1. towards open pedagogical practices

Editor's Notes

• #6: Representation challenges: 1. It is not possible to precisely define the survey population. 2. Self selection Significantly, 69% declaired to be teaching Face-to-face courses, this is, a course where all meetings are face-to-face, may use a learning management system (LMS) or web pages to post the syllabus and assignments. Around 21% taught in a blended/hybrid course: where sufficient content is delivered online to create a reduction in the number of face-to-face class meetings. Online course: A course in which all, or virtually all, the content is delivered online. Typically have no face-to-face class meetings.
• #8: Question 10 sought to establish how respondents looked for open educational resources to reuse. Results are presented in Table 11/Figure 11. The use of search engines (e.g. Google) and YouTube accounted for 34% of all responses. Sharing among known colleagues was the next most popular way to find open resources, accounting for 11% of responses. Library subscriptions, conference presentations & journal articles and professional & discipline associations accounted for a further 25% (10%, 8% and 7% of responses respectively). Both online courses/MOOCs and Slideshare accounted for 6% of responses each. The use of open learning repositories accounted for just 5% of all responses, ahead of Twitter, LinkedIn, commercially authored content licensed to institutions and iTunes. Finally, 23 responses fell into the ‘other’ category. For 12 of these the question was not applicable. Three responses were re-coded into existing categories, and the remaining answers highlighted the additional sources listed below for finding open educational resources. Apart from Facebook which got 2 mentions, all other sources got just 1 mention.   Facebook; Prezi; National Centre for Case Study Teaching in Science; Cambridge, MIT, Harvard; TED Talks.
• #9: Question 9 asked respondents to what degree they had used open educational resources as part of their primary course material and their supplementary course materials (supporting material to enhance teaching, or as further reference for students). Results are presented in Table 10/Figure 10. There was more use of OER as supplementary course material with 38% (or 72 respondents) reporting occasional use and just over a fifth of respondents (21%, or 41) reporting regular use.
• #10: Question 11 investigated respondents’ awareness of licensing mechanisms. Results are presented in Table 12/Figure 12. Respondents were most aware of copyright licensing (68% aware or very aware). Over half of respondents were unaware or just somewhat aware of creative commons and public domain licensing (58% and 53% respectively).
• #11: Question 12, an open question, asked respondents how they deal with copyright issues for the OER that they reuse. Four discrete categories emerged from the data (155 responses) as follows. (iv) Check copyright/licence and act accordingly There were 41 respondents, or 26% of those for whom the question was relevant, who specifically stated that they take cognisance of specific copyright issues pertaining to the open educational resources that they reuse. w to deal with copyright issues for the open educational resources that they reuse.
• #12: Question 13 sought to elicit whether or not respondents share the educational resources that they produce themselves. 65% of respondents (or 125) stated that they share resources, with 35% (or 67) stating that they do not share resources. While almost two-thirds of respondents stated that they ‘shared’ resources, when they were asked to specify how they shared, answers revealed that this occurs privately, for the most part, between colleagues. Sharing resources with students, either through course delivery or VLEs, was also put forward as an example of how respondents shared their educational resources. These two methods of private sharing outweighed public sharing, implicit in open educational resources, by a factor of more than 2 to 1. The metaphor of an iceberg is used by White and Manton (2011:5) in the OER Impact Study funded by JISC. They distinguish between the visible reuse and production of licensed OER that bear the name of the institution, and the invisible reuse by staff and students of digital learning resources in and around the curriculum. The majority of reuse takes place in contexts that are not publicly visible. Much of that reuse is possibly illegal, but the risk is considered acceptable. In relation to students they found that: they were generally oblivious to OER, they lack the requisite digital literacy skills, and they value the curation of resources.
• #22: Chairperson then says whether the motion is carried (proposer win) or defeated (opposer win) by saying “I declare this motion – reads motion – carried or defeated.”