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

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

ReviewAppendixInterviews

Page history last edited by Lou McGill 11 years, 3 months ago

 

Appendix 2.

Key findings from the evaluation of HEFCE OER Activities

 

Allison Littlejohn, Lou McGill, Isobel Falconer, Jan Dempster November 2012

 

 

1. Introduction

 

We were commissioned by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) to examine the impact of funded activity related to Open Educational Resources. The study has been carried out by a team led by the Caledonian Academy at Glasgow Caledonian University, UK: Lou McGill, Isobel Falconer, Jay Dempster, Helen Beetham and Allison Littlejohn.

 

 

 

HEFCE activity in the area of Open Educational Resources includes the UKOER programme, led by the Joint Information Systems Committees and Higher Education Academy (2009-2012) and the Support Centre for Open Resources in Education, based at the Open University, UK. Aside taking forward the development and release of resources in more ‘open’ form, these initiatives have provided a platform for the identification of key issues, particularly those pertaining to changes in practice, by individuals, communities and institutions, through engaging in the release and use of Open Educational Resources. This study aimed to deepen our understanding of if and how professional practice is changing.

 

 

 

The way Open Educational Practices are perceived in terms of how academics interact around OERs is a key indicator of potential longer term impact. It suggests changes in attitudes that can lead to a greater and more widespread release and use of OER by academics and students, enhanced student centred approaches to teaching and learning, as well as acting as marketing tools leading to reputational gains for universities. Over the past three years the UKOER programme has aimed to create longterm, sustained change in professional practice towards the sorts of Open Educational Practices outlines above. One way of examining whether change can be sustained is to identify key factors of sustainability in universities where teaching practice has changed. 

 

 

 

This appendix summarises preliminary findings addressing the questions: 

 

  •  What impact has the UKOER programme had on professional practice within universities?
  •  Is this change sustainable long term?

 

 

 

2. Method  

 

The findings outlined here follow results from two survey questionnaires distributed via social networks and relate to a series of semi-structured interviews. A selection of 10 survey respondents were invited to participate in interviews and care was taken to ensure the sample (i) incorporated both UKOER (8) and SCORE (4) directly funded staff; (ii) senior staff more indirectly involved (2 individuals in institutional management or mentoring roles); and (iii) did not favour only the champions or enthusiasts of OER. This aimed to balance and triangulate the data as far as possible within the scope of the review.

 

 

 

Interviews were semi-structured and built on respondent’s survey responses. Respondents were asked to describe individual or institutional journeys, outlining factors that influenced the evolution of practice. A central principle is that evolution is far from linear and continual - periodic critical events determine the direction of travel. Interviews enabled respondents to recount their story to build up a picture of what has changed since the initial UKOER pilot programme in 2009 (e.g. how they have moved from where they were to where they are now).

 

 

 

 

 

3. Analysis

The study explores evolutionary journeys of individuals and organisations in their move towards open educational practices. We wanted to move beyond evidencing stages in the evolutionary journey to examining reflexive interactions of  professionals (academics and support staff), their structural contexts (colleges and universities), and social and technological change (openness). Therefore, this analysis takes a life course perspective to examine how the environment impacts on the individual and, at the same time, consider niche-construction; how people alter their environment and co-evolution of the two into specialised organism-environment dualities.  This allows us to encompass the bottom-up impact of individuals on institutions and the top down effect of institutions on individuals, and the way each responds to changing practice in the other.

 

 

4. What impact has the UKOER programme had on open educational practice?

 

 

 

We have clear evidence of changing culture and attitudes towards openness amongst people who participated in the UKOER programme. Openness can be viewed as a philosophical position underlined by democratic decision-making and communal management by distributed stakeholders, rather than a centralised authority. It was established through open source software development and relates to the principles underpinning open learning, open courses and open educational resources.

 

 

 

All of the respondents referred to openness, some describing it as philosophy driving change within society in general and the culture and practice of professionals in universities in particular.    

 

There’s a… conviction about the open education enterprise and about feeling that it’s a really positive activity and even philosophy with which to be involved and feeling that more broadly you’re sharing that with likeminded people when you get together and talk about the issues associated with OERs and what people are doing and so forth. (R4) 

 

 

A lot of the things with OERs are about philosophy, it’s about culture, it’s about why are we actually wanting to do this? (R6)

 

 

 

There is a growing acceptance of openness which is impact on practice, pedagogy and policy. One respondent (R3) expressed the view that engagement with OERs is a focal point for changing the nature of current, mainstream activity in universities.

 

 

 

We have evidence of change in expectations in relation to the openness of resources and technical infrastructure. However, this view was not universally shared.

 

 

 

Problems were identified inhibiting the instantiation of ‘openness’ in some organisations. Problems included organisational culture and difficulties with changing day-to-day professional practice and behaviours. Nevertheless, examples of changing work practices are pervasive amongst the people involved with the UKOER programme and all participants in this study had adopted some form of Open Educational Practice (OEP).

 

 

 

A characteristic of Open Educational Practice, compared with conventional forms of academic practice, is that it changes the nature of relationships between people. For example relationships change:

 

 

 

  •  between academics and support staff, as people work in multi-disciplinary teams, sharing areas of expertise;
  • amongst academics, as teaching practice shifts from individual practice to cross-institutional and inter-institutional collaboration;
  • between academics and students, as teachers and learners (who may not be registered with a university) interact in new ways; 
  • between academics and organisations (including the university where they are employed) as university activities open up.        

 

 

 

4.1 Relationships between academics and support staff

 

 

 

Creating and releasing open resources requires a range of specialist skills and expertise including shifts in mindset towards:

 

 

 

  •  creating and using resources in open networks and with multiple (sometimes unknown) associates (resource users and/or collaborators).
  • adopting emerging open learning approaches which are sometimes at odds with current mainstream academic practices.
  • applying new copyright and IPR rule
  •  using a range of technical and hosting solutions, ranging from enterprise solutions (eg university repository) to social media sites (eg YouTube).
  • understanding the marketing potential associated with OER     

 

 

 

Attitudes and behaviours towards copyright had been, in some cases, naive, but there was evidence of practice change within the UKOER programme. However, overwhelmingly, institutional and sector-wide policy change is too slow, causing tensions with professional practice and impacting on change.

 

 

 

Technical hosting solutions used by academics were divided between tools hosted and supported by universities and social media tools. There was some evidence of tensions between these two areas – one example is that some academics who were expected to use enterprise solutions preferred to use open social media sites – however both areas appear to co-exist offering different options to academics.

 

 

 

There were pockets of change in technical solutions and policy in some universities. However, overwhelmingly, institutional and sector-wide policy change is too slow, impacting on change.

 

 

 

4.2 Relationships amongst academics

 

Open Educational Practices are characterised by collaborations which are.

 

  • Inter-institutional with like-minded academics who subscribe to the idea of openness
  • Intra-institutional, often within discipline based communities of practice   

 

 

 

A strong motivator for changing practice was the idea of working with like-minded people who work within the principles of openness:

 

The idea that you’re part of something more collective I think is quite a powerful one (R4)

 

 

 

There is little evidence of  wholesale culture change towards openness within universities. Therefore institutions tend not to provide an environment conduicive to change.  Conversely, communities of practice seem excellent environments for creating and releasing resources within a trusted group of colleagues. These communities provide a trusted environment for those new to Open Educational Practices. Not surprisingly, then, changes in professional practice is often within broad communities and/or collectives within which academics share not only resources but ideas around practice. However, longterm these communities can become inward facing, inhibiting potential growth, creativity and innovation:

 

They [Communities] are not reaching out to the disciplines anywhere near as well as they could. (R2)

 

 

 

Consequently the release and reuse of OERs is may not truly be open. Therefore, although Communities of Practice are a helpful in providing a trusted environment within which academics and support staff in universities can change their professional practice, longer term these communities can be inward facing, missing opportunities for innovation. Homogeneity limits progress, as alliances form amongst people with similar mindsets.

 

 

 

We found a number of instances where respondents enhanced their reputation across the sector through sharing their expertise or showcasing resources. There were examples of respondents being recognised and rewarded, either through promotion or through attaining leadership or almost celebrity status.  While reputation enhancement  drives forward a shift in professional practice, it limits the areas of practice change, since academics tend to prefer to create and gain credit for resources they have created themselves. Convincing academics to change their professional practice to include repurposing and improving resources creating by others seems difficult:

 

 

 

Getting academics to improve each other’s resources is…  a key issue for OERs and if we can crack that …we will end up with a better pool of resources. (R3)

 

 

 

Few respondents provided examples of repurposing, with some explicitly stating it was usually easier to create original material rather than repurpose existing resources. This example illustrates how far collective professional practice has yet to mature. In the future academics will have to change and improve OERs, not only within communities of trusted colleagues, but with indefinite people across the world.

 

 

 

Additionally, despite changes in the ways in which academics collaborate, our study evidenced that academics predominantly focus on teaching activity, rather than considering learner-initiated, open engagement in learning. Although OER activity  may have had an impact on the way individuals think about ‘openness’, there was a view that this activity had limited impact on changing the nature of learning and teaching in universities.

 

 

 

4.3 Relationships between academics and students

 

Relationships between academics and students change. Examples include:

 

 

  • co-creation of educational resources by students and academics
  • new forms of interaction via social media sites
  • connections with potential learners and collaborators around the world
  • open, public engagement with users of educational content (who are not necessarily registered students) creating opportunities for non formal learning through the release of Open Educational Resources (OER)
  • open marketing and showcasing resources.      

   

 

 

One example of new forms of connecting with potential learners is by using popular social media sites. Benefits of scale are achieved through linking OERs with sites such as You Tube. Two respondents illustrated their use of YouTube to host OERs and discuss concepts with learners around the world. In these examples their interactions with learners extended beyond disseminating materials to allow for two-way connection and discussion (see www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dfd_U-24egg). 

 

 

An instance of open, public engagement with users of educational content is the UK Open University’s Open Learn initiative where OERs designed for non-formal learning also allow for  presampling of OU courses, thus marketing the university to potential students worldwide.

 

 

 

Despite the apparent benefits, a number of difficulties in changing the relationship between academics and students were uncovered.  One problem is associated with the ability of large numbers of users to view OERs. This factor places pressure on academics to make resources public, possibly slowing down the resource release process:  

 

 

 

Academics don’t want to release things that are rough and ready, if they’re going to release it and it’s going to have a bigger national profile then they want it to be polished. So that gives them an extra hurdle to surmount  (R2)

 

 

 

Another problem is that practice around pedagogy has been slow to change. While the shift on focus in the sector from Open Educational Resources to Open Educational Practice has been valuable in advancing teaching in open environments, and there are some notable exemplars, there is little empirical evidence of learners’ active engagement in learning.

 

 

 

Overall, we have limit evidence of a shift in mindsets of academics towards ‘open pedagogy’ where students can set learning pathways and be the producers of content. However, progress in this area maybe inhibited by focus on educational content rather than learning activities. Change requires an even more fundamental shift focusing on learners’ ability to learn in open networks.

 

 

 

4.4 Relationships between academics and organisations

 

Open Educational Practices change the relationships between academics and organisations, whether their own university where they are employed or other public, private or third sector organisations. Academics have to change their practice to:

 

 

  • work with (sometimes unknown) people around the world.  
  • attain global reach.
  • work across sectors(public, private, third sector).

 

 

We have evidence of work practices and alliances changing as people occupy new territorial positions. Some circumvent perceived institutional limitations by staking out their own territories, occasionally attaining ‘celebrity geek’ status with thousands or tens of thousands of followers. Alliances may change from the employing organisation to a wider public. The driving force appears to be recognition and reward through attaining a leadership  or improving academic status.

 

 

 

On the surface, some of these actions seem at odds with the seemingly altruistic philosophy of openness:

 

Academic territories… are in collision with OER altruism… If people have an established academic territory they would rather grow it by developing their own skills (R2)

 

 

 

Multiple motivations around openness do lead to contradictions in the way practice is changing. The long term sustainability of changes to practice, pedagogy and policy across the sector after the end of the UKOER funding is unclear. However, some indicators of likely outcomes might be found by examining change in universities and individuals outside the UKOER programme.

 

 

 

5 Is change in professional practice sustainable?

 

 

 

We interviewed two managers from universities to consider activities related to Open Educational Resources and Open Educational Practices outside the UKOER programme. A critical factor for sustainability is when  institutions build on their existing strengths and set their journey along known pathways. There are obvious advantages in scaling up existing key strengths, rather than taking transformational steps. Initiatives can be mainstreamed relatively quickly:  

 

 

 

The real way of trying to get sustainability or viability is to see the value that it adds to existing activity such that it gets incorporated into existing budgets. It’s not an add on, it’s not a change... (R10) 

 

 

 

Examples of fitting  activities with existing institutional and professional practice described by respondents include: 

 

 

 

  •  MIT –   the Open Courseware initiative was an extension of  an existing MIT initiative to capture and make available lecture materials. By adopting and using the Creative Commons licence to make courseware available worldwide, MIT created a step-change

  •  

  •  The UK Open University- the OpenLearn initiative built on the OU’s strengths as a producer of high-quality educational content by dedicated course production teams. A step-change was produced by linking non-formal learning opportunities freely available through the OpenLearn site with formal courses at the Open University.

  •   

  • Oxford University -capitalised on the track record of public lectures around high-quality research. The step-change in the Open Spires initiative was in making podcasts available to a global audience.

 

 

 

In these examples OER activities are viewed as complimentary to existing activities within these universities, rather than transformational. The focus tends to be on a change of scale rather than a change in the nature of the initiative.

 

 

 

Respondents described benefits of Open Educational Resources and Practices that are aligned with long term sustainability as:

 

 

 

Increase in global visibility, the ability of institutions and/or individuals to orientate their knowledge and connect with massive numbers of people around the world, offered through the release of Open Educational Resources and though Open Educational Practices. ‘Visibility’ is increased orientating services and knowledge towards massive numbers of people around the world via social media sites.  Much of the discussion in this regard is aligned with publishing educational content, albeit in a different form and on a much bigger scale.  

 

 

 

Changing interactions with other agencies In our study we sourced examples of how universities are interacting with agency groups - vendors, publishers, broadcasters, informal learners, other universities - in new ways. Of particular interest are changes in accessibility. There were examples of the use of OERs opening access to people from countries where access to higher education is prohibitive. There were other examples of accessibility including access for learners with disabilities or dialogue between teachers and learners via social media sites. These examples illustrate not simply a change in scale of what universities offer, but also a change in the nature of how education is offered. These opportunities signal a shift in what universities may offer from access to education to access to learning. However, success of the latter depends on the ability of learners to direct their own learning.

 

 

 

Opening up accreditation New accreditation pathways are being explored, though it could be argued that these directions are slight deviations from known accreditation. Amongst these new pathways are ‘open badging systems’ that allow informal and non-formal learners to gain credits in the form of badges which both have currency and recognition in the employment sector. Badges may be considered equivalent to learning outcomes and credits gained in the formal education sector. 

 

 

 

Opening access Rhetoric around opening access tended to focus on access to educational resources. There was a view that the sector may be ‘on the cusp between managed media presence and unmanaged media presences’. The idea of unmanaged media presence raises questions around whether universities should tread new pathways in terms of the production, release and use of resources. However, there was little evidence of radically new learning pathways.  Exceptions include opportunities for informal learning and Massive Open Online Courses. However, there is scepticism about the effectiveness of MOOCs, with  a view that these courses are  ‘primarily for the educationally advantaged because the way they are structured does not help the educationally disadvantaged’.

 

There is a view that non-alignment of open educational activities with mainstream university activity would be problematic and would slow down progress. This suggestion is particularly relevant in the climate of 'survive and thrive', in which most universities and college currently find themselves, which is not inductive for innovation and radical change.   

 

 

 

6 Summary

 

 

 

This study provides empirical evidence of emerging open educational practices through activities around Open educational Resources. However, evolutionary journeys appear to be highly contextualised. To achieve sustainability universities tend to journey to familiar destinations, building on what they are already doing. By following familiar paths institutions are bringing about change, though the change tends not to be transformational.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments (0)

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