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.

Social mediapanel cetisrow_190410

930 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Social mediapanel cetisrow_190410

  1. 1. Flying Under the Radarlessons learned from a fun ‘faux-pository’ project<br />SHEEN Sharing<br />CETIS-ROW:<br />Repositories and the Open Web<br />19 April 2010, Birkbeck College<br />Sarah Currier<br />Sarah Currier Consultancy Ltd.<br />
  2. 2. Traditional Educational Repositories and Web2.0 Resource Sharing?<br /><ul><li>I’m a formal repositories kinda gal, a librarian with a primary professional interest in learning materials repositories and educational metadata since 1999.
  3. 3. For 14 months I had the guilty pleasure of organising a totally Web2.0-based educational resource sharing project, with some success.</li></li></ul><li>A starting point<br />For me, the questions are:<br />How can educational communities make best use of both formal repositories and Web2.0 sharing?<br />How can repository developers and managers support educational communities by leveraging Web2.0-type technologies?<br />
  4. 4. What’s the difference?<br />Formal repositories meet a certain set of use cases, requiring things like:<br />A long-term view of, and expertise in, resource curation and management;<br />Good quality metadata for high precision and recall in resource discovery;<br />In some use cases, resource preservation;<br />Solid support for rights protection;<br />... and so on ...<br />BUT! All this is expensive and requires a high degree of strategic buy-in from funders.<br />Not all educational communities<br />(a) have the requisite resource or support, or<br />(b) operate with those types of use cases.<br />
  5. 5. What’s the difference?<br />Formal repositories meet a certain set of use cases, requiring things like:<br />A long-term view of, and expertise in, resource curation and management;<br />Good quality metadata for high precision and recall in resource discovery;<br />In some use cases, resource preservation;<br />Solid support for rights protection;<br />... and so on ...<br />BUT! All this is expensive and requires a high degree of strategic buy-in from funders.<br />Not all educational communities<br />(a) have the requisite resource or support, or<br />(b) operate with those types of use cases.<br />
  6. 6. Educational communities of practice?<br />CoPs and resource sharing in UK HE:<br />PROWE, CD-LOR, SPIRE (JISC DRP 2005-2007)<br />JISC Emerge, Pathfinder DMU Learning Exchanges<br />Interviewed key people.<br />“[...] the pedagogical, social, and organisational aspects of these communities have not been at the forefront in the design and development [...]. Research has consistently demonstrated that the most substantial barriers in uptake of technology are rooted in these factors”<br />Margaryan, Milligan and Douglas, 2007. CD-LOR Project<br />
  7. 7. Inclusion and identity<br />JISC Emerge (2009) found that “[t]he effective use of Web2.0 applications depends essentially on human networks. This raises questions of inclusion, exclusion and identity”.<br />We’ve had to stay very aware of the different levels of engagement/confidence and utilise the CoP and peer stories to help people along.<br />
  8. 8. An educational communitywithout a repository<br />Scottish Employability Coordinators’ Network (ECN).<br />Made up of those in Scottish Funding Council’s funded posts supporting employability in Scottish HE.<br />Tossed a small amount of money to spend on small projects to meet their pressing needs.<br />
  9. 9. An educational communitywithout a repository<br />The ECN’s original idea was that “someone” should provide them with a Website, perhaps powered by a “repository”, and populate it for them.<br />Given the project’s resourcing, timescale and intended outcomes, they were advised by JISC CETIS to look at Web2.0 / social media resource sharing instead.<br />The HEA was keen to use the forthcoming EvidenceNet repository as a more formal home for resources that required this further down the line.<br />JorumOpen was also still in development at the time.<br />
  10. 10. Project resources<br /><ul><li>Project timescale: Jan 2009 – Feb 2010
  11. 11. Project lead: Cherie Woolmer, Employability Coordinator, University of Strathclyde (voluntary)
  12. 12. Project consultant, 2.5 days / week for 9 months: Sarah Currier (now extended for 4 months )
  13. 13. Project Development Group: enthusiasts in the Employability Coordinators’ Network (voluntary)
  14. 14. Admin and advisory support from HEA
  15. 15. Travel and events budget
  16. 16. No technology budget</li></li></ul><li>Project resources<br /><ul><li>Project timescale: Jan 2009 – Feb 2010
  17. 17. Project lead: Cherie Woolmer, Employability Coordinator, University of Strathclyde (voluntary)
  18. 18. Project consultant, 2.5 days / week for 9 months: Sarah Currier (now extended for 4 months )
  19. 19. Project Development Group: enthusiasts in the Employability Coordinators’ Network (voluntary)
  20. 20. Admin and advisory support from HEA
  21. 21. Travel and events budget
  22. 22. No technology budget</li></li></ul><li>Project approach<br />Experimental -- Developmental -- Iterative<br />Must have ownership and involvement of ECN to succeed<br />Flexible: change track quickly if something isn’t working<br />Safe communication spaces + open dissemination spaces<br />Must not be driven by traditional project reporting outputs<br />CoP = sharing of knowledge, experience and peer teaching within community<br />CoP = room for mistakes, learning from trial and error, reporting what doesn’t work as well as what does, supporting each other<br />Piloting use of freely available Web tools<br />Validated 100% by Project Review!<br />
  23. 23. Project approach<br />Experimental -- Developmental -- Iterative<br /><ul><li>Must have ownership and involvement of ECN to succeed
  24. 24. Flexible: change track quickly if something isn’t working
  25. 25. Safe communication spaces + open dissemination spaces
  26. 26. Must not be driven by traditional project reporting outputs
  27. 27. CoP = sharing of knowledge, experience and peer teaching within community
  28. 28. CoP = room for mistakes, learning from trial and error, reporting what doesn’t work as well as what does, supporting each other
  29. 29. Piloting use of freely available Web tools</li></ul>Validated 100% by Project Review!<br />
  30. 30. Getting to know the community (1)<br />Ca. 20-22 members at any given time.<br />National, across all Scotland’s HE institutions<br />Geographically distributed, with some members, particularly in the north of Scotland, less able to attend centrally based meetings;<br />Mostly female (76% female / 24% male);<br />A mix of part-time and full-time (59% full-time / 41% part-time) ...<br />
  31. 31. Getting to know the community (2)<br />A mix of professional backgrounds:<br />Lecturers;<br />Researchers;<br />Careers advisers;<br />Policy developers and implementers;<br />Staff developers;<br />Educational developers;<br />Librarians<br />... ?<br />
  32. 32. Getting to know the community (3)<br /><ul><li>A mix of institutional situations, in terms of:</li></ul>1. the type of department they are based in:<br /><ul><li>59% educational development;
  33. 33. 41% careers service;
  34. 34. some co-located in different departments;</li></ul>2. the emphasis required by their institution:<br /><ul><li>working at a policy level;
  35. 35. working on curriculum and course development;
  36. 36. working directly with academics and students.</li></ul>3. university type, from red brick to the ancients, including the Open University and the federated UHI Millennium Institute.<br />
  37. 37. Getting to know the community (4)<br />Temporary: funding for their work will not continue beyond the next couple of years (a few have permanent posts).<br />A small number of institutions did not employ designated “employability coordinators”, but most did.<br />
  38. 38. Implications<br /><ul><li>There is significant time pressure on many ECN members;
  39. 39. There are a range of professional and institutional cultures, priorities and communication styles coming to bear on their ability to participate;
  40. 40. There are institutional cultures with different levels of support for use of technology;
  41. 41. There is a sense that the work accomplished must not be lost after the end of the ECN’s funded tenure in their roles.</li></li></ul><li>Implications<br /><ul><li>There is significant time pressure on many ECN members;
  42. 42. There are a range of professional and institutional cultures, priorities and communication styles coming to bear on their ability to participate;
  43. 43. There are institutional cultures with different levels of support for use of technology;
  44. 44. There is a sense that the work accomplished must not be lost after the end of the ECN’s funded tenure in their roles.</li></li></ul><li>ECN Requirements<br /><ul><li>Communication:</li></ul>Mutual support;<br />Sharing experience, practice and learning.<br /><ul><li>Resource sharing, comprising:</li></ul>Discovery, sharing, recommending and rating;<br />Sharing experiences of use of resources;<br />Targeted resource dissemination to all stakeholders.<br /><ul><li>One-stop shop for employability for:</li></ul>New employees coming in;<br />Employer stakeholders;<br />Academics;<br />Students ... And more?<br />
  45. 45. Diigo + Netvibes = 1 free repository?<br />Where we are now<br />
  46. 46. So, is this a repository?<br />http://groups.diigo.com/group/employability<br />(... maybe, kind of ... but it didn’t meet all this community’s requirements ...)<br />
  47. 47. What about this?<br />http://www.netvibes.com/Employability<br />According to that formal repository definitions, definitely not! But to this community, it completes the meeting of their requirements.<br />They are delighted with their Web-based resource, their one-stop-shop for employability resources for Scottish higher education, and they will call it a repository, or a portal, whether we like it or not!<br />
  48. 48. Netvibes and formal repositories<br /><ul><li>Formal repositories with working newsfeeds:</li></ul>EdShare at Southampton University;<br />Anything based on intraLibrary (but only if you can get behind the wall; their current open interface is based on SRU and doesn’t offer feeds out-of-the-box);<br /><ul><li>Formal repositories not currently offering feeds:</li></ul>HEA EvidenceNet (but they are working on it, and we’ve used their search URL in meantime);<br />IRISS Learning Exchange is an example of a good intraLibrary repository using their open interface: again, the search URL can be used.<br />JorumOpen.<br /><ul><li>Netvibes SWORD widget: rudimentary right now: not usable for a community like this.</li></li></ul><li>Reflections<br />
  49. 49. What I would share with repository people<br /><ul><li>Overall: put educational communities at the heart of requirements gathering and ongoing planning
  50. 50. First priority: make sure at the very minimum you support newsfeeds robustly and flexibly:</li></ul>Make sure users can easily create standard feeds based on any search/browse/tag/collection;<br />Provide feeds that include user ratings / recommendations / commentary;<br />Make sure they really work!<br /><ul><li>Second priority: remote, easy deposit tools (use SWORD) that can capture metadata;
  51. 51. Third priority: “save/share this resource”.. Especially to email, Twitter, Facebook, social bookmarking / recommendation sites.</li></ul>Again, include ratings/recommendations/commentary.<br />
  52. 52. What I would share with repository people<br />IMO:<br />Don’t waste time creating your own version of Facebook or MySpace or Twitter or Ning or other Web 2.0 tools as part of your repository.<br />Instead, make sure you work well with existing tools your users use.<br />Let a million flowers bloom. You are not and never will be a one-stop-shop.<br />
  53. 53. References<br />Currier, S. (2009) SHEEN Sharing Benchmarking and Final Requirements Report. Final Public Draft. Higher Education Academy. Available: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16529191/SHEEN-Sharing-Benchmarking-and-Requirements-Report-Final-Public-Draft<br />Currier, S. (2009) SHEEN Sharing Review. Final Public Draft. Higher Education Academy. Available: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16529201/SHEEN-Sharing-Review-Report-Final-Public-Draft<br />Hughes, A. (2009) Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World: Report of an independent Committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students’ widespread use of Web 2.0 technologies. JISC. Available: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/heweb2.aspx<br />IMS (2003) IMS Digital Repositories Interoperability - Core Functions Information Model. Version 1.0 Final Specification Available: http://www.imsglobal.org/digitalrepositories/index.html<br />JISC Emerge (2009) JISC Emerge: A User-Centred Social Learning Media Hub: Supporting the Users and Innovation R&D Community Network. JISC. Available: http://reports.jiscemerge.org.uk/Publications/<br />Margaryan, A., Milligan, C. And Douglas, P. (2007) CD-LOR Deliverable 9: Structured Guidelines for Setting up Learning Object Repositories. Available: http://www.academy.gcal.ac.uk/cd-lor/documents/CD-LOR_Structured_Guidelines_v1p0_000.pdf<br />
  54. 54. Credits<br />Image on 1st slide by ycc2106:<br />http://www.flickr.com/photos/ycc2106/103383461/ available under Creative Commons: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en_GB<br />Slides by Sarah Currier, Consultant, SHEEN Sharing Project<br />http://www.sarahcurrier.com/<br />sarah.currier@gmail.com<br />Slides © 2010 Higher Education Academy.<br />

×