OER Synthesis and Evaluation / Pilot Phase Synthesis Framework
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.

View
 

Pilot Phase Synthesis Framework

Page history last edited by Lou McGill 9 years, 1 month ago

This is the final synthesis framework for the pilot programme and includes outcomes. As project outputs emerge which illustrate and evidence the outcomes these will be added as links.

 

Many of the issues identified below are discussed in detail in project final reports and evaluation documents. Where a report pays particular attention to an issue - this will be noted in the table below. Final reports, evaluation documents and other outputs from pilot programme projects are all available from the JISC OER Infokit

 

Focus area

Issues and questions

Lessons/outcomes

Outputs/deliverables

General approaches to open content

Do we have an initiative, project, working group, or other forum to bring together people interested in open educational resources?


Who (else) needs to be involved?


What models are sustainable?

Just getting the interested parties together can help move towards improved practice on open educational resources.


Face to face working has considerable advantages if it can be arranged.


Roles that may need to be considered and ideally included in OER initiatives include: e-learning, library and learning resources, content development (multimedia), repository, legal (IPR), learning and teaching champions, quality.


Working across departments is essential but can take time: allow more time than you think to build trust and achieve consensus.


A community repository approach has been highly successful (shared responsibility, tangible outcomes of shared development activities, web 2.0 features which allow individuals to create a profile and identity within the community).

Case studies and scenarios

Case studies (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

OER MEDEV: 14 scenarios/use cases (66 more planned) (MEDEV Project)

OER-CSAP six partner case studies (CSAP Project)


Workflow models

CORRE workflow model (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)


A sustainable model for OER Implementation at Leeds metropolitan University OER10 Conference March 2010 - (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

Chemistry FM Project notes on sustainability (Chemistry FM, University of Lincoln) 


  web 2.0 communities

 

What institutional strategies and policies are relevant to open content? How might they have to change?

 

Case studies and scenarios


Workflow models

CORRE: a framework for transforming teaching materials into OERs and CORRE workflow model (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)


STEM OER Guidance Wiki - This wiki constitutes a collection of guidance documentation on all aspects of Open Educational Resources (OER), produced by the STEM project teams from a number of Higher Education Academy/JISC OER pilot projects, and is based on the teams' combined experiences working with practising academics to explore the issues surrounding OER production and release.
OER Briefing Paper - Turning a Resource into an Open Educational Resource (OER) - (Skills for Scientists Project)

 


C-change evidence of new or enhanced policies, processes and work flows at consortium institutions through case studies of practice: http://c-changeproject.org.uk/?page_id=3


ADM-OER report detailing current practices in participating institutions and offering guidance on OER release http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/library/files/sector-projects/adm-oer-project-report-folder/oers-towards-understanding-and-future-policy-in-art-design-and-media-higher-education-focus-group-report.pdf

 

OER Strategy Document   - (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)  

 

 

What are our motivations to release open content?

How an institution takes forward open content initiatives will depend on the motivations and business models perceived as relevant. Motivations are typically multiple, complex, and open to change as the process unfolds. They might include:


institutional reputation and attracting potential students


enhancing learner choice/information


personal academic/professional reputation


share-and-share-alike


commitment to open education agenda


support institutional repository/content agenda


meet outreach and public engagement goals


other public interest agenda (e.g. with content such as public health, climate change)


make content development more efficient (especially in niche/declining subject areas)


enhance access for e.g. work-based, international and lifelong learners


respond to changing modes of learning e.g. peer-to-peer, learner-directed, informal


build curriculum partnerships e.g. with industry

Institutional Strategy and Policy documents

Leeds Metropolitan University Academic Board discussion paper (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)


Guidelines for different aspects of the release process

OER staff development workshop - supported by Cloudworks Nov 2009 and Analysis of workshop evaluation questionnaire (Open Exeter, University of Exeter with support from the Open University)

Staff training sessions summary (OpenSpires project, University of Oxford)

OER Basics (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

FAQs (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

Open Educational resources at Leicester (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

FAQs (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

Survey results of OER staff development workshop evaluation (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

Guidelines for evaluating value of materials for use in the OER Project (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

Joint staff OER guide booklet led by Leeds Metropolitan University with contributions by others - (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

Releasing Open Educational resources, including how to clear a resource for open release, dealing with 3rd party content, Creative Commons licensing and how to upload/download resources to Flickr, Scribd, Slideshare and YouTube (CORE-Materials Project)

Humbox guide to oers (Humbox Project)

STEM OER Guidance Wiki This wiki constitutes a collection of guidance documentation on all aspects of Open Educational Resources (OER), produced by the STEM project teams from a number of Higher Education Academy/JISC OER pilot projects, and is based on the teams' combined experiences working with practising academics to explore the issues surrounding OER production and release. The resource has been designed as a starting point for those interested in OER, and contains a general overview, information on intellectual property rights, packaging and uploading resources, evaluating suitability of resources and ensuring their promotion and sustainability

OER Briefing Paper - Turning a Resource into an Open Educational Resource (OER) - (Skills for Scientists Project)

 

What seem to be our main barriers and concerns?

Many individuals are keen to see their content openly available but lack knowledge of how to go about this. Some are very concerned about legalities – both who owns their learning and teaching content, and how to ensure that content they release is legal.


Some institutions are also extremely concerned about legal issues, and/or regard content as an important asset to be protected.


Key success factors cited by projects: accessible, easy-to-use repository; local support for technical, legal and educational issues; time and opportunity to experiment; flexible quality processes; institutional support. The lack of these can present barriers to change.

Workflow models

CORRE workflow model (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)


Raising awareness of content:

 

MMTV newspaper articles on awareness-raising processes: Twitter
Social Networking Marketing 

Series of videos to support those using the web to highlight open content  MMTV: Making XML Site Maps:  MMTV: Registering on multiple domains  ; MMTV: Twitter:   MMTV: Tweet Deck  (MMTV Project, University of Westminster)

 

Developing, managing and sharing OERs

What models and resources do we have available for developing content, including multimedia and hybrid content?

How resources are designed has significant impact on their 'openness' in practice. Currently, academics and departments do not tend to consider reusability issues when developing teaching materials unless there is a course redesign or pdeagogic approach that supports ongoing development.

 


 

Many projects are exploring models of technology-enhanced learning, alongside models for supporting the OER lifecycle. Implying the two may be closedly connected.

 


Many projects are finding that design for open release, rather than repurposing of existing resources, can be more efficient.


Bite-sized resources may be preferable to encourage repurposing (but note some academics and institutions prefer to maintain the integrity of materials)

 

Process models

Module framework - used as a template (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)

CORRE: a framework for transforming teaching materials into OERs (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)


Guidance on various aspects of the open content lifecycle


Guidance on releasing various types of content

Creating and formatting documents for e-readers using ePub (OTTER Project)

Screencast tutorials on producing podcasts - (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

Creating and formatting documents for e-readers using ePub: a comprehensive guide on how to create and edit existing documents into ePub files for use on e-readers and other devices (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)


Taxonomies and metadata guidelines

Guidelines For EngSC OER-Descriptions - (ENGSC Project)
Metadata mapping - (Open Exeter, University of Exeter)
Metadata Schema - (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)
Metadata Arghhh blog post - (Chemistry.FM)

 

 

What policies and resources do we have available for managing content?

Institutional repositories can be key drivers for open content release, but they are not always the best hosting solution and sometimes can present problems e.g. of resource duplication, branding and presentation. Also access permissions and contributor permissions if those developing the OER are not members of the institution.  


Issues such as branding, hosting, QA, IPR (internal/external) need policies and support at institutional level (some of these dealt with below), but release initiatives need flexibility to innovate


Many projects are using social media sites to host and promote content: clear policies on these are helpful


Take-down policy if status of a resource changes or is challenged


Need for integrated approach to the management of content including educational resources, research and innovation outputs, learner-generated content etc. Ideally with the possibility of interoperability with learner-related and course-related data (e.g. to support personalised learning paths)

Guidance on releasing various types of content

Creating and formatting documents for e-readers using ePub: a comprehensive guide on how to create and edit existing documents into ePub files for use on e-readers and other devices (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)


Taxonomies and metadata guidelines


Case studies in different organisational approaches to support


BROME take down policy  


 Chemistry FM reflection on "Pencils and Pixels"

 

 


OOER MEDEV toolkits: including: Patient and non-patient consent; IPR/copyright; Institutional policy; Internationalisation; Pedagogy/QA; Resource discovery;Resource upload (OOER and MEDEV Projects)

 

OER MEDEV: 14 scenarios/use cases (66 more planned): to be made available from http://www.medev.ac.uk/oer/case_studies.html

 

OER-CSAP toolkit https://csapoer.pbworks.com/Project-outputs%3A-Toolkit

OER-CSAP six partner case studies: https://csapoer.pbworks.com/Development-activity-3%3A-Putting-together-case-studies

 

A draft working copy of list of GEES Teaching Resources to help with Copyright Clearance in C-change:  GEES Teaching resources:

 

What new issues are likely to arise with open content?

Designing for unknown users and for multiple contexts of use


Design of online materials including multiple media and hybrid formats


Granularity of resources: bite-sized elements of content may be more appropriate than integrated course materials


May need to record new metadata e.g. attributions and references, (multiple) IPR clearance, (multiple) dates and contributors


Multiple hosting solutions – institutional repositories, open/public repositories, social networking sites... tension between repurposability and integrity/control


Inclusion of learner-created content with some OERs

Process models

Making resources discoverable presentation (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)


Guidance on various aspects of the open content lifecycle


Guidance on releasing various types of content

Series of videos to support those using the web to highlight open content MMTV: Making XML Site Maps MMTV: Registering on multiple domains MMTV: Twitter MMTV: Tweet Deck (MMTV Project, University of Westminster)

MMTV: search rankingsvideo and video showing links to the website (MMTV Project, University of Westminster)


Case studies in different organisational approaches to support


Student as producer and student IPR (Chemistry FM project, University of Lincoln)

Example of student-generated content as OERs - BURN Biosciences Undergraduate Research at Nottingham (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)

Expertise

What expertise will we need to build capacity for developing, managing and sharing OERs?

At present, staff need 'considerable support' to ready materials for open access and re-use. Some of the relevant expertise necessarily resides in – or can be developed by – specialist departments, while some arguably should to be extended to frontline academic staff. Projects are finding that the relevant expertise includes:


finding and using open resources for learning and teaching


designing content for online delivery


designing content in different media and for different platforms e.g. mobile


packaging and uploading resources to a repository or host site, including metadata and other conextualising information (comments etc)


choosing and using public hosting sites e.g. SL, youtube, i-tunes-u, slideshare, Vimeo, openlearn, opencourseware, WordPress, e-Prints


making content easily discoverable e.g. promoting through google, twitter, facebook and other social networks


evaluation and Quality Assurance of OERs


evaluation, communication and sustainability of OER projects

Projects will produce tailored guidance for their institutions/communities. Programme will develop generic guidance drawing on best examples

Series of videos to support those using the web to highlight open content MMTV: Making XML Site Maps MMTV: Registering on multiple domains MMTV: Twitter MMTV: Tweet Deck (MMTV Project, University of Westminster)


Subject Centres can provide guidance to their communities on OER issues and in many cases have open repositories and/or communities of practice www.heacademy.ac.uk/subjectcentres


JISC Legal can provide guidance on the legal aspects of content and IPR www.jisclegal.ac.uk


SCORE can provide guidance on other aspects of open content release http://www8.open.ac.uk/score/

Business cases and benefits realisation

What business model(s) can we offer or develop for our stakeholders?

We are finding three alternative cases for open release – there may be more: add link


The current financial climate is discouraging innovation unless direct benefits can be proven in terms of (e.g.) new markets, student numbers, shared costs of development and teaching

Evidence of benefits experienced by institutions and communities


Good intentions: Business Cases report (2009)

 

What benefits might we expect to see from open content release?

Different benefits are experienced by individuals, departments, institutions and subject communities (see 'motivations' above). Evidence for benefits is summarised in a separate document.


Awarness raising around OER can have benefits in increased awareness of related work. 


OER originators benefitted from reflection gained via student/user feedback. All projects have commented on the benefits gained in this way, and the improvement to their materials

 

Evidence of benefits experienced by institutions and communities - several resources in the Cultural issues section of this table focus on benefits


Good intentions: Business Cases report (2009)


 Video demonstrating increased ranking of course due to awareness raising of OERs MMTV video showing ranking of MSc in Multimedia

 

What costs can we expect?

The main costs are associated with the time involved in preparing and uploading resources, securing copyright clearance, and undertaking any additional development/QA required by the process of open release. These may be borne mainly by specialist staff e.g. on project funding, or mainly by academic staff with appropriate support.

Project costings as exemplars - mainly covered in project final reports

Cultural issues

What attitudes to and expectations of OER exist in our institution?

Many projects have commented on the lack of a awareness of OER, including knowledge of creative common licensing and the use of open web 2.0 services for hosting.


Where there is awareness, there is often a lack of consensus about what constitutes ‘openness’, metadata requirements, resusability, a repository.


We are finding evidence of different norms and values within HE, FE, Industry & the professional bodies, and in different subject and topic communities.


However, there is a much greater awareness of open content now than even a short time ago thanks to some high profile international and national initiatives.


How past and current OER initiatives are perceived can have a significant impact, positive or negative; perceived quality of existing shared resources is also significant.

Review of existing research into these issues and outcomes of project reflections and evaluations

 

Staff attitudes to OERs survey and presentation Opening Up: Staff attitudes to open learning OCWC Global 7th May 2010 (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)

 

The Challenge of OER to Academic Practice  Abstract and Presentation at OER10 Conference March 2010 (Open Exeter, University of Exeter)

 

MEI, Q., BOYLE, T.. Dimensions of Culturally Sensitive Factors in the Design and Development of Learning Objects. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, North America, 2010, dec. 2010. Available at: http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2010-6. (Open Exeter, University of Exeter)

 

Summary of staff focus group activities (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

 

Staff survey results (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford

 

Stakeholder views on Open Educational Resources: research report (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

 

Small sample staff survey results (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University) 

 

Developing a local reward and recognition strategy and discussions on a national agreement - (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

 

Survey results of OER staff development workshop evaluation (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

 

LLAS e-learning symposium, 28/29 January, 2010. workshop on publishing teaching resources and enhancing your professional reputation on day 1; while day 2 featured a presentation on innovative use of HumBox (Humbox Project)

 

Lifting the Lid: sharing in the humanities community using the Humbox, OER Conference, Nottingham, 25 November, 2009. (HumBox Project)

 

OERs - Towards Understanding and Future Policy in Art, Design and Media Higher Education: Focus Group and Survey Report (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

 

ADM-OER Project Survey Summary 1 and ADM-OER Project Survey Summary 2 (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

 

OER Focus Group Handout (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

 

Peer Review Workshop, September 2009 edited videos (HumBox Project)
 

 

openSpace critiquing guidelines (openspace Project)

 

openSpace forums (openspace Project)


Comparative data on differential practices across institutions, subject areas, and sectors


Evidence of actions that have led to change of attitude, enhanced awareness and confidence, engagement, sustainability in communities involved in OER.


 

 

 

What practices and partnerships already exist that could be supportive of OER?

OER projects have had greatest impact where institutions and communities were already collaborating on some aspects of educational content, and where good working relationships among the relevant staff already existed.


Accepted practice appears to be that a ‘reasonable’ amount of exchange between academics in different institutions is expected (e.g. lectures and notes) but whole courses or significant blocks of material have not often been considered.


OER partnerships can be difficult to get off the ground but once established can help to spread open practices rapidly as institutions/depts share best practice.

Review of existing research into these issues and outcomes of project reflections and evaluations


Comparative data on differential practices across institutions, subject areas, and sectors


Evidence of actions that have led to change of attitude, enhanced awareness and confidence, engagement, sustainability in communities involved in OER.


The time barrier can be overcome if coupled with some other disruptive and time-consuming change such as course review, adapting content for a new business partner, or implementation of new technological systems, and in these circumstances staff seem more willing to be open.

 

What are the cultural barriers to open release and how can we help overcome them?

Staff are often willing to release resources openly but feel constrained by: a lack of time and support, concern about 'inappropriate' use of resources by others (see under third-party services below), anxiety over IPR issues (see legal).


There is a lack of reward and recognition for investment in OER in current academic career pathways.


Some staff are reluctant to raise the issue at institutional level for fear of discovering that practices which have worked well 'under the radar' will be deemed unacceptable.

Review of existing research into these issues and outcomes of project reflections and evaluations


Comparative data on differential practices across institutions, subject areas, and sectors


Evidence of actions that have led to change of attitude, enhanced awareness and confidence, engagement, sustainability in communities involved in OER.

 

What other cultural issues need to be taken into account?

Little evidence of UK HEIs using OERs from outside the UK.


Teaching materials may need to be examined for cultural bias and assumptions about the end user community.


There have been concerns raised that open release of UK OERs may constitute a form of 'cultural imperialism' which may have negative impacts on the capacity of developing HE systems to define their own curricula and content.

Review of existing research into these issues and outcomes of project reflections and evaluations


Comparative data on differential practices across institutions, subject areas, and sectors


Evidence of actions that have led to change of attitude, enhanced awareness and confidence, engagement, sustainability in communities involved in OER.

Roles, rewards and divisions of labour

With whom are open educational resources primarily identified (i.e. who benefits from reputational enhancements)?

Need to consider the balance of institutional branding and marketisation with incentives for individuals to showcase their own learning/teaching expertise, and the desire for materials to be easily repurposed by end users.


However, individuals may worry that they will be seen as 'responsible' for all uses of content which they originally released: a degree of collective responsibility is necessary.

Institutional case studies and transformation indices/measures


Evidence of new or enhanced open licensing policies, processes and work flows


HR toolkit

 

How might the open release of learning resources affect the roles of individuals?

Direct access to content by learners may change roles in learning-teaching relationship


Departmental boundaries and management structures may come under strain due to multiple implications of open release


Need to look at how OER uptake could be credibly evidenced to enhance academic reputation e.g. in new research assessment framework, review and promotion etc


See also 'expertise' for implications of OER for human resources and capacity.

Institutional case studies and transformation indices/measures


Evidence of new or enhanced open licensing policies, processes and work flows


HR toolkit


Collaboration and peer review may provide feedback and assessment : openSpace critiquing guidelines
openSpace forums

 

Who is identified as responsible for legality, accessibility, re-usabillity and quality of open content?

All projects reporting that responsibility for these issues is extremely variable across institutions, and within one institution it can be impossible for even well-informed and motivated staff to find support. Because of the complexity of the issues, advice on a per-case basis is of more value than guidance documents.

OER Legal matters interview broadcast as JISCLegal Webcast (Open Exeter Project, University of Exeter)

Identifying provenance of learning materials - guidelines for Academics  (Open Exeter Project, University of Exeter)

Staff poll relating to Image use (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

IPR workshop survey responses (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)
What is OER? licence and explanation of how people can use the OERs (brOME Project, Mark Van Hoorebeek, Bradford University)

Student as producer and student IPR (Chemistry FM project, University of Lincoln)

IPR and copyright when sharing educational resources, University of Southampton, 14 December, 2009. (Humbox Project)

Copyright, Intellectual Property and Licensing: Institutional Report (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

Releasing Open Educational resources, including how to clear a resource for open release, dealing with 3rd party content, Creative Commons licensing and how to upload/download resources to Flickr, Scribd, Slideshare and YouTube (CORE-Materials Project)

Legal issues

What legal issues will need to be considered?

Obtaining permissions for every element of content included in an open resource


Sourcing replacement materials that are free of copyright or available for open release where necessary


Managing creative commons licensing and other legal frameworks for open release


Managing partnership arrangements for consortia approaches to IPR

Template letters, licenses, agreements

Copyright tracking sheet (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

Copyright guidence resources: links to a range of support materials available on the web (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

Lessons learned by the Copyright Officer of the OTTER Project, University of Leicester

Copyright at Oxford (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

U-Now Copyright Statement (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)

Copyright in Online Resources: Content Authors (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

Copyright in Online Resources: Content Users (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

FAQs on Copyright - series of MP3 podcasts  Who owns copyright?  How long does copyright last?  Where would you inquire about copyright clearance?  What resources are covered by copyright?  Web pages and copyright    Movies and copyright  Music and copyright (OpenStaffs Project, Staffordshire University)

Guide to Copyright (OpenStaffs Project, Staffordshire University)

Summary of Copyright Quiz activities (OpenStaffs Project, Staffordshire University)

OERs - Copyright, Intellectual Property and Licensing Guidance (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

OER Depositor Agreement (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

UAL Seeking Permission from publishers letter (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

UCA Digital Resources Release Form (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

IPR and Copyright when sharing Educational Resources Humbox/EdShare event (Humbox Project)


JISCLegal guidelines and direct support


 

How can these best be addressed?

Essential to inform academics of the support available and of their responsibilities – there is anxiety around this issue.


Ensure legal support is updated to cover digital learning and teaching materials and the implications of open licensing.


Ensure legal support is flexible and can be contextualised for different academic needs – generic guidance is less useful than case-specific and hands-on advice.


Policy and practice are often at odds – in some places just 'asking the question' can be seen as dangerous, leading to increased scrutiny and problems. Policy needs to be clarified and ideally needs to be supportive of an open education agenda.

IPR papers and toolkits arising from the separate projects

Series of presentations to staff Teaching presentation 1 - OpenSpires Project Teaching presentation 2 - Copyright Introduction Teaching presentation 3 - Creative Commons Introduction (1/2) Teaching presentation 4 - Finding OER (Powerpoint link) (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

Releasing Open Educational resources, including how to clear a resource for open release, dealing with 3rd party content, Creative Commons licensing and how to upload/download resources to Flickr, Scribd, Slideshare and YouTube (CORE-Materials Project)

Identifying provenance of learning materials - guidelines for Academics (Open Exeter Project, University of Exeter)

FAQs on Copyright - series of MP3 podcasts Who owns copyright? How long does copyright last? Where would you inquire about copyright clearance? What resources are covered by copyright? Web pages and copyright Movies and copyright Music and copyright (OpenStaffs Project, Staffordshire University)

Guide to Copyright (OpenStaffs, Staffordshire University)

OERs - Copyright, Intellectual Property and Licensing Guidance (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)


Outcomes of any programme approaches to specific publishers e.g. Ordnance Survey, Elsevier etc.

 

What specific IPR issues are likely to arise?

Practical and legal complications of tracing IPR on materials created from multiple sources – allow more time!


Problems securing copyright for material from journals (often small-scale e.g. diagrams, graphs) which may have been included in OERs – a sector-wide approach is called for


Rights clearance metadata needs to be built into content management


IPR on screenshots is particularly complex as it concerns both content and software, as is


IPR on 'generic' materials such as formulae and closely related works, and on simulations


A take-down policy is important to enable swift response to any violations


Some resources may require multiple licenses to cover different elements (though this should be avoided if possible)

 

Licenses

Open content terms of use in U-Now repository (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)

Licencing and clearing issues Guidance for content contributors prepared by Head of IPR and University Lawyers (Open Exeter Project, University of Exeter)

OpenSpires Creative Commons Introduction (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

Background to the OpenSpires Licence (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)

What is OER? licence and explanation of how people can use the OERs (brOME Project, Mark Van Hoorebeek, Bradford University)


JISCLegal guidelines and direct support


IPR papers and toolkits arising from the separate projects


Outcomes of any programme approaches to specific publishers e.g. Ordnance Survey, Elsevier etc.

 


Takedown policies:

Takedown policy - U-now repository (BERLIN Project, University of Nottingham)

Repository takedown policy - (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

UAL Take Down Policy (Open Educational Resources (ADM-OER) Project)

BROME take down policy  (BROME Project)


Statement on licencing of captured data:

.http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ma-professional-writing/ma-professional-writing-taster-sessions/taster-1-introduction-writin

 

 

Technical and hosting issues

How should we be hosting OERs?

To some extent this depends on your motivations: community repositories work well for a 'share and share alike' model, while individuals may look to third-party hosting to maximise the discoverability of their resources.


It is important to maintain the most up to date version of a resource at a stable URL to support reliable access


Whatever hosting solution is used, consider how use will be tracked

Findings and case studies on different hosting solutions


Guides to packaging and uploading OERs to a range of repositories and host sites


Guide to tracking use of OERs

 

What kinds of metadata are required, and what are the issues in creating and managing metadata?

The upload process must be kept as simple as possible so that it can be managed effectively by non-specialists


End-user requirements need to be traded against ease and speed of upload.


Different levels of metadata (essential and desired) may be appropriate for different users


Project team doing the tagging (quality and consistency assured, reduced burden on contributors) vs devolved to contributors (more sustainable, lower quality and consistency)


Several projects are finding free tagging leads to cumbersome searches, and are developing controlled vocabularies for use in a particular domain of OER.

Metadata templates and use guides

Guidelines For EngSC OER-Descriptions - (ENGSC Project)
Metadata mapping - (Open Exeter, University of Exeter)
Metadata Schema - (OpenSpires Project, University of Oxford)
Metadata Arghhh blog post - (Chemistry.FM)
JorumOpen Help Guides include helpsheets on depositing, adding and amending metadata, and the Licence Guide for JorumOpen



Resource type taxonomies


Subject and topic taxonomies


Interfaces and automated schema for tagging


Chemistry FM blog on metadata issues  

 

How do existing repositories e.g. OpenJorum support the release, management, discovery etc of OERs in the UK?

A great deal of feedback has been given to JorumOpen by project teams – this is being separately collated for our final report. Issues raised include:


Dealing with expired content and keeping content up to date


Duplicated content or linked-to?


Different degrees of openness available to depositors?


Potential tension between open content ethos and mandating specific hosting solutions (e.g. a specific repository).

 

Updated processes and guidance from JorumOpen

JorumOpen Help Guides include helpsheets on depositing, adding and amending metadata, and the Licence Guide for JorumOpen

JorumOpen FAQs

the Jorum Community Bay includes a JorumOpen and OER discussion forum, and a series of vidcasts on using JorumOpen


Evaluation of institutional and community repositories for useability


 

What issues arise when using public/third-party hosting solutions?

Projects have successfully used SecondLife, youtube, slideshare, flickr, i-tunes-u to host OERs. However, there are some problems with the use of third-party solutions:

  • may not interface well with repositories
  • may not support all formats e.g. Flash animations
  • inconsistency and unreliability: web 2.0 sites are at different stages of development
  • issues of resource ownership e.g. Flickr does not allow upload by proxy – the person who has up-loaded the resource is, by default, the resource owner
  • risks associated with plagiarism, defamation, flaming, spamming, bullying (and particularly how these risks are perceived by potential contributors)

Evidence on pros and cons of different open content websites


Guidance on use of Web 2.0 services

 

Precaution against the danger that free, third-party, solutions may disappear by storing resources elsewhere: Chemistry FM mindmap navigation 

take advantage of the benefits of more dynamic third-party sites without the risk of losing original material:

Chemistry FM blog on repositories and the open web
Chemistry FM presentation on repositories and the open web


 


 

Potentially greater visibility provided by third party public solutions: Chemistry FM YouTube videos

 

Format/platform/standards issues

Materials will need to be converted to non-proprietary formats, which often means repurposing them from the versions made available in the VLE.


Technical repurposing may need to include:

  • making learning objects editable and reusable
  • making hybrid, interactive and multi-media resources available for open access (e.g. packaging Flash movies etc)
  • standardising use of ppt. doc, pdf and other standard file types – what versions etc?
  • content packaging
  • conforming to interoperability standards (list of standards being used by projects is separately available)

Guidelines on a range of resource types


Guidelines on creating and releasing simulations


Guidelines on releasing mathematical formulae and other specialist entities


Guidelines on releasing interactive content

 

Other technical developments

Technical developments being explored by projects include:


use of RSS feeds to aggregate resources from different sites


specialist interfaces/tools for search and upload


community repositories and contribution to development of JorumOpen interface platform and standard for sharing simulation components


learning design tools and platforms to support development of OERs use of google analytics to track access and downloads

Technical developments as listed, and any evaluation data


Guidelines on using e.g. Wimba and other platforms to author OERs

Quality issues

What quality processes are appropriate for different communities?

Subject communities are finding peer review the natural way to quality assure open resources.


Some projects are testing resources directly with learners.


Institutions will want to manage QA within existing processes, including peer review and student representation


Web 2.0 solutions and community repositories can support ongoing review/commentary around issues of 'best use' and emerging value rather than just a one-off value judgement.

Reflection on peer review processes by different projects


Findings on sustainability of quality processes


Any quality checklists and criteria used by projects

Guidelines for evaluating value of materials for use in the OER Project (Unicycle Project, Leeds Metropolitan University)

Quality criteria for OERs

(OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

Quality matters in OERs (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

Usability evaluation of U-now by OER Africa (BERLIN Project - University of Nottingham)
 

Do OERs require different/additional quality processes?

Online resources do have different quality issues e.g. interactivity, interoperability, accessibility


Question: (how) do repurposed resources retain quality? (This was found to be a major concern for academic contributors)


Question: (how) can resources be designed for unknown learners and multiple contexts of use? Does this impact on quality?


Criteria currently in use for QA by projects include: appropriateness and relevance; usability; reusability and repurposability; clarity of content and design; fit with benchmarks, UG and other subject/professional frameworks; accessibility; interactivity; portability; discoverability; user satisfaction; pedagogic acceptance/value; software compatibility; metadata tagging; conformance to technical standards; sustainability

Reflection on peer review processes by different projects


Findings on sustainability of quality processes


Any quality checklists and criteria used by projects


public peer review:  ChemistryFM poster analysing YouTube rankings and student survey results

 


a community-based approach : "Teaching in Public framework"

 

Are there any sustainable, long-term approaches to QA and QE for OERs?

(How) can quality be monitored over time?


What impact do perceptions of quality have on uptake and reuse?


(How) can re-use enhance the quality of open resources?

Reflection on peer review processes by different projects


Findings on sustainability of quality processes


Any quality checklists and criteria used by projects

Pedagogy/end-use issues

Which types of OER are used by different stakeholders?

Projects are releasing a very wide range of OER types, including: videos, podcasts, notes, bibliographies, mind maps, assignments and exercises, course outlines, readings, slides, online tutorials and workshops, RLOs, web links, quizzes, exam papers, simulations...


Projects are collating evidence of the demand for OERs from different stakeholders, including CPD users, casual/informal learners, enrolled and potentially enrolled students, teaching staff, and different types of re-use (e.g. mediated by teachers/direct by learners, stand-alone/re-embedded etc)

Evaluation data relating to users and uses including any evidence of pedagogic enhancement


Pedagogic guidelines


Guidelines on use and re-use

Guidance on how to engage with, re-use and share openSpace OERs (openSpace Project, University College Falmouth)

Guidance on how to engage with openSpace sessions and units (openSpace Project, University College Falmouth)

Downloading and using the re-packaged interactive Flash content from CORE-Materials (CORE-Materials Project)

 

What are the pedagogical issues in designing content for open release?

There is a trade-off between the integrity of the resource, which is often a priority for providers (particularly those seeking reputational benefits), and its repurposability (a priority for end users).


Many projects are choosing to disaggregate resources to support re-use. However, this is often within a context where the whole curriculum is conceptualised (e.g. through a taxonomy, benchmark or framework). This requires additional work and may assume a shared set of pedagogic objectives and values by the end user.


There is an issue over how far pedagogy – i.e. an implied educational approach and values, specific learning goals and activities – can and should be incorporated into content, and whether as an integral part of content design, through metadata tagging, or released separately e.g. case studies, guidance notes, example activities.

Evaluation data relating to users and uses including any evidence of pedagogic enhancement


Pedagogic guidelines

 

The Challenge of OER to Academic Practice OER10, Cambridge, 22-24 March, 20 (OpenExeter, University of Exeter)

 

Poscasting in Assessment: New technology in Higher Education Research (PANTHER) Workshop (OTTER Project, University of Leicester)

 

The HEA/JISC funded Chemistry FM project: Opening Education and Teaching in Public (Chemistry FM Project, University of Lincoln)

 

Out of the Box: Using HumBox for Sharing and Showcasing Teaching Resources, University of Sheffield, 26 February, 2010.  Official launch of the HumBox

 

Creating OE for Art, Design, Media & Performance Students
paper delivered at Open Ed 2009 (Vancouver) (OpenSpace Project, University of Falmouth)

 

Publishing your teaching resources and enhancing your professional impact. Humbox pre event workshop, LLAS e-learning symposium, on the 28th January, 2010 (Humbox Project)

 

Browne, T.J. & Newcombe, M. (2009) "Open educational resources: A new creative space", in Same places, different spaces. Proceedings ascilite Auckland 2009  and the presentation(University of Exeter)

 

In what ways are learners accessing and using OERs?

In what ways, if at all, do learning and teaching practices (need to) change when OERs are widely available?


What skills/literacies do staff and students need to adapt to using and creating content in an open way?


These questions are not the primary focus of the OER pilot programme but clearly need to be addressed by institutions. Some of the entries under 'expertise' above are relevant.

Evidence from evaluations of end use (incuding surveys, focus groups, user testing...)


Literature review on OERs and challenges to existing learning practices and educational institutions

 

Opening Resources, Opening Minds OER10, Cambridge, 22-24 March, 20 (HumBox project)

 

 

 




 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.