Live blogging 2pm:

A talk given by Dr Robin Goodfellow for the Teaching and Learning Research Group of the Open University (TLRG).

Robins starts by talking about what literacy is. It is apparently not as obvious as it may seem. Commonly literacy is understood as reading and writing skills. Another definition is that in a digital environment literacy means reading and writing but in relation to the interaction with the technology medium, and this is the field of engagement of the New Literacies approach. Robin’s definition of literacies is even broader than that, it has to do with the various practices involved in academic life, such as writing journal articles, creating power point presentations, dealing with emails, writing blogs, filling in institutional forms, and the list goes on and on. There are technical skills involved in all of these, and using appropriate language for an academic context is also part of the skills required for engagement. What these definitions have in common, however, is that all these tasks involve creating texts. Texts not as only print or written language, but videos, images etc.

All these activities involve not only the person that the texts are directed to but also all the other people involved in using these documents, creating them etc. There are relation of power involved all the way through these practices (e.g. peer review process of accepting a journal article). Literacy then is about social practices, and the kind of texts and kinds of power relations that are envisaged in a digital university. He asks: What kinds of skills constructs the idea of the digital university, given that all universities nowadays are engaged in digital practices?
How can practices such as Facebook-ing, Tweeter-ing, Tagg-in, Second Life-ing be better understood? Research on this is at an ‘embrionic’ phase, he argues.

Robin is now looking into some of the current research that deal with the discourses that are embedded in these new social practices in academia. There are two streams about research in this area: the stream that tries to support the traditional academic practices, and the stream that is keen to foster the use of technologies at the university because the new generation of learners will most likely want to see this happening as they are already used to using technologies.

Robin mentions OpenLearn’s final report in which two types of learners for open educational resources are identified, the voluntary learner and the social learner. Besides the OER reference, he mentions new universities practices related to the web 2.0 and the whole questioning whether the university will remain to be a university. Is the university going to be ‘IT’ centred rather than ‘academic’ centred? He wonders.

The key question for Robin and his project is: What is the relation of established academic discourses and practices to the emergent ones of informal and practitioner learning in digitalised contexts?

In order to investigate this question there is a project called Literacy and the Digital University, funded by ESRC and promoting a seminar series to discuss these issues. Robin mentions another project, the Digital Literacies in Higher Education. This project investigates how digital literacies drive new practices in teaching and learning at the university.

In various universities digital practices penetrate from various sides, but ‘reading’ still seems to be one of the top skills that learners need to do in academia. What is driving pedagogy in these contexts then? It is not the technology but rather the validation of the students’ work that comes from the students and from the institutions themselves, he argues. The institution themselves are creating the digital universities and not only the external influences coming from business, e-commerce, etc. Students also do a lot of writing in the university, and that remains a key skill in academic practice.

Robin argues that the central relation of power in this matter is the ‘persistence of conventional academic values and practices’. He suggests that this is what needs to be looked into in order to understand the emergent practices of the digital university. Why do we need to engage in the understanding of the new practices? Because we need to understand the traditions of what kinds of knowledge are valued and why; we need to understand the new practices that we request our students to do and understand why we do so. Robin questions how these new practices go with the traditional roles that universities traditionally have: at the core of the university is the authority of knowledge, without it there is nothing else the university can offer. Can knowledge be authoritative and accessible at the same time? Universities inform public debate, ideologies and the perception of whose interests are at stake within the construction of knowledge. One of the main reasons for the existence of the university is also the validation of knowledge.

Robin asks what kinds of texts are produced in the new digital scholarship practices. How do we validate this new digital scholarship? These are questions he suggests need attention in academia.

Overall, a talk that provides food for thought at various levels of academic practice!

For more information on the Literacy in the Digital University:

http://literacyinthedigitaluniversity.blogspot.com

11:00 AM

This morning I set myself to explore some technologies to support the upcoming OLnet virtual workshops. The OU itself offers a number of them, such as Cloudworks, Cohere and FM. These are great tools that have been used successfully by a growing number of people worldwide. Nevertheless it’s important for us to keep an eye on what else the world finds interesting, and try to understand how best to make use of these tools for community enabling and to support our research purposes. In less than half an hour of what I would call a ‘very modest’ exploration, within my own social networking links, I found out three new tools. This time I didn’t even have the luxury of doing a Google search! I realised that in order to keep up with the technology available out there I would have to keep both eyes on it and not only one (excuse my Brazilian irony, I hope it makes sense lol). Just by reading some colleagues’ twitter messages and blog posts, as well as by looking at the technologies they use, I found out this whole new universe in front of me, that if I were to seriously explore, it would take at the very least the rest of my day time. Most immediately after this realisation and a quick look at the clock, I gave up searching for new technology and decided to think about how to make the best use of the tools that I already know. But is this the best option? I wondered. Maybe yes, I could get things done timely and effectively! Maybe not…. I could be missing out on better ways of doing things… and I would also be missing on the innovation side of things… the buzz tools, the buzz words, the DIM DIM, the DIGG, the Wave….

What a struggle. I concluded. And this is because I am not the most dummy of the persons when technology is concerned. Ok, I am more of an educationalist than a technologist, but even though… Perhaps the problem is not so much on ‘how’ to use the tools (at least for me), the problem nowadays is that there’s too much out there. It’s a Technology Empire.

Not that it’s necessarily a bad thing, excuse me the techie ones :-) But that this infinity of options can be rather blurring, distracting and time consuming, oh yes it can. And when it comes to OER design, use and re-use, do people actually have that much time to spend on shopping around the options? In fact, perhaps one of the biggest appeals nowadays about shopping around for technology is that it’s free: you can download and play as much as you want with the tools without digging a hole in your pocket. And pardon my rather naive comparison, but I wish make-up and shoes were available in the shops and free in the the same way … ;-)

Now, seriously, how on earth can we expect people to get grips with all that is around (even if it means two or three tools) and still produce wonderful reusable open content materials? And come up with great expertise and stories of success they can share with the world? And convince their institutions, colleagues and students that OER is a really cool thing to do? In most of the interviews with users I conducted for the past three years (teachers and general practitioners) they say something like this: “I love this technology, I really do. I think it is clever and could be really useful. But I sincerely do not have the time to invest in learning how to use it.” And they not rarely add “There’s a sea of options out there, I do not know what to choose and I do not even know where to get started. It’s a pity but it’s reality”. They are not alone. What to say next?

I still do not have a conclusion for my technology matter. It seems I am going round in circles, both counciously trying to get out of the technology trap (I like your term ‘trap’ Patrick) at the same time fascinated by the options these digital era gives me. And to give you an insider view, potential virtual workshop participants seem to prefer to use their own technology (they also develop cool things in their countries, you know?). So I wrote to my colleagues on Facebook, Twitter, Ning, Orkut, MySpace, Skype and Messenger (have I forgotten anything?) and asked for their help; I asked them to suggest me some interesting virtual learning environments and social networking websites that could make great mediation tools to our virtual workshops, something they would like to use. Some of them sent me some total unfamiliar (to me of course), really cool stuff they say, something we could never do without, all open source…. I must try them out… mustn’t I?

I need an aggregator, now I got it! I finally got the inspiration I was after, it only took me a blog post and it came my way. I am off to look for one now. Hum? The virtual workshops? The OER stuff? I think they can wait a little longer, I have something more important to do right now…

Live blogging, 10:00 AM – attendance by webinar

TUDelft University is hosting a seminar on open courseware today, mostly targeting the universities of the Netherlands. The idea is to bring together prospective and existing initiatives to discuss the challenges and the successes of OER provision.

The experience of the Open University of the Netherlands was presented by Robert Schuwer:

Started in 2006, followed by Delft in 2007. They have two institutional initiatives, OpenER and Spinoza. The OUNL is one of the fourteen universities in the Netherlands, and they focus on lifelong learning. With more than 20.000 students, they are celebrating their 25th anniversary this year.

Their aim with OER is to lower the threshold for access to formal HE, at the same time widening and increasing participation in HE in the Netherlands. They focus on offering high quality short open courses developed for self-study, what they call a ‘portal of temptation’ to higher education. They also offer the possibility to bridge informal learning and formal education, by means of official examination options. OpenEr was funded by both Hewllet Foundation and the Dutch Ministery of Education.

Figures of OpenER: the project generated a lot of media attention, attracted near 1.000.000 visitors, provided 25 courses online, 5700 users registered voluntarily, courses cost between 3.000-30.000 Euros each. The project ended formally in June 2008, but is now being incorporated to normal university activities. Approximately 10% of OpenER visitors signed up for formal courses at OUNL.

Three key best practices: Rely on quality awareness of authors (auhtorsd are already used to produce self-study materials); Support of top management (described as ‘crucial’), production of open courses should be a regular task of faculties (not dependent upon a few enthusiastic people).

Sustainability: can an OER project exist without grants? This is a challenge that all initiatives face, says Robert. At OUNL their aim is to incorporate the initiative to their business model. Each course they offer will have an OER (it may be all the course or a piece of it). They aim to be a service-oriented organisation and to offer interactive OER using different media.

Wikiwijs is a national OER initiative in the Netherlands. This national initiative was created due to the observation of the success of initiatives such as OpenER. They aim to offer school books for free and to make more appealing the ‘teaching profession’. It offers a platform where people can upload learning materials onto a repository at the same time being redirected to other existing educational materials (that they nicely call a ‘referatory’). The name of the initiative draws on the philosophy of Wikepedia, where together people create materials. Launching in Dec 2009 with the beta version, focusing on primary, secondary and community college sector. In January 2011 is the delivery of the implementation plan for the years ahead. Materials will be published under the Creative Commons License. Materials will be peer-reviewed.

Nice talk, Robert!

Live blog post, 3pm

continued form previous post:

1) Models of technology:

All projects use a pool of technologies: social networking (e.g. Facebook, Ning, Cloudworks), repositories (OpenLearn, slideshare, flickr), mapping software (e.g. Compendium, Cohere).

2) Models of learning:

Common to all projects: an attempt to blend formal and informal learning;

Discussed: the individual and social dimension; structure and unstructured materials.

3) Models of community:

Various foci: content, social interactions etc. How do these things characterize different types of interactions between learners, how does leadership happen in these spaces?

Common to the projects: personalisation, content-focus, forums, openness. The concept of the collective, learning design (as a community)

4) Models of design:

Different models of design and how these projects can be placed in these models:

4 types of design model:

1) configuration and re-configuration design (creating new patterns from existing ones) LDI, SocialLearn, OpenLearn

2) Inspirational design (Creativity): OLnet, VirtualMphil

3) Effective design (for particular requirements): VirtualMphil, TERGU, Atelier-D

4) Collaborative design & Cooperative design (teams of people doing things): OLnet, Atelier-D

We will continue the conversation at Ning/Cloudworks. Cloudworks is open to the public view. Photos of the day are available at OLnetChannel on Flickr.

Live blogging:

2:15pm

continued from previous post:

What does each project think they can get out of this workshop?

What are the models of learning?

What do we mean by communities? What about collaborations?

In terms of technology, what are the experiences we have in terms of using different tools? How can we pull this knowledge together?

How can we use tools to better communicate and support communities?

How to explore ways of communication between OU existing projects?

What are the dimensions of formal and informal learning within our projects?

In terms of the design of materials, are there any approaches that would help us achieve what we want?

How can we draw on the visual elements of design? And representations in various ways?

Creative thinking and creative learning: how could people make the best of the opportunities that they are given?

Social technologies allow for creativity: what is the effect of this creative on the learning?

How can we build more authentic assessment drawing on users’ personal experiences?

Boundaries: how to manage our identity in social networking spaces?

How can we explore new ways of collaborating between the projects?

3 main themes: communities/collaboration, design/learning, technologies (formal &informal learning)

4 Models: models of learning: models of communities; models of technologies; models of design

Big question: How to explore ways of communication between OU existing projects?

We are now being divided into 4 groups, each group being a gatekeeper of each of the themes above. Our aim is to create a representation of how each of the 7 projects discussed today tackle the models above.

More to follow….

Live blogging:

11:25am

This morning we are gathered together at the Open University, The Design Observatory, Observation Space, to discuss the connections amongst the various OER projects existing in the university. By ‘we’ I mean representatives from projects such as OLnet, Atelier-D, OpenLearn, SCORM, LDI, iSpot, the TERG research group and the OU Library.

We started by ‘building’ a virtual representation of the projects, using traditional technologies such as pens, paper, glue and magazines! Interestingly, most posters have pictures that evoke meanings such as networks, international scope, multiculturality, technologies and mixed age-groups.

Andreia Santos started by talking about the main three elements of OLnet (Open Learning Network): networking, participatory research and fellowships. OLnet is an international research hub that aims to bring together OER researchers, providers and practitioners with a view to promote a space for the sharing of experiences in designing, using and re-using OER. It offers a website and links to tools such as social networking (Cloudworks), a mapping tool (Cohere) and blogging/discussion forums to support community engagement.

Lucia Rapanotti follows by talking about The Virtual MPhil, a research programme offered by the OU computing department aiming to support a diverse community through online technology, bringing together supervisors and students working at a distance. It involves a number of technologies, such as Second Life and Ning.

Andy Lane talks about OpenLearn as a test-bed, a project to develop OER on big scale (big ‘d’). It exposes the OU content and other people’s content , but it is also a platform in which many things can be done. There is the LabSpace and Learning Space, and overall 20000 download of study units every week. OpenLearn is a test-bed for learners, for students, for educators, for the universities. People can do things with it and they do not have to ask us to do so. Research continues to be an important element to the understanding of how useful these materials are for the community and actually what they ‘do’ with them.

Theo Zamenopoulos talks about Atelier-D: Achieving Transformation, Enhanced Learning and Innovation through Educational Resources and Design. Atelier-D is a design studio (of materials), a place for people to work together in collaboration with tutors and other students. It is a social environment for collaboration. The big question for the project is how to use the technologies to understand the dynamics of a traditional design studio. They use a mix of technologies such as Facebook, Second Life, Compendium, Flickr and Elluminate. They aim to bridge the use of these tools and try and create an infrastructure for the students to work with. How to integrate the complexities of the use of all these technologies is one of the project’s challenge (and of OLnet too, I should add!)

The next project showcased is iSpot; a project interested in wildlife and providing a space for the sharing of ideas within a friendly community. It is a place for informal and mobile learning, in which individuals can use the resources provided to observe wildlife and share information. The research side of iSpot is to observe people in their journey, how they use resources and make connections with them, although they say it is a real challenge!

TERG (Technology and Education Research Group) is a research group in the communication systems department, focusing on the use of technologies for learning and on how to learn with technologies. It involves different people at the OU collaborating and sharing experiences.

More on Explore, Map and Build to follow….

Live blog:11:25AM

New OER initiatives are popping out throughout the world. It is often the case that institutions are looking for answers on how to get started as OER providers, and how to get their staff and students involved in the process. Today I am in a meeting with some Dutch universities, which are either already offering content online or considering joining the OCW movement. The questions they ask and discuss in the meeting are, in my view, very relevant for any institution contemplating offering OER. These are:
What is the best audience for OER, learners or teachers?
What sort of support should an institution provide to its staff to design OER?
Should lecturers be involved in publishing the materials as well as developing them? Or should they only concentrate on designing, and the institution provide the infra-structure for publishing?
How to involve lecturers in designing and providing content?
What criteria to use to guarantee that the material offered is of high quality?
What do lecturers have to know before they get started?
With so much technology available, how to decide on the best media for OER provision?
OpenLearn has answers for many of these questions (perhaps all), but “does one size fit all’? By the way, this is one of the favourite questions of our new VC, Mr Martin Bean. And it is also something that OLnet is interested in finding out, evidence of best practices that can serve as a starting point for discussion around these issues. OLnet welcome ideas, experiences and stories to share with the community.

It’s been a while since I last wrote a note in this blog. This is because I had been (and still am!) very busy making corrections in my PhD thesis. I was on a six-month leave from work to make the corrections, and should be finishing them soon. So, as from last week, I am back at OLnet (Open Learning Network) on a full-time basis. It’s exciting! The project has loads of research opportunities and offers a number of ways in which to get involved with it.

I have been working on a research project alongside some of my colleagues, Giselle Ferreira and Alexandra Okada, both of whom also work at the Open University and have some sort of research interest in OERs. We are in that phase of writing the drafts of the research project proposal; discussing ideas and building the communication infrastructure that we need to exchange our messages and our paper work. I plan to be more present here at the blog, as there’s lots to reflect upon when it comes to OER. This project that we are incubating is also filled up with interesting ideas and this blog seems to be a good place for reflection on all those things. Shall be back soon :-)

I have been thinking on how to restructure my PhD thesis to reflect the examiners’ comments. It is a difficult task because I have to use the same data I collected yet within a slightly different perspective. Today I thought I should have a go and try to visualise the whole thesis and check for consistency, connectedness, flow and main ideas. I used Compendium as a tool for drawing a concept map. It is quite difficult to show the connectivity of all concepts because  Compendium does not offer ‘curved lines’,  but even though I tried to represent it (surely this design can be improved, just waiting for enlightenment!). Below is the first draft of the map – I know many other versions are to come. I still have to populate the map with further ideas for the chapters within each node and change most of the arrows to ‘both ways’, rather than the ‘one way’ relationship between concepts. Hopefully this map will be a good working tool for me in this restructuring task.

At OLnet/TEL day workshop. The group discusses what it means to be a researcher 2.0 .

Martin Weller presents his session on Elluminate and and points to the importance of trying and exploring new media and innovative ways of publishing and sharing content.

‘Liberate the archive’ is Martin’s message to the Open University. The community could consider more ‘distributed research’, with a set of interesting research questions generated by the community. Share results in a wiki for example, and blogs to overlap and share parallel conversations.