• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Oer11 starsand fastcars_symposium
 

Oer11 starsand fastcars_symposium

on

  • 1,098 views

This is the set of presentations given at OER11, May 2011, Manchester Conference Centre in a symposium entitled 'Stars and Fast Cars: walking the red carpet of good practice'

This is the set of presentations given at OER11, May 2011, Manchester Conference Centre in a symposium entitled 'Stars and Fast Cars: walking the red carpet of good practice'

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,098
Views on SlideShare
1,097
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
8
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://cloudworks.ac.uk 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Lindsay Wood, Project Officer HEFCE, JISC and HEA
  • These are only a few of the many recommendations, but they are the ones which we want to highlight to you . We really need institutions to use CC licences on their works, to clarify exactly who owns what and how it may be used. Institutions frightened of giving away the ‘crown jewels’ may be perfectly happy with releasing up to 75% of a module or programme (which may still be useful to others). To protect ourselves and our colleagues into the future we need sophisticated searching (reputation based materials) and take down policies. We would like to know that staff can be rewarded for getting involved in this, as contributors and users of other people’s resources. We also had many recommendations for JorumOpen (the national repository) who we were working with to implement as many as we can.
  • Authentication, data security, interoperability, quality assurance
  • What are the barriers to OER adoption What are the solutions - now and in the future how might we customise and promote these processes
  • On the website you can find reports, the toolkit – version 3 will be significantly better in terms of the single interface, and available in November 2010. You can find information about OER2, PORSCHE and ACTOR projects, and find an increasing number of case studies – about 10 so far, though we have done about 60. Do get in touch with us and follow us on Twitter…..
  • We all know the benefits of OER, how sharing is good for economic reasons, transparency, legal reasons, accessibility… What we wanted to do within *this* project, is to get the message out there to the community…
  • Wenger defines communities of practice as such. Building on the use and re-use of OERs we are concentrating on creating a community of practice which will extend beyond the original partners.
  • So – who are these people? Well. Some of these courses are acredited against the UKPSF - The UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) for teaching and supporting learning, a framework which uses a descriptor-based approach to professional standards. It aligns them to descriptors such as professional activity, core knowledge and professional values. If anyone would like any information about the While they are in competition for students, each PGCertClinEd is run by a small number of dedicated staff committed to diversifying their provision, and there are tens of thousands of potential applicants as NHS leaders required educational supervisors to be ‘trained’.
  • So – what will they do? Well, looking through the material they already have available, they can identify resources that can be made OPEN – and they’ll do this using the MEDEV toolkit. (as the PORSCHE project explained, this risk assessment toolkit looks at copyright clearance, patient consent, accessibility and quality assurance – it then allows you to print a record of each resource you’ve taken through this process – for audit purposes). They are investigating current institutional policy (where it exists) around opening up educational resources. This way we can document the processes necessary to enable learning resources from the sector to be made ‘open’ .
  • Policies and practice: This way we can document the processes necessary to enable learning resources from the sector to be made ‘open’ . How do the policies their institutions have in place relate to IPR and consent?
  • Applying CC licences What happens if they move to a new institution and inherit a previous course director’s materials. Can they use it? If an academic gets another job in a different institution – can they take their old material (that they designed) with them? These are all issues we are addressing with the ACTOR community Up to 30 credits worth of clinical education materials into Jorum to share.
  • Clinical diaries can be a nightmare for one-2-one meetings, let alone a meeting for all partners (and others) to attend. The project is due to finish (officially) on 31 st August 2011. Thereafter…well, it’ s a matter of sustainability
  • Motivation so far has been good. Obviously this is a small project and therefore a small amount of funding just covers expenses. With this in mind we considered the following Face-to-face meetings to begin with. Each site visit to partners consisted of a meeting (approx. half a day) to go through the project plans and discuss potential issues or threats to competition of the project. Then a more blended approach was necessary. The use of web 2.0 and social networking tools have been used a lot within this project. Most communication has been online in some format or other. For example….
  • PM s/w – basecamp. Proves useful for most of our MEDEV projects. Used as a central repository for and messages/notes/emails/files relating to the problem. Everyone has a login for it and is advised when any new relevant information appears. We purchased a copy of Elluminate for workshops with run within MEDEV. This has proved extremely useful for hosting online Exec Group/Partner meetings. Elluminate allows video conferencing, participation on screen whiteboards, voting/poll systems. No travel – meeting for up to 90 mins at desk – in this economic climate is a bonus. It also allows webcasting so we can demonstrate resources/toolkits and any new technologies. Skype: Face to face video or audio conference can be invaluable for a quick meeting – say 5mins – to report on any progress to date or to get together to decide on one issue, rather than 20 emails going back and forth. Blogs: MEDEV has an oer-phase-2-blog which takes feeds from individual staff blogs which are tagged with ‘oer-phase-2’ and the PORSCHE and ACTOR blogs. These combine into one big feed which can be syndicate and commented on. If you wish to view ACTOR separately – the URL is shown here.
  • Using Google ’ s advanced search helps them find openly licenced images Same with Flickr – using the advanced search Xpert is a search tool created at Nottingham university which allows you to search for openly licenced material (images, videos, etc.) which also searches Flickr. It then shows you an easy way to attribute resources and embed them into teaching materials. Xerte has online and desktop tools which allow creation of learning objects that can then be uploaded to blackboard or another VLE GLOmaker is similar in that it has tools to help you create ‘ shareable ’ content.
  • Nominal funding means that the partners engage voluntarily so there are challenges to the virtual community [For the money we had we could ’ ve paid one person to create all of these materials – but would they be as good?] A site visit to one partner for 90 mins has proved more valuable than anything else they ’ ve done in the last year.
  • Our 5 main partners are on board – not only are they disseminating inforamtion about the ACTOR community at conferences much like this – but they are disseminating within their own institutions and this is havinga significant effect on their superiors, their colleagues and their students. Here ’ s a couple of example of the kind of resources….
  • Example OER resource (video) with example attribution – owner and source clearly identified. ‘ Aspects of Anatomy ’ (very West End title!) A professor of anatomy demonstrates various aspects with plastinated specimens
  • Another example from the RVC – an extremely well-behaved virtual dog. you can shine lights / out a finger in front of the eye / or poke it with a cotton bud to judge the reaction and make a diagnosis
  • This is the purpose of the ACTOR project.
  • Slides used at CETL4HealthNE workshop on Tuesday 29 March at Durham Conference Centre, and again at QUILT workshop on Friday 15 April 2011.
  • JW Then SH Here is the problem. OERs move across clinical and academic settings. The same person might be making and delivering materials. They may be, or the recordings used within them are collected by clinicians under rigorous guidance both at a national (GMC) level and a local trust of health authority level. When these materials are then delivered in an educational event in an academic setting things can go awry. This slide illustrates one of the things that is special to our project and other healthcare projects: Where we have clinicians who are paid by the NHS, who create materials in clinical settings, but deliver them in academic settings under an honorary contract with the university but who are not paid by that university Where then does risk and responsibility lie? Enlarging on this a bit further, what we have on the left is a very clear process for taking cosent for using recordings within a clinical setting for treatment, research and ‘ local ’ education. On the right however, we then wish to re-use images and incorporate them into VLEs, share materials, etc. But no evidence of consent, we don ’ t have access to the patient record. And so the location of risk is unclear. What we do know is that both the clinical organisation and the academic organisation both want to do what is right. It is not clear where the responsibilities of the clinical setting end – what happens once images left their patch? On the other side, universities are beginning to be aware of their responsibilities but have no mechanisms to handle them But all want to do the right thing. Mobilty of image around the world and the fact that resources are being shared whether they were intended to be shared or not Universties are not aware of their responsibilities in this setting Doctors want to do it properly Universities want to do it properly No mechanism is currently in place to support them doing that
  • JW The OOER project recommended just getting consent – and then we are clear. SH We feel this is something we should all be doing anyway – in the same way we collect and store consent for treatment and research. And in the same way as we reference in publications. It should be as easy and as embedded in practice as that. Its about good practice which is easy and practical to implement. It ’s about covering our backs and trying to think further down the line – making the consent status clear for other users who may use this recording in a different way. What a consent license could do is make the patients rights clear alongside the owner ’s rights.
  • Need to ba able to hallmark or give provenance to the fact that consent exists under what conditions the recording can be used.
  • In our field – healthcare education there is a third thing we should be thinking about. If there are people in our resources, if they contain any recordings – video, audio, photographs – we need to additionally think about consent. I am not going to focus on this today, but it is useful to know that there are another couple of pieces of work going on around consent and making this explicit too – email me if you want more details on this, or I can come back another time to talk to you specifically about that. I was at a meeting yesterday which is bringing together experts to put together a set of principles and a code of practice around consent, and in our OER2 project, PORSCHE, we are working with CC UK and others to put together some ideas around a Consent Commons to complement Creative Commons – making consent in resources.
  • While copyright is an automatic right, data protection is better described as a set of principles. Arising from the perspective of patient consent (patient data is classed as ‘sensitive’ under the DPAct1998) for patient materials used in teaching, we argue for additional tools to support consent from people. When creating open educational resources copyright doesn’t quite go far enough to recognise the rights of people who are represented to be respected (whether they have copyright or not). Representation could be a photograph, voice or video recording, data set or patient story. For example, if a person has agreed for their photograph to appear in your open educational resources (they are a student, a member of staff, an actor, etc.), and they pass away, what do you do if their family asks you to take down the OER? (What you are legally required to do may be different to what you would choose to do, in principle). Therefore you are essentially operating ‘policies’.
  • A human consent version of a Creative Commons licence would enable much more sophisticated recognition of the role and rights of people (whether they are the ‘creators’ or not) to be treated fairly and with respect. We need new technologies to support the implementation of Consent Commons – such as the ability to inform users that a resource has been updated or ‘taken down’.
  • SH We would like to propose a consent commons to work alongside or with creative commons as a way of demonstrating due diligence in dealing with issues of consent and using patient data sensitively in learning and teaching with specific reference to being able to share.
  • Clinical research data has a sell buy date after which it must be disposed of Do the same principles apply to learning and teaching?
  • On the website you can find reports, the toolkit – version 3 will be significantly better in terms of the single interface, and available in November 2010. You can find information about OER2, PORSCHE and ACTOR projects, and find an increasing number of case studies – about 10 so far, though we have done about 60. Do get in touch with us and follow us on Twitter…..
  • Thanks for listening….. NOTES Chair of TEL strategy development group at DH is Dr Stuart Charney – elearning simulation and other tel systems. National eLearning Portal Kate Lomax: www.elearning.nhs.uk Forthcoming workshops on copyright and elearning – nb contact kate and see if collaboration useful Is the search on the readiness toolkit available to build services on top of? E.g does it have RSS? Elearning developers network – consent commons? CoP. Resources loads of useful stuff there. NLMS Jo Sidebottom
  • Slides used at CETL4HealthNE workshop on Tuesday 29 March at Durham Conference Centre, and again at QUILT workshop on Friday 15 April 2011.
  • Just as we expect students and junior staff to model professional behaviours in real life, we need them to do the same in the digital environment.
  • Thanks for listening….. NOTES Chair of TEL strategy development group at DH is Dr Stuart Charney – elearning simulation and other tel systems. National eLearning Portal Kate Lomax: www.elearning.nhs.uk Forthcoming workshops on copyright and elearning – nb contact kate and see if collaboration useful Is the search on the readiness toolkit available to build services on top of? E.g does it have RSS? Elearning developers network – consent commons? CoP. Resources loads of useful stuff there. NLMS Jo Sidebottom

Oer11 starsand fastcars_symposium Oer11 starsand fastcars_symposium Presentation Transcript