Beyond the EU: DORA and NIS 2 Directive's Global Impact
dScribe: The makers of OPEN
1. dScribe: the makers of OPEN
/ September 2009
/ OCWC
Garin Fons
http://open.umich.edu
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
3. * ** ***
students know stuff.
* 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.
10. a desire to
increase access
to knowledge
CC:BY-NC-ND ul_Marga (flickr)
11. an
eagerness
to solve
real world
problems
CC: BY-SA julien_harneis (flickr)
12. an ability to collaborate and participate
CC: BY-NC-SA tojosan (flickr)
13. * ** ***
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.
14. a passion
a desire
we had an eagerness
and the ability
16. one two
CC: BY-SA jfabra (flickr) CC: BY-SA jfabra (flickr)
a new model for a new paradigm in
creating OER/OCW. teaching and learning.
17. one
opportunity for a new model
CC: BY-SA jfabra (flickr)
Traditional OCW/OER Challenges
publication model
• cost
• staff centered • access to faculty
• retroactive • scale
• refresh rate
18. two
change the existing pedagogy
CC: BY-SA jfabra (flickr)
students
teacher
learning
happens in
there
somewhere?
knowledge
CC:BY-NC-ND kioko (flickr)
25. Motivated
students...
collaborate with faculty...
and a team of U-M OER specialists...
26. Motivated
students...
collaborate with faculty...
and a team of U-M OER specialists...
to gather, review, edit, and publish
course materials...
27. Motivated
students...
collaborate with faculty...
and a team of U-M OER specialists...
to gather, review, edit, and publish
course materials...
for use by students, educators and self-learners...
28. Motivated
students...
collaborate with faculty...
and a team of U-M OER specialists...
to gather, review, edit, and publish
course materials...
for use by students, educators and self-learners...
worldwide.
30. faculty & dScribe2 dScribe attends
faculty & dScribe2
connect: license training course led
recruit dScribe
material as OER by dScribe2
publish
dScribe to OER
site
Publishing faculty transfers course
material to dScribe
Process
Class #1 Agenda:
Class #1 Agenda:
roles faculty reviews
material: publish
dScribe identifies
& documents
to U-M OER site potential IP issues
dScribe
clear IP
Class #1 Agenda:
dScribe2
dScribe makes
necessary edits to OER team reviews &
course material clears IP issues
instructor BY: Garin Fons, Pieter Kleymeer
characters by Ryan Junell
51. one
address main challenges of OCW creation
CC: BY-SA jfabra (flickr)
create a method that is...
: scalable
: sustainable
: cost effective
: enables refresh
52. “dScribes”
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
53. dScribe publication model
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
54. 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
55. dScribe publication model
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
56. two social view of learning & learning 2.0
CC: BY-SA jfabra (flickr)
the classroom is changing
57. 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-sa/2.0/
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
58. 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/
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
59. 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
60. 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
62. students as makers.
students as collaborators.
students as teachers.
sharing the stuff they know.
making learning relevant,
interesting, meaningful.
making open the norm.