UHMLG Spring 2010

Opening access to educational resources for use and reuse. OOER MEDEV! A progress report Suzanne Hardy Senior Advisor (Information) March 2010 UHMLG Spring Forum, Woburn House, London www.medev.ac.uk

The HEFCE/JISC/HEA OER programme (14/08) - Background
Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) announced an initial £5.7 million of funding for pilot projects that will open up existing high-quality education resources from UK higher education institutions to the world
Higher Education Academy and JISC working in partnership to deliver 12-month pilot projects - formally launched in April 2009
www.medev.ac.uk

The HEFCE/JISC/HEA OER programme (14/08)
Aims to make a wide range of learning resources created by academics freely available, easily discovered and routinely re-used by both educators and learners.
Expected that funded projects demonstrate long term commitment to release of OER resources. Projects working towards sustainability of long term open resources release via the adoption of appropriate business models to support this
Recommendations may include modifications to institutional policies and processes, with the aim of making open resources release an expected part of the educational resources creation cycle
www.medev.ac.uk

OER could include full courses, course materials, complete modules, notes, videos, assessments, tests, simulations, worked examples, software, and any other tools or materials or techniques used to support access to knowledge. These resources will be released under an intellectual property license that permits open use and adaptation (e.g. Creative Commons)
www.medev.ac.uk

Creative Commons: example www.medev.ac.uk

Pilot projects to release existing learning resources under a suitable license for open use and repurposing under 3 strands of activity:
Institutional
Individual
Subject
www.medev.ac.uk

Not about creating new content
Exposing existing content to wider audiences
Exploring the drivers, challenges and barriers and making recommendations
Projects mandated to deposit into Jorum Open
Evaluation of pilot programme, including synthesis of project outcomes, to be carried out by Glasgow Caledonian University
www.medev.ac.uk

www.medev.ac.uk

JorumOpen
JorumOpen - for content whose creators and owners who are willing and are able to share their content on a worldwide basis under the terms of a Creative Commons (CC)
www.jorum.ac.uk
Limited metadata requirements, many more optional fields: http://www.jorum.ac.uk/docs/pdf/japv1p0.pdf
Use #ukoer as tag in web2.0 e.g. blogs, Twitter and del.icio.us
www.medev.ac.uk

www.medev.ac.uk NB Draft Jorum v.1 application profile (Stevenson 2005) has over 100 elements, mostly optional

OOER
Organising Open Educational Resources
Bid can be downloaded from www.medev.ac.uk/oer
Focusses on issues relating to consent, securing ER from staff delivering programmes who are non-HEI employed, and complements other projects in the programme
Results of mapping and readiness categorisation together with development of simple toolkits (to help HEIs, Subjects and Individuals) will inform identification of ER to be included
Uploading OER will test toolkits
www.medev.ac.uk

OOER Project: Workpackage flow diagram for uploading a resource – what does the project look like? Y Start Identify ontent type Image/video/audio? Patient data? Y Y Text? N N N Refer to WP3 workflow Refer to WP2 workflow Refer to WP5 workflow Is the IPR status clear? Y N Refer to WP6 workflow Collect basic metadata about resource

Collect basic metadata about resource Map against readiness scale Is it a quality resource? Refer to WP7 workflow Refer to WP4 workflow N Y Is the resource ready to upload? Make any technical adjustments necessary N Choose APIs and add appropriate metadata Y OOER Project: Workpackage flow diagram for uploading a resource – what does the project look like?

Choose APIs and add appropriate metadata Refer to WP9 workflow Upload resource Refer to WP8 workflow Syndicate metadata End OOER Project: Workpackage flow diagram for uploading a resource – what does the project look like?

www.medev.ac.uk

www.medev.ac.uk Readiness categorisation pyramid (in development)

Openness scale – in development www.medev.ac.uk e.g. WAG, Bobby etc

Upload? Share? Publish? Deposit?
As easy as possible to end user
API toolkit
Put
In
Many
Places
Syndicates resource info
www.medev.ac.uk

PIMPS example www.medev.ac.uk

OOER
Toolkits available so far (all feedback gratefully received!):
IPR and copyright
Patient consent
Institutional policy and procedure
See www.medev.ac.uk/oer
Ready soon:
Quality and pedagogy
Resource discovery and reuse
Metadata and API
Impact on existing projects – senior manager briefing paper
www.medev.ac.uk

So what? www.medev.ac.uk

www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: Teaching resource quality
The quality of educational resources, as a whole, will be driven upwards due to competition, feedback and peer review.
www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: Financial
Time saved in not duplicating resources or parts of resources, with novel resources having a foundation to build upon (Yuan, 2009).
Time saved in using an IPR and Patient Consent cleared repository of OER (Fleming & Massey, 2007).
Promotion of an institution’s teaching portfolio and recruitment of new students (Yuan, 2009).
There is potential for new funding and revenue generation opportunities (Fleming & Massey, 2007).
Opportunity to build upon institutional repuation at the national/global level, dependent on project scale, enhancing the institutional reputation and providing publicity as a promoter of educational altruism (McGill et al . 2008).
www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: Diversity
OER may increase diversity in student applications to undergraduate programmes. E.g. OU
OER may aid in widening participation (OECD, 2007).
www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: Institutional
OER development will allow comparison of institutional policies and will lead to development of UK wide best practices (IPR, Patient Consent) more quickly and efficiently (Fleming & Massey, 2007).
OER portfolio and institutional brand image will be linked in the future (thus OER cost will become a ‘necessary overhead’) (Smith, 2009).
Used as evidence of efficiency and value for money as required by funding bodies and taxpayers (Fleming & Massey, 2007).
Potential students may view a portfolio of OER from a host institution and use, in part, to decide if institutional teaching approaches are compatible with their own learning style.
An OER repository can be a means to an effective individual staff teaching portfolio of learning resources/activities.
Increase in collaboration between institutions, including inter-discipline exchange (Yuan, 2009).
Increased institutional publicity and reputation (OECD, 2007).
If an OER culture is inevitable, such as directed by future funding body requirements, early adoption is preferable.
www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: Student recruitment, satisfaction and retention
Address specific student learning resource needs more rapidly by finding appropriate resources available from other institutions uploads to an OER repository.
Students could access resources that have a different approach (visual, audio, text, etc.) in their teaching method and add them to their own personal learning environment to complement host institution resources.
Potential students may view a portfolio of OER from a host institution and use, in part, to decide if institutional teaching approaches are compatible with their own learning style.
www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: Sustainability
Over 75% of staff surveyed in the WM-Share project were engaged in departmental sharing prior to the project (WM-Share, 2006). This highlights the strong culture for sharing that currently exists within academia and emphasises the likelihood for continued sharing of OER after project completion once the tools are put in place.
The paper by McGill et al . (2008) highlights the significant impact that OER can have on the sustained long-term sharing of resources for both the Communities of Practice (CoP) and subject-based areas.
www.medev.ac.uk

Draft OOER value statement: References
Li Yuan, Sheila MacNeil and Wilbert Kraan. Open Educational Resources – Opportunities and Challenges for Higher Education . JISC CETIS. 2009
Catherine Fleming and Moira Massey. Jorum Open Educational Resources (OER) Report . 2007.
Marshall S. Smith. Opening Education . Science. 89 ; 323. 2009.
Giving Knowledge for Free: the Emergence of Open Educational Resources . OECD. 2007.
WM-Share Final Report . WM-Share. 2006.
Lou McGill, Sarah Currier, Charles Duncan, Peter Douglas. Good Intentions: improving the evidence base in support of sharing and learning materials . McGill et al . 2008
www.medev.ac.uk

Demonstrating impact
GMC patient consent guidance (revised)
eVIP – embedded IPR process
Policy development e.g. Southampton, RVC
Already working with over 50% of UK schools of medicine, dentistry and veterinary medicine
In discussions with the NHS eLearning Repository
www.medev.ac.uk

www.medev.ac.uk

Related projects: PHORUS http://phorus.health.heacademy.ac.uk/ www.medev.ac.uk

Related projects: Simshare http://www.ukcle.ac.uk/simshare/index.html www.medev.ac.uk

Related projects: Bioscience OER http://tinyurl.com/oerbio www.medev.ac.uk

Further information
www.hefce.ac.uk/news/hefce/2008/os.htm
www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/oer www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/teachingandlearning/oer
www.medev.ac.uk/oer
www.health.heacademy.ac.uk
phorus.health.heacademy.ac.uk
www.ukcle.ac.uk/simshare/index.html
tinyurl.com/oerbio
www.medev.ac.uk

www.medev.ac.uk Call: 0191 246 4550 Email: [email_address]

UHMLG Spring 2010

by SuzanneHardy on Mar 20, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

UHMLG Spring 2010 — Presentation Transcript