) What informs teachers’ technology integration practices? 3) What are the practices of secondary teachers related to tech integration? The findings indicate that four factors inform teachers’ technology integration practices: values and beliefs, narrative authority, knowledge of and access to resources, and narrative knowledge. The study also suggests that teachers enacted technology integration practices along a process-oriented and product-oriented spectrum. Taking these two findings into account, I developed the Pinwheel Framework in order to explain how teachers constructed their technology integration practices. This research shifts the conversation from designing technology integration professional development for teachers (a product-oriented approach) towards using teachers’ lived experiences as part of technology integration professional development practices (a process-oriented approach).