| |
UKOER-Phase-3-Interim-findings
This version was saved 13 years, 8 months ago
View current version Page history
Saved by Lou McGill
on May 10, 2012 at 6:00:52 pm
Part-time/hourly-paid tutors have a range of varied motivations for working on a fractional basis and some may wish for greater integration into the academic life of their institutions, but others may not. The project team were initially convinced that hourly-paid tutors would be easily persuaded to participate in the project for several reasons: it would raise their profile within their institution and beyond; they could have a public professional profile which would be held outwith any institutional affiliation; they could participate in a research project and attend conferences etc. However, it quickly became clear to us that many such tutors choose their working patterns (rather than being forced by circumstances within an institution) and so do not necessarily have a particular interest in a professional profile or greater integration into their institution – and so were not that interested in open practice and the FAVOR project. Similarly, the lack of job security felt by tutors disinclined them to share their work generally. We intend to explore these attitudes as part of the evaluation process to obtain a better understanding of how open practice relates to the work of part-time language tutors, and how arguments should be formulated to build an effective and active community of practice amongst this group.
Open practice is still a new concept to many language teachers and issues around copyright, IPR, licensing and quality still need to be discussed and worked through.
Community-building through face-to-face meetings is challenging for part-time tutors, who are rarely all available at the same time. When such meetings take place, they are much valued for the opportunity to share practice – but in many cases, have been impossible for project partners to facilitate.
Part-time/hourly-paid tutors have a range of varied motivations for working on a fractional basis and some may wish for greater integration into the academic life of their institutions, but others may not. The project team were initially convinced that hourly-paid tutors would be easily persuaded to participate in the project for several reasons: it would raise their profile within their institution and beyond; they could have a public professional profile which would be held outwith any institutional affiliation; they could participate in a research project and attend conferences etc. However, it quickly became clear to us that many such tutors choose their working patterns (rather than being forced by circumstances within an institution) and so do not necessarily have a particular interest in a professional profile or greater integration into their institution – and so were not that interested in open practice and the FAVOR project. Similarly, the lack of job security felt by tutors disinclined them to share their work generally. We intend to explore these attitudes as part of the evaluation process to obtain a better understanding of how open practice relates to the work of part-time language tutors, and how arguments should be formulated to build an effective and active community of practice amongst this group.
|
Evaluation buddy groups
|
Evaluation questions
|
Themes/Links |
|
CORE-SET - University of Liverpool
http://coreset.liv.ac.uk
Evaluation contact/s: Adam
|
|
science, engineering, technology, student content, 3rd sector, private sector, public sector, cross-sector partnerships, OER publishing, enhancing learning experience, OER use, re-use, sustainability, industry sector, case studies, HE
|
|
REACTOR - Doncaster College
(Renewable, Environmental and Construction technology Open Resources)
http://reactor.fusedworks.com
Evaluation contacts: Helen Richardson and Lou McGill
|
|
built environment, construction, student content, sustainability, private sector, public sector, enhancing learning experience, 3D, cross sector partnerships, HE in FE, industry sector, skills sector, case studies, accessibility, disabled students, mobile platforms, changing teaching practice, SEO |
|
Opening up a Future in Business - Southampton Solent University
http://solentoer.wordpress.com/
Evaluation contact/s:
|
|
business, SMEs, enhancing learning experience, student content, cross sector partnerships, colleges, FE, HE, employability skills
|
| |
|
|
|
COMC - Coventry University
Coventry Open Media Classes
http://coventryomc.wordpress.com/
Evaluation contact/s: Shaun Hides
|
|
art, design, media, culture, photography, activism, open courses, enhancing learning experience, emergent forms of learning, student content, student use of OER, digital literacies, learning communities, mobile platforms, case studies, student empowerment, HE
|
|
PARiS - University of Nottingham
Promoting Academic Resources in Society
www.nottingham.ac.uk/open/parisproject
|
|
sustainability, cross-sector partnerships, 3rd sector, charities, changing teaching practice, student use of OER, multi-disciplinary, learning communities, accessibility, disabled students, case studies, employability skills, HE
|
| |
|
|
|
PublishOER - Univesity of Newcastle
http://www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/publishOER
Evaluation contact/s: Caroline Ingram
|
|
veterinary medicine, oer publishing, academic publishing, sustainability, business models, publishers, enhancing learning experience, rights management, re-use, use-cases, case studies, student use of oer, policy, HE
|
|
HALS OER - De Montfort University
Health And Life Science Open Educational Resources
http://vrolfe00.our.dmu.ac.uk/
Evaluation contact/s: L Hurt
|
|
healthcare, life sciences, midwifery, biomedicine, forensic science, oer publishing, student use of OER, NHS, enhancing learning experience, cross sector issues, publishers, schools, FE, student use of OER, student content, adult learners, disabled students, SEO, tracking, mobile platforms, digital literacies, HE
|
|
Great Writers - University of Oxford
http://openspires.oucs.ox.ac.uk/greatwriters/
Evaluation contact/s: Rhonda Riachi
|
|
english literature, humanities, oer publishing, student content, enhancing learning experience, ebooks, re-use, changing teaching practice, learning communities, mobile platforms, HE
|
|
ALTO UK - University of the Arts London
Arts Learning and Teaching Online UK
http://blogs.arts.ac.uk/alto/
Evaluation contact/s: John Casey
|
|
art, design, oer publishing, sustainability, changing teaching practice, visual media, DRUPAL/JORUM technical investigations, learning communities, HE in FE, digital literacies, re-use, accessibility, HE
|
| |
|
|
|
ORBIT - University of Cambridge
An Open programme and Resource Bank on Interactive Teaching for teacher education and development
http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/orbit/
Evaluation contact/s: Bjorn Hassler and Teresa Connolly
|
|
interactive teaching, primary education, secondary education, mathematics, science, changing teaching practice, teacher education, case studies, open courses, ebooks, open textbooks, publishers, re-use, legacy materials, student content, HE
|
|
Digital Futures in Teacher Education (DeFT) -
Sheffield Hallam University
http://deftoer3.wordpress.com/about/
Evaluation contact/s:
|
|
digital literacies, teacher educations, changing teaching practice, OER use, cross-sector partnerships, student content, case studies, open textbooks, industry sector, schools, FE
|
| |
|
|
|
FAVOR - University of Southhampton
http://www.thefavorproject.wordpress.com
Evaluation contact/s:
|
|
languages, part-time teachers, changing teaching practice, enhancing learning experience, schools, learning communities, legacy materials, student content, HE
|
|
Sesame - University of Oxford
http://www.tall.ox.ac.uk/research/current/sesame.php
Evaluation contact/s: Nicola warren
nicola.warren@conted.ox.ac.uk
|
|
adult learners, part-time learners, digital literacies, changing teaching practice, multi-disciplinary, re-use, student content, student use of OER, case studies
|
| |
|
|
|
Teesside Open Learning Units -Teesside University:
Gillian Janes
|
A number of IPR/Copyright issues have emerged and required attention as a result of releasing what were written as internal publications rather than as OERs for use by a wider audience. This has required some editing/re-writing or the addition of a background statement for some resources to ensure perceived relevance for other users. The extent of the changes required has varied by topic/resource content and writing style of different authors but has taken additional time and resources that were not anticipated initially. As a result of this learning however, internal processes and procedures for the ongoing development of additional titles in the Rough and Quick Guide Series are being amended to ensure these issues do not arise in the future.
Our Rough Guide resources each have an ISBN and practical issues about how to effectively manage this within the context of a Creative Commons Share-Alike license have arisen. It could be argued that the use of ISBNs in an OER context is not appropriate however the Rough Guides are relatively substantial documents and we have found the ISBN to be an important motivator for potential authors of these resources who are usually experienced L&T academics with multiple calls on their time and competing priorities.
One of the key contributions from us concerns how our experience, as an organization not previously heavily involved in OER practice, can be used to promote the wider engagement with and sustainability of an Open Learning/OER approach for staff/organisations not already very involved in this agenda/practice. For example, having an identified ‘buddy’ for day to day advice on practical issues would help.
user involvement from the start. - good level of interest but takes a lot of time particularly at early stages - surprised by level of interest around what we mean by open - linked to sustainability - for this project sustainability is strongly connected to the community – Our Friends in the North - useful group - given feedback and offered to pilot resources
tying into existing CoPs
small offshoot - of project - did survey about jorum use - result - very positive - being asked has got people on there and reflecting positively.
|
OMAC, HE, academic practice, teacher education, re-use, CPD, distance learning, digital literacies, employability
|
|
Academic Practice in Context: OERs for Exploring Discipline-based Learning & Teaching - University of Bath
Helen King
|
Value of experienced team - to discuss issues and come to consensus, as well as trust each other to get on with the work individually. As a result, the production of the outputs has gone smoothly and according to plan, whilst allowing flexibility to respond to unexpected opportunities.
The concept of ‘Discipline-orientated academic development’. Whereas the HEA Subject Centres (with which I as closely involved) provided discipline-based academic development and educational developers in institutions deliver ‘generic’ programmes; the concept of discipline-orientated academic development brings these two together and gives a framework for institution-based educational developers to account for and support the multi-disciplinary audience they have for their activities. The materials produced by this project will provide a wide array of activities that can be used in accredited programmes or even just short workshops that will enable this discipline-orientated academic development to take place.
Engaging the academic development community in the project early on was a good strategy - already promoted the project, rather than going into a post hoc ‘dissemination phase’.
developing workshop style materials - to get ed devs thinking about discipline based practice
building all from scratch - keeping simple and easy to use - keeping together in different categories but thinking how they might all connect together
not packing as online module but easy to strip apart
thinking of producing a single document linking them eg a prezi
Also trying a new format - putting together i-book of resources - raising questions about oer...does it matter if its available in different formats - not be inhibited to try new techs,...
|
OMAC, HE, teacher education, CPD, re-use, academic practice, digital literacies, ebooks, mobile platforms
|
|
Digital Literacy and Creativity for University Teachers (PG Cert Module) - University of Bedfordshire
Sarah Younie
|
Need for HE institutional ‘buy in’ with regards to the uptake of the 30 credit online module. To this end, the 30 credit module and it’s 9 units have been structured into the three blocks of 10 credits, to provide more flexibility and each individual ‘unit’ can be taken as a standalone unit too.
At a project partner meeting (with a pro VC responsible for learning and teaching) and the user needs analysis survey, the following issues were identified: HE institutions have a great deal of variation in their PG Certs in HE and CPD opportunities for HE staff, in terms of the structure, organisation and delivery modes of the these.
It is a challenge to get institutions to look at and adopt the new 30 credit online module on ‘Digital literacy and creativity’. In the meeting with the pro VC and other stakeholders the discussion highlighted institutional barriers and differences between HEI’s approaches to the ‘up skilling’ of a HE tutors with respect to digital technologies and their use for learning and teaching.
|
OMAC, HE, digital literacies, creativity, teacher education, CPD, academic practice
|
|
Building Learning Objects for Collaborative Knowledge Development (BLOCKeD) - London South Bank University
Tony Churchill
|
Project based on (and is providing evidence to support) the notion that the barriers to technology-enhanced learning are primarily pedagogic rather than technical. Its purpose is to explore how to refocus staff time on the participative elements of learning. For many staff this challenges their underpinning conceptual framework of learning and teaching.
Enabling busy practitioners to adopt more participative approaches necessarily involves identifying how lecturer time can be saved in other elements of learning. To achieve this delivery of significant elements of the collaborative learning objects is intended to be self-regulating. Once the resource is launched participants work independently through the content and the knowledge checks (receiving predetermined feedback on those interactions). This provides a basis for exploration of the topic in the collaborative element. Even the collaborative elements start with administrative elements, such as allocation to groups, which are self-regulated. Whilst this is intended to reduce the tutor workload of detailed e-moderation, the distinctive feature of collaborative learning objects is that they include opportunities for feedback from the tutor, particularly on the process and product of the student interactions. This will be a focus of the guidance document produced to support the release of the CLOs.
From the outset the intended audience for the BLOCKeD workshops was beyond the innovators who have been responsible for much existing work in this area. Despite the scale of such innovation, it is clear that learning and teaching in the sector remains stubbornly untransformed. Early analysis of contributions to the BLOCKeD workshops suggests that the majority of the self-selecting participants are either innovators or enthusiastic early adopters. Publicity for future workshops will further emphasise the intended target audience
|
OMAC, HE, teacher education, sustainability, research skills, CPD, TEL, academic practice, collaboration
|
Part-time/hourly-paid tutors have a range of varied motivations for working on a fractional basis and some may wish for greater integration into the academic life of their institutions, but others may not. The project team were initially convinced that hourly-paid tutors would be easily persuaded to participate in the project for several reasons: it would raise their profile within their institution and beyond; they could have a public professional profile which would be held outwith any institutional affiliation; they could participate in a research project and attend conferences etc. However, it quickly became clear to us that many such tutors choose their working patterns (rather than being forced by circumstances within an institution) and so do not necessarily have a particular interest in a professional profile or greater integration into their institution – and so were not that interested in open practice and the FAVOR project. Similarly, the lack of job security felt by tutors disinclined them to share their work generally. We intend to explore these attitudes as part of the evaluation process to obtain a better understanding of how open practice relates to the work of part-time language tutors, and how arguments should be formulated to build an effective and active community of practice amongst this group.
Open practice is still a new concept to many language teachers and issues around copyright, IPR, licensing and quality still need to be discussed and worked through.
Community-building through face-to-face meetings is challenging for part-time tutors, who are rarely all available at the same time. When such meetings take place, they are much valued for the opportunity to share practice – but in many cases, have been impossible for project partners to facilitate
UKOER-Phase-3-Interim-findings
|
|
Tip: To turn text into a link, highlight the text, then click on a page or file from the list above.
|
|
|
|
|
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.