Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Open course design and development: A case study in the Open Educational Resource university


Published on

Research into collaborative open course design and development using OERs in the Open Educational Resource university wiki environment

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Open course design and development: A case study in the Open Educational Resource university

  1. 1. Open Course Design and Development: A Case Study in the Open Educational Resource university Irwin DeVries, PhD This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 4.0 International License 1 Screenshot, OERu website. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  2. 2. What is the OERu? 2      Global partnership of like-minded postsecondary institutions – not university per se Committed to free courses and programs based on OERs Optional support, assessment and credible credentials through partner institutions Sponsored by a not-for-profit foundation in New Zealand (OERu Foundation) Virtual presence in WikiEducator wiki
  3. 3. 3 Screenshot, WikiEducator. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  4. 4. How does it work? “Parallel learning universe” (Taylor, 2007) 4 OERu logic high level. Wayne Mackintosh. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  5. 5. The “unbundling” concept 5 Model showing OER or OCW reuse (“any content”). Friesen & Murray (2011). Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  6. 6. OERu collaborations 6 Diagram showing high-level logic model for OERu. By Wayne Macintosh. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  7. 7. Open design and development 7    The generic design process, for instance, the ADDIE Model incorporating the five processes of Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation as a dynamic system. Open collaborative design and development models associated with the open source software development model to facilitate rapid prototyping and continuous feedback and improvement loops “Dynamic processes for collaborative development” (WikiEducator, 2013)
  8. 8. Prototype development 8    Focus on small number of prototype courses for OERu Our first contribution: ART100 Art Appeciation and Techniques Redesigned from existing OERs  Course from via WA State Board of Community Colleges Open Course Library  Added own content, activities, assessments, etc.  Is the focus of my research
  9. 9. 9 Screenshot, WikiEducator. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  10. 10. Research questions 10 1. 2. How has open design and development been conceptualized and realized in the Open Educational Resource university (OERu)? What are the currently visible features of open design and development as indicated by practices and products in the OERu prototype course projects: • As compared with traditional instructional design and development; and, • As compared with open source software development?
  11. 11. Open / traditional instructional design Aspect Open Design and Development Traditional Instructional Design • Participants • Volunteer – either individual or institutional • Paid, institutionally based • Makeup of design team • Volunteers from global WikiEducator community – individuals or institutions • From within one organization • Roles of design team members • Varied, overlapping • More clearly circumscribed • Content copyright • Open licensing with some rights reserved • Mostly rights reserved • Content versions • Multiple simultaneous • Single official version • Intended learners • Multiple constituencies, many unknown in advance • Predefined • Design processes • Informal design processes • Formal design processes • Authoring environment • Generally open source software – e.g. WikiMedia, OpenOffice • Generally proprietary; e.g. Word, Photoshop • Delivery environment • Multiple options, based on those used by member institutions • Usually a single dedicated platform – e.g. BlackBoard, 11 Moodle
  12. 12. “Traditional instructional design” working description 12  Three elements    Higher education online or distance education course development Scientific / planned process (Richey et al., 2011) “Messiness” (Conole, 2009), iterative cycles of knowledge building and adaptations to situational contexts and events (Rowland, 1992) Public Mural, Liverpool. Photo by Keith Edkins. Licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 BY-SA Unported. Ceramic Bowl, Mexico. Photo by Alejandro Linares Garcia. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  13. 13. Open design and development 13 Related concepts & historical context Pastels. Clementina. Licensed under Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 Unported. Open educational resources (OERs) Learning objects Sharing of learning design knowledge Open source software development
  14. 14. Open educational resources 14 “Teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use or re-purposing by others. Open educational resources include full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, str eaming videos, tests, software, and any other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge” Atkins, Brown and Hammond (2007) The Golden Arches. Photo by Kenny Louie. Lcensed under Creative Commons 2.0 BY.
  15. 15. Open educational resources 15  The 4 R’s of reusability  Reuse  Redistribute  Revise  Remix (Hilton et al., 2010). Stucco Gandhara figure. Photo by Michael Wai. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  16. 16. Learning objects 16 Learning objects    Chunks of learning content that can be shared and reused Concept was driven mainly by technological considerations Concerns grew about “sequencing” and need for pedagogy – e.g., Activity centred – engage learners in reflection – allow for practice and production – personalized – feedback – different learning approaches (Watson, 2010) Fränzi vor geschnitztem Stuhl, by Kirchner. Public Domain.
  17. 17. 17 Sharing of learning design knowledge  Learning design - examples  What is (are) learning design(s)?  Structuring learning sequences (Britain, 2004)  Capturing learning design practice (Conole et al., 2007)  Representations of how to support learning (Goodyear, 2005)  Learning design patterns (Rohse & Anderson, 2006)  Sharing “pedagogical know-how” only content  design knowledge  Tools and collaboration  From
  18. 18. Sharing learning design knowledge 18 Conole (2008). Used with permission.
  19. 19. Sharing learning design knowledge 19  Quietly listening to the wind in the pines, 1246. Ma Lin. Public Domain. “Traditionally design has been an implicit process, how do we shift to a process of design that is more explicit and hence shareable?” (Conole, 2008)
  20. 20. 20 Screenshot, WikiEducator. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  21. 21. 21 Screenshot, WikiEducator. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 B
  22. 22. Sharing learning design knowledge 22    Rationalistic tradition of instructional design models (Richey et al., 2011) Situated, iterative nature of practice / instructional design (e.g. Rowland, 1992; Suchman, 2007) Reusability: conduit and encapsulation metaphors (Griffiths and Garcia, 2003) “In order to achieve a convergence of meaning, knowledge has to be acquired by doing and experiencing: becoming a reflective practitioner” (Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1991) Sioux quilled tobacco bag. Photo by Pierre Fabre. Public Domain.
  23. 23. Collaborative design in other fields 23  Architecture, expert systems, telecommunications, engineering  Multiple points of negotiation and evaluation (Kvan, 2000)  Explicit sharing of design information using communication tools (Chiu, 2002)  Design teams need to explore and integrate differences (Sonnenwald, 1996)  Intentional communication processes are essential (Hixon, 2008)
  24. 24. OSS design and development 24  Based on collaboration and communities of volunteers  Commitment to philosophy of sharing  Personal and professional benefits  Induction processes for newbies  Communication and versioning systems  Decentralized but with some leadership  Visible design rules Masque aux lépreux Bwa. Village de Boni. By Ji-Ell . Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  25. 25. Research design 25  Comparative case study  Scope: one course developed over a fixed period of time in OERu  Similar case study in OSS used for comparison: Freenet (von Krogh et al., 2003)  Highlight “relationships, contrasts and similarities  Extend learning from one case to the other (Khan & VanWynsberghe, 2008)
  26. 26. Research methods 26  In-depth, semi-structured interviews with OERu developers (Creswell, 2007)      Selected as “key informants” (Marshall, 1996, Yin, 2009) – ART100 developers in OERu project Public email conversations and archives History of wiki contributions and “talk pages” by developers Meeting records Publicly available sources (contextual)
  27. 27. Data analysis 27       Collection of content in ATLAS.ti QDA Initial coding of content (Soldaña, 2009) Secondary grouping, multiple iterations generating themes Qualitative, narrative portrait (Auerbach and Silverstein, 2003) Frequent cross-checks back and forth Trustworthiness: Triangulation, overlapping, member checks, audit trail (Guba,1981; Guba & Lincoln, 1982; Yin, 2009)
  28. 28. Findings 28  Two over-arching themes  Designing for openness  A community of volunteers Street Musicians. Eugène_Atget. PD-US-1923.
  29. 29. Designing for openness 29   Influence of assessment and credit on design Need to share core expectations about learners     Digital and learning literacies Tool use – LMS, wiki, blog, ePortfolio,Twitter etc. Independent and cohort models Pedagogical design and the challenge of scale     Institutional autonomy over pedagogical designs of contributed courses  learning design design community within OERu Scope of learner control Obtaining local or other support resources Feedback
  30. 30. Designing for openness 30   Institutional flexibility – assessment and credit, curricular oversight Designing with OERs   Wiki environment    E.g., source files – marking regimes – LMS – multiple versions – timetables – assumptions re groupwork – copyright issues – cultural biases – developing as OERs Wiki challenges – text conversions, formatting, flat file structure, wiki syntax, templates Need for mediating artifacts - There but hard to find Communication habits, use of appropriate channels and protocols is essential   Decision histories for later joiners Shared understandings and approaches
  31. 31. 31 Screenshot, WikiEducator. Licensed by Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  32. 32. 32 Screenshot, WikiEducator. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  33. 33. 33
  34. 34. 34
  35. 35. A community of volunteers 35  Comparison with OSS: Importance of community        Developer motivations (want to make a contribution) A community of volunteers (attrition) – needs to grow Division of labor - developer specializations (multiple roles) Shared and standardized communication habits (essential for shared understanding of project) – mediating artifacts Mentoring Visible design rules/agreements and history for late joiners Patterns of persistence “When code and community do not develop in parallel, the learning curve can be steep” (O’Mahoney, 2007)
  36. 36. Developer contributions 36
  37. 37. Conclusions 37  Turn “unknowns” of designing for openness into “knowns”  But maintain as much design flexibility as possible  Develop core of instructional design expertise in OERu beyond institutional preferences  Awareness of mediating artifacts, visible design rules  Use OERu as catalyst for institutional innovation  Non-traditional assessment, credit
  38. 38. Conclusions 38     Learn from OSS development experience Attention to community, recruitment, induction Appropriate division of labor and specialization Developer motivations  Incorporate   work into regular responsibilities Communication systems and protocols Value of system-wide views and visible design rules/mediating artifacts
  39. 39. Limitations 39     Differences between Freenet comparator and OERu cases Bracketing of other developments both within and outside OERu Limited timespan of study Small developer sample Sagami Temple detail. Photo by 663highland. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.
  40. 40. 40 Recommendations for further research       Partner institutions’ attitudes toward acceptance of differently structured courses for credit Recruitment and retention of volunteer developers outside institutional volunteers Developer roles and responsibilities Further integration/use of Web 2.0 tools Alternative collaborations – e.g. sjprints, hackathons Design research specific to course design
  41. 41. References  Atkins, D., Brown, J., & Hammond, A. (2007). A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities. Report to the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation  Britain, S. (2004). A Review of Learning Design: Concept, Specification and Tools. Retrieved from Hixon, E. (2008). Team-based Online Course Development  A Case Study : of Collaboration Models. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 11(4), 1–8. Retrieved from winter114/hixon114.html    Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Kvan, T. (2000). Collaborative design: what is it? Automation in Construction, 9(4), 409–415. doi:10.1016/S0926-5805(99)00025-4  Khan, S., & Samuel VanWysberghe. (2008). Cultivating the Under-Mined: Cross-Case Analysis as Knowledge Mobilization. Qualitative Social Research, 9(1). Retrieved from article/view/334/729  Marshall, M. N. (1996). The key informant technique. Family practice, 13(1), 92–7. Retrieved from  Conole, Gráinne, Thorpe, M., Weller, M., Wilson, P., Nixon, S., & Grace, P. (2007). Capturing Practice and Scaffolding Learning Design. Retrieved March 17, 2011, from  Conole, Gráinne. (2008). Using Compendium as a tool to support the design of learning activities 1, 1–19. Retrieved from  Conole, Gráinne, & Culver, J. (2009). Cloudworks: Social networking for learning design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 763– 782.  Chiu, M. (2002). An organizational view of design communication in design collaboration. Design Studies, 23, 187–210.  Cresswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Friesen, N., & Murray, J. (2011). “ Open learning 2.0?” Aligning student, teacher and content for openness in education. Retrieved February 2, 2012, from  O’Mahony, S. (2007). The governance of open source initiatives: what does it mean to be community managed? Journal of Management & Governance, 11, 139–150.    Friesen, N., & Murray, J. (2011). “ Open learning 2.0?” Aligning student, teacher and content for openness in education. Retrieved February 2, 2012, from Goodyear, P., & Retalis, S. (2010). Learning, Technology and Design. In P. Goodyear & S. Retalis (Eds.), Technology enhanced leanring: Design patterns and pattern languages (pp. 1–27). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher  Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and Methodological Bases of Naturalistic Inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology, 30(4), 233–252.  41  Soldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of Qualitative Research: Understanding Qualitative Research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.  Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine configurations: Plans and situated actions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.  von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K. R. (2003). Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy, 32, 1217–1241. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00050-7  Watson, J. (2010). A Case Study: Developing Learning Objects with an Explicit Learning Design. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8(1), 41–50. Retrieved from Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Guba, E. G. (1981). ERIC / ECTJ Annual Review Paper: Criteria for Assessing the Trustworthiness of Naturalistic Inquiries. ECTJ, 29(2), 75–91.  Sonnenwald, D. H. (1996). Communication roles that support collaboration during the design process. Design Studies, 17(3), 277–301.   Rohse, S., & Anderson, T. (2006). Design patterns for complex learning. Journal of Learning Design, 1(3), 82–91. Hilton, J. I., Wiley, D., Stein, J., & Johnson, A. (2010). The four “R”s of openness and ALMS analysis: Frameworks for open educational resources. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 25(1), 37–44
  42. 42. Thank you Irwin DeVries, PhD Director, Curriculum Development Thompson Rivers University, Open Learning Demonstration of Reification in Perception. S. Lahar. Public Domain. 42