DOCSLIB.ORG

Open Educational Practices and Resources

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Open Educational Practices and Resources Open Educational Practices and Resources OLCOS Roadmap 2012 Edited by Guntram Geser Salzburg Research EduMedia Group Project information and imprint Project information and imprint Open e-Learning Content Observatory Services (OLCOS) OLCOS is a Transversal Action funded by the European Commission under the eLearning Programme. Duration: January 2006 – December 2007 Website: www.olcos.org Project partners European Centre for Media Competence, Germany European Distance and E-Learning Network, Hungary FernUniversitaet in Hagen, Germany Mediamaisteri Group, Finland Open University of Catalonia, Spain Salzburg Research, Austria Project coordinator Salzburg Research / EduMedia Group Veronika Hornung-Prähauser Jakob Haringer Straße 5/III, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria [email protected] Tel. 0043-662-2288-405 OLCOS roadmap editor Guntram Geser, Salzburg Research / EduMedia Group, Austria Contributors to the OLCOS roadmap FernUniversitaet in Hagen: Peter Baumgartner and Viola Naust Open University of Catalonia: Agustí Canals, Núria Ferran, Julià Minguillón and Mireia Pascual Mediamaisteri Group: Mats Rajalakso and Timo Väliharju Salzburg Research: Wernher Behrendt, Andreas Gruber, Veronika Hornung-Prähauser and Sebastian Schaffert Graphics & layout Jesper Visser, Salzburg Research 3 Project information and imprint Images Based on copyright-free photographs from www.imageafter.com Print version ISBN 3-902448-08-3 Printed in Austria January 2007 Online A digital version of this report can be freely downloaded from www.olcos.org Copyright This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 2.5 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ Disclaimer This publication was produced by the OLCOS Project with the financial support of the European Commission. The content of this report is the sole responsibility of OLCOS and its project partners. Furthermore, the information contained in the report, including any expression of opinion and any projection or forecast, does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission and in no way anticipates any future policy plans in the areas addressed in this report. The information supplied herein is without any obligation and should be used with the understanding that any person or legal body who acts upon it or otherwise changes its position in reliance thereon does so entirely at their own risk. 4 Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The OLCOS Project Consortium would like to thank the following individuals for their highly valuable contributions: Workshop participants and roadmap reviewers: Graham Attwell, Pontydysgu (Bridge to Learning), SIGOSSEE project; Wales/UK Timo Borst, FernUniversitaet in Hagen, CampusContent project, Germany Peter Burnhill, University of Edinburgh, Edina national data centre, JORUM project, UK C. Sidney Burrus, Rice University, Connexions project, USA Raymond Elferink, RayCom B.V., BAZAAR project, The Netherlands Volker Grassmuck, Humboldt University Berlin, Helmholtz Center for Cultural Technology; Wizards of OS and iRights.info, Germany Jan Hylén, OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, France Keith G. Jeffery, CCLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, UK Thomas Nárosy, eLISA Academy, Austria Petra Oberhuemer, University of Vienna, Center for Teaching and Learning, Austria Oystein Johannessen, Norwegian Ministry of Education, Deputy Director General (ICT Strategy), Norway Georg Pleger, Creative Commons Austria, Austria Niall Sclater, The Open University, Virtual Learning Environment Programme, UK Bernd Simon, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Institute of Information Systems & New Media, EducaNext project, Austria David Wiley, Utah State University, Center for Open and Sustainable Learning, USA Interviews: Asta Bäck, VTT Media and Internet, Finland Jakub Borkowski, Tampere University of Technology, Institute of Communications Engineering, Finland Paula le Dieu, Creative Commons International, UK Erik Duval, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Ariadne Foundation, Belgium David Megías, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, International Master Program in Free Software, Spain Fred Mulder, Rector of the Open Universiteit Nederland, The Netherlands Robert Newcombe, VW Group, Virtual Campus Manager, UK Tere Vadén, Tampere University, Hyper Media Laboratory, Finland Sven Reiter, Raytheon, European Sales Curriculum Manager, Germany Christian Schrack, Pedagogical Institute Vienna, e-Learning Department, Austria Tere Vadén, Tampere University, Hyper Media Laboratory, Finland Llorenç Valverde, Vice-rector of Technology, Open University of Catalonia, Spain Jordi Vivancos, Generalitat de Catalunya, Education Department, Spain Stuart Yeates, University of Oxford, Research Technologies Services, UK Raquel Xalabarder, Open University of Catalonia, School of Law and Political Science, Spain 5 Acknowledgements By acknowledging the involvement of the above individuals and the review process in which they participated, we do not imply their endorsement of the published results of this report. The final responsibility for the content of this report lies solely with the OLCOS Project Consortium and the editor of the report. 6 Table of content Content Project information and imprint 3 Acknowledgements 5 1 Executive summary 12 2 Introduction: Context, objectives and direction of the OLCOS road mapping work 15 2.1 Context and objectives 15 2.2 How can Open Educational Resources make a difference in teaching and learning? 16 2.3 Towards learning experiences which are real, rich and relevant 17 3 The quest for Open Educational Resources 20 3.1 Attributes and expected benefits of Open Educational Resources 20 3.2 Ongoing discussion for a comprehensive definition of Open Educational Resources 21 3.3 Who should create and provide educational content? 24 3.4 Open e-learning resources in a European perspective 31 4 Competences for the knowledge society 37 4.1 An urgent need for a transformation of educational practices 37 4.2 Defining and developing key competences 38 4.3 Priority of open educational approaches 41 4.4 Open educational content value chains 42 4.5 Canned products vs open practices 44 4.6 Activities in the open digital educational content life cycle 47 5 Presentation of OLCOS road mapping results 51 1.1 Introduction: Scope and approach, areas and topics covered 51 1.2 Policies, institutional frameworks and business models 54 5.2.1 Drivers and enablers 54 Policies emphasise educational innovation and organisational change in educational institutions 54 Understanding that ICT-based lifelong learning needs to be promoted through easy access to educational resources 57 International interest in, and funding of, Open Educational Resources 57 Creative Commons licensing is firmly established and increasingly used 58 Healthy competition among leading institutions in providing free access to educational resources 60 Open and Distance Teaching Universities make open self-learning resources accessible as a way to attract students 62 8 Table of content The Bologna Process could become a driver for cross-border collaborative development and sharing of study material in Europe 63 5.2.2 Inhibitors 64 Business models in Open Educational Resources are tricky 64 Lack of institutional policies and incentives for educators to excel in OER 65 Models that build on teachers in the creation and sharing of OER will need to invest considerable effort on training and support 67 Difficulty of finding a balanced approach for open and commercial educational offerings 68 Little innovation by most academic and educational publishers 68 Possible implementation of rigid Digital Rights Management Systems by many organisations 69 5.3 Open Access and open content repositories 72 5.3.1 Drivers and enablers 73 Strong breakthrough of the Open Access principle in academic publishing 73 Funding bodies require that project results be made available through Open Access repositories 75 Widespread tried and tested know-how in distributed open access repositories 76 Open content repositories increasingly surface from the Deep Web 78 5.3.2 Inhibitors 79 Further success of Open Access publishing of academic resources requires overcoming fears of low recognition among researchers 79 Need to reinforce institutional Open Access policies and measures 80 Barriers to making research data openly available for further research and teaching 81 Creation of rich educational metadata will remain costly 82 Ontology-based educational Semantic Webs will have a long way to go 83 5.4 Laboratories of open educational practices and resources 87 5.4.1 Drivers and enablers 87 Free and Open Source software is more widely used in Higher Education and Further Education institutions 87 The “industrialist” Learning Objects approach has run out of steam 89 New systems for creating and handling group-based Learning Designs are in the pipeline 91 Social Software tools and services empower learners to easily create and share content 94 RSS feeds enrich educational portals and learners can subscribe directly to thematic content feeds 96 Licensing open content will become easier through plug-ins for widely used software packages and standardisation of user information 98 Emergence of personal learning environments (“e-learning 2.0”) 98 Semantic applications offer new ways of accessing knowledge resources 100 5.4.2 Inhibitors 101 More cooperation between tools developers and educators is needed 101 Lack of know-how for enabling innovative educational settings to emerge 101 9 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OER: a Field Guide for Academic Librarians Andrew Wesolek Vanderbilt University, [email protected]
    Pacific nivU ersity CommonKnowledge Pacific nivU ersity Press Pacific nivU ersity Libraries 11-2018 OER: A Field Guide for Academic Librarians Andrew Wesolek Vanderbilt University, [email protected] Jonathan Lashley Boise State University, [email protected] Anne Langley University of Connecticut, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.pacificu.edu/pup Part of the Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Recommended Citation Wesolek, Andrew; Lashley, Jonathan; and Langley, Anne, "OER: A Field Guide for Academic Librarians" (2018). Pacific nU iversity Press. 3. https://commons.pacificu.edu/pup/3 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Pacific nivU ersity Libraries at CommonKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pacific nivU ersity Press by an authorized administrator of CommonKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OER: A Field Guide for Academic Librarians Description We intend this book to act as a guide writ large for would-be champions of OER, that anyone—called to action by the example set by our chapter authors—might serve as guides themselves. The following chapters tap into the deep experience of practitioners who represent a meaningful cross section of higher education institutions in North America. It is our hope that the examples and discussions presented by our authors will facilitate connections among practitioners, foster the development of best practices for OER adoption and creation, and more importantly, lay a foundation for novel, educational excellence. Disciplines Library and Information Science | Scholarly Communication | Scholarly Publishing Publisher Pacific nivU ersity Press ISBN 9781945398797 Comments Errata / Version Statement: All formats (print, PDF, epub) corrected 12/04/2018 to reflect editorial corrections not captured in initial publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Education Resources: Current Limitations and Challenges and Its Usage in Developing Countries
    Open Education Resources: Current Limitations and Challenges and its Usage in Developing Countries Mark Peneder and Felix Walcher February 9, 2020 1 Abstract As the cost and demand of higher education is on the rise all over the world, education stakeholders are searching for ways to meet these demands. Open Educational Resources (OER) have the potential to provide these resources and promote lifelong learning. OER are freely accessible resources for educational purpose. OER are considered to reduce the gap between different strata of society and countries. But despite all these opportunities, OER has still not reached its full potential. This might be explained by the fact that it is still in the early adoption state and the number of challenges that OER is still facing at the moment. Often both teachers and students in higher education communities are not aware of the potential of OER. Furthermore, the major content of OER is mostly English language based and global north dominated. OER is free to use but not free to produce and maintain, because of this the perhaps biggest challenge of Open Educational Resources is their sustainability in financial terms. Developing countries have the possibility to benefit even more from existing OER to enhance or develop new teaching material based on the knowledge from all over the world but are also facing additional challenges. The western-dominated resources have to be recontextualized for their cultural context and they are plagued by limited funding, poor internet infrastructure and a general lack of awareness of OER and policies for its use and creation.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Educational Engineering Resources: Adoption and Development by Faculty and Instructors
    Paper ID #18100 Open Educational Engineering Resources: Adoption and Development by Faculty and Instructors Chelsea Leachman, Washington State University Chelsea Leachman is the engineering librarian at Washington State University. She obtained here Masters of Library and Information Science from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in 2011. She has a background in science and engineering. She received her Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science with a minor in geology from the University of Idaho 2007. Ms. Talea Anderson, Washington State University Talea Anderson works as Scholarly Communication Librarian in the Center for Digital Scholarship and Curation at Washington State University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Open Educational Engineering Resources: Adoption and Development by Faculty and Instructors As the cost of higher education has continued to rapidly rise, the associated student government organization at Washington State University successfully launched a Course Material Cost Reduction Initiative1. In their statement to the Provost’s Office, campus bookstore, and Faculty Senate, students called on instructors and administrators to consider strategies for reducing the cost of course materials1. Following discussion, the campus responded by creating a task force, which ultimately recommended, among other things, increased use of open educational resources (OERs) on campus2. The task force made initial forays into open education by matching available OERs to general-education undergraduate courses such as introductory biology, mathematics, and history. However, when addressing engineering courses, they encountered unique problems related to the availability of appropriate resources and the organization of departmental selection processes. For this project, the scholarly communication librarian and the engineering librarian at the university have come together to work with the College of Engineering to address the best way to incorporate OERs into upper-division undergraduate courses for engineering students.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 OCW Impact Report Contents
    2020 OCW Impact Report Contents Reflections • 3 MIT OpenCourseWare: Part of a Global Effort • 4 OCW: Sharing MIT Materials With Learners and Educators Everywhere • 4 Updates From the Dean for Digital Learning • 5 Reaching Learners and Raising Awareness • 6 OCW’s Impact By the Numbers • 7 Thankful for Your Support • 8 Supporting Educators and Sharing Pedagogy • 9 Chalk Radio: A Podcast About Inspired Teaching • 10 In Memoriam • 11 Future Forward: Next Gen OCW • 12 2 Reflections Dear Friend of OCW, The challenges we have all faced over the last eight months have been extreme, ranging from the loss of loved ones to tragic consequences of long standing inequities and injustice, to the emotional toll of uncertainty and isolation in our daily lives. Amidst all of this, we are humbled and inspired to witness the amazing resilience of the millions of students, teachers, and independent learners using OpenCourseWare, and prioritizing learning. We are inspired by the teaching and learning communities that have come together and the resolve of people who continue to pursue knowledge even as they are isolated. Teaching and learning is what we do, together, even when we are apart. Hearing about your experiences doing so during these most trying circumstances is uplifting. We are also profoundly thankful to you, the faculty and contributors to OCW. Your support directly makes our work possible and helps us serve the thousands of learners who use and visit our site every day. We are grateful to count you as part of our growing learning community. As we head into a new academic year, we wanted to look back and share some of the high points as well as a snapshot of where OCW is headed.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Educational Resources: CLIPP
    CLIPP 45 College Library Information on Policy and Practice from the College Libraries Section of the Association of College and Research Libraries Open Educational Resources COMPILED AND WRITTEN BY MARY FRANCIS Association of College and Research Libraries A division of the American Library Association Chicago, Illinois 2021 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Stan- dard for Information Sciences–Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48- 1992. ∞ Library of Congress Control Number: 2021931261 Copyright ©2021 by the Association of College and Research Libraries. All rights reserved except those which may be granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Printed in the United States of America. 25 24 23 22 21 5 4 3 2 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS VII CLS CLIPP COMMITTEE 1 INTRODUCTION 3 LITERATURE REVIEW AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 13 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF SURVEY RESULTS 18 Appendix A: Survey With Results 50 Appendix B: Resources From Survey Respondents 51 Appendix C: Sample Documents 53 OER RESOURCES LISTS: 53 Elon University Belk Library Elon, NC 53 Open Educational Resources (OER) 54 Furman University James B. Duke Library Greenville, SC 54 Open Educational Resources (OERs): OERs by Subject 55 FACULTY STIPEND PROGRAMS: 55 Connecticut College Charles E. Shain Library New London, CT 55 Open Educational Resources Grant Program 55 Rationale 56 Program Design 56 Application Categories 59 Fort Hays State University Forsyth Library Hays, KS 59 Open Textbook Grant
    [Show full text]
  • Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: Analysis of Contributor’S Commits in Apache Software Foundation Projects
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: Analysis of Contributor’s Commits in Apache Software Foundation Projects Tadeusz Chełkowski1☯, Peter Gloor2☯*, Dariusz Jemielniak3☯ 1 Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland, 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Cognitive Intelligence, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America, 3 Kozminski University, New Research on Digital Societies (NeRDS) group, Warsaw, Poland ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. * [email protected] a11111 Abstract While researchers are becoming increasingly interested in studying OSS phenomenon, there is still a small number of studies analyzing larger samples of projects investigating the structure of activities among OSS developers. The significant amount of information that OPEN ACCESS has been gathered in the publicly available open-source software repositories and mailing- list archives offers an opportunity to analyze projects structures and participant involve- Citation: Chełkowski T, Gloor P, Jemielniak D (2016) Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: ment. In this article, using on commits data from 263 Apache projects repositories (nearly Analysis of Contributor’s Commits in Apache all), we show that although OSS development is often described as collaborative, but it in Software Foundation Projects. PLoS ONE 11(4): fact predominantly relies on radically solitary input and individual, non-collaborative contri- e0152976. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152976 butions. We also show, in the first published study of this magnitude, that the engagement Editor: Christophe Antoniewski, CNRS UMR7622 & of contributors is based on a power-law distribution. University Paris 6 Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, FRANCE Received: December 15, 2015 Accepted: March 22, 2016 Published: April 20, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Chełkowski et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Courseware and Developing Countries: Building a Community
    Open Courseware and Developing Countries: Building a Community This is the report of The Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries, convened in Paris by UNESCO 1-3 July 2002, with the support of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and organizational assistance from the Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, WCET. Participants mapped a collaborative course, involving colleges and universities from around the world, for the productive and creative use of openly shared educational resources. In advance comments, summarized in an appendix to this report, they provided insights on the potentials and complex issues involved. This report was prepared by John Witherspoon. Contents The Forum Report Introduction: Open Resources 3 Defining the Concept 3 Prospects and Issues 3 Open Educational Resources: Turning a Concept into Reality 5 Design of an Index/Database 5 Creating a Globally Viable Infrastructure 6 2003: From Concept to Operation 6 Appendix A: Overview of the MIT OpenCourseWare Initiative 7 Appendix B: Summary of Forum Participants’ Preliminary Papers 11 Appendix C: Participants and Organizational Representatives 15 2 Introduction: Open Resources In spring 2001 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced that over a half- dozen years the substance of virtually all its courses would be posted on the Web, available for use by faculty members and students around the world, at no charge.1 Just over a year later – before material from its first course was online – MIT’s OpenCourseWare concept became the focus of a new international community. This emerging consortium was organized to evaluate, adapt, use, and develop open resources for its members’ many cultures and diverse languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access, Open Education and Open Data
    IFMSA Policy Proposal OpenAccess, OpenEducation and OpenData Proposed by Team of Officials Presented to the IFMSA General Assembly August Meeting 2017 in Arusha, Tanzania Policy Commission • Eleanor Parkhill, Medsin-UK, [email protected] • Kim van Daalen, IFMSA-The-Netherlands, ifmsa-the- [email protected] • Alexander Lachapelle, Liaison Officer for Medical Education issues, IFMSA, [email protected] Policy Statement Introduction Scholarly material is essential for research and education. Committing to making high value scientific knowledge accessible to researchers, scientists, entrepreneurs, and policy makers worldwide is a major step towards better health outcomes for all. Yet, cost barriers or use restrictions often prevent health professionals worldwide - and scientists from all areas - from engaging or consulting the very materials that report scientific discovery. Over the past decade, Open Access, Open Education & Open data have become central to advancing the interests of researchers, scholars, students, businesses and the public. Yet, while consulting academic journals, students face limited access to published research output, data and papers because of very high fees. The high cost of academic journals restricts the use of knowledge. A vast amount of research is funded from public sources – yet taxpayers are locked out by the cost of access. IFMSA Position The International Federation of Medical Students’ Associations (IFMSA) firmly believes in the importance of openness across all published research outputs (including among others, all online research output, peer-review and non-peer-reviewed academic journal articles, conference papers, theses, book chapters, monographs). Thereby IFMSA believes in the ability of openness to improve the educational experience, democratize access to research and education, advance research and education, and improve the visibility and impact of scholarship.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Annotation Enabling Collaboration for Open Learning
    Social Annotation Enabling Collaboration for Open Learning Jeremiah H. Kalir University of Colorado Denver Email: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0003-2302-7989 Twitter: @remikalir 1 Social annotation enabling collaboration for open learning Jeremiah H. Kalir• Learning Design & Technology, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado, 80204, United States Abstract Collaboration is a conceptually ambiguous aspect of open education. Given inconsistent discussion about collaboration in the open education literature, this article suggests collaboration be defined and studied as a distinct open educational practice. A theoretical stance from the discipline of computer-supported collaborative learning helps conceptualize collaboration as processes of intersubjective meaning-making. Social annotation is then presented as a genre of learning technology that can productively enable group collaboration and shared meaning- making. After introducing an open learning project utilizing social annotation for group dialogue, analysis of interview and annotation data details how social annotation enabled three group-level epistemic expressions delineating collaboration as intersubjective meaning-making and as an open educational practice. A summative discussion considers how the social life of documents encourages collaboration, why attention to epistemic expression is a productive means of articulating open learning, and how to extend the study of collaboration as an open educational practice. Keywords: annotation; collaboration; computer-supported
    [Show full text]
  • Peer Production: a Form of Collective Intelligence.” in Hand- Book of Collective Intelligence, Edited by Thomas Malone and Michael Bernstein
    THIS IS A PRE-PRINT VERSION OF PUBLISHED BOOK CHAPTER.THE FINAL VERSION AND THE REFERENCE TO USE WHEN CITING THIS WORK IS: Benkler, Yochai, Aaron Shaw, and Benjamin Mako Hill. (2015) “Peer Production: A Form of Collective Intelligence.” In Hand- book of Collective Intelligence, edited by Thomas Malone and Michael Bernstein. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Peer Production: A Form of Collective Intelligence Yochai Benkler ([email protected]) HARVARD UNIVERSITY Aaron Shaw ([email protected]) NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY Benjamin Mako Hill ([email protected]) UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION Wikipedia has mobilized a collective of millions to produce an enormous, high quality, encyclopedia without traditional forms of hierarchical organiza- tion or financial incentives. More than any other twenty-first century collab- orative endeavor, Wikipedia has attracted the attention of scholars in the so- cial sciences and law both as an example of what collective intelligence makes possible and as an empirical puzzle. Conventional thinking suggests that ef- fective and successful organizations succeed through hierarchical control and management, but Wikipedia seems to organize collectively without either. Legal and economic common sense dictates that compensation and contracts are necessary for individuals to share the valuable products of their work, yet Wikipedia elicits millions of contributions without payment or owner- ship. Intuition suggests that hobbyists, volunteers, and rag-tag groups will not Parts of this chapter build upon work published in: Y. Benkler, Peer. “Production and Cooperation” forthcoming in J. M. Bauer & M. Latzer (eds.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar. 1 2 be able to create information goods of sufficient quality to undermine pro- fessional production, but contributors to Wikipedia have done exactly this.
    [Show full text]
  • OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES Presented By: Robin Robinson and Millie Gonzalez Why OER
    KEEPING HIGHER EDUCATION AFFORDABLE INCREASING STUDENT ENGAGEMENT OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES Presented by: Robin Robinson and Millie Gonzalez Why OER 2013 study by the College Board Government estimates, average Accountability Office, student attending a textbook prices have four-year public college increased by 82 percent will spend $1,200 on in a 10-year period books and supplies Why OER 94% (who 48% text 65% not didn’t buy book cost buying text book) influenced required concerned course text book about selection grades The research group estimates that each student could save about $100 per class by using open textbooks. Those are textbooks with open copyright licenses that are available free online, although students who want printed versions would pay modest fees. http://mitopencourseware.wordpress.com/2014/01/28/open- textbooks-could-help-students-financially-and-academically- chronicle-of-higher-ed/ U.S. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) AGENDA What is OER? How does it apply to FSU? Context How does it benefit students? Challenges and Opportunities Creative Commons Impact to Faculty and Students Application Next steps Discussion Resources Thank you What is OER? Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning or Source material research materials that Educational material created under an are in the public offered freely and open license can be domain or released with an intellectual open to anyone under reused, improved, property license that license agreements redistributed or re- allows for free use, mixed adaptation, and distribution. Source: UNESCO http://en.unesco.org/ -(United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization) WHAT IS OPEN ACCESS VS OER? Open Access OER Open access refers to free, OER encompasses a broader set of immediate, online availability of digital content which works well in research articles with rights to an online or blended learning these articles.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Opencourseware Publication on Higher Education Participation and Student Recruitment
    Impact of OpenCourseWare Publication on Higher Education Participation and Student Recruitment Stephen Carson1, Sukon Kanchanaraksa2 (not shown), Ira Gooding2, Fred Mulder3, and Robert Schuwer3 1Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US 2Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, US 3Open Universiteit, The Netherlands Abstract The free and open publication of course materials (OpenCourseWare or OCW) was initially undertaken by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and other universities primar- ily to share educational resources among educators (Abelson, 2007). OCW, however, and more in general open educational resources (OER),1 have also provided well-documented opportunities for all learners, including the so-called “informal learners” and “independent learners” (Carson, 2005; Mulder, 2006, p. 35). Universities have also increasingly docu- mented clear benefits for specific target groups such as secondary education students and lifelong learners seeking to enter formal postsecondary education programs. In addition to benefitting learners, OCW publication has benefitted the publishing institu- tions themselves by providing recruiting advantages. Finally enrollment figures from some institutions indicate that even in the case of the free and open publication of materials from online programs, OCW does not negatively affect enrollment. This paper reviews evaluation conducted at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (JHSPH), and Open Universiteit Nederland (OUNL) concerning OCW effects on higher education participation and student recruitment. Keywords: Distance education; open learning; open universities; distance universities; higher education; e-learning; online learning 1 In this paper we will use one reference term only (OCW), just for convenience and being fully aware of the definition differences between OCW and OER. Only in the case of possible misun- derstanding we refer specifically to OER.
    [Show full text]