Inside Out


Published on

ALTO project presentation at the OER11 conference in Manchester - this has the references that some people asked for.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • IPR awareness, de-contextualization of resources, presentational and media design issues, and ‘learning design for strangers’.
  • Inside Out

    1. 1. Inside Out The ALTO Project: Linking OERs to Professional Development and Knowledge Management activities John Casey, Hywell Davies, Chris Follows, Nancy Turner, Ed Webb-Ingall, University of the Arts London, Centre for Learning & Teaching in Art & Design.
    2. 2. Inside Out - Content <ul><li>Problem – moving from subsistence to sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Situational Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Approach – CoPs and Fieldworkers </li></ul><ul><li>Rationale & Benefits </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge Management </li></ul><ul><li>Social Layer </li></ul><ul><li>System Design </li></ul>
    3. 3. Stating the Problem <ul><li>The need to move from a subsistence to a sustainable model of HE & OERs – technology will be involved </li></ul>“ To meet the staggering global demand for advanced education, a major university needs to be created every week” Sir John Daniels, ceo, COL
    4. 4. Situational Analysis – 1 <ul><li>Staff development in HE has traditionally been supplied by central units </li></ul><ul><li>Adapting current teaching practices and cultures to use new technologies presents this centralized development model with critical challenges: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Capacity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Skills </li></ul></ul>
    5. 5. Situational Analysis – 2 <ul><li>OER engagement adds a range of additional needs: IPR, de-contextualization, presentational and media design, and ‘learning design for strangers’ etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Ed Tech has not broken through - lack of attention to systemic and soft issues is often cited as some of the causes for this failure (Kumar @ MIT) </li></ul><ul><li>But OER engagement ‘surfaces’ systemic and soft issues – so a potentially powerful engine for change </li></ul>
    6. 6. Situational Analysis – 3 <ul><li>Design, development, sharing, reuse and adaption of learning resources are poorly understood </li></ul><ul><li>Growing awareness and policy agenda that now privileges process over content and collaboration over delivery – a move from OER to Open Practice (but still needs/builds on OER) </li></ul><ul><li>The value proposition of sharing and OER is becoming much more explicit and forceful (Chow) </li></ul>
    7. 7. Situational Analysis – 4 <ul><li>Sharing as a signifier of change </li></ul>
    8. 8. Approach <ul><li>ALTO has approached this challenge in a number of ways: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tapped into existing communities of practice around a variety of themes and contexts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Employed and trained part-time staff to work with front-line teaching staff across a number of different areas (IPR, learning design etc) – they and the project manager act as ‘Fieldworkers’ </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Rationale <ul><li>Th e Fieldworker concept is an established practice in anthropology and ethnographic studies - is used to understand and interact with a culture </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Fieldworkers have an important role in the design of socio-technical systems in the workplace - advocated by pioneers like Mumford and by modern practitioners such as Sharples </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>By mobilizing existing communities of practice and using fieldworkers - OER engagement can potentially be a CPD tool to do more with limited resources </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Provides the basis for an economically sustainable means of enhancing educational development provision in a time austerity. </li></ul><ul><li>Has implications for existing approaches to educational development, organizational structures and cultures </li></ul>
    10. 10. Benefits <ul><li>Engagement with OER creation is a de facto reflective exercise – designing resources and learning experiences for ‘strangers’ - this takes us out of our normal frame of reference </li></ul><ul><li>Everyone has an implicit model of learning and teaching (Biggs, Ramsden) OER engagement brings these models to the surface for discussion </li></ul><ul><li>This puts us in the ‘right mind’ set for thinking about designing for flexible and blended learning – tricky in A&D! </li></ul><ul><li>Good foundation for introducing and embedding new learning and teaching models </li></ul>
    11. 11. Methods <ul><li>Leverage OER engagement by deliberately introducing flexible and blended learning concepts via the fieldworkers – strategic agenda </li></ul><ul><li>Fieldworkers use OER resources as ‘mediating artefacts’ to help practitioners articulate, share and reflect on mental models (Conole) and design strategies </li></ul><ul><li>OERs become ‘boundary objects’ that support communication and understanding between CoPs (Wenger) </li></ul><ul><li>Fieldworkers encourage and support ‘collaborative learning design’ activities between practitioners (internal and external) - benefits: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mutual support </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reflection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>P2P learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Low threshold concepts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shared authentic language </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Embedding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CoP development & strengthening </li></ul></ul>
    12. 12. Knowledge Management 1 <ul><li>Early days still </li></ul><ul><li>Previous tech-centric approaches have not worked well (Lambe, Friesen, Hoel), some have a dubious rationale and ideological agenda (Friesen) </li></ul><ul><li>These are complex socio-technical systems and highly entropic </li></ul><ul><li>It is not nearly enough to just provide a mechanism of storage or retrieval – presentation and social layers are needed </li></ul><ul><li>Do not use meaningless and rebarbative jargon with users – use straightforward concrete language </li></ul><ul><li>Allow/support users and communities to articulate their own meanings (ontologies) and classifications (taxonomies) record these for later elaboration and mediation </li></ul>
    13. 13. Knowledge Management 2 <ul><li>By all means use a Repo - we use EdShare, it’s good </li></ul><ul><li>But do not attempt to impose terminology, vocabularies and taxonomies developed by experts – however well meaning or authoritative </li></ul><ul><li>This is not a well-defined domain: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mainstream public education is a messy and contingent enterprise and is highly dependant on contextual factors – it’s not like military or aviation training – where such tech approaches originated </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Introduce a ‘social layer’ for interaction, creation sharing, collaboration and negotiation of content and meanings (example - process arts) </li></ul>
    14. 14. The Social Layer – 1 EdShare Repository
    15. 15. The Social Layer – 2
    16. 16. ALTO System Design <ul><li>A presentation & social layer enables the important human factors of communication, collaboration, and participation that are needed for sustainable resource creation, sharing and sense making within community networks </li></ul><ul><li>Solutions provided should help, not hinder, participants needs and activities </li></ul><ul><li>Guiding system design principle should be the concepts of conviviality (Illich, 1973, Hardt & Negri 2009) and stewardship (Wenger et al, 2009) </li></ul><ul><li>Arrange for longer term storage and sense making to be migrated from the social layer to a repository </li></ul>
    17. 17. Inside Out Summary <ul><li>Problem – moving from subsistence to sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Situational Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Approach – CoPs and Fieldworkers </li></ul><ul><li>Rationale & Benefits </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge Management </li></ul><ul><li>Social Layer </li></ul><ul><li>System Design </li></ul>
    18. 18. Referneces 1 (as they appear) <ul><li>Vijay M. S. Kumar, Kim Thanos (2011), Systemic Planning for the Open Education Innovation, OCWC Conference proceedings, </li></ul><ul><li>Daniels, J (2007) quoted in (p.32). Atkins, D, E, Brown, J., S. Hammond A., L. A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities, Hewlett Foundation </li></ul><ul><li>Chow, B. (2010) The Way Forward; OER’s Value Proposition, Presentation at: Taking the Open Educational Resources (OER) Beyond the OER Community: Policy and Capacity. UNESCO Policy Forum, Paris. accessed March 6 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Mumford, E. (1995). Effective Systems Design and Requirements Analysis: The ETHICS Approach. Basingstoke: Macmillan. </li></ul><ul><li>Sharples, M. (2006). Socio-Cognitive Engineering. In Ghaoui, C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Computer Interaction . Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference </li></ul><ul><li>Biggs, J. (2006). Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does . Maidenhead, United Kingdom: Open University Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education , Abingdon: Routledge and Falmer </li></ul><ul><li>Conole, G. (2008). Capturing practice: the role of mediating artefacts in learning design. In Lockyer L., S. Bennett, S., Agostinho, and B Harper (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning Design and Learning Objects: Issues, Applications and Technologies . Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. </li></ul>
    19. 19. Referneces 2 (as they appear) <ul><li>Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, </li></ul><ul><li>Friesen, N. (2004a). Three Objections to Learning Objects and E-learning Standards. In: McGreal, R. (Ed.). Online Education Using Learning Objects. London: Routledge. pp. 59- 70. </li></ul><ul><li>Friesen, Norm & Cressman, Darryl. (2007). “The Political Economy of Technical E-Learning Standards” In Koolhang, A. & Harman, K. (eds.), Learning Objects: Theory, Praxis, Issues & Trends. Warsaw: Informing Science Press. pp. 507-526. </li></ul><ul><li>Lambe, P. (2002), The Autism of Knowledge Management, autism.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Hoel, T. (2010) accessed March 6 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Hardt, M., Negri, A., (2010) Commonwealth, Harvard University Press </li></ul><ul><li>Illich, I. (2009), Tools for Conviviality, Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd, London </li></ul><ul><li>Wenger, E., White, N., Smith J.D., (2009) Digital Habitats: stewarding technology for communities Portland. </li></ul>