Olnet 30 June Workshop


Published on

Published in: Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

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

No notes for slide

Olnet 30 June Workshop

  1. 1. G. Conole, Y. Dimitriadis, P. McAndrew & Tina Wilson
  2. 2.  Awareness of resources to support the design of OERs  Exploration of the value of pedagogical patterns and learning design  Introduction to ◦ Open Educational Resources ◦ Pedagogical Patterns ◦ Learning Design  The OLnet initiative ◦ Hands on experience of some of the OLnet tools and ideas
  3. 3. Open Educational Resources Pedagogical patterns Learning Design
  4. 4.  Introduction to workshop and aims  Discussion of the issues and visions  Activity: Think-pair-share exercise  Sharing and discussion of the design  Reflecting on representations and mediating artifacts  Activity: redesign “introducing social work practice”  Towards a global vision  Hands-on challenge
  5. 5. The open provision of educational resources, enabled by information and communication technologies, for consultation, use and adaptation by a community of users for non-commercial purposes (UNESCO 2002)
  6. 6. Learning resources Courseware, content modules, learning objects, learner support & assessment tools, online learning communities Resources to support teachers Tools for teachers and support materials to enable them to create, adapt and use OER; training materials for teachers Resources to assure the quality of education and educational practices (UNESCO 2004)
  7. 7. New technologies offer new pedagogical opportunities Array of Not fully technologies exploited Potential for reuse with Open Educational Resources Open Educational Little evidence Resources of reuse
  8. 8.  Derived from Alexander’s work  “Solutions to problems” ◦ Introduction ◦ Context ◦ Problem headline ◦ Solution ◦ Picture ◦ Similar patters
  9. 9. Representing pedagogy Empirical evidence base Guiding design Sharing ideas
  10. 10. “Open Design” Adaptive Contextual Affordances of new Characteristics of Personalised Networked technologies good pedagogy Situative Immersive Social Collective Experiential Reflective
  11. 11. Network From producing open resources to use of open resources •Build capacity •Find evidence •Refine the issues Research Fellowships
  12. 12.  What do you think is needed to encourage uptake and reuse of OERs?  What would be particularly useful from an OU perspective?  What are your views on this approach?
  13. 13.  Ways of educational technology – lack of take up, well documented, the not invent here syndrome
  14. 14.  Think of a resource you have created  Describe its inherent design  Share with the person next to you  Share with the wider group
  15. 15.  How many of you used an open resource? Some yes, but not necessarily an OER  Mainly resources created by the individual  About half used some form of graphically representation, mainly unsuccessfully, kind of maps, a number of people used just text  What is design? There are many interpretations of this…  Example: Online academic literacies support; wanted to show that functionally it was up to the
  16. 16.  Example: Step by step sequence of activities. A design which had an implicit sequence was much easier to represent  Some people tend to think textually rather than visually  Example: the resource is a design itself and a representation of that – bullet point and diagram  Example: A model for students, website for supporting module activities; showed the
  17. 17.  No single way of representing designs  Text, temporal diagrams, maps, etc  Some represented a static map of the contents or elements, others represented the temporal sequence  Some attempted to represent the objectives of the course – why  Value of dialogue to explain things and question and answer coupled to represented design (ie text and or diagrams)
  18. 18.  Some specified whether design was individual or collaborative  Many elements to design – what are the elements and what did you use to explain to your partner – were they mainly content, objectives, principles, what are the essential things you needed to represent  Did you understand what your partner was describing, what else would you need to better understand it?
  19. 19.  Many different ways of representing and understanding a resource  Many different element we can represent  What elements do people expose to explain a resource  This can link to reuse of the resource, the better I understand it the more likely it is I can reuse it  This exercise could be done differently – interrogate individuals and ask them their
  20. 20.  Design implicit, difficult to represent  Different representations highlights different aspects of the design  Activity has a “design” “Think-pair-share” pedagogical pattern  Value of visual representations
  21. 21.  The value of visualisation ◦ Makes design explicit and sharable ◦ Means of guiding process of design  Different ways of thinking about and representing design ◦ Task timeline – mapping tasks, tools, resources, times ◦ Pedagogy profile – view of tasks across a course and student workload ◦ Curriculum mapping – at a glance view mapped to pedagogy ◦ Aligning learning outcomes to tasks and assessment
  22. 22.  Swim lines: ◦ roles + tasks, ◦ resources + tools
  23. 23.  In groups explore the H808 design  Do this give you a good overview of what is it the students are doing?  How much time does each task take?  Have the learning outcomes been met?
  24. 24.  Liked the visual representation, although wondered if it should be landscape on the time dimension, a few minutes to see it was over two weeks. Learning outcomes: Were they assessing the design or for evaluation afterwards? Not totally clear  Not clear what the transition between the activities, is there a trigger/transition point?  There is collaboration build on but on a student centric timeline so difficult to see in this view, ‘inform other students of your
  25. 25.  Visualisation informs the design and time taken, can see weekly plan but not duration, some students might have different backgrounds not reflected in design. Learning outcomes: some info missing re: how artefacts students used are related to the outcomes  Lack of clarify in terms of expectations, and how long it might take, how is this being assessed? Particularly LO3, good way of
  26. 26.  Represents course well at one level in terms of how course designer intended, but doesn’t show what students are doing and how they are interacting  Focuses LO1 only, LO2&3 are outcomes of the course as a whole  Mainly covers LO1  Representation that is physical there may be other views – pedagogical etc, would be good to understand how sub-activities contribute to the overall LOs  Overlaid view that grays things out and how
  27. 27.  Filtering and layering of visualisation  Need legend of the different icons and what they are for – 2 different levels 1. design, 2. task sequence.  Could add a layer of semantic connections: Some are cognitive, some are practical  Would be nice to have layers where you look at this from a pattern level – might help you to look at some of the patterns  How does the task sequence relate to the assumed learning sequence? How much unpacking needs to take place with the
  28. 28.  Who is the design for? Designer or student? Each will require different levels of details  Is it for use on paper or digitally??
  29. 29.  Tool for visualisation designs  The method is an important as the tool  Will provide a demonstration  Hands-on exploration of the tool  Discussion
  30. 30. Core icon set Design icon set
  31. 31.  Swim lines: ◦ roles + tasks, ◦ resources + tools
  32. 32. Activity Assignment Outcome Resource Role Stop Task Tool
  33. 33. Using a wiki to analyse a pop song for English language learning
  34. 34. Timings
  35. 35.  Explore the introduction to social work practice OER  Represent the design of the OER visually using the CompendiumLD notation
  36. 36.  How do we create the visual representation and what did you think of it? How was it for u?  CompendiumLD gives you an easy to follow structure, don’t know if it would be so easy for someone who wasn’t IT-savvy (we are used to these kind of modeling approaches)  Looked at extract 2: basic tasks on the task line, another line of tools  Tried to link LO to the tasks  Put in blogs with links  Was it easy to get the detail about what the
  37. 37.  Thinking sequential can identify things that don’t make sense, in some ways therefore it exposes some of the difficulty of what the student is being asked to do  Did you see any underlying patterns of things?  When you try to analyse a resource by itself – read some thing, do this, write in journal, etc… i.e. a pattern of interactions which you can see more clearly when represented visually  Activity 1: exploring lives – has a deep and surface level; how do we handle this simultaneously in CompendiumLD? This relates
  38. 38.  What is the added value of each representation? Is the representation adding something on top of the actual resource?  We had a lot of problems in doing this, creating the representation without reading the text is v difficult, actually therefore what we did was try and convert a rich narrative into a simplistic form following the bullets, therefore is very flat; issue of ownership if you didn’t create the resource – need to be clear of the value  Balance of power and limitations of visual
  39. 39.  “I haven’t time to read through this OER to know if its any good” So what type of representation would tell us if this is any good and whether its relevant for me  Is there an issue in terms of whether the design is inherently ”good”  Three layers: ◦ Design ◦ Opinion of goodness ◦ Discussion/context  Socialisation of designs
  40. 40.  Extract: http://titan.tel.uva.es/wikis/yannis/images/2/29  Extract: http://titan.tel.uva.es/wikis/yannis/images/0/06
  41. 41.  Aim is to make an OER more collaborative  Explore the collaborative pedagogical patterns  Use the patterns to make an aspect of the OER more collaborative
  42. 42.  What process did you follow, what patterns did you use and what was the new output you produced?  Grp1: Recognised that there was a problem to solve, i.e. need for collaboration, intuitively felt that the patterns to look for sharing of tasks/resources and found 2 potential patterns, focused on Activity 1. Needed to expand the time to coordinate the collaborative activities, discovered a logistic problem as doing two groups at one time, get
  43. 43.  So had a fast and slow group working in parallel  Patterns used jigsaw and enriching a learning process; description of the patterns was v helpful  Grp2: Approach was more ad hoc, focused on sub-part of 1.3 on knowledge in social work, wanted to augment text, how can patterns enrich the content, Use of knowledge cards + difference in Social work in different countries. Included a brainstorming session on ways of doing things in social work, come
  44. 44.  Select salient methods from the brainstorming sessions and set up a role play game re-inacting a social work situation and do in 2 different countries. Good example of really trying to rethink one resource  Grp 3: Focus on knowledge aspect as well, but wanted to focus on practice aspect, create a care package for family with a disabled child, looked at patterns, brainstorm first the case and then breakout and use the jigsaw pattern and research the issues identified, then come back and recombined in
  45. 45.  The value is that the patterns can be used as a starting point, people can adapt and appropriate and combine in different novel ways  Grp 4: Looked at life story biography, listen to audio and relate to your own life, but seems that this lends itself to a shared, group activity, so how can we make more collaborative, problem for me with scripts is that it’s a reflective activity not a problem solving one so couldn’t find an appropriate pattern, did come up with a sequence of
  46. 46.  Need for an extensive set of patterns  Way of looking at new border objects and their role in the learning sequence  Grp 5: 4 component and how these could be divided, so used Jigsaw patterns, 100 students need some structuring to manage, mapped with pyramid approach to include experts, also pattern of guiding patterns, pattern of enriching discussion  Did you use the visual representation to help you with your thinking or not? Some did and some didn’t
  47. 47.  Used patterns, design and text in different ways at different types  What do you combine and why… care!  Grp6: Looked at the patterns themselves – like pyramid and their properties and then looked at the activities in the course and looked for a match, like activity 10 – no clear answers with some guiding questions, pyramid to work individually and then compare or think-pair-share or discussion group with conflict pattern might be useful later in the course when they are more
  48. 48. Learning outcomes Open source, Tasks open tools and services, Open Educational Assessment Resources Free, shared, collaborative, cumulatively better.. Principles “Open Design” Open Sharable Explicit
  49. 49. Mediating artifacts Lesson plans Mediating Step by step guides artifacts Online tools Pedagogical patterns “Expert other” Olnet tools OER Designer Creates Has an Design inherent User Can we develop new innovative mediating artifacts? How can we make the design more explicit and sharable? Vygotsky
  50. 50. Deposits OER Creates Designer Design Deposits Quiz + beginners route Uses Learner A OER Quiz + advanced route Chooses Learner B Uses Design Repurposes Tutor & deposits
  51. 51. Prior designs Process design New designs & resources Content: (OER repositories, etc) Designs: New OER (Pedagogical & designs Patterns, CompendiumLD designs)
  52. 52.  Use post-its to reflect on the following: ◦ Workshop format ◦ Workshop content ◦ What did you like? ◦ What didn’t you like? ◦ What one action will you take away as a result of today?
  53. 53.  Many people involved but want to thank in particular: ◦ Patrick McAndrew = Director of Olnet ◦ Yannis Demitriadis – Olnet visiting professor ◦ Andrew Brasher – CompendiumLD developer  Funders ◦ The William and Flora Hewlett foundation, the JISC, the Open University for strategic funding
  54. 54.  Institutional perspectives and hence a lot of this is inherently historically based, perhaps need to broaden out, build in the informal aspects  OERs as things that come from other teaching contexts, how can we broaden that? Without designs and models of how people interact we cant really reach the promise of OERs and genuine reuse – if we add to OER some design do we help the world? Answer is only theoretically…
  55. 55.  Adding the design layer is much more difficult than it might appear, lots of different ways of doing it, representing OER designs may only be of limited value in themselves  There is a lot of open content out there, how do we deal with all of this? How do we add value to and make sense of the huge open resource that is the web, I don’t have the time to look at these resources and don’t know who I am doing it for?  Making design explicit, helps to stop seeing everything as a linear sequence
  56. 56.  Getting people to think differently about resources and how they can be used  Calls for interest in creating collaborative resources and designs… build as part of a community  Subject areas – what’s missing is anything to do with content, think that is missing there needs to be some way of tackling this  Collaboration – up to the people in context what works in a particular situation, with OERs collaboration is more like to be invisible, in context
  57. 57.  Conole, G., McAndrew, P. & Buckingham Shum, S. (forthcoming), A new approach to supporting the design and use of OER: Harnessing the power of web 2.0, M. Edner and M. Schiefner (eds), Looking toward the future of technology enhanced education: ubiquitous learning and the digital nature.  OpenLearn: McAndrew, P. and Santos, A. (2008), Learning from OpenLearn Research Report 2006-2008, Open University: Milton Keynes
  58. 58.  OER, patters and learning design ◦ http://e4innovation.com/?p=324  Curriculum representation ◦ http://e4innovation.com/?p=312  Pedagogy schema ◦ http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue56/conole/
  59. 59.  Olnet ◦ http://olnet.org  OULDI ◦ http://ouldi.open.ac.uk  Cloudworks ◦ http://cloudworks.ac.uk  CompendiumLD ◦ http://compendiumld.open.ac.uk