• Like

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

OpenEd10_SimonBUCKINGHAMSHUM_2

  • 469 views
Uploaded on

Open Ed Conference 2010 Slides …

Open Ed Conference 2010 Slides

Title: Collective Intelligence for
OER Sustainability

Session by Simon Buckingham Shum and Anna de Liddo

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
469
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
1
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

Transcript

  • 1. Open Education 2010, Barcelona Collective Intelligence for OER Sustainability Simon Buckingham Shum & Anna De Liddo OLnet Project, Knowledge Media Institute Open University UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk 1
  • 2. OLnet
aims
to
search
 out
the
evidence
for
 use
and
reuse

 of
OER
 and

 build
a
collec7ve
 intelligence
 infrastructure
that
 makes
this
a
visible,
 and
evolving
map
of
 the
movement’s
 knowledge
and
open
 challenges
 olnet.org

  • 3. Examples of OER Collective Intelligence   The following tend to be adoption obstacles for OER in Africa…   OER xyz failed to transfer to a new context because…   There appear to be 5 main strategies to OER sustainability, of which only 2 have robust evidence…   The following arguments for OER have proven most compelling to state educational boards…   Successful OER initiatives seem to share these competencies in the core team…
  • 4. Examples of OER evidence 4
  • 5. OER Sustainability 5
  • 6. OER Sustainability ~ Sustainability as a property of ecosystems 6
  • 7. Line of argument… Sustainability  Resilience  Resilience Thinking  Resilience Platforms  OER Threats/Opps  OER Collective Intelligence Comple xity 7
  • 8. Resilience   Walker, et al. (2004) define resilience as “the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change, so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks” 8
  • 9. Resilience in Socio-Ecological Systems   Walker, B., C. S. Holling, S. R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9, (2): 5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5 Fig. 1a. Three-dimensional stability landscape with two basins of attraction showing, in one basin, the current position of the system and three aspects of resilience, L = latitude, R = resistance, Pr = precariousness. Latitude: the maximum amount the system can be changed before losing its ability to recover Resistance: the ease or difficulty of changing the system Precariousness: the current trajectory of the system, and how close it currently is to a limit or 9 “threshold”
  • 10. Resilience in Socio-Ecological Systems   Walker, B., C. S. Holling, S. R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9, (2): 5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5 Fig. 1b. Changes in the stability landscape have resulted in a contraction of the basin the system was in and an expansion of the alternate basin. Without itself changing, the system has changed basins. It may not yet be possible to model a human community in such quantitative terms, but the broader principles of Resilience Thinking apply to non- ecological systems more clearly 10
  • 11. Resilience http://www.futureofed.org/driver/Platforms-for-Resilience.aspx “System shocks and disruptions in the arenas of energy, finance, climate, and health care are key forces of destabilization in this century. Institutional strategies that focus on resisting disruption and maintaining the status quo will not offer sufficient responses.” 11
  • 12. Resilience Thinking (explosion of resources on this)   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… promotes biological, landscape, social and economic diversity embraces and works with natural ecological cycles consists of modular components possesses tight feedbacks promotes trust, well developed social networks and leadership places an emphasis on learning, experimentation, locally developed rules, and embracing change has institutions with "redundancy" in governance structures mixes common and private property with overlapping access rights considers all nature’s un-priced services 12
  • 13. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… promotes biological, landscape, social and economic diversity Diversity is a major source of future options and of a system's capacity to respond to change. 13
  • 14. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… embraces and works with natural ecological cycles A forest that is never allowed to burn loses its fire- resistant species and becomes very vulnerable to fire. 14
  • 15. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… consists of modular components When over-connected, shocks are rapidly transmitted through the system - as a forest connected by logging roads can allow a wild fire to spread wider than it would otherwise. 15
  • 16. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… possesses tight feedbacks Feedbacks allow us to detect thresholds before we cross them. Globalization is leading to delayed feedbacks that were once tighter. For example, people of the developed world receive weak feedback signals about the consequences of their consumption. 16
  • 17. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… promotes trust, well developed social networks and leadership Individually, these attributes contribute to what is generally termed "social capital," but they need to act in concert to effect adaptability - the capacity to respond to change and disturbance. 17
  • 18. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… places an emphasis on learning, experimentation, locally developed rules, and embracing change When rigid connections and behaviors are broken, new opportunities open up and new resources are made available for growth. 18
  • 19. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… has institutions with "redundancy" in governance structures Redundancy in institutions increases the diversity of responses and the flexibility of a system. 19
  • 20. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… mixes common and private property with overlapping access rights Because access and property rights lie at the heart of many resource-use tragedies, overlapping rights and a mix of common and private property rights can enhance the resilience of linked social-ecological systems. 20
  • 21. Resilience Thinking   A resilient world (Walker, 2008)… considers all nature’s un- priced services – such as carbon storage, water filtration and so on - in development proposals and assessments. These services are often the ones that change in a regime shift – and are often only recognized and appreciated when they are lost. 21
  • 22. Resilience Platforms http://www.futureofed.org/driver/Platforms-for-Resilience.aspx 22
  • 23. Resilience Platforms http://www.futureofed.org/driver/Platforms-for-Resilience.aspx Creating flexibility and innovation amid system failures “Platforms for resilience - enabling responsive flexibility, distributed collaboration, and transparency - will allow institutions to meet such challenges through innovation, adaptation, and openness.” 23
  • 24. Resilience in knowledge-intensive ecosystems When knowledge and understanding are key variables in the system, resilience depends on the capacity for learning e.g. awareness of discrepant evidence, critical practice, reflection and dialogue when confronted by challenges or shocks to the system. 24
  • 25. Resilience Thinking: OER opportunities + threats Threat to established educational paradigm? (Opportunity for OER/Open Social Learning?) 25
  • 26. Resilience Thinking: OER opportunities + threats Threat to established educational paradigm? (Opportunity for OER/Open Social Learning?) 26
  • 27. Resilience Thinking: OER opportunities + threats Threat to established educational paradigm? (Opportunity for OER/Open Threat to OER/Open Social Social Learning?) Learning? 27
  • 28. Resilience Thinking: OER opportunities + threats Public doc on SBS blog: http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/sbs/2010/10/resilience-thinking-edu 28
  • 29. Resilience Thinking: OER opportunities + threats Public doc on SBS blog: http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/sbs/2010/10/resilience-thinking-edu 29
  • 30. Collective Intelligence for resilience? 30
  • 31. Collective Intelligence for resilience? 31 Sources include: Weick (1995); Kurtz & Snowden (2003); Browning, L. and Boudès, T. (2005); Hagel et al (2010)
  • 32. Collective Intelligence for resilience? 32 Sources include: Weick (1995); Kurtz & Snowden (2003); Browning, L. and Boudès, T. (2005); Hagel et al (2010)
  • 33. Towards an OER Collective Intelligence Infrastructure the key idea… sensemaking revolves around conversations perspective and context are key: we don’t always agree contested collective intelligence 33
  • 34. How can we pool the OER evidence base and debate open issues?... 34
  • 35. How can we pool the OER evidence base and debate open issues?... 35
  • 36. How can we pool the OER evidence base and debate open issues?... interpretation interpretation interpretation interpretation 36
  • 37. How can we pool the OER evidence base and debate open issues?... interpretation interpretation interpretation (a hunch – no grounding evidence yet) interpretation interpretation interpretation 37
  • 38. How can we pool the OER evidence base and debate open issues?... interpretation Is pre-requisite for interpretation interpretation (a hunch – no grounding evidence yet) causes predicts interpretation interpretation interpretation 38
  • 39. How can we pool the OER evidence base and debate open issues?... interpretation Is pre-requisite for prevents interpretation interpretation (a hunch – no grounding Is inconsistent with evidence yet) causes predicts challenges interpretation interpretation interpretation 39
  • 40. Building the story that makes sense of the evidence… i.e. plausible narrative and arguments Question responds to motivates Answer Assumption supports challenges Supporting Challenging Argument… Argument… 40
  • 41. Building the story that makes sense of the evidence… i.e. plausible narrative and arguments Question responds to motivates Answer Hunch supports challenges Supporting Challenging Argument… Argument… 41
  • 42. Building the story that makes sense of the evidence… i.e. plausible narrative and arguments Question responds to motivates Answer Data supports challenges Supporting Challenging Argument… Argument… 42
  • 43. a prototype infrastructure for collective intelligence/social learning http://cohere.open.ac.uk Convergence of… web annotation social bookmarking concept mapping structured debate 43
  • 44. Structured deliberation and debate in which Questions, Evidence and Connections are first class entities (linkable, addressable, embeddable, contestable…) 44
  • 45. Structured deliberation and debate in which Questions, Evidence and Connections are first class entities (linkable, addressable, embeddable, contestable…) 45
  • 46. Analyst-defined visual connection language 46
  • 47. Structured deliberation and debate in which Questions, Evidence and Connections are first class entities (linkable, addressable, embeddable, contestable…) 47
  • 48. — web annotation of OER (Firefox extension)
  • 49. seeing the connections people make as they annotate the web using Cohere Visualizing all the connections that a set of analysts have made — but unfiltered, this may not be very helpful
  • 50. — semantic filtering of connections Visualizing multiple learners’ interpretations of global warming sources Connections have been filtered by a set of semantic relationships grouped as Consistency De Liddo, A. and Buckingham Shum, S. (2010). Cohere: A prototype for contested collective intelligence. In: ACM Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 2010) - Workshop: Collective Intelligence In Organizations, February 6-10, 2010, Savannah, Georgia, USA. http://oro.open.ac.uk/19554
  • 51. — web annotation for sensemaking
  • 52. Concept Social Network Network Social Discourse Network
  • 53. — geospatial mashup of ideas Nodes in the semantic network containing geolocation data can be visualized in Google Maps
  • 54. — timeline viz. mashup of ideas Nodes in the semantic network containing temporal data can be visualized in MIT Simile’s timeline
  • 55. A large scale OER CI exercise: Are you on the map? (whose map?...)   120 OER project reports from Hewlett Foundation   What is the evidence base around OER impact?   What are the unresolved questions that help set the roadmap?   Reports analysed by OER researchers and via computational linguistics engine… …feeding into a set of multi-dimensional interactive knowledge maps   To be shared with the OER community Spring 2011, inviting mass participation to update the evidence base, and create a living conversation, generating dynamic maps that we can collectively own 55
  • 56. Summary Sustainability  Resilience  Resilience Thinking  Resilience Platforms  OER Threats/Opps  OER Collective Intelligence Comple xity 56
  • 57. In more detail… articles, books, news, movies, software, community… http://OLnet.org http://cohere.open.ac.uk http://projects.kmi.open.ac.uk/hyperdiscourse 57