The document discusses a shift in focus for learning technology from core IT to collaboration with libraries and tech-oriented departments. It emphasizes reimagining the role of instructional designers, increasing faculty engagement in MOOCs, and improving the management of open educational resources through better curation and branding. The text also critiques current open educational resources for being difficult to find and use, suggesting a need for comprehensive offerings and improved visibility.

1. Faculty Perspective
 Learning technology center is moving
 Away from core IT
 Towards Libraries
 Towards tech-oriented schools and departments
 School of Education
 School of Information
 Re-imagine "instructional designer" role
 Accelerate faculty vectors in things like MOOCs
 Replace publisher role so we can retain IP

2. MOOC Effect
 Massive institutional interest in my teaching
 Sharing the brand
 Who owns the user experience
 Involvement of the Marketing Department
 Who / where do I meet my institution around global
branded teaching?

3. Learning Object Repository
 Classic Learning Object Repository – NO!
 Look at publisher processes (repositories)
 Talent heavy
 Careful professional curation
 EPUB3 / E-book as LMS
 New learning technology with 0.1% adoption

4. Open Educational Resources
 Generally a failure
 Unfindable
 Unuseable
 Open Educational Resources Needs
 Education
 Audit
 Curation
 Branding / consistency

5. Open Educational Resources
Roles
 Open Educational Resources
 Education
 Audit
 Curation
 Branding / consistency
 Look at publishers – Pearson's MyMathLab
 Need a full-span set of offerings
 Open Syllabus Effort
 PageRank for Learning Resources