01 chrispeglerkeynote
Download as PPT, PDF1 like697 views
This document discusses the concepts and implications of resource reuse in education, outlining various acronyms such as RLO (Reusable Learning Object) and OER (Open Educational Resource). It emphasizes the benefits of reusability for cost reduction in online learning and highlights the complexity of the implementation cycle and the human factors involved. The text also raises concerns about the quality, accessibility, and copyright issues associated with reusing educational materials.
![Does Reuse save time?
‘To teach unfamiliar content, he [Westfall] found
that it was necessary to spend a substantial amount
of time studying the previously developed materials
and working with the software. In some instances,
he had to find and study other materials on the
topic, to achieve the necessary proficiency.
However he would have had to do this even
without these materials. Since these materials were
available, he did not have to develop the lecture
notes and assignments that would have been
necessary otherwise’. (Westfall, 2000, p1856)
Westfall, R. D., (2000). Reuse of Web-Based Teaching Materials in IS Courses. In: AMCIS 2000 Proceedings. Paper 271.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/01chrispeglerkeynote-140221040501-phpapp01/85/01-chrispeglerkeynote-24-320.jpg)
01 chrispeglerkeynote
- 1. H818 Conference 15 February 2014 Chris Pegler By DeVos http://www.flickr.com/photos/devos/2862695450/ CC-BY-NC-SA Implementing resource reuse in learning and teaching. The journey from RLO to OER?
- 2. A quick tour through some acronyms • • • • • • RBL - resource based learning RLO – reusable learning object OER – open educational resource OEP – open educational practice OEI – open education idea* TLA – three letter acronymn * Source: http://www.idea-space.eu/open-educational-ideas-a-new-approac - 31 Jan 2014
- 3. Do you recognise these people? A B C D E F
- 4. Rory McGreal • Current UNESCO OER scholar • Editor of Online Education using Learning Objects (2004) • In which he offered this enthusiastic endorsement: ‘From anything and everything to specific digital learning resources, the future of learning is inextricably linked to the development of quality LOs.’
- 5. David Wiley • Has suggested OER = RLOs + open license & coined the term ‘open content’ • From his PhD (2000): ‘the Internet is poised to bring about a paradigm shift in the way that people learn. Consequently, a major change may also be coming in the way educational materials are designed, developed and delivered to those who wish to learn.’ • Spoke against Lego analogy and automation of learning object assembly but strong endorsement of reusability.
- 6. Martin Weller • Best known in OER circles for endorsement of open scholarship and ‘Big and little OER’ arguments • In 2002/3 authored (with Mason and Pegler) an OU course (H806) made of RLO – the first substantial accredited course in the UK and RLOs from this were reused • Emphasis on overcoming the pedagogical implications of learning objects in use.
- 7. David Kernohan ‘It is a holy grail of e-learning content, that all media assets, information, learning objects, and learning activities, or learning designs, should be made once and used in learning many times, either unchanged or modified. Behind the simple aspiration is a complex web of interdependent issues; organisational, cultural, technical, legal and pedagogical’. Ferguson, Jacobs, Kernohan and Schmoller (2007) From 2010-2013 David Kernohan was the programme manager for JISC UK OER
- 8. Stephen Downes Spoke against cottage industry and bespoke approaches to elearning: ‘I agree that hand-rolled bread carefully prepared by a master chef, is superior in quality to a standard loaf purchased from Safeway. But to a person who is merely hungry – rather than a connoisseur – the obligation to purchase only hand-rolled bread is more than just an imposition, it amounts to a denial of basis of sustenance for many.’ (Downes, 2000)
- 9. George Siemens • Leader in MOOCs (with Downes) and connectiveness • Emphasis on new ways of learning (2002): ‘Learning objects have their greatest value in creating personalized learning…not in reusing objects developed by others. For example, our current notion of a “course” will change significantly over the next few years’
- 10. Why the interest in resource reuse? Emphasis on mass HE, measuring quality in learning and teaching. P E S T Reuse helps to pay for online learning Cost reduction by sharing at scale. Knowledge transfer to developing world. Changing teaching practices. Technological changes with online and digital resources easy to repurpose/reuse.
- 11. Reuse being Political* RLO benefits of being RLO benefits of being ‘free-standing, non‘free-standing, nonsequential, coherent and sequential, coherent and unitary’ (Longmire, 2000) unitary’ (Longmire, 2000) remain important. remain important. Cable Green demoing this Cable Green demoing this to Washington State to Washington State Education Board (Jan Education Board (Jan 2012) 2012) http://www.tvw.org/index .php? option=com_tvwplayer&ev entID=2012010137#start= 6580&stop=6865 Note Capital P here …
- 12. Simple Economics of reuse 1st reuse saves 50% By 3rd reuse cost is spread four ways >5 reuses marginal saving is now <3%
- 13. Simple Economics of reuse 1st reuse saves 50% By 3rd reuse cost is spread four ways >5 reuses marginal saving is now <3% Start to share Start to share openly? openly?
- 14. Online networked Society CC: BY NC Niklas Wikström
- 16. The triumph of the Technical Easier to •Make •Publish •Distribute •Find •Adapt •Track http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekqnXztr0mU
- 17. With all that going for it what could go wrong? http://www.magnificentrevolution.org/2012/09/cycle-in-cinema-presents-monty-python-and-the-holy-grail/
- 18. The reuse implementation cycle Pegler, 2011 Based on Strijker (2004)
- 19. Who does what? OBTAIN: LABEL: OFFER OBTAIN: LABEL: OFFER SELECT: USE: RETAIN
- 20. The different players •• •• •• Librarians Librarians Copyright experts Copyright experts Repository Repository managers managers •• Metadata experts Metadata experts •• JISC projects & HEA JISC projects & HEA subject centres subject centres OBTAIN: LABEL: OFFER OBTAIN: LABEL: OFFER • Teachers • Learners SELECT: USE: RETAIN
- 21. A common understanding? •• •• •• Librarians Librarians Copyright experts Copyright experts Repository Repository managers managers •• Metadata experts Metadata experts •• JISC projects & HEA JISC projects & HEA subject centres subject centres OBTAIN: LABEL: OFFER OBTAIN: LABEL: OFFER • Teachers • Learners Q: Do YOU use what Q: Do YOU use what you select (e.g. you select (e.g. download)? download)? SELECT: USE: RETAIN
- 22. Motive: Why choose to reuse? Pragmatic/Practical? Pedagogic? Philosophical? Policy? 20th May 2013 Chris Pegler : Camden, London 22
- 23. How difficult can reuse be? Just because you can find open content does not mean you can reuse it. But it sounded But it sounded perfect in the perfect in the metadata metadata description… description… CC-BY-SA By sflaw http://www.flickr.com/photos/sfllaw/222795 669/ 20th May 2013 Chris Pegler : Camden, London 23
- 24. Does Reuse save time? ‘To teach unfamiliar content, he [Westfall] found that it was necessary to spend a substantial amount of time studying the previously developed materials and working with the software. In some instances, he had to find and study other materials on the topic, to achieve the necessary proficiency. However he would have had to do this even without these materials. Since these materials were available, he did not have to develop the lecture notes and assignments that would have been necessary otherwise’. (Westfall, 2000, p1856) Westfall, R. D., (2000). Reuse of Web-Based Teaching Materials in IS Courses. In: AMCIS 2000 Proceedings. Paper 271.
- 25. Future reuse Who is responsible for updating? Migration from the original where derivatives are permitted? •Issues of ownership •Issues for accessibility following modification Concerns about ‘consent commons’ * * Further reading: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/subjects/medev/Paper _on_Consent_Commons_for_opened10_this_afternoon
- 26. It takes time to share … 89% Check grammar 89% Check accuracy and currency 87% Add references and acknowledgements 78% Improve appearance 66% Make available in other file formats 64% Re-size so that it can be used as stand-alone 62% Remove contextual information (e.g. dates) 61% Check for third party rights ORIOLE survey 2011 Q12a asked about extra activity in order to share (link to questions http://bit.ly/irTMpZ). 2011 figures. 192 responses (c. 174 responded to Q12a). All respondents were users or makers of educational resources
- 27. Other factors that play a part … Some quality concerns: Fit for purpose? Confident in quality? Subjective reviews?
- 28. Is it technically appropriate? Functionality? Licensing? Limits? Systems? Support? BTW I consider CC a technical tool
- 29. Where are we now? • We’ve solved most of the technical problems • We now have is the human issues* * Hm. Would money or recognition or reward (technical) or greater clarity about copyright (technical) solve these problems?
- 30. Reuse contexts: zones of proximity Spot the differences: Spot the differences: Reuse within Social Care Reuse within Social Care or Health or within or Health or within Language Teaching Language Teaching 1. Individual (Creator) 2. Module/Programme 3. Department/Institution 4. Community (Region) 5. National 6. International/Open
- 31. Sharing in H818
- 32. Questions: Do you agree … References and script (which will include things I forgot to say here) will be posted into Cloudworks and added to after show. Visit http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8543