RLO Design


Published on

Presentation given at the SUILCoP event on 29th April 2009. The presentation covers the BRUM project and re-usable learning objects in general. It also covers issues surrounding sharing learning material.

Published in: Education, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • RLO Design

    1. 1. Designing RLOs for Information Literacy: The BRUM Project Nancy Graham April 2009
    2. 2. BRUM – Part One <ul><li>Background and outline of project </li></ul><ul><li>What is a ‘learning object’? </li></ul><ul><li>What is ‘good’ design? </li></ul><ul><li>What about pedagogy? </li></ul><ul><li>How do we test our RLOs? </li></ul>
    3. 3. BRUM – Part Two <ul><li>What can we learn from good practice? </li></ul><ul><li>Creation vs. re-use </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing – time for a CoP? </li></ul><ul><li>Information about existing material </li></ul>
    4. 4. Background to BRUM <ul><li>B irmingham R e- U sable M aterials </li></ul><ul><li>Externally funded </li></ul><ul><li>15 RLOs to support information literacy </li></ul><ul><li>Engagement with academics and students </li></ul>
    5. 5. What we did 15 RLOs 3 x Captivate demos 3 x Turning Point quizzes 3 x audio guides 3 x audio/visual recordings 3 x Choose your own Adventure PowerPoint
    6. 6. http://www.is2.bham.ac.uk/blasst/brum.htm
    7. 7. What we did <ul><li>10-20 hours per RLO </li></ul><ul><li>Other librarians got involved </li></ul><ul><li>Steep learning curve! </li></ul><ul><li>Problems </li></ul>
    8. 8. What the academics thought <ul><li>Academic ‘buy-in’ </li></ul><ul><li>Time – theirs and yours! </li></ul><ul><li>Role of librarians </li></ul><ul><li>Sage on the stage culture still pervades </li></ul>
    9. 9. What the students thought <ul><li>Pre and post questionnaires </li></ul><ul><li>Focus group </li></ul>
    10. 10. “ I’ve been thinking for ages about how to get the best out of eLibrary and now I’ve seen these RLOs, I’ve learnt loads.” “ if it wasn’t for this meeting today I would never have found these, and wouldn’t have even imagined that this type of thing existed.” “ these need more promotion”
    11. 11. What is a learning object?
    12. 16. What makes a learning object ‘re-usable’?
    13. 17. What is ‘good’ design? <ul><li>Granularity </li></ul><ul><li>Generic and adaptable </li></ul><ul><li>Using familiar technology/software </li></ul><ul><li>Meaningful metadata </li></ul><ul><li>Flexible </li></ul>
    14. 18. Granularity
    15. 19. Generic and adaptable
    16. 20. Using familiar technology/software
    17. 21. Meaningful metadata
    18. 22. Flexible
    19. 23. Background to BRUM: SPIRE <ul><li>Wikis </li></ul><ul><li>Communication tools (instant messaging, social networking) </li></ul><ul><li>Creating content (blogs) </li></ul>
    20. 24. Background to BRUM: SPIRE <ul><li>Organising information (Bloglines) </li></ul><ul><li>Keeping up to date (RSS) </li></ul><ul><li>Social tagging (del.icio.us) </li></ul>
    21. 25. Design attributes of RLOs Can be aggregated Re-usable and re-purposable Self-paced, interactive Self-contained Flexible use RLOs
    22. 26. Attributes that appeal to students “ Mash ups” Re-usable and re-purposable Self-paced, interactive Embeddable Accessibility – want to log on anytime, anywhere Students
    23. 27. Pedagogy <ul><li>Link to learning outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Learning styles </li></ul><ul><li>To test or not to test? </li></ul><ul><li>Technology vs. pedagogy </li></ul>
    24. 28. Text vs. interaction
    25. 29. How do we test our designs? <ul><li>Student assessment and feedback </li></ul><ul><li>Academic feedback </li></ul><ul><li>Colleague feedback </li></ul><ul><li>Objective peer review (Merlot) </li></ul>
    26. 32. Where’s the good practice? <ul><li>CILIP sub-group IL page – starting point </li></ul><ul><li>Merlot – evaluation criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Cardiff – excellent examples </li></ul><ul><li>NDLR – community of practice </li></ul><ul><li>SMILE – example of re-used material </li></ul>
    27. 33. Creation vs. re-use
    28. 34. Creation <ul><li>Pros </li></ul><ul><li>Complete control and ownership </li></ul><ul><li>Specific to institution </li></ul><ul><li>Understand context </li></ul><ul><li>Cons </li></ul><ul><li>Can be time-consuming </li></ul><ul><li>Duplication </li></ul><ul><li>Silo working </li></ul>
    29. 35. Re-use <ul><li>Pros </li></ul><ul><li>Save time </li></ul><ul><li>Use existing good practice </li></ul><ul><li>Avoid duplication </li></ul><ul><li>Cons </li></ul><ul><li>Can be time-consuming!! </li></ul><ul><li>Nothing ‘fits’ </li></ul><ul><li>No context </li></ul><ul><li>No or restricted persmissions </li></ul>
    30. 36. Other re-use issues <ul><li>Quality assurance </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata (discoverability and relevance) </li></ul><ul><li>Repositories vs. silos </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>IPR </li></ul>
    31. 37. Sharing <ul><li>Cultural changes </li></ul><ul><li>OER (JISC projects) </li></ul><ul><li>Common goals? </li></ul><ul><li>A community of practice? </li></ul>
    32. 38. Further information <ul><li>IL RLO Share wiki: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://ilrloshare.wetpaint.com </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Project blog: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http:// brumproject.blogspot.com </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Project web-site </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://www.is2.bham.ac.uk/blasst/brum.htm </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Nancy Graham [email_address] </li></ul>