Transcript Slide 1

Photo courtesy of Flickr - (badjoby)
Sharing Resources in the Humanities
Background & Vision
Brett Lucas, Learning technologist, English Subject Centre
[email protected]
This is the first time that a project of this nature
will have been undertaken on this scale, collaboratively
across an entire national educational sector.
Malcolm Read – Head of JISC
Project Strands
Institutional strand
 Encompass a wide range of an
institutions academic activity
 Demonstrate that the project
will release a substantial amount
of learning resources:




from a variety of subject
areas
equivalent to one
undergraduate degree-level
course (360 credits)
Provide clear evidence of
support for the bid at a senior
central institutional level
Include a substantial institutional
contribution
Photo courtesy of Flickr -steveyb
Who got the Dosh?







Coventry University - Open
Content Employability Project
Exeter University - Open Exeter
Leeds Metropolitan - University
Unicycle
Leicester University - OTTER
Nottingham University - BERLiN
Oxford University - Open Spires
Staffordshire University OpenStaffs
Project Strands
Individual strand
 evidence of expertise in
developing high quality
learning and teaching
activities e.g. through some
form of institutional or
national recognition
 the release of the equivalent
of 30 credits worth of
pre-existing learning
resources
 proposers must own and/or
have permission to relicense
the resources
Photo courtesy Flickr (fotobydave)
Who got the dosh?









University of York - Open Source
Electronics Learning Tools (Java
BreadBoard)
University of Westminster www.multimediatrainingvideos.com
Oxford Brookes University - Food Safety
Education Pilot OER
University College Falmouth - openUCF
Anglia Ruskin University - NumBat
(Numeracy Bank)
University College London - Open
Learning Environment Early Modern Low
Countries History
University of Central Lancashire EVOLUTION: Educational and Vocational
Objects for Learning Using Technology In
Open Networks
University of Lincoln - Chemistry.FM
Bradford University - Open Educational
Resources Project (OERP)
Photo courtesy Flickr – (NZ) Dave
Project Strands
Subject Strand
bids from subject area consortia, led
by an Academy Subject Centre




the release of the equivalent of one
undergraduate degree level course
(360) credits worth of pre-existing
learning resources
commitment to facilitate the
department to open up resources
evidence of intention to support
development of departmental
processes and policies to enable
future open release of resources
contribution is required from
project partners (indirect or direct)
Photo courtesy of Flickr – Amyn Kassam
Who got the Dosh?

SC LLAS, ENG (Royal Holloway), PRS (Leeds), HCA (Warwick) - The HumBox Project

SC ICS (Ulster) - Open Educational Repository in Support of Computer Science

SCEngineering (Loughborough) - Open Educational Resources Pilot

SC UKCME (Liverpool) - CORE-Materials: Collaborative Open Resource Environment –
for Materials

SC Economics (Bristol) - TRUE:Teaching Resources for Undergraduate Economics

SC Physical Sciences (Hull/Liverpool) - Skills for Scientists

SC GEES (Plymouth) - C-change in GEES: Open licensing of climate change and sustainability
resources in the Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences

SC ADM (Brighton) - Open Educational Resources in Art, Design and Media

SC MSOR (Birmingham, Nottingham Trent, Glasgow) - FETLAR (Finding electronic teaching
learning and assessment resources)

SC Bioscience (Leeds)- An Interactive Laboratory and Fieldwork Manual for the Biosciences’

SC UKCLE (Coventry) - Simulation Learning Resources

SC HSAP (London)- Public Health Open Resources in the University Sector (PHORUS)

SC C-SAP (Southampton) - Evaluating the practice of collective endeavour in opening up key
resources for learning and teaching in the social sciences

SC MEDEV (Newcastle) - Organising Open Educational Resources (OOER)
HumBox partners
A Context of growing openness





Open source software
Open standards
Open access
Open science
Open educational content
The Open Content Spectrum
Community attitudes
“It is probably a general
truism that amongst
English scholars In the UK
there has been
a fair degree of scepticism at
the rush to ‘online anything’ ”
Stephenson, 2001
What do English lecturers think?
8.4 In general w ould you be happy to m ake learning
resources that you had produced available to others
assum ing that appropriate credit w as given?
No
12
Yes
92
0
20
40
60
80
English Subject Centre - E-learning Practitioner Survey - 2005
100
What do English lecturers think?
7.1 When choosing resources to use with learners the following issues may also be significant. Please indicate how
significant each issue is to you. (All Practitioners)
Not at all significant
Somewhat
significant
Significant
highly
significant
Costs of use
8% (9)
29% (31)
33% (36)
29% (31)
Reputation of person/organisation producing
resource
5% (5)
23% (25)
32% (35)
37% (40)
Recommendations/comments about the
resource from other teachers
4% (4)
25% (27)
46% (50)
23% (25)
Adaptability (i.e. resource can easily be
changed to suit your needs)
4% (4)
23% (25)
47% (51)
22% (24)
Contextualisation (i.e. resource can easily
be integrated into existing lesson plans or
activities)
1% (1)
15% (16)
50% (54)
31% (34)
Self-containment (i.e. resource can be used
‘as-is’ with learners incorporating learning
outcomes content and activities)
19% (21)
24% (26)
38% (41)
14% (15)
Access for learners (i.e. learners have the
technologies capacities and skills needed to
use the resource)
Other Please give details below
1% (1)
0% (0)
11% (12)
1% (1)
43% (46)
1% (1)
44% (47)
2% (2)
Total Respondents
(skipped this question)
108
8
What do English Lecturers think?
Type of learning material
% of all respondents
reusing this type
N = 57
% of tutors
N = 31
% of postgraduates
N = 26
Primary texts
77.2%
80.6%
73.1%
Secondary research texts
78.9%
74.2%
84.6%
Images
71.9%
80.6%
61.5%
Audio clips
22.8%
32.3%
11.5%
Film/video clips
22.8%
32.3%
11.5%
Course syllabi
24.6%
16.1%
34.6%
lists
70.2%
54.8%
88.5%
Handouts
28.1%
35.5%
19.2%
Lecture notes and/or slides*
8.8%
3.2%
15.4%
In-class activities/exercises
29.8%
32.3%
26.9%
Out of class activities
10.5%
6.5%
15.4%
Exam questions/assignment topics
56.1%
45.2%
69.2%
Reusing Learning Materials in English Literature and Language: Perspectives
from three universities – ( see SC website)
What do English lecturers think
Reuse can be interpreted in a number of ways, and
so respondents were further asked what they generally did
(or would do) with the reused materials: viz.:
a) Incorporate them directly into their teaching
without modifying them in any way: 12.1%
b) Adapt them to fit their own approach: 81.0%
and/or
c) Look at them as a source of inspiration but
develop their own materials: 75.9%
(N = 31 tutors + 27 postgraduates)
What do English lecturers think?
“I find the idea of reproducing someone else’s class or
lecture in total (or having mine reproduced) very distasteful. […]
classes simply don’t work if you’re trying to be someone else;
furthermore, the whole idea is not in the spirit of teaching.”
(Postgraduate in LAMS/Sharing resources study 2005)
“I do this already – and the incentives are really mostly to do with the enormous increase
In collaborations with academics which has resulted ( a virtual llearning community
In which students also share as a result of having their best work web-published...”
National E-learning Practitioner survey - 2005
Why not before?











Critical mass of resources
Poor marketing
Cumbersome depositing
processes
Access issues
Community intransigence
Poor quality
Non peer-reviewed
Copyright/IPR issues
Institutional buyin
Costs
Unsustainable?
Photo courtesy of Flickr (Photo_hunger)
HumBox project benefits







Focus on process
Working across the
humanities
Subject level vs discipline
Pedagogical insights
Departmental profile
Personal engagement
Want to do it better this
time
Visions of of the wider project


Cultural change –
potentially revolutionary
Sustainable processes





which models work?
what is effective?
what is economical?
what is efficient?
what is sustainable?
Photo courtesy of Flickr (i_gallagher)
Potential benefits






You
Your institution
Your subject
Your students
The Humanities
Society
Photo courtesy of Flickr (AA7JC)
Open content – benefits





Marketing opportunity
Curriculum support
Potential to reward good
teaching
“shop window” –
dept/inst/ed system
Empowering students
Photo courtesy of Flickr - posixeleni
Photo courtesy of Flickr - (badjoby)