OER11: Cases of OER use: aspects that contribute to successful adoption.

Cloud created by:

Patrick McAndrew
12 May 2011

Renee Fisher and Jim Greeno
Looking at reuse of OLI material in Higher Educationking an Activity Theory view of the use of OER as practice.
Preliminary conclusions:
1. Assume OER will be used differently by different instructors. (Also confident that can also be said of learners). Some dependence on subject domain of the OER.   
2. So do not design for single use. Anticipate various uses – a “pedagogical pachage” rather than a course.
3. Detail may add or detract E.g.: conceptual explanations facilitate some and detract for others
Interviewees – 3 elementary statistics instructors, 2 web design. Interviews every 1-2 weeks. Total of 40 interviews (30-45 minutes). Stats courses use OLI. Web design focussed on web based tools.  Different way in which topic functions.
Three issues for productivity and usability:
1. Alignment of OER conceptual focus with previous emphasis
2. Match OER topics and sequence with previous syllabus
3. Affordances and constraints on instructor-student interaction (e.g. OER providing feedback but only works for some sorts of use)
In this talk looking at conceptual focus examples:
1. Instructor functioning as a mentor: preparing students to join the community of practice (cf Lave and Wenger). Aim that students join the community of professional web designers). Encourage innovation/exploration. Develop connections through e.g. professional visits, attend conference.
2. Instructor functioning as a coach: sees students as cognitive apprentices (Collins).  Web resources are tools to help reach goals.
3. Knowledge as problem solving and concepts. Use “wordy” text to explain which software illustrates. OLE leaves it to the technology. [Not previous practice as had emphasised the calculation.
a. Preferred by one and will adopt less computation in the future
b. Works ok for some students – produces a different distribution of results.
c. Augmented the material to meet curriculum
Q&A
Does this mean that we should not seek perfection in OER?
An interesting area to go to with this research to investigate what it means for uptake and adoption. How fully developed and specified should things be for release.
How is this different in an OER context?
Interactive approaches can be more intrusive – tracking by the instructor can cause coercion.

Renee Fisher and Jim Greeno from Carnegie Mellon University (and OLnet). Looking at reuse of OLI material in Higher Education taking an Activity Theory view of the use of OER as practice.

Preliminary conclusions:

  1. Assume OER will be used differently by different instructors. (Also confident that this can also be said of learners). Some dependence on subject domain of the OER.   
  2. Need to not design for single use. Anticipate various uses – a “pedagogical pachage” rather than a course.
  3. Detail may add or detract E.g.: conceptual explanations facilitate some and detract for others

Interviewees – 3 elementary statistics instructors, 2 web design. Interviews every 1-2 weeks. Total of 40 interviews (30-45 minutes). Stats courses use OLI. Web design focussed on web based tools.  Different way in which topic functions.

Three issues for productivity and usability:

  1. Alignment of OER conceptual focus with previous emphasis
  2. Match OER topics and sequence with previous syllabus
  3. Affordances and constraints on instructor-student interaction (e.g. OER providing feedback but only works for some sorts of use)

In this talk looking at conceptual focus examples:

1. Instructor functioning as a mentor: preparing students to join the community of practice (cf Lave and Wenger). Aim that students join the community of professional web designers). Encourage innovation/exploration. Develop connections through e.g. professional visits, attend conference.

2. Instructor functioning as a coach: sees students as cognitive apprentices (Collins).  Web resources are tools to help reach goals.

3. Knowledge as problem solving and concepts. Use “wordy” text to explain which software illustrates. OLE leaves it to the technology. [Not previous practice as had emphasised the calculation.

a. Preferred by one and will adopt less computation in the future

b. Works ok for some students – produces a different distribution of results.

c. Augmented the material to meet curriculum

Q&A

Does this mean that we should not seek perfection in OER?

  • An interesting area to go to with this research to investigate what it means for uptake and adoption. How fully developed and specified should things be for release.

How is this different in an OER context?

  • Interactive approaches can be more intrusive – tracking by the instructor can cause coercion

Extra content

Embedded Content

Contribute

Contribute to the discussion

Please log in to post a comment. Register here if you haven't signed up yet.