‘Now’s the time’ to be an open learner. There is a cornucopia of resources out there for learning ... Meghan YouTube examples.‘But’. Need to balance optimism. Learners and teachers need equity of access to essential conceptual, cultural and social resources. Note: As a starting point I take an anthropological view of culture, namely as encompassing all human phenomena that are not purely results of human genetics. In this sense mobile phones can be viewed as cultural resources for meaning making.
However, technology is embedded in cultural practices, which are integrated in, and determined by the school’s cultural scripts. So we get schools banning some technologies like mobile phones. At the same time, technology emerges from specific socio-cultural structures like the individualised, mobilized mass communication. For example YouTube. Anderson (2011) reports a lack of motivation for distance education content developers to use OERs.Many DE developers and Faculty define themselves by the production of quality content – not by the consumption and customization of content created by others. Anderson, T. (2011). Technological Challenges and Opportunities of Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogies. http://www.slideshare.net/terrya/hub-de-summit-sydney
Technology is also socio-culturally constructed, with the agency of learners and teachers playing a key role.user-generated context (Cook et al., 2011) is conceived in a way that users of mobile digital devices are being ‘afforded’ synergies of knowledge distributed across: people, communities, locations, time (life-course), social contexts and sites of practice (like socio-cultural milieus) and structures. Of particular significance is the way in which mobile digital devices are mediating access to external representations of knowledge in a manner that provides access to cultural resources.
Paul Bacich anecdote related to HE Academy benchmarking and how close we were to “getting it right” with model in BJET!Cut and paste from Cook et al. 2007for the purposes of this paper, Figure 2 is used as a benchmarking tool to explain the process redesign and ‘informal change’ that has taken, and is taking place at London Metropolitan University. The trajectory of the CETL is indicated by the arrow. Our resulting model places a premium on informal change, feasibility and sequence. By informal change we refer to practitioner initiated change rather than top-down senior management group strategy documents. Furthermore, we are taking the tipping point to be an informal yet powerful target of where we (the authors) believe the university should be travelling to. Consequently, the model is being used by our project as a way of mapping out what we are doing in terms of change management. Figure 2 is split into three phases. Phase 1 of the model (the boxes labelled internal coordination and localised use) has an important self inspection phase, where critical process and interactions within the organisation are identified. This first phase involves extensive effort being spent onexamining the localised use of technology and internal coordination of processes. An analysis at this stage identifies existing and target processes; systems interactions that are both complementary and competing are noted. Our analysis at Phase 1 noted that local users were being enabled, through small pockets of centrally provided resource, to develop e-learning materials in an environment free from centralised control. The formation of the CETL in 2005, together with other institutional activities, provided a springboard for the institutional e-learning development, leading the newly formed London Metropolitan University into phase two (the boxes labelled process redesign and network redesign with subsequent embedding). This is a contrast to the development of e-learning in many other post 1992 universities, many of whom rushed into developing e-learning around the institutional requirements to place materials within a VLE such as Blackboard. The second phase in the middle of Figure 2 involves looking at pockets of change as the process of redesign gets underway. In phase 2 there is a need to determine the degree of difficulty in shifting from existing to target practices. Specifically, at phase 2 the requirement has been found for the need for some type of networked organisation as a premium is placed on innovation and because of the impact of an institutional merger in 2004: “If environmental factors oppose one another they may indicate instabilities that might uncover new more flexible – possibly networked – organisations, with a premium on innovation” (Brynjolfsson et al, 1997). By encouraging a more flexible, organic growth in phase 2, the institution was able to move towards the medium term goals of ‘feasibility and sequence’ of e-learning innovation; this in turn is leading towards the inevitable solidification of processes and networks. The momentum towards the tipping point is being maintained with the added benefits that student led initiatives (e.g. a student network) were able to be capitalised upon and included by the time a draft e-learning strategy was developed for the institution towards the middle of phase 2 (April 2007). The second half of phase 2 may entail a dipping off of the degree of change effort involved as the organisation adjusts to the process redesign. When the right-hand edge of phase 2 hits the tipping point we are about to enter phase 3, which is where large-scale transformations, innovations and change that are self-sustaining take off.
*Uploaded by the end of March 2011.**Not amongst the top positions, therefore no stats available.The server is at some data center in Nuremberg. Klaus and Judith (LMLG) havehosting contracts with the mall one-man company that is selling thespace to us since about 10 years now. Works quite good.Btw: Don't take the 2 million hits in May too serious. This could havebeen bots, search engines and hackers ...
Boyer usefully identifies four ‘Types of Scholarship’ those of Discovery, Integration, Application and Teaching (DIAT), Boyer , E. (1990).Scholarship. Reconsidered.
Technological Challenges and Opportunities of Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogieshttp://www.slideshare.net/terrya/hub-de-summit-sydney
The eclectic RyCooder wrote this on the liner notes of Buena Vista Social Club. Joke about Bar Mitzvah and Weddings. Outside in, inside out problem. Mediating access to cultural resources.
Diary of an open journey.A personal open odyssey ...Extended version, 19 June 2011Comments welcome John Cook Learning Technology Research Institute London Metropolitan University
Johnnigelcook or Jonni Gel Cook! Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Home page: http://staffweb.londonmet.ac.uk/~cookj1/Twitter: http://twitter.com/johnnigelcookSlideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/johnnigelcook Music wiki: http://johnnigelcook.wetpaint.com/page/Music Academia.edu: http://londonmet.academia.edu/JohnCook/About Blip.fm: http://blip.fm/johnnigelcook
Image / template acknowledgements Past, present and future: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_CDDStcgxrtA/TCNWygGpj8I/AAAAAAAAANM/YHCxnF_pRnI/s320/past,+present,+future.jpeg We cannot jump over our shadows! http://bit.ly/lpl5tp at http://4.bp.blogspot.com/ Time lime template downloaded http://ancienthistory.pppst.com/timeperiod.html 9 June 2011 Join the band http://cache1.bigcartel.com/product_images/30458935/Join_The_Band_GIRLS_CARTEL.jpg Damn fine coffee! http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ld50kbJQSM1qzfp7bo1_500.jpg Buena Vista Social Club http://runningdownhill.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/buena-vista-social-club.jpg Thank you! http://farm1.static.flickr.com/2/2086641_23234fb0f8.jpg
Structure Vision & position Open Journey Focus on open design, open research and open practice Briefly look at open scholarship, open teaching, open learning, open pedagogy and open policy. Open Questions Note View contains additional references and some additional notes.
Vision & position Now’s the time to be an open learner? Yes, learners have more control and a cornucopia of resources and networks to choose from. But, learners need equity of access to cultural resources. Ubiquitous technologies can be viewed as cultural resources for ubiquitous mobility and learning. New patterns of power, participation and inclusion are emerging.
Technology is embedded in cultural practices integrated in & determined by an institutions cultural scripts E.G. Anderson (2011) reports a lack of motivation for distance education content developers & Faculty to use OERs define themselves by production of quality content not by consumption & customization of content created by others Technology also emerges from specific socio-cultural structures individualised, mobilized mass communication E.G. YouTube, Slideshare, Twitter, etc. Pachler, N., Bachmair, B. and Cook, J. (2010). Mobile Learning: Structures, Agency, Practices. New York: Springer.
Technology socio-culturally constructed agency of learners and teachers playing a key role User-generated contexts (Cook et. al., 2011) where mobile digital devices are mediating access to external representations of knowledge access to cultural resourcesacross: people communities locations time (life-course) social contexts sites of practice (like socio-cultural milieus) structures Cook, J., Pachler, N. and Bachmair, B. (2011). Ubiquitous Mobility with Mobile Phones: A Cultural Ecology for Mobile Learning. E-Learning and Digital Media. Special Issue on Media: Digital, Ecological and Epistemological.
Open Journey … FP7 & LLL Projects ubiquitous learning(2007 - on) Open scholarship & teaching LMLG: open research (2006 - on) Institutional Impact: ‘Evidence’ to BIS: open policy Manager RLO CETL: open design (2005-08) OU PhD & DBR (1998) 2000 2005 2008 2010
Open Design FP7 & LLL Projects ubiquitous learning(2007 - on) Open questions RLOCETL: open design (2005-08) OU PhD & DBR (1998) 2000 2005 2008 2010 “Open design is concerned with opening up the process of designing learning interventions.” (Conole, 2010)
Theories and Models of interaction and learning Empirical work Tool and learning support development Open Design OU PhD & DBR (1998) JiME (2002) FP7 MATURE D6.1, (2009) 2000 2005 2008 2010 Cook, J. (2002). The Role of Dialogue in Computer-Based Learning and Observing Learning: An Evolutionary Approach to Theory. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 5. Paper online: http://www-jime.open.ac.uk/2002/5
http://www.rlo-cetl.ac.uk/ Open Design Critical mass of RLOs, now available in the CETL repository, thoroughly evaluated with large (>2000) cohorts of students across 3 universities. “The TEC approach enables teaching staff, multimedia developers and students to become involved in an iterative and highly creative process of reusable learning object design, implementation and evaluation.” Team Enhanced Creativity: An Approach to Designing User-Centred Reusable Learning Objects (Cook et al., 2006) * 2000 2005 2008 2010 * http://www.slideshare.net/johnnigelcook/an-approach-to-designing-usercentred-reusable-learning-objects
Open Design Cook et al. (2007). A Stakeholder Approach to Implementing E-Learning in a University. British Journal of Education Technology, 38(5), 784–794. “We conclude by (i) proposing that the inclusion of different stakeholders, and in particularly the student voice, has provided the catalyst for change within the three partners of the CETL, and (ii) suggesting that the crucial factors in change implementation are the coordination and dynamic extension of informal change processes which already exist.” 2000 2005 2008 2010 Student included in design, research and presented papers, e.g. Mitchell, A., Holley, D., Cook, J., Windle, R. and Morales, R. (2008). 360 Degree Rotations – A Kaleidoscope of Voices from the RLO-CETL.The Higher Education Academy Annual Conference 2008, Harrogate, July 1-3.
Replication Transformation Figure 2: Institutional change model (Cook et al., 2007) High Process redesign TippingPoint Redefinition & innovative use Degree of change effort Internal Coordination “If environmental factors oppose one another they may indicate instabilities that might uncover new more flexible – possibly networked – organisations, with a premium on innovation” (Brynjolfsson et al, 1997). Network redesign & embedding Brynjolfsson, E., Renshaw, A.A. and van Alstyne, M. (1997). The Matrix of Change: A Tool for Business Process Reengineering. MIT Sloan School of Management. Retrieved 4 June 2006, [WWW document]. URLhttp://ccs.mit.edu/papers/CCSWP189/CCSWP189.html
Open Design “To summarise, the elements of an Augmented Contexts for Development (ACD) are: (i) the physical environment (Cistercian Abbey); (ii) pedagogical plan provided in advance by the tutor; (iii) tools for visualisation/augmentation oriented approach that create an umbrella ‘Augmented Context for Development’ for location based mobile devices (acts as part of the substitute for Vygotsky’s “more capable peer”); (iv) learner co-constructed ‘temporal context for development’ (see below), created within a wider Augmented Context for Development through (v) collaborative learners’ interpersonal interactions using tools (e.g. language, mobiles, etc) and signs; (vi) these aforementioned elements (i-v) lead to intrapersonal (internal) representations of the above functions.” Mobile Phones as Mediating Tools Within Augmented Contexts for Development (Cook, 2010). Used in mLeMan as basis for Mobile Augmented Reality – with Carl Smith 2000 2005 2008 2010 http://mleman.dipseil.net/
“The ability to be in a particular position but get a variety of views/different visual perspective was a very useful opportunity. The whole thing also got everyone talking in a way I hadn't experienced on field trips to Fountains before.”
“The information given was underlined by the 'experience' of the area and therefore given context in both past and present.”
“it was triggering my own thoughts and I was getting to think for myself about the area and the buildings.”
Initial Design Skill Set for Mobile Augmented Reality (Carl Smith, LTRI) for mLeMan 3) Participatory Design: Is there scope in the intervention for users to adapt the content elements of the MAR system? 4) Multiple Ways of Seeing: Has the MAR environment incorporated multiple ways of seeing? Whether utilising microscopic, xray or macroscopic all these augmented ways of seeing are available within MAR systems and should be taken advantage of if appropriate.
Macroscopic Learning A map of Manhattan named “Here & There.” places the viewer simultaneously above the city and in it and allows them to plot a path between them. http://berglondon.com/projects/hat/ The projection connects the viewer's local environment to remote destinations normally out of sight. “A macroscope is something that helps us see what the aggregation of many small actions looks like when added together.” John Thackera http://clubneko.net/matt-webb-on-design/ (Slide by Carl Smith)
Open Design (Ravenscroft, Schmidt, Cook & Bradley, JCAL, under review) 2000 2005 2008 2010 3rd Annual Review Assessment "MATURE can become the benchmark project in knowledge management and workplace interactive learning".
Open Design Bannan, Cook and Pachler. Pedagogically-Orientated Mobile Learning Research: The Case of Design Research (AERA, 2011) Book and ESF bid for a conference in this area planned 2000 2005 2008 2010
Open Design selected papers Cook, J. (2002). The Role of Dialogue in Computer-Based Learning and Observing Learning: An Evolutionary Approach to Theory. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 5. Paper online: http://www-jime.open.ac.uk/2002/5 Cook, J., Holley, D., Smith, C., Haynes, R. and Bradley, C. (2006). Team Enhanced Creativity: An Approach to Designing User-Centred Reusable Learning Objects. IV International Conference on Multimedia and ICTs in Education (m-ICTE2006). Available; http://slidesha.re/iUmpPD Cook, J. (2007). Symposium – Design in the Disciplines. Chapter 5. In Geoff Minshull and Judith Mole (Eds.) Designing for Learning. The Proceedings of Theme 1 (A4) of the JISC Online Conference: Innovating e-Learning 2006. Available from www.jisc.ac.uk/elp_conference06.html Cook, J., Holley, D. and Andrew, D. (2007). A Stakeholder Approach to Implementing E-Learning in a University. British Journal of Education Technology, 38(5), 784–794. Cook, J., Wharrad, H., Windle, R. J., Leeder, D., Morales, R., Boyle, T. and Alton, R. (2007). Implementations, Change Management and Evaluation: A Case Study of the Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Reusable Learning Objects. Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change, 4(1), 47–63. Mitchell, A., Holley, D., Cook, J., Windle, R. and Morales, R. (2008). 360 Degree Rotations – A Kaleidoscope of Voices from the RLO-CETL.The Higher Education Academy Annual Conference 2008, Harrogate, July 1-3. Holley, D., Bradley, C. Greaves, L. and Cook, J. (2009). “You Can Take Out of it What you Want” – How Learning Objects Within Blended Learning Designs Encourage Personalised Learning. In John O’Donoghue (Ed.) Technology Supported Environment for Personalised Learning: Methods and Case Studies. IGI Global. Cook, J. (2009). Scaffolding the Mobile Wave.Keynote at Institutional Impact, a JISC online conference, 9th July 2009. See http://ssbr0709.inin.jisc-ssbr.net/programme/ Cook, J. (2010). Mobile Phones as Mediating Tools Within Augmented Contexts for Development. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2(3), 1-12, July-September. Preprint: http://bit.ly/g5cODr Smith, C., Bradley, C., Cook, J. and Pratt-Adams, S. (2011). Designing for Active Learning: Putting Learning into Context with Mobile Devices. In Anders D. Olofsson and J. Ola Lindberg (Eds), Informed Design of Educational Technologies in Higher Education: Enhanced Learning and Teaching. IGI Global. Bannan, B., Cook, J., Pachler, N., and Bachmair, B., (2011). Pedagogically-Orientated Mobile Learning Research: The Case of Design Research, Round-Table Session at 2011 AERA (American Educational Research Association) Annual Meeting, April 8-12 in New Orleans. Ravenscroft, A., Schmidt, A., Cook, J. & Bradley, (under review). Designing Socio-Technical Systems for Informal Learning and Knowledge Maturing in the ‘Web 2.0 Workplace’. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning .
Open Research LMLG open research (2006 - on) Open questions Slideshare:Cook, Phases Of Mobile Learning, uploaded June 2009, 7287 views, 83 downloads “the central theme of open research is to make clear accounts of the methodology, along with data and results extracted therefrom, freely available via the Internet. This permits a massively distributed collaboration.”* 2000 2005 2008 2010 *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_research, accessed 9 June 2011
Open Research I am a founding member of the LMLG where I have embedded two colleagues from LTRI into this self-organising network of excellence. Brings researchers at all stages of career from around world together (see http://bit.ly/fAdmBk) LMLG open research (2006 - on) 2000 2005 2008 2010
Selected research LMLG outputs First authored book in 2010 on mobile learning. Being used in teaching in such institutions as University Hull, University Leeds, University Stockholm, and University of California, Berkeley. LMLG open research (2006 - on) User Generated Contexts Workshop Research Methods in Informal and Mobile Learning * 2000 2005 2008 2010 * http://www.wlecentre.ac.uk/cms/files/events/book.pdf
Open Evaluation: Using Theory to Review and to Plan the Blending of Mobile Learning into Practicehttp://www.slideshare.net/johnnigelcook/using-theory-to-review-and-to-plan-the-blending-of-mobile-learning-into-practice Key questions
Which Cultural Practices does this intervention or innovations relate to, build upon, challenge etc?
What Structures does it utilise? Are these “standard” or “bespoke”?
How does Agency (human capacities to act in the world) affect the intervention, or how is the intervention dependent on Agency?
Selected Publications – "gold" / “green” road to OA and ‘toll’ road! Cook, J. and Smith, M. (2004). Beyond Formal Learning: Informal Community eLearning. Computers and Education, CAL03 Special Issue, 43(1–2), 35–47. PDF of final draft Cook, J., Bradley, C., Lance, J., Smith, C. and Haynes, R. (2007). Generating Learning Contexts with Mobile Devices.In Norbert Pachler (Ed.), Mobile Learning: Towards a Research Agenda, WLE Occasional Papers in Work-Based Learning 1, London. Available from: http://www.wlecentre.ac.uk/cms/files/occasionalpapers/mobilelearning_pachler2007.pdf Cook, J., Pachler, N. and Bradley, C. (2007). Whither Case-Cased Approaches to Understanding Off-Site and On-Campus Mobile Learning?Paper presented at Workshop on Research Methods in Informal and Mobile Learning: How to get the data we really want, 14 December, WLE Centre, Institute of Education London, UK. Available from: http://www.wlecentre.ac.uk/cms/files/events/book.pdf Cook, J., Pachler, N. and Bradley, C. (2008). Bridging the Gap? Mobile Phones at the Interface between Informal and Formal Learning. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, Spring. Available from: http://www.rcetj.org/index.php/rcetj/article/view/34 Bachmair, B., Pachler, N. and Cook, J. (2009). Mobile Phones as Cultural Resources of Learning, an Education Analysis of Structures, Mobile Expertise and Cultural Practices. MedienPädagogik online journal. Available from http://www.medienpaed.com/2009/bachmair0903.pdf Cook, J. (2009). Phases of Mobile Learning. Invited lecture at Joint European Summer School on Technology Enhanced Learning 2009. Terchova, Slovakia, May 30 - June 6. See: http://tinyurl.com/psejxu - over 7000 views Pachler, N., Bachmair, B. and Cook, J. (2010). Mobile Learning: Structures, Agency, Practices. New York: Springer. Treasure-Jones, T., Murphy, K., Cook, J., Frith, G., Kapdi, A. and Taylor, J. (2010). Navigating Through the Storm – Using Theory to Plan Mobile Learning Deployment.(Workshop). In Blackey, Hayden, Habib, Laurence, Jefferies, Amanda and Johnson, Mark (Eds.) ALT-C 2010 - Conference Introduction and Abstracts. Available: http://repository.alt.ac.uk/798/ (see page 47). Cook, J., Pachler, N. and Bachmair, B. (2011). Ubiquitous Mobility with Mobile Phones: A Cultural Ecology for Mobile Learning. E-Learning and Digital Media. Special Issue on Media: Digital, Ecological and Epistemological. Cook, J. (2011). Educational Design Research Investigation of the Temporal Nature of Learning: Taking a Vygotskian Approach. Mobile Learning: Crossing Boundaries in Convergent Environments Conference, held in Bremen, Germany, March 21st to 22nd. PDF book of abstracts: http://bit.ly/fFeTUN - over 19,000 downloads of proceedings
Open scholarship and teaching My collaborative publications: LTRI 44, RLO CETL 40, LMLG 17, CONTSENS 8, MATURE 4, other 28. Put another way, a total 141 out of total of 177 of my outputs (excludes invited) are collaborative. LTRI, RLO-CETL, LMLG, Faculty, LGC ‘inquiry as stance’ Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009) 2000 2005 2008 2010
Open Scholarship Taking my lead from the likes of Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009) I take an ‘Inquiry as Stance’ approach, which is where I encourage teams to broadened inquiry from, for example, a study of classroom/online practice to a lifelong habit of mind wherein teams link up to researchers and practitioners from around the world, where teams become networked, using an inquiry lens to question any aspect of the educational system with the social justice goal of more equitable outcomes for students. This is how I helped develop research and development teams within LTRI, the Reusable Learning Objects CETL and the London Mobile Learning Group (LMLG). Inquiry as Stance Practitioner Research for the Next Generation Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan L. Lytle Practitioners Inquiry Pub Date: April 2009,
Open Scholarship Weller (2010) refers to Boyer’s (1990) definition of scholarship in terms of discovery (i.e. the creation of new knowledge), integration (i.e. creating knowledge across disciplines), application (i.e. engagement with the wider community beyond education) and teaching (i.e. applying research to teaching) Weller lists characteristics of digital scholarship: openness and sharing as a default, digital, and networked, a global network of peers to generate and share ideas Weller cites the way in which Twitter, for example, can enable researchers to have access to immediate expertise but points out that you build networks first Weller, M. (2010). Thoughts on digital scholarship. http://nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/no_good_reason/2010/07/thoughts-on-digital-scholarship.html, downloaded 15 June, 2011
Open Scholarship Garnett and Ecclesfield (2011, forthcoming ALT-C proceedings) note that building on the Taxonomy of the Many (Anderson & Dron 2007) Anderson looks at how learning is moving from the group to the collective (Dron 2008), challenging Boyer’s institution-centric approach. Anderson additionally sees a key function of Open Scholarship as being “empowering learners as future teachers.” Haythornthwaite (2009) sees “contributory, open and participatory practices” as signifying trends in learning which signify the “emergent work” They update Boyer’s DIAT model suggesting the following set of descriptors (changes highlighted in red) Garnett and Ecclesfield go on to propose an additional ‘type” of Scholarship, that of co-creating based on The Pedagogy, Andragogy, Heutagogy Continuum, which is part of the Open Context Model of Learning (Luckin et al., 2007) developed by the Learner Generated Context group: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learner_generated_context Luckin, R., Akass, J., Cook, J., Day, P., Ecclesfield, N., Garnett, F. Gould, M., Hamilton, T. and Whitworth, A. (2007). Learner-Generated Contexts: Sustainable Learning Pathways Through Open Content.OpenLearn 2007 - Researching Open Content in Education, 30-31 October 2007, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Table 2 Co-creation Model of Open Scholarship (Garnett and Ecclesfield, 2011, forthcoming)
Open scholarly support I have recently been working as one of London Met’s Blended Learning Champions (BLCs) Involves mentoring fellow BLCs and Faculty colleagues in terms of digital literacy Link to slides I used in a session with fellow BLCs in September 2010 “Student engagement and feedback in material design and participation (mobile devices/forums/blogs/wikis)”: http://www.slideshare.net/johnnigelcook/blc-cook Here is an email from the Associate Dean thanking our BLC team for running Faculty staff development day in February 2011: “You all did brilliantly and the day was a great success! The feedback forms are excellent! Well done team!” Here is a comment from a colleague thanking me for a session for fellow BLCs that I ran on using Twitter in Blended Learning, in March 2011 (screen shots from open resources I developed for this follow): “Dear John, A big thank you for this and for the workshop yesterday. I really enjoyed it and I'm sure the others did too. You certainly showed how learning - and Twitter - can be fun. The workshop is definitely a reusable learning object (!) - let's roll it out to other HALE staff! We BLCs need to get confident with it first though, as you said before John. Let's see how we go over the next week or two. Best wishes [name of fellow BLC]”
Open Teaching Wiley (no date, slide 17) cites a number of examples of how to adopt open everyday (teaching and learning) practices: “Open your student work through blogs. Use only open materials for your classes. Write your own teaching materials. Put your teaching materials in a wiki and encourage student contribution / alteration. Put you syllabus in a wiki and encourage student contribution / alteration. Completely open participation in your class”. Wiley, D. (n.d.). E-learning and openness. Retrieved from http://mediastudio.unu.edu/download/wiley.ppt, 15 June 2011. Semi-open Teaching of undergrad module 2010/2011 ‘New Technologies and Learning module’ I taught last semester Introduced students to use of open social software like Twitter and Wikis and enabled range group discussions in VLE EG (screen shot that follows this slide) Students put class activity outputs in wiki on module http://hijabfashion.wetpaint.com/
Open Teaching Regarding my lead and teaching on ‘New Technologies and Learning’ module evaluation I am particularly pleased with response in module feedback to q4&5 (that rate the module convenor/lab assistants – the average is a 75% satisfaction rating). There was also some positive student feedback to the open questions and I particularly liked the comment “I have felt the lectures have been brilliant and the aids and videos have made for really enjoyable discussion”.
(But) Are you More than Your Content? lack of motivation for distance education content developers to use OERs ?? Many DE developers and Faculty define themselves by the production of quality content – not by the consumption and customization of content created by others. Slide from Anderson (2011). http://www.slideshare.net/terrya/hub-de-summit-sydney
Open policy Local as E-Learning Project Leader and nationally through ALT (2003 – onwards) 2000 2005 2008 2010
Open Policy: Local TAL/TEL Executive The Teaching, Assessment, Learning / Technology Enhanced Learning Exec Originally 4 person group that reports to the University Executive (2 DVCs & VC) and key University committees Work included delivery of workshops and provision of follow-up support to Faculty management, T&L champions and subject groups; the goal of this work is to help Faculty/subject groups develop Blended Learning Strategies/quick win plans. In 2009 I was set and met targets that included the goal of developing University policies in the areas of using Web 2.0 and other external digital resources, and digital literacy. BLC "Lunch Club" presented policies (2010) Presented on this at the Staff Conference (6th July, 2010: ‘Digital literacy: the gr8db8 surrounding the fragmentation of ‘literacy’ abilities’.
Open Policy: National December 2004. Act (as Chair of ALT) as consultant on the Higher Education Policy Institute report to UK VC’s (Spent Force or Revolution in Progress? eLearning After the eUniversity, lead author Prof. John Slater). Attend report launch at reception in House of Commons on 2nd February 2005. http://bit.ly/iGXI3I ALT/TLRP-TEL (2010). Technology in Learning: A Response to Some [evidence-seeking] Questions from the Department of Business Innovation and Skills. Foreword by John Cook (LTRI/ALT) and Richard Noss (TLRP-TEL), October. Available: http://repository.alt.ac.uk/839/ or http://www.tlrp.org/tel/technologyinlearning/ (comments possible at latter site). Cook also first author of content. ALT/TLRP-TEL (2011). Response to National Curriculum Review. http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2099/ Contribute to IET impact at University level
Open Questions To conclude, rather than proffer solutions I instead offer a few questions for further consideration ...
Open teaching What cultural practices will give teachers equity of access to cultural resources? In the context of OULDI, Conole (2011) defines learning design as: “We see ‘learning design’ as an all encompassing term to cover the process, representation, sharing and evaluation of designs from lower level activities right up to whole curriculum level designs.” Is open teaching the same as learning design? Conole (2011) Learning Design questions: Can we develop a range of tools and support mechanisms to help teachers design learning activities more effectively? Can we agree a shared language/vocabulary for learning design, which is consistent and rigorous, but not too time consuming to use? How can we provide support and guidance on the creation of learning interventions? What is the right balance of providing detailed, real, case studies, which specify the detail of the design, compared with more abstract design representations that simply highlight the main features of the design? How can we develop a sustainable, community of reflective practitioners who share and discuss their learning and teaching ideas and designs? Conole (2011). Chapter two – Design languages. http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/5406, accessed 13 June, 2011.
Open pedagogy and scholarship Connectivist models introduced to networked learning can be foundational for lifelong learning in complex contexts? Can Connectivist models be used for linking formal and ‘informal’ learning? (Anderson, 2011) Do learners still need to be scaffolded in a Connectivist world? Does Garnett and Ecclesfield’s (2011) extension of Boyer’s ‘types’ contribute to notions of the open scholar?
Open (cultural) practice How can we mediate access for all to cultural resources given the barriers of cultural scripts and practices? Replication or transformation of practice? Should we go for evolution or revolution in terms addressing an institution’s cultural scripts? “The cost of sharing has disappeared … but we act as if it hasn’t.” (Weller, 2009) Why is this? Are we more than our content? How can we motivate distance education content developers & Faculty to use OERs? (Anderson, 2011) Students as agents of change in a stakeholder approach seems to be taking off? (Cook, et al., 2007) . How can we build on this? Do the problems surrounding community practice dimensions of Learning Object Repositories persist for OER practice? “The development of international standards … are easing the development of learning design tools … Despite this, social and cultural barriers are providing more challenging than technical issues. It is difficult to change current ways of working towards more sustainable practices (for example teachers tend to reuse resources within small, localised, tightly bound groups rather than sharing resources with a wider collective).” Littlejohn and Cook, (2010). ALT’ s What Research Has to Say for Practice – Learning Objects and Learning Object Repositories http://bit.ly/iiNzUh
Open research Implications of open access movement and open data movement? (Conole, 2010) But what is open research? Is it more than making methods, data and results transparent? Is it taking “gold” road to OA? Is it the same as participative research? If yes, what about users participating in the analysis of research data?
Open design “What would a vision of a truly open approach to design mean; beyond open educational resources towards a more explicit representation and sharing of the whole design process?” (Conole, 2010) What is the relationship between open design and other forms like Design Based Research (DBR)? Just make DBR transparent? How do we factor in institutional & organisational issues into open design? Design for who and by who? Is it just about teachers? Where is the locus of control? Who decides what learning is? Do we include participatory design? If so, is there scope in an intervention for users to adapt the content elements of a Mobile Augmented Reality system? Inclusive research with people with learning disabilities. What do we mean by individualized risk? Risk to who? RE MATURE’s work-based learning (WBL) DBR model ‘Learn and problematize about experience and constraints in context’. Is there is a tension between scientific innovation and user needs? Sharing theory with all stakeholder is complex?
Open design What about open design for WBL contexts? How do we support transition between contexts as work-based, informal and formal learning contexts merge? During their continuing learning activities, what will the learning trail left behind by learners tell us as they move from one learning context to the next? How can we improve our understanding of how elements of context can be maintained over time, so as to scaffold a perceived continuity of learning? How do we to make explicit to society at large what new abilities are needed to design for the world we live in? How do we place the means for learning these skills at the heart of society? Is the alternative the gradual curtailment of democratic processes as people lose their power to contribute to debates about their future?
“In Cuba the music flows like a river. It takes care of you and rebuilds you from the inside out.”
References for open questions ALT (2010). What Research Has to Say for Practice. http://wiki.alt.ac.uk/index.php/What_research_has_to_say_for_practice Anderson, T. (2011). Technological Challenges and Opportunities of Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogies. http://www.slideshare.net/terrya/hub-de-summit-sydney Conole, G. (2010). The nature of openness. http://www.slideshare.net/grainne/chapter-16-open-practices Conole (2011). Chapter two – Design languages. http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/5406 Garnett, F. and Ecclesfield, N. (forthcoming). Towards a Framework for Co-Creating Open Scholarship. ALT-C 2011 proceedings: http://www.alt.ac.uk/altc/alt-c-2011 Weller, M. (2009). Reflections on openness. http://nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/no_good_reason/2009/09/reflections-on-openness.html