Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Introduction to Open Educational Practices (OEP) ELT506 | October, 2014 Module 3 Week 11 Luke Padgett OER Project Leader, Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching The text of this presentation is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License Images and graphics in this presentation are subject to separate licenses and copyright restrictions.

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  Open Educational Resources (OER),  Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)  Open Educational Practices (OEP), In this Session

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching 'Open' philosophies and models have emerged during the 20th Century as a result of several different drivers and motivations:  sharing freely;  preventing duplication;  avoiding restrictive (copyright) practices;  promoting economic efficiencies; and  improving access to wide groups of stakeholders. Openness Open source (relating to business and technology) Open source software Open standards Open access (research) Open admission Open curriculum Open knowledge Open data Open content Open educational resources Open educational practices Massive open online courses

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  The Concept of OER is closely linked to the concept of ‘learning objects’. Learning objects are said to be materials that are used to support learning, that can be broken down into (or constructed from) numerous elements which can be combined and reused in various scenarios (Wiley, 2002). Learning Objects Figure 1: Learning object granularity (McGreal, 2004)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching Defining Open Educational Resources (OER) UNESCO (2002) “teaching, learning and research materials in any medium, digital or otherwise, that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits no-cost access, use, adaptation and redistribution by others with no or limited restrictions.” Cape Town Declaration (2007) “everyone should have the freedom to use, customize, improve and redistribute educational resources without constraint OECD (Ischinger, 2007) ‘Digitised materials offered freely and openly for educators, students and self- learners to use and reuse for teaching, learning and research.’ Paris OER Declaration (2012) Refers to the previous declarations

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Discussion point on OER Some definitions provide that OER must be free from all use restrictions, others provide that OER can be limited to educational use or non- commercial use. What do you think? Some definitions limit OER to digital resources, while others consider that any educational resource can be an OER. What do you think? Some definitions limit OER to resources produced specifically to support learning or with an expressed educational aim, others provide that any resource can be an OER if it can be potentially used for learning. What do you think? Further Readings: McAndrew, P., Santos et al.(2009). OpenLearn [CS4] research report Retrieved from: Pirkkalainen, H., Pawlowski, J.M. (2010): Open Educational Resources and Social Software in Global E-Learning Settings. In: Yli-Luoma, P. (ed.), Sosiaalinen Verkko-oppiminen, pp , IMDL, Naantali, Retrieved from: _Global_Settings_ pdf _Global_Settings_ pdf Conole, G., & McAndrew, P. (2010). A new approach to supporting the design and use of OER: Harnessing the power of web 2.0, M. In M. Edner & M. Schiefner (Eds.), Looking toward the future of technology enhanced education: ubiquitous learning and the digital nature. Retrieved from ew_shum_chapter_edner_book_v3.doc ew_shum_chapter_edner_book_v3.doc

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  MOOCs “offer a middle ground for teaching and learning between the highly organised and structured classroom environment and the chaotic open web of fragmented information” (Siemens, 2013).  MOOCs have been said to integrate “the connectivity of social networking, the facilitation of an acknowledged expert in a field of study, and a collection of freely accessible online resources. Perhaps most importantly, however, a MOOC builds on the active engagement of several hundred to several thousand “students” who self-organize their participation according to learning goals, prior knowledge and skills, and common interests. Although it may share in some of the conventions of an ordinary course, such as a predefined timeline and weekly topics for consideration, a MOOC generally carries no fees, no prerequisites other than Internet access and interest, no predefined expectations for participation, and no formal accreditation”( The MOOC model for digital practice, 2010).The MOOC model for digital practice Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching ELEMENTS:  Massive, in relation to the number of students that can participate at any one time. They are scalable and can involve hundreds or thousands of students. The concept of “massive” may extend beyond quantitative measures of student numbers and can be applied to course impact.  Open, in that they are freely accessible. However there is a great diversity as to the openness of course resources. Some for-profit enterprises like Coursera deliver MOOCs with content that is not openly licenced. That is, the content of the MOOC can be accessed for free without fee for the purpose of undertaking the MOOC, but they cannot necessarily be reused outside the MOOC.  Online, in that all learning activities, content and engagement occurs online.  Courses. They have a start and finish time. A MOOC has some structure and its content is sequenced. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  MOOCs have been discussed as either cMOOCs, xMOOCs or quasi-MOOCs  Different ideologies have driven MOOCs in two distinct pedagogical directions: the connectivism MOOCs (cMOOC) which are based on a connectivism theory of learning with networks developed informally; and content-based MOOCs (xMOOCs), which follow a more behaviourist approach (Yuan & Powell, 2013).  MOOCs are hosted on a variety of commercial and institutional platforms Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  Questions for discussion:  Do MOOCs threaten the existence of Universities?  Are MOOCs a sustainable business proposition for Universities? After considering these questions try reading some of the following articles. Are your answers to the questions still the same?  Wiley, D. (2012). The MOOC Misnomer. Retrieved from  Siemens, G. (2013). Massive Open Online Courses: innovation in education? In R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia & S. Marshall (Eds.), Open educational resources: innovation, research and practice (pp. 5-15). Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University. Retrieved from  Yuan, L., Powell, S., & Oliver, B. (2014). Beyond MOOCs: Sustainable Online Learning in Institutions: CETIS. Retrieved from Discussion point on MOOCs

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  The growing diversity of OER initiatives coupled with better understanding of the limitations of open content, without open practices, has led to an important shift in thinking in the field.  A narrow focus on OER per se may not be enough for educational institutions to fundamentally embrace and establish effective open pedagogical practices. Most OER initiatives to date have largely focused on creation and publication of OERs.  The Open Educational Quality Initiative (OPAL, 2011) established the following OEP principles: OEP are based on OER OEP embraces open learning strategies OEP leads to learning and teaching quality improvement OEP leads to change of educational cultures Use of OER must be seen as a value proposition for Institutions Open Educational Practices (OEP)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  OEP has been described as a second phase in open education development that uses OER in a way that learning experiences improve and educational scenarios are innovated (Ehlers, 2011). Open Educational Practices (OEP) Figure 2 Shift from OER to OEP (Ehlers, 2011)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching  Open Educational Practices have been stated (Camilleri et al, 2014) as having the following characteristics:  They build on OER and move on to the development of concepts of how OER can be used, reused, shared and adapted.  They go beyond access into open learning architectures and seek ways to use OERs for transforming learning.  They focus on learning as a construction of knowledge assets which they share with others and receive feedback and reviews.  They follow the notion of improving quality through external validation because of the importance of sharing of resources.  They are about changing the educational paradigm of many un- knowledgeable and a few knowledgeable to a paradigm in which knowledge is co-created and facilitated through mutual reflection.  They emphasise the fact that OER contribute to the value chain of educational institutions. Open Educational Practices (OEP)

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching Discussion point:  UTAS has developed and implemented a number of supporting strategies and policies to support the development of Open Educational Practices by UTAS staff.  The development of Open Educational Practices is part of Divisional planning. Ensuring that UTAS staff are well supported to take up Open Educational Practice is part of the S&E Division's five year plan.S&E Division's five year plan  Embracing Open Educational Practices is a UTAS curriculum principle. The use of Opening Educational Practices to "enhance and extend curriculum offerings through being a member of a vibrant community of practice sharing high quality resources" is provided as the University's tenth curriculum principle.tenth curriculum principle  Using Open Educational Practices counts towards teaching performance expectations. Teaching staff are also encouraged to use and develop a range of learning technologies and online resources such as MOOCs and Open Educational Resources and this is formally recognised within the University's Teaching Performance Expectations.Teaching Performance Expectations  What more is needed do you think for UTAS as an institution to engage in OEP? Discussion point on OEP

Tasmanian Institute of Learning & Teaching Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teaching Cape Town Open Education Declaration. (2007). Retrieved from Camilleri, A., Ehlers, U. D., & Pawlowski, J. M. (2014). State of the Art Review of Quality Issues Related to Open Educational Resources (OER): Publications Ehlers, U.-D. (2011). From open educational resources to open educational practices. eLearning Papers, 23, 1-8. Ischinger, B. (2007). Giving Knowledge for Free: The Emergence of Open Educational Resources. OECD. McGreal, R. (2004). Learning objects: A practical definition. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning (IJITDL), 9(1). Retrieved from OPAL. (2011). Beyond OER: Shifting Focus to Open Educational Practices: Open Education Quality Initiative. Paris OER Declaration, UNESCO (2012 June 20-22). Siemens, G. (2013). Massive Open Online Courses: innovation in education? In R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia & S. Marshall (Eds.), Open educational resources: innovation, research and practice (pp. 5-15). Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University. UNESCO (2002),‘Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries’ in 2002, report available online at URL_ID=5303&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.htmlhttp://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php- URL_ID=5303&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Wiley, D. A. (2002). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), Instructional use of learning objects (pp. 3-24). Bloomington, Indiana: Agency for Instructional Technology and Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Retrieved from Yuan, L., & Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and Open Education: Implications for Higher Education White Paper. University of Bolton. Retrieved from References