OpenEd 2011: Amplifying Openness
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•537 views
Badging: how rewarding the little things can add up to big things in open education production and advocacy.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (9)
Similar to OpenEd 2011: Amplifying Openness
Similar to OpenEd 2011: Amplifying Openness (20)
More from Emily Puckett Rodgers
More from Emily Puckett Rodgers (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
OpenEd 2011: Amplifying Openness
- 1. Amplifying Openness through Rewards Recognition Emily Puckett Rodgers Pieter Kleymeer
- 2. Follow Along Detailed Handout http://openmi.ch/opened11-handout
- 3. Evaluation and Impact “I share learning materials with my colleagues to…” ? http://openmi.ch/om-eval2011
- 4. Evaluation and Impact Establish Open.Michigan in main channels of U-M communication Clarify copyright in OER and provide resources Make short-term improvements to OER Encourage cultural shifts in learning http://openmi.ch/om-eval2011
- 6. dScribes Don’t Work Rote work and little continuity between cohorts resulted in the dScribes being segregated from the other members of the Open.Michigan community. dScribe OCW meeting – tvol on flickr – CC-BY
- 7. Strategic Vision Open.Michigan enables University of Michigan faculty, students, staff and others to share their educational resources and research with the world. Open.Michigan’s efforts contribute to two primary goals: 1. to sustain a thriving culture of sharing knowledge at U-M; and 2. to provide comprehensive public access to all of U-M’s scholarly output. http://openmi.ch/om-strategy
- 8. Face-to-Face Community "Participation has the most impact when designers can scale up collaborative opportunities to all interested visitors. This means offering every visitor a legitimate way to contribute to the institution, share things of interest, connect with other people and feel like an engaged and respected participant." - Henry Jenkins, Convergence Culture
- 9. Community Interviews Open.Michigan participants want recognition for practicing openness and acknowledgement of the skillsets they develop through those practices. They also want to know about the supporters and experts of open practices within their professional or academic http://openmi.ch/badges-interviews networks.
- 10. Goals for Building Community How do we acknowledge, support and connect our largely face to face community online and in social networks? How do we remove Open.Michigan as the gatekeeper or bottleneck around open behavior?
- 11. What Motivates Academics I want to share my knowledge and increase the visibility of my work. I want to build my reputation as an expert in my field. I want to be promoted within my field and be compensated for my efforts. I want to improve the impact of my domain knowledge. I want to help the world and contribute to society. I want to intellectually explore topics that interest me. I want to be gainfully employed and establish a successful career. I want to build relationships through shared experiences. I want to help the world and contribute to society. I want to build professional skills and use them to support my institution. I want to increase the visibility and use of my work. I want to be promoted within my field and be compensated for my
- 12. Recognition, but Not Reward These words of motivation: share, gain visibility, build reputation, get promotion, make an impact, create relationships, contribute to society... all scream “recognition.”
- 13. Erin Knight design – awarded to Philipp Schmidt and Piet Kleyme is.badges badges are symbols of identity, signifying levels of achievement or character, participation in events or activities, or
- 14. Infrastructure, So They Say http://openbadges.org
- 15. It’s Always a Process
- 16. Badges Here, Badges There http://open.umich.edu/connect/badges
- 17. Open Season thanks!
Editor's Notes
- How we’ve been analyzing and researching our own community at U-M.How we’ve developed ways to support and foster a community of sharing at our university. I’ll be talking about our evaluations and research and how it applies to our communityPiet will be talking more about what we’re doing with all this research.
- Last year we embarked on an evaluation of the impact of the Open.Michigan initiativeIncluded examining our publication process, who is working with us, and what their own motivations are in partnering with our initiative.Conducted a U-M wide series of surveys aimed to uncover the awareness and use of Open.MichiganOER more generally and motivations for sharing (not OER branded) across U-M. faculty, staff, students, and open survey (98 responses on open survey). 2,000 students, a few hundred faculty and staff.
- Themes from survey commentsEstablish Open.Michigan in main channels of U-M communicationClarify copyright in OER and provide resourcesMake short-term improvements to OEREncourage cultural shifts in learning
- dScribe evaluation, data from 2007-2010 82 participants in the process exit interviews and quantitative data Participants learned:Copyright knowledge and applicationRecognizing and searching for high quality open contentShift in perspective to using and creating open contentMotivations:Desire to do goodShareProvide access to learning resources
- Many barriers to ‘doing good’ dscribe model is a good functional process but does not really foster a growing community. dScribe process is tedious and detail oriented no continuity between projects or continued involvement with Open.Michigan segregation of dScribes and other members of open community at U-M had to start process over from beginning to continue involvement in Open.Michigan
- Part of this evaluation project was also develop a strategic vision for Open.Michigan Foster and grow a community of sharing at U-M Not focus on OER production Discovered: to grow community awareness and make it easier for folks to participate in openness at U-M
- Fall 2010 also started experimenting with providing U-M with different ways of engaging with Open.Michigan and open projects. Using principles of in-person engagement (e.g. participatory museum, volunteering, community engagement). Went from hosting workshops for dScribes and occasional larger events to a variety of events and partnerships. Events based on leveraging current projects and embedded interest of open advocates. Started getting more feedback to inform our evaluation from these events, working to standardize this feedback this year.
- Summer 2011, intern Anya Shyrokova conducted seven interviews with stakeholders. Goals: to uncover motivations for sharing and working with Open.Michigan, community interests and needs, behaviors around sharing.These were faculty, staff and students.
- Now our challenge is to develop ways to recognize multiple avenues for participation, not just through dScribe or through content contributions. Acknowledge the broad range of community members that work with us, for example, staff are often strong advocates for our work. Must: identify behaviors, skills, tasks, and practices that students, faculty, staff, others engage in and then develop a set of mechanisms to recognize these activities.