Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Inside Out
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Inside Out

514

Published on

ALTO project presentation at the OER11 conference in Manchester - this has the references that some people asked for.

ALTO project presentation at the OER11 conference in Manchester - this has the references that some people asked for.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
514
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • IPR awareness, de-contextualization of resources, presentational and media design issues, and ‘learning design for strangers’.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Inside Out The ALTO Project: Linking OERs to Professional Development and Knowledge Management activities John Casey, Hywell Davies, Chris Follows, Nancy Turner, Ed Webb-Ingall, University of the Arts London, Centre for Learning & Teaching in Art & Design.
    • 2. Inside Out - Content <ul><li>Problem – moving from subsistence to sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Situational Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Approach – CoPs and Fieldworkers </li></ul><ul><li>Rationale &amp; Benefits </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge Management </li></ul><ul><li>Social Layer </li></ul><ul><li>System Design </li></ul>
    • 3. Stating the Problem <ul><li>The need to move from a subsistence to a sustainable model of HE &amp; OERs – technology will be involved </li></ul>“ To meet the staggering global demand for advanced education, a major university needs to be created every week” Sir John Daniels, ceo, COL
    • 4. Situational Analysis – 1 <ul><li>Staff development in HE has traditionally been supplied by central units </li></ul><ul><li>Adapting current teaching practices and cultures to use new technologies presents this centralized development model with critical challenges: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Capacity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Skills </li></ul></ul>
    • 5. Situational Analysis – 2 <ul><li>OER engagement adds a range of additional needs: IPR, de-contextualization, presentational and media design, and ‘learning design for strangers’ etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Ed Tech has not broken through - lack of attention to systemic and soft issues is often cited as some of the causes for this failure (Kumar @ MIT) </li></ul><ul><li>But OER engagement ‘surfaces’ systemic and soft issues – so a potentially powerful engine for change </li></ul>
    • 6. Situational Analysis – 3 <ul><li>Design, development, sharing, reuse and adaption of learning resources are poorly understood </li></ul><ul><li>Growing awareness and policy agenda that now privileges process over content and collaboration over delivery – a move from OER to Open Practice (but still needs/builds on OER) </li></ul><ul><li>The value proposition of sharing and OER is becoming much more explicit and forceful (Chow) </li></ul>
    • 7. Situational Analysis – 4 <ul><li>Sharing as a signifier of change </li></ul>
    • 8. Approach <ul><li>ALTO has approached this challenge in a number of ways: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tapped into existing communities of practice around a variety of themes and contexts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Employed and trained part-time staff to work with front-line teaching staff across a number of different areas (IPR, learning design etc) – they and the project manager act as ‘Fieldworkers’ </li></ul></ul>
    • 9. Rationale <ul><li>Th e Fieldworker concept is an established practice in anthropology and ethnographic studies - is used to understand and interact with a culture </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Fieldworkers have an important role in the design of socio-technical systems in the workplace - advocated by pioneers like Mumford and by modern practitioners such as Sharples </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>By mobilizing existing communities of practice and using fieldworkers - OER engagement can potentially be a CPD tool to do more with limited resources </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Provides the basis for an economically sustainable means of enhancing educational development provision in a time austerity. </li></ul><ul><li>Has implications for existing approaches to educational development, organizational structures and cultures </li></ul>
    • 10. Benefits <ul><li>Engagement with OER creation is a de facto reflective exercise – designing resources and learning experiences for ‘strangers’ - this takes us out of our normal frame of reference </li></ul><ul><li>Everyone has an implicit model of learning and teaching (Biggs, Ramsden) OER engagement brings these models to the surface for discussion </li></ul><ul><li>This puts us in the ‘right mind’ set for thinking about designing for flexible and blended learning – tricky in A&amp;D! </li></ul><ul><li>Good foundation for introducing and embedding new learning and teaching models </li></ul>
    • 11. Methods <ul><li>Leverage OER engagement by deliberately introducing flexible and blended learning concepts via the fieldworkers – strategic agenda </li></ul><ul><li>Fieldworkers use OER resources as ‘mediating artefacts’ to help practitioners articulate, share and reflect on mental models (Conole) and design strategies </li></ul><ul><li>OERs become ‘boundary objects’ that support communication and understanding between CoPs (Wenger) </li></ul><ul><li>Fieldworkers encourage and support ‘collaborative learning design’ activities between practitioners (internal and external) - benefits: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mutual support </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reflection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>P2P learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Low threshold concepts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shared authentic language </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Embedding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CoP development &amp; strengthening </li></ul></ul>
    • 12. Knowledge Management 1 <ul><li>Early days still </li></ul><ul><li>Previous tech-centric approaches have not worked well (Lambe, Friesen, Hoel), some have a dubious rationale and ideological agenda (Friesen) </li></ul><ul><li>These are complex socio-technical systems and highly entropic </li></ul><ul><li>It is not nearly enough to just provide a mechanism of storage or retrieval – presentation and social layers are needed </li></ul><ul><li>Do not use meaningless and rebarbative jargon with users – use straightforward concrete language </li></ul><ul><li>Allow/support users and communities to articulate their own meanings (ontologies) and classifications (taxonomies) record these for later elaboration and mediation </li></ul>
    • 13. Knowledge Management 2 <ul><li>By all means use a Repo - we use EdShare, it’s good </li></ul><ul><li>But do not attempt to impose terminology, vocabularies and taxonomies developed by experts – however well meaning or authoritative </li></ul><ul><li>This is not a well-defined domain: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mainstream public education is a messy and contingent enterprise and is highly dependant on contextual factors – it’s not like military or aviation training – where such tech approaches originated </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Introduce a ‘social layer’ for interaction, creation sharing, collaboration and negotiation of content and meanings (example - process arts) </li></ul>
    • 14. The Social Layer – 1 EdShare Repository
    • 15. The Social Layer – 2 http://process.arts.ac.uk/
    • 16. ALTO System Design <ul><li>A presentation &amp; social layer enables the important human factors of communication, collaboration, and participation that are needed for sustainable resource creation, sharing and sense making within community networks </li></ul><ul><li>Solutions provided should help, not hinder, participants needs and activities </li></ul><ul><li>Guiding system design principle should be the concepts of conviviality (Illich, 1973, Hardt &amp; Negri 2009) and stewardship (Wenger et al, 2009) </li></ul><ul><li>Arrange for longer term storage and sense making to be migrated from the social layer to a repository </li></ul>
    • 17. Inside Out Summary <ul><li>Problem – moving from subsistence to sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Situational Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Approach – CoPs and Fieldworkers </li></ul><ul><li>Rationale &amp; Benefits </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge Management </li></ul><ul><li>Social Layer </li></ul><ul><li>System Design </li></ul>
    • 18. Referneces 1 (as they appear) <ul><li>Vijay M. S. Kumar, Kim Thanos (2011), Systemic Planning for the Open Education Innovation, OCWC Conference proceedings, http://conferences.ocwconsortium.org/index.php/2011/cambridge/paper/view/199 </li></ul><ul><li>Daniels, J (2007) quoted in (p.32). Atkins, D, E, Brown, J., S. Hammond A., L. A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities, Hewlett Foundation </li></ul><ul><li>Chow, B. (2010) The Way Forward; OER’s Value Proposition, http://oerworkshop.weebly.com/uploads/4/1/3/4/4134458/bchow.ppsx Presentation at: Taking the Open Educational Resources (OER) Beyond the OER Community: Policy and Capacity. UNESCO Policy Forum, Paris. http://oerworkshop.weebly.com/policy-forum.html accessed March 6 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Mumford, E. (1995). Effective Systems Design and Requirements Analysis: The ETHICS Approach. Basingstoke: Macmillan. </li></ul><ul><li>Sharples, M. (2006). Socio-Cognitive Engineering. In Ghaoui, C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Computer Interaction . Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference </li></ul><ul><li>Biggs, J. (2006). Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does . Maidenhead, United Kingdom: Open University Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education , Abingdon: Routledge and Falmer </li></ul><ul><li>Conole, G. (2008). Capturing practice: the role of mediating artefacts in learning design. In Lockyer L., S. Bennett, S., Agostinho, and B Harper (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning Design and Learning Objects: Issues, Applications and Technologies . Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. </li></ul>
    • 19. Referneces 2 (as they appear) <ul><li>Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, </li></ul><ul><li>Friesen, N. (2004a). Three Objections to Learning Objects and E-learning Standards. In: McGreal, R. (Ed.). Online Education Using Learning Objects. London: Routledge. pp. 59- 70. </li></ul><ul><li>Friesen, Norm &amp; Cressman, Darryl. (2007). “The Political Economy of Technical E-Learning Standards” In Koolhang, A. &amp; Harman, K. (eds.), Learning Objects: Theory, Praxis, Issues &amp; Trends. Warsaw: Informing Science Press. pp. 507-526. </li></ul><ul><li>Lambe, P. (2002), The Autism of Knowledge Management, www.greenchameleon.com/thoughtpieces/ autism.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Hoel, T. (2010) http://hoel.nu/wordpress/?p=426 accessed March 6 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Hardt, M., Negri, A., (2010) Commonwealth, Harvard University Press </li></ul><ul><li>Illich, I. (2009), Tools for Conviviality, Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd, London </li></ul><ul><li>Wenger, E., White, N., Smith J.D., (2009) Digital Habitats: stewarding technology for communities Portland. </li></ul>

    ×