dScribe: The makers of OPEN

dScribe: the makers of OPEN / September 2009 / OCWC Except where otherwise noted, this work is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Copyright 2009 The Regents of the University of Michigan Garin Fons h ttp://open.umich.edu

students know stuff.

students * students are becoming ever harder to define in traditional ways like, say, someone who shows up to “class”. ** know in ways that are explicit, measurable, quantifiable; but also in ways that are tacit, immeasurable, and, frankly, taken for granted. *** stuff about not only technology and the web, but also about people, practices, potential. know stuff. * ** ***

students ^ know stuff. a lot of

cliched stuff games gadgets communication consumption social networking

maybe it isn’t so cliched layering connecting sharing remixing

students know stuff. a lot of ^ interesting meaningful valuable useful

driven by:

know- how

a passion for learning CC:BY-NC-ND kuzeytac (flickr)

a desire to increase access to knowledge

CC:BY-NC-ND ul_Marga ( flickr )

an eagerness to solve real world problems

CC: BY-SA julien_harneis ( flickr )

an ability to collaborate and participate

CC: BY-NC-SA tojosan ( flickr )

we knew stuff. * * we were a group of grad students and a faculty member at U-M ** knew less than we know now, but that might have been ok *** stuff about Creative Commons, some programming, web 2.0, sharing, etc. ** ***

we had a passion a desire an eagerness and the ability

so we began to build

two a new model for creating OER/OCW. a new paradigm in teaching and learning. one CC: BY-SA jfabra ( flickr ) CC: BY-SA jfabra ( flickr )

opportunity for a new model

cost

access to faculty

scale

refresh rate

Traditional OCW/OER publication model

staff centered

retroactive

Challenges one CC: BY-SA jfabra ( flickr )

change the existing pedagogy teacher students knowledge learning happens in there somewhere? two CC: BY-SA jfabra ( flickr ) CC:BY-NC-ND kioko ( flickr )

how else can we do this?

convert producing OER who are these people ? people OER curriculum materials c into

what about students ?

and a team of U-M OER specialists... for use by students, educators and self-learners... Motivated students... collaborate with faculty... to gather, review, edit, and publish course materials... worldwide.

Source: Regents of the University of Michigan

publish to OER site dScribe Publishing Process roles dScribe2 dScribe instructor faculty transfers course material to dScribe dScribe attends training course led by dScribe2 dScribe identifies & documents potential IP issues Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan OER team reviews & clears IP issues clear IP BY: Garin Fons, Pieter Kleymeer characters by Ryan Junell dScribe makes necessary edits to course material Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan faculty reviews material: publish to U-M OER site Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan faculty & dScribe2 connect: license material as OER faculty & dScribe2 recruit dScribe

dScribe cast of characters dScribe Faculty dScribe2

license material That’s easy!

select a dScribe Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for this course I’ll do it!

dScribe training course copyright open resources fun! decision trees

transfer material Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan

vet material Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan OERca: Content & Decision Management Software

Modeling workflow

review material Content Processing Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan Where does this image come from? OERca: Content & Decision Management Software

edit material Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan

final review Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan Looks good!

publication open.michigan Class #1 Agenda: find dScribe for open.michigan

create a method that is... : scalable : sustainable : cost effective : enables refresh address main challenges of OCW creation one CC: BY-SA jfabra ( flickr ) approach: we could leverage the capacity of institutional technologies and talents we had training in automating and simplifying complex process

do-it-yourself, digital, distributed

motivated students or individuals who:

organize, clear, tag course materials

are familiar with technology and software

learn about intellectual property & copyright

engage with content in new ways

“ dScribes”

benefits to students:

master course content

learn about copyright and copyleft

establish unique connection w/ faculty

potential to get course credit

collaborate w/ other dedicated classmates

make resources available to everyone

dScribe publication model

benefits to faculty:

students in course know best!

establishing unique connection w/ students

quality assurance of materials

obtain user feedback on content >> improve content

issues we have noted:

difference between student quality and faculty quality of work

limited expertise in subject area

limited time to devote to OER production

difficult to obtain the right balance of incentives for participation and production

the classroom is changing two CC: BY-SA jfabra ( flickr ) social view of learning & learning 2.0

a Cartesian view of knowledge and learning

:: John Seely Brown and Richard P. Adler

: “I think therefore I am”

: knowledge as substance & pedagogy as knowledge transfer

CC: BY-NC-SA smallestbones (flickr) http://www.flickr.com/photos/jenkim/5535084 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-s a/2.0/ Cartesian perspective assumes that knowledge is a kind of substance and that pedagogy thinks that the best way to transfer this substance is from teachers to students. See: Brown, John Seely and Richard P. Adler, “Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and Learning 2.0” Educause Review, January/February 2008, pages 17 - 32

the social view of learning - learning 2.0

:: John Seely Brown and Richard P. Adler

: “we participate therefore we are”

: understanding is socially constructed

CC: BY-NC berbercarpet (flickr) http://www.flickr.com/photos/flickerbulb/1477994596 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ - our understanding of content is socially constructed through conversations about that content and through grounded interactions around problems and actions. not “what” but “how” we learn (JSB) See: Brown, John Seely and Richard P. Adler, “Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and Learning 2.0” Educause Review, January/February 2008, pages 17 - 32

learning 2.0 - characteristics

:: connected

: students, staff, & faculty

:: global audience

: facebook, slideshare, YouTube

:: participatory

: commenting as part of assignments

:: project based learning

: authentic assessments and real clients

:: technology as a mindset, not a skill

: blogs, wikis, multimedia, social networking

: collaborative virtual spaces

: permanent records of work and conversations

more here in Kim Cofino’s presentation - “The 21st Century Classroom” http://www.slideshare.net/mscofino/the-21st-century-classroom

a summary :: sharing as the norm :: learning is more about how than what :: participation and collaboration are key a proposition :: learning how to be open is essential to engaging in social learning and learning 2.0 Not just “learning about” but “learning to be” developing the practices and norms of a the practitioners in a field to acculturate ones self into a culture of practice

is a step in that direction.

students as makers. students as collaborators. students as teachers. sharing the stuff they know . making learning relevant , interesting , meaningful . making open the norm.

https://open.umich.edu/wiki/Main_Page [email_address]

https://open.umich.edu/wiki/ -> Presentation, poster, and diagram downloads We were made CC:BY Ryan Junell