Transcript Document

Open Educational Resources (OER)
World wide access to learning and
teaching resources
Dr Megan Quentin-Baxter
Director, Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for
Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine (MEDEV)
Tel: +44 (0) 191 222 5888 [email protected]
Suzanne Hardy
MEDEV Senior Advisor and OOER Project Manager
Newcastle University
Tel: +44 (0) 191 222 5888 [email protected]
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
The Higher Education Academy
• The Academy's mission is to help institutions, discipline groups
and all staff to provide the best possible learning experience for
their students
–
–
–
–
–
Informing policy (government, professional bodies, etc.)
Supporting institutions (assessment, feedback, internationalisation, etc.)
Research and evaluation (EvidenceNet, funded pedagogic projects, etc.)
Supporting learning (sharing good practice, networking, enquiries, etc.)
Professional development and recognition (including fellowship of the
Academy and the National Teaching Fellowship Scheme) (staff
development, accrediting teaching, reward and recognition, etc.)
– Disciplines and networks (subject centres, sustainability, islamic
studies)
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
www.heacademy.ac.uk
www.heacademy.ac.uk
April
2010
The Academy
and its
Subject
Centres
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
The Academy
and its
Subject
Centres
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Subject Centre for Medicine, Dentistry and
Veterinary Medicine
• Hosted by the University of Newcastle upon Tyne
• Supporting 30,000+ staff and 110,000 students in the UK
– Approximately 8 fte staff - director, manager, education adviser/s,
information officers, clerical support
– Approximately £500K turnover per centre per year
– Subject based and themed activities (e.g. assessment)
– Networks of ‘primary contacts’ and ‘subject specialist advisors’
– Information filtering/interpretation and brokerage
– Journals, newsletters and eBulletins
– Website: educational information & resources, news, etc.
– Workshops, conferences, SIGs/COPs and other events
– Stakeholder engagement, dissemination
– Funding for small projects (mini-projects, small grants >130 since 2000)
– Support for strategic initiatives / large projects, fund-raising
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
©Megan Quentin-Baxter 2009 cc0
April 2010
Source: UCAS and funding
council websites
University /
Community
Higher and Further Education
Higher Institutions
/Further
Education
Education
Institutions
Institutions
Northern Ireland
Total
5
6
11
England
130
362 (123
directly
funded)
492
Scotland
20
43
63
Wales
12
21
33
Total
167
432
April 2010
599
www.medev.ac.uk
UK Universities and
Further Education
Colleges
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
openlearn.open.ac.uk
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Pros and cons of ‘going OER’
Pros
Cons
•
Whole Programmes/Modules; individual
documents; lectures; tests; images; etc.
•
Risk of infringing third party rights
•
Formalise current ‘ad hoc’ practice
•
Not all staff would want to be involved
•
Sharing the results of the public purse
•
Giving away the ‘crown jewels’
•
Exposing University brand to new
markets – students, partners, public
•
Quality could be good or bad (what if
the content is poor quality or ‘wrong’?)
•
Anyone can contribute
•
How do you find good-quality stuff?
•
Materials are more accessible for our
own (and other) students
•
•
Institutions can establish and enforce
high quality policies and procedures of
‘ownership’ and ‘licencing’
‘Third parties’ might abuse the
system/make money out of OER
materials
•
Better not to open Pandora’s Box –
better to remain in the dark and not
know
•
Funding for JorumOpen might be cut
without warning
•
A single place where materials are
searchable/stored/available from
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
The HEFCE/JISC/Academy OER programme (14/08)
• HEFCE funded programme (£5.7M), managed by the Academy
and the Joint Infrastructure Committee (JISC) until April 2010
• OER could include full courses (programmes and modules),
course descriptions, lectures, notes, videos, assessments,
tests, simulations, worked examples, software, and any other
tools or materials or techniques used in teaching
– Make existing material available - not about creating new content
– Resources released under an intellectual property license permitting
open use and adaptation (e.g. Creative Commons)
– Expose existing content to wider audiences and exploring the drivers,
challenges and barriers and making recommendations
– Projects mandated to deposit into national repository (JorumOpen)
– End goal is sustainability
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
The HEFCE/JISC/HEA OER programme (14/08)
• Pilot projects made up of 3 strands of activity:
– Institutional (7 projects @~£250K each)
– Individual (8 projects @~£20K each)
– Subject (14 projects @~£250K each)
1. LLAS (Southampton), ENG (Royal Holloway), PRS
(Leeds), HCA (Warwick): The HumBox project
2. ICS (Ulster): Open educational repository in support
of computer science
3. Engineering (Loughborough): Open educational
resources pilot
4. UKCME (Liverpool): CORE-Materials: collaborative
open resource environment – for materials
5. Economics (Bristol): TRUE - Teaching Resources for
Undergraduate Economics
6. Physical Sciences (Hull/Liverpool): Skills for
scientists
7. GEES (Plymouth): C-change in GEES: Open
licensing of climate change and sustainability
resources in the geography, earth and environmental
sciences
April 2010
8. ADM (Brighton): Open Educational Resources in Art,
Design and Media
9. MSOR (Nottingham Trent): FETLAR (Finding
electronic teaching learning and assessment
resources)
10. Bioscience (Leeds): An Interactive laboratory and
fieldwork manual for the biosciences
11. UKCLE (Warwick): Simulation learning resources
12. HSaP (KCL): Public health open resources in the
university sector (PHORUS)
13. C-SAP (Birmingham): Evaluating the practice of
collective endeavour in opening up key resources for
learning and teaching in the social sciences
14. MEDEV (Newcastle): Organising open educational
resources (OOER)
www.medev.ac.uk
www.medev.ac.uk/oer/
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
OOER: iterative improvement cycle
Institutional
Policies
Case
Studies
April 2010
Toolkits
www.medev.ac.uk
OOER: readiness categorisation pyramid
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Creative Commons: example
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Good practice compliance table (managing risk)
Action
Risk of litigation from
Good Explanation
practice compliance
table
(managing
risk)
infringement of IPR/copyright or
patient consent rights
3 Institutional policies are clearly Low. Institution follows best practice
in place to enable resources to and has effective take down
be compared to the toolkits.
strategies. Institution able to legally
pursue those infringing the
institution’s rights.
Periodically test resources against
policies to keep policies under review.
Keep abreast of media stories.
Limited liability insurance required.
2 Compliance tested and
policies are adequate in most
but not all aspects to allow the
compliance of a resource to be
accurately estimated. A small
number of areas where
policies need to be further
developed for complete clarity.
Medium. Ownership of resources is
likely to be clear. Good practice is
followed in relation to patients. Take
down and other ‘complaint’ policies
are in place and being followed.
Review those areas where developed
is required, possibly in relation to e.g.
staff not employed by the institution
e.g. emeritus or visiting or NHS. It
may be that a partner organisation
requires improvement to their
policies. Some liability insurance
may be necessary.
1 Compliance tested but too few
policies available or
insufficiently specified to allow
the compliance of any
particular resource to good
practice guidelines to be
accurately estimated.
Medium. It is unlikely that the
ownership and therefore licensing of
resources is clear. Resources
theoretically owned by the institution
could be being ripped off.
Collate suite of examples of best
practice and review against existing
institutional policies. Follow due
process to amend and implement
those which are relevant to the
institution. Take out liability
insurance.
0 Compliance with the toolkits
unknown/untested.
High/Unknown. Risk may be minimal
if resource was developed based on
best practice principles. Institutional
policy status (ownership, consent) is
unknown.
Establish a task force to test some
resources against institutional
policies; then follow 1-3 below. Take
out liability insurance.
www.medev.ac.uk
Compliance has been tested
and materials failed to pass.
April 2010
April 2010
Used with permission
©CETL www.clinicalskillscentre.ac.uk
www.medev.ac.uk
http://www.clinicalskillscentre.ac.uk/
Website of materials recently (since 2005) purposemade/commissioned to good practice standards
•
•
•
•
Strategy to produce and share educational resources
Academics were supported by learning technologists
Materials come from multiple institutions under an agreement
What issues or policy implications exist?
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Website of materials recently (since 2005) purposemade/commissioned to good practice standards
•
•
•
•
Strategy to produce and share educational resources
Academics were supported by learning technologists
Materials come from multiple institutions under an agreement
What issues or policy implications exist?
– Intellectual property rights of teachers; support staff including learning
technologists, photographers/audio-visual/illustration staff; etc.
– Third party or ‘upstream’ rights including material of mixed origin
– Patients and non-patients such as role players; family members
(including children); other healthcare workers including porters and
receptionists; students; members of the public; etc.
– Sub-contractors rights including technical, audio-visual staff;
facilities/physical resources; data providers, etc.
– Incidental product placement including brand names visible in videos
– Materials may go out of date if clinical skills/guidelines are updated
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
www.medev.ac.uk/oer/value.html
cc by-nc-sa
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertfrancis/100775342/
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
‘Recap’ (like video) recording of a lecture
(voice over powerpoint) with or without talking head
• All materials correctly attributed to publisher according to
published guidelines
– Images have been altered (labels) to suit commentary
– Images are ‘embedded’ (not easily copied and pasted)
– Recording is lower quality than the original
• Currently running on an internal virtual learning environment
(behind a login)
• What issues or policy implications exist?
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
‘Recap’ (like video) recording of a lecture
(voice over powerpoint) with or without talking head
• All materials correctly attributed to publisher according to
published guidelines
– Images have been altered (labels) to suit commentary
– Images are ‘embedded’ (not easily copied and pasted)
– Recording is lower quality than the original
• Currently running on an internal virtual learning environment
(behind a login)
• What issues or policy implications exist?
– Rights of the publisher – images openly available; images ‘defaced’
– Potential to raise the profile of the publisher – more people buy books?
– Publisher may allow inclusion of materials in OER but we have to clear
rights
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
April 2010
©Newcastle University PsychiatryTeacher
cc by-nc
www.medev.ac.uk
Video of doctor with patient or role player
• Doctor is employed by National Health Service (NHS) and has
agreed to participate
• In this case it is a role player who is being paid to participate
• What issues or policy implications exist?
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Video of doctor with patient or role player
• Doctor is employed by National Health Service (NHS) and has
agreed to participate
• In this case it is a role player who is being paid to participate
• What issues or policy implications exist?
– If the audio-visual recorder is externally contracted then they will own
the recording unless they have signed a contract agreeing to relinquish ©
– Real patient data is anonymised – but is it recognisable?
– Doctor (or their family) may later change their mind and reasonably
request that the clip is removed / taken down
– Role player may not have consented for materials to appear on the web
– actors’ unions can claim that this is reducing actor’s income
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
©Megan Quentin-Baxter, 1995 cc0
With thanks to Dr Graham Irving
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Video of an academic with veterinary material
(recently dead rat) recorded onto 1” film in 1988
• Signed ‘consent to participate’ - forms for all parties (including
audio-visual staff) still available in hard copy
• Video commissioned as part of a PhD study
• What issues or policy implications exist?
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Video of an academic with veterinary material
(recently dead rat) recorded onto 1” film in 1988
• Signed ‘consent to participate’ - forms for all parties (including
audio-visual staff) still available in hard copy
• Video commissioned as part of a PhD study
• What issues or policy implications exist?
– Produced by a student – not technically an employee – whose IPR?
– Transferred from 1” film to MPG and onto the web
– Developed at a previous (not current) employing institution - under which
institution should the materials be released?
– Age of materials – issues about format and quality
– Techniques demonstrated may have been updated especially in
response to animal welfare therefore video is no longer best practice
– Possible response against the author from anti-vivisection community
– Academic passed away about 6 months after this was recorded and
never saw the final version
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Toolkits–asking necessary questions with links to
sample policy documents/further information
Start
Identify content type
Image/video/aud
io?
Y
Y
Patient data?
N
N
Refer to WP3
workflow
N
Text?
Y
Refer to WP6
workflow
Refer to WP5
workflow
N
Is the IPR
status clear?
Y
Refer to WP2
workflow
Sample
policy
documents
Collect basic metadata about
resource
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
April 2010
•
Available from www.medev.ac.uk/oer
www.medev.ac.uk
Resources identified for inclusion per site
Case studies
WP4 database
Newcastle University
‘Resources’ identified for inclusion
8 (3)
949
University of Oxford
3 (1)
14
University of Aberdeen
4 (2)
35
The Royal Veterinary College
5 (1)
64
University of Nottingham
6 (3)
19
University of Southampton
5 (1)
TBC
University of Bristol
4 (1)
133
Queen’s University Belfast
4 (2)
7
Imperial College
2 (1)
28
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
1 (1)
2
St Georges, University of London
4 (2)
63
Cardiff University
2
TBC
Bedfordshire University
2
TBC
University of Edinburgh
2
5
University of Warwick
2
TBC
2 (1)
TBC
5
800
60 (19)
~2000
www.medev.ac.uk
Keele University
Non partner (e.g. other HEIs such as QMUL & City
University; NHS eLearning Repository; commercial/charity)
Total
April 2010
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
www.jorum.ac.uk
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Recommendations
• That authors should ‘hallmark’ all their content with CC licences
• Consent everything-even where ownership and patient/nonpatient rights appear clear and store consent with resource
• Review institutional policies against good practice
• Aim to release a fraction of a programme rather than 100%
• UK HE enters a dialogue with publishers to increase the
potential for re-using upstream rights (especially images)
• Have sophisticated ‘take-down’ policies
• Development of a tool to track resources and for them to ‘phone
home’ (like software updaters) to check their status
• Staff reward system is established (formal recognition of using
and reusing others’ resources, PDRs, promotion criteria, etc.)
• JorumOpen-specific recommendations such as bulk upload
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
In conclusion
• The UK aims to be a major player in open educational
resources
– The JISC has issued a call for phase II of the OER programme with bids
due by 24 June 2010
• Further work is needed on, for example:
–
–
–
–
–
National repository vs. distributed content
Resource discovery and reuse and associated issues
Reputation and branding
Upstream rights
Materials going out of date, etc.
• Looking to collaborate (nationally and internationally)
• We don’t know the long term implications of the programme
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Acknowledgements: project partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bedfordshire University
Cardiff University
Imperial College
Keele University
London School of Hygiene
and Tropical Medicine
Newcastle University
Queen’s University Belfast
Royal Veterinary College
St George’s University of
London
University of Aberdeen
April 2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
University of Bristol
University of Edinburgh
University of Liverpool
University of Nottingham
University of Oxford
University of Southampton
University of Warwick
Intute: Health and Life
Sciences
www.medev.ac.uk
Acknowledgements
• Gillian Brown, Advisor
• Programme staff at JISC and
HEA
• Victor Ottaway, Centre
Manager
• Synthesis and evaluation
team esp. Helen Beetham
• James Outterside, Advisor
• Content providers whose
• Sharon Percy, Secretary
material appears here
• Nigel Purcell, Senior Advisor
especially:
• Chris Smith, Project Assistant
– Dr Brian Lunn
• Vicky Thomas, Secretarial
– Dr Philip Bradley
Assistant
– Professor Annie Cushing
• Lindsay Wood, Project Officer
• All the legal teams at partner
HEIs
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
References
• Li Yuan, Sheila MacNeil and Wilbert Kraan. Open Educational Resources –
Opportunities and Challenges for Higher Education. JISC CETIS. 2009
• Catherine Fleming and Moira Massey. Jorum Open Educational Resources
(OER) Report. 2007.
• Marshall S. Smith. Opening Education. Science. 89 ; 323. 2009.
• Giving Knowledge for Free: the Emergence of Open Educational Resources.
OECD. 2007.
• WM-Share Final Report. WM-Share. 2006.
• Lou McGill, Sarah Currier, Charles Duncan, Peter Douglas. Good
Intentions: improving the evidence base in support of sharing and learning
materials. McGill et al. 2008
• CHERRI, Ellaway, R. et al http://www.cherri.mvm.ed.ac.uk/
• GMC patient consent guidance http://www.gmcuk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk
Expert panel
• Suzanne Hardy, Senior Advisor, Higher Education Academy
Subject Centre for Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine and
Project Manager, Organising Open Educational Resources (OOER)
• Chara Balasubramaniam, Project Manager, e-Learning Unit,
Centre for Medical and Healthcare Education, St George's University
of London (OOER IPR Lead)
• Michael Begg, eLearning Manager, Learning Technology
Section, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine,
University of Edinburgh (OOER OpenLabyrinth Lead)
• Dr David Davies, Associate Professor, Institute of Clinical
Education, University of Warwick (OOER Resource Discovery Lead)
• Dr Jane Williams, Head of eLearning, Medical School, University of
Bristol (OOER Patient and Non-patient Consent Lead)
April 2010
www.medev.ac.uk