OER Roulette

2,480 views
2,372 views

Published on

An exploration of the issues around OER using granularity as a lens. Presented at Open Ed 2010

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,480
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
562
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

OER Roulette

  1. 1. A non-linear exploration of the influence of granularity on OER reuse Martin Weller
  2. 2. OER Roulette!
  3. 3. My OER experience OpenLearn Blog Sidecap
  4. 4. Granularity Big and Little OER
  5. 5. Big Little Institutional Individual high reputation cheap good teaching quality, web (2) native little reversioning required easily remixed and reused expensive low production quality often not web native reputation ‘buyer beware’ reuse limited distributed
  6. 6. My hypothesis Granularity is a lens through which we can explore many of the issues around open content
  7. 7. Sustainability Aggregation Messages Portals Context Working Time Projects Content Status Questions
  8. 8. Models of OER sustainability Centralised Team (MIT) Teaching Duty (USU) Distributed dev (Rice) (decentralisation) (cost) (Wiley)
  9. 9. Research papers Lectures/Teaching content Conferences Data Code IdeasDebate Higher Education as long tail production engine
  10. 10. Should we just stop worrying about sustainability and embrace little OER?
  11. 11. Aggregation and Adaptation (McAndrew et al 2009): “In relation to repurposing, initially it was thought: 1. that it was not anyone’s current role to remix and reuse; 2. the content provided on the site was of high quality and so discouraged alteration; 3. there were few examples showing the method and value of remixing; 4. the use of unfamiliar formats (such as XML) meant that users were uncertain how to proceed.”
  12. 12. Little OER tends to • not be explicit learning content – not generated with the aim of being used for learning; • not specify the learning that will occur • be easily aggregated into a pathway or framework which is created by the educator.
  13. 13. The Lamb formula
  14. 14. Do you get different types of learning from aggregation and adaptation?
  15. 15. Implicit Message
  16. 16. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6jt5bqMqY0 ]
  17. 17. When are these different messages appropriate in learning?
  18. 18. Portals and Sites [http://ocw.mit.edu]
  19. 19. [http://slideshare.net]
  20. 20. Specific Project Site Third party site Advantages Greater brand link Greater traffic Link through to courses Cheaper Control Greater serendipity Ability to conduct research Expertise in social software development Disadvantages Requires specialist team Can lose service Requires updating No control eg over downtimes Lower traffic Loss of ownership of data More expensive Other non-educational content also present
  21. 21. Should we stop building our own OER sites?
  22. 22. Context “No amount of creativity in the making of an artefact will compensate for the absence of a framework within which to disseminate it. My Facebook postings (of links to my 2 videos) received brief comments from 3 of my 67 ‘friends’. Nothing on Twitter or Youtube. This demotivated me to continue investing the time. If I’d had, say, a teaching forum with students working on intercultural semiotics, I’d have had more of an impact”
  23. 23. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdAkKKxOvu4 ]
  24. 24. Can educational content survive outside of an educational context?
  25. 25. New ways of working [http://www.slideshare.net/mweller/future-of-education-3475415 ]
  26. 26. [http://www.darcynorman.net/2009/11/24/how-do-you-connect-to-people-online-the-video/
  27. 27. • Distributed • Free • Remix/Adapt • Multi-media • = New academic skills?
  28. 28. We’ve only just begun – what other ways of working does open content allow?
  29. 29. Time [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyoNHIl-QLQ ]
  30. 30. Big OER takes time to produce and ‘scrub’ But can be used as is = Potential big payoff Little OER is quick to produce Takes time to aggregate = Small payoff per item
  31. 31. Can we quantify these pay-offs?
  32. 32. Project Organisations understand projects, they have responsibility, budget, objectives.
  33. 33. Pic: Patrick McAndrew Projects isolate practice
  34. 34. Bottom up/frictionless approach doesn’t fit this model
  35. 35. Can an unproject approach work (particularly in an era of cutbacks)?
  36. 36. Content Content isn’t everything But that doesn’t mean it’s nothing
  37. 37. Quick poll 1. Blogs/wikis 2. Quizzes 3. Screencasting 4. Podcasting
  38. 38. When is the personal element appropriate?
  39. 39. Status
  40. 40. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYy7pO_RFVM ]
  41. 41. What is the cultural/social/professional context for reuse?
  42. 42. Questions Should we just stop worrying about sustainability and embrace little OER? What is the cultural/social/professional context for reuse? When is the personal element appropriate? Can an unproject approach work (particularly in an era of cutbacks)? Do you get different types of learning from aggregation and adaptation? Can we quantify these pay-offs? Can educational content survive outside of an educational context? We’ve only just begun – what other ways of working does open content allow? When are these different messages appropriate in learning? Should we stop building our own OER sites?

×