Freedoms In the Classroom: Cultivating a Successful Third Space for Literacy Growth

Abstract

This phenomenologically-based, teacher research study looked at themes across the interviews of college students after they participated in the Digital Reading Log (DRL), a literacy-based activity utilizing the Internet, word processing software, and email. The purpose of this study was to investigate students' experiences in the basic skills reading classroom while engaged with the DRL. Findings indicate that the DRL afforded the students various freedoms, such as freedom of language and choice. The data suggested that the instructor was able to draw upon these freedoms to effectively create a Third Space that improved struggling young adult readers' understanding of text while increasing their motivation to read.

Co-constructing teaching and learning in higher education: a literature review of practices and implications

“…constructed) in a way that capitalises on available ecological resources, emphasises meaning-making, and promotes an environment most conducive to learning (Wickman, 2004;Kolb and Kolb, 2005;Prince and Felder, 2006;Mascolo, 2009;Damşa, Nerland, and Andreadakis, 2019). Nash-Ditzel and Brown, 2012;Faraon et al, 2020;Damşa and Muukkonen, 2020). The concept of a zone of proximal development and scaffolded learning are essential to understanding a co-constructed learning environment.…”

“…Having a sense of the purpose of their learning facilitates students' ability to embrace their sense of agency and to feel valued in the classroom space (Grimmett, 1997;Kolb and Kolb, 2005;Fried, 2007;Barton and Tan, 2009;Nash-Ditzel and Brown, 2012;Cook-Sather, 2014;Stefaniak and Tracey, 2015;Ha and Pepin, 2017;Cook-Sather, 2018). In a commentary on rethinking traditional pedagogies, Fried (2007) summarises how co-constructed learning can allow students an opportunity to not only construct knowledge and meaning but to construct their sense of self, formulate their personal beliefs, and identify their individual purpose within society.…”

“…For the purposes of this paper as an activator in co-constructed learning spaces, relationships are multifaceted and include both interpersonal relationships (see Jørgensen et al, 2020) and mediated (relational) knowledge between students and educational tools (see epistemological objects in Damşa and Muukkonen, 2020). In alignment with the zone of proximal development, numerous studies demonstrate how these relationships can exist between students and teachers, between students and other students, between students and learning tools, and/or between students and physical or mental spaces (Wickman and Östman, 2002;Wickman, 2004;Sidelinger and Booth-Butterfield, 2010;Nash-Ditzel and Brown, 2012;Cook-Sather, 2014;Cook-Sather, 2018;Jørgensen et al, 2020;Sisson et al, 2021).…”

“…This flexibility allows for the inclusion of content that students find relevant, thus promoting engagement and investment in their education. Utilising topics from popular culture and current events, the use of modern technologies, and incorporating variations in forms of communication and engagement (such as using the internet to facilitate discussion) are some of the ways in which teachers co-construct learning with their students while also tapping into the third space (Kolb and Kolb, 2005;Nash-Ditzel and Brown, 2012;Jørgensen et al, 2020).…”

The Transformative Learning Potential in the Hybrid Space Between Technology and Intercultural Encounters

“…Although there is the potential for transformative learning in this third space, this is more likely to be realized when scaffolded by the mutual relationships between lecturers, students, activities, and knowledge both inside and outside the school (Nash-Ditzel, & Brown, 2012). This scaffolding takes place within the learner’s zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978) because learners can draw on their local literacy practices, and it involves a more capable peer or teacher providing the necessary support for the learner to extend their skills or knowledge.…”