Curriculum meets platform: A reconceptualisation of flexible pathways in open and higher education

References

• Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bratton, B. H. (2015). The Stack: On software and sovereignty. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bucher, T. (2018). If… then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, M. (2018). Understanding curriculum: An actor network theory approach. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 9(3), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.37237/090302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, B. Y., Kern, D. E., Kearns, R. M., Thomas, P. A., Hughes, M. T., & Tackett, S. (2019). From modules to MOOCs: Application of the six-step approach to online curriculum development for medical education. Academic Medicine, 94(5), 678–685. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002580
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cliff, A., Walji, S., Jancic Mogliacci, R., Morris, N., & Ivancheva, M. (2022). Unbundling and higher education curriculum: A cultural-historical activity theory view of process. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1711050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cone, L. (2021). The platform classroom: Troubling student configurations in a Danish primary school. Learning, Media and Technology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.2010093
   Google Scholar
• Decuypere, M. (2019a). STS in/as education: Where do we stand and what is there (still) to gain? Some outlines for a future research agenda. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2018.1549709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decuypere, M. (2019b). Open education platforms: Theoretical ideas, digital operations and the figure of the open learner. European Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 439–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118814141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decuypere, M. (2020). Visual network analysis: A qualitative method for researching sociomaterial practice. Qualitative Research, 20(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118816613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decuypere, M. (2021). The topologies of data practices: A methodological introduction. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), 67–84. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2021.1.650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decuypere, M., Grimaldi, E., & Landri, P. (2021). Introduction: Critical studies of digital education platforms. Critical Studies in Education, 62(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1866050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decuypere, M., & Landri, P. (2021). Governing by visual shapes: University rankings, digital education platforms and cosmologies of higher education. Critical Studies in Education, 62(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1720760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downes, S. (2008). Places to go: Connectivism & connective knowledge. Journal of Online Education, 5(1), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, R. (2011). Translating the prescribed into the enacted curriculum in college and school. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(sup1), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2009.00602.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, R. (2015a). Software and the hidden curriculum in digital education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23(2), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2014.977809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, R. (2015b). Knowledge infrastructures and the inscrutability of openness in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(3), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1006131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, R., & Fenwick, T. (2017). Knowledge infrastructures, digital higher education and the hidden curriculum. In B. Leibowitz, V. Bozalek, & P. Kahn (Eds.), Theorising learning to teach in higher education (pp. 81–96). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315559605-13
   Google Scholar
• Eisner, E. W., & Vallance, E. (1974). Five conceptions of curriculum: Their roots and implications for curriculum planning. In E. W. Eisner & E. Vallence (Eds.), Conflicting conceptions of curriculum (pp. 1–18). McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Fenwick, T. J., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gourlay, L., & Oliver, M. (2018). Student engagement in the digital university: Sociomaterial assemblages. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315647524-6
   Google Scholar
• Halvorson, M. (2011). Revealing the technological irresponsibility in curriculum design. Curriculum Inquiry, 41(1), 34–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2010.00523.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirst, P. H. (1969). The logic of the curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1(2), 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027690010205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houlden, S., & Veletsianos, G. (2021). The problem with flexible learning: Neoliberalism, freedom, and learner subjectivities. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(2), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1833920
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivancheva, M. P., Swartz, R., Morris, N. P., Walji, S., Swinnerton, B. J., Coop, T., & Czerniewicz, L. (2020). Conflicting logics of online higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 41(5), 608–625. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2020.1784707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S., & Bastian, M. (2014). ForceAtlas2, a continuous graph layout algorithm for handy network visualization designed for the Gephi software. PLoS One, 9(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonker, H., März, V., & Voogt, J. (2020). Curriculum flexibility in a blended curriculum. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4926
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, G., Coffrin, C., de Barba, P., & Corrin, L. (2015). Predicting success: How learners’ prior knowledge, skills and activities predict MOOC performance. In P. Blikstein, A. Merceron, & G. Siemens (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 136–140). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2723576.2723593
   Google Scholar
• Knox, J. (2016). Posthumanism and the MOOC: Opening the subject of digital education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 35(3), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-016-9516-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knox, J., Williamson, B., & Bayne, S. (2020). Machine behaviourism: Future visions of “learnification” and “datafication” across humans and digital technologies. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1623251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, K. L. D. (2022). Vectors of change in higher education curricula. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 54(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2020.1764627
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, S. (2022). Curriculum, more than a journey on a map. Curriculum Inquiry, 52(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2022.2022334
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambert, S., & Alony, I. (2018). Embedding MOOCs in academic programmes as a part of curriculum transformation: A pilot case study. In K. C. Li, K. S. Yuen, & B. T. M. Wong (Eds.), Innovations in open and flexible education (pp. 73–81). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Li, K. C., Yuen, K. S., & Wong, B. T. M. (2018). Introduction to the book. In K. C. Li, K. S. Yuen, & B. T. M. Wong (Eds.), Innovations in open and flexible education (pp. ix–xviii). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Light, B., Burgess, J., & Duguay, S. (2018). The walkthrough method: An approach to the study of apps. New Media & Society, 20(3), 881–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816675438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCowan, T. (2017). Higher education, unbundling, and the end of the university as we know it. Oxford Review of Education, 43(6), 733–748. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1343712
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaela, M., & Godonoga, A. (2020). SDG 4 - Policies for flexible learning pathways in higher education: Taking stock of good practices internationally. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000372817
   Google Scholar
• Nespor, J. (1994). Knowledge in motion: Space, time and curriculum in undergraduate physics and management. The Palmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nichols, T. P., & LeBlanc, R. J. (2021). Media education and the limits of “literacy”: Ecological orientations to performative platforms. Curriculum Inquiry, 51(4), 389–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2020.1865104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). What students learn matters: Towards a 21st century curriculum. https://doi.org/10.1787/D86D4D9A-EN
   Google Scholar
• Orr, D., Weller, M., & Farrow, R. (2019). How is digitalisation affecting the flexibility and openness of higher education provision? Results of a global survey using a new conceptual model. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2019(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.523
   Google Scholar
• Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Pinar, W. F. (1978). The reconceptualisation of curriculum studies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 10(3), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027780100303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinar, W. F., & Grumet, M. R. (1976). Toward a poor curriculum. Kendall/Hunt.
   Google Scholar
• Priestley, M. (2019). Curriculum: Concepts and approaches. Impact. https://my.chartered.college/impact_article/curriculum-concepts-and-approaches
   Google Scholar
• Priestley, M., & Philippou, S. (2018). Curriculum making as social practice: Complex webs of enactment. The Curriculum Journal, 29(2), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1451096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich, J. (2020). Failure to disrupt: Why technology alone can’t transform education. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sefton-Green, J. (2021). Towards platform pedagogies: Why thinking about digital platforms as pedagogic devices might be useful. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2021.1919999
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simons, M. (2021). The figure of the independent learner: On governing by personalization and debt. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 42(6), 813–827. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1732302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spector, J. M. (2016). A critical look at MOOCs. In M. Jemni, Kinshuk, & M. K. Khribi (Eds.), Open education: From OERs to MOOCs (pp. 135–147). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-52925-6_7
   Google Scholar
• Storme, T., Vansieleghem, N., Devleminck, S., Masschelein, J., & Simons, M. (2016). The emerging pedagogy of MOOCs, the educational design of technology and practices of study. Journal of Computers in Education, 3(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-016-0070-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinnerton, B., Coop, T., Ivancheva, M., Czerniewicz, L., Morris, N. P., Swartz, R., Walji, S., & Cliff, A. (2020). The unbundled university: Researching emerging models in an unequal landscape. In N. Bonderup Dohn, P. Jandric, T. Ryberg, & M. de Laat (Eds.), Mobility, data and learner agency in networked learning (pp. 19–34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36911-8_2
   Google Scholar
• The Open University. (2019). Financial statements 2019.
   Google Scholar
• The Open University. (2022). OpenLearn: The home of free learning from the OU. http://www.open.ac.uk/about/open-educational-resources/openlearn
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2016). Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of sustainable development goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245656
   Google Scholar
• van de Oudeweetering, K., & Decuypere, M. (2019). Understanding openness through (in)visible platform boundaries: A topological study on MOOCs as multiplexes of spaces and times. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(28), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0154-1
   Google Scholar
• van de Oudeweetering, K., & Decuypere, M. (2021). Navigating European education in times of crisis? An analysis of socio-technological architectures and user interfaces of online learning initiatives. European Educational Research Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041211059008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & De Waal, M. (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vansieleghem, N. (2019). Scholastic practices in digital education: On grammatization and poetization in bMOOC. In N. Vansieleghem, J. Vlieghe, & M. Zahn (Eds.), Education in the age of the screen: Possibilities and transformations in technology (pp. 140–157). Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Veletsianos, G., & Houlden, S. (2019). An analysis of flexible learning and flexibility over the last 40 years of distance education. Distance Education, 40(4), 454–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1681893
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wahlström, N. (2018). Where is “the political” in curriculum research? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(6), 711–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2018.1537375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiley, D., & Hilton, J. (2018). Defining OER-enabled pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(4), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i4.3601
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar