Nordlet Open Education Summit Wiki

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

The Nordlet Open Education Summit Wiki

Follow our twitter stream with the tag #nordlet

Declaration

  1. Publically funded educational resources should be made available with an open license i.e Creative Commons. Openness should be a category for public funding evaluation
  2. Promote the recognition of OER in accreditation procedures and career development
  3. Coordinate common standards and metadata framework to ensure interoperability, i.e. description of resources including Copyright and License.
  4. Teachers and educators should have competence in the pedagogical use of OER need more word smithing?
  5. National policies should include instruments and incentives promoting creation, deployment and dissemination of OER
  6. It should be possible to link OER to the curricula, reading lists, and tools supporting teacher and learners
  7. Ensure stakeholder involvement in tools and resource development
  8. The Nordic and Baltic Councils of Ministries should form a steering group to monitor and promote Open Education as a collaborative effort across the region – an initial project should identify and implement common focus areas

Annex:

  • Need for connecting national OER registries

 The next steps

  • Using the conference wiki to finalize the declaration
  • Developing the preamble Finalization ~2 week
     

    Action plan

  • Commitment: Virtual Signing
  • How to bring it to the ministries, nordic council, university heads?
  • Input to OECD / UNESCO
  • Developing a white paper (as part of the Nordlet activities)
  • Project activities
  • Making the NB OER Summit an annual event?!

 Whats going on right now - Documentation of the Event

  1. Initial presentation on the Summit here: http://www.slideshare.net/jan.pawlowski/nordlet-free-sharingareapawlowski20111123final

Ebba Ossianilsson's Presentation on International OER initiatives: http://www.slideshare.net/EbbaOssiann/stlm-balticsummit2011-10305506

First Session: Who is who, introduction of participants

  • 24 people participating
  • A lot of different stakeholders - policy, researchers, technologists, educators, teachers, & standardization experts...

Second Session: Experiences from the Nordic and Baltic Countries - Input Statements

 What went wrong, what went well - sharing experiences on OER usage

 Speakers

1. Speaker: David Karnohan, JISC, UK (Guest-Nordic)  - overview of activities in Davids Blog

2. Speaking team: Öystein Johanessen / Ivana Celik, Norway -

 3. Speaker: Daiva Vitkute- Adzgauskiene, OER in Lithuania

 4. Speaker: Petri Lounaskorpi, Finland

5. Speaker, Jan Hylen, Sweden

6. Speaker: Ilmars Slaidins, Latvia

7. Speaker: Jan Hylen, OECD

8. Speaker: Ebba Ossianilsson, presenting OER/OEP results from Unesco projects

Good practices Cases

 Challenges and Issues

Policy Level

  • UK: Problems of sustainability of OER
  • UK: No evidence of academic re-use
  • NO: Public commitment with a substantial and long-term funding!
  • NO: Support for large initiatives on digital content (country cooperation)
  • NO: Budget for public teaching is spent in the open market (industry perspective)
  • NO: Open market possibilities
  • NO: Practitioners need to be involved (eg. teachers), unleashing creativity
  • LT: Involvement of state institutions
  • LT: Harmonizing fragmented institutional activities
  • FIN: strong national intiatives, e.g. for teachers
  • FIN: promoting openness (in terms of attitutes and opportunities)
  • EE: Activating users, e.g. through national competitions 
  • EE: Licensing (enforcing ease of use: e.g. one creative commons license)
  • SE: Lack of national strategic initiatives
  • SE: publishers curious but not fully involved
  • SE: How to come from enhancement level to transformation level
  • LV: National strategy on informatization of Education and Library System
  • LV: Updates required to stimulate collaboration
  • International: new policies on publically funded resources
  • International: Strong focus on government funding for learning materials
  • International Sustainability, quality
  • International: Availability of national strategy
  • International: Opportunities for a common declaration

Technology Level

  • UK: Helpful support for OER Usage OER Infokit, OER Practices
  • NO: High awareness is a key (NDLA >70%, >50% use the offers, matematikk.org around 300000 unique users)
  • NO: High quality is a key 
  • NO: Licensing, metadata, open format need to be clear
  • NO: Dont reinvent the wheel, integrate the best
  • LT: Crowdsourcing, rating, inclusion of non-repository materials
  • LT: How to maintain OER, will they exist tomorrow
  • FIN: Many materials available, available through teachers (teachers assembling materials)
  • FIN: Marketing of creativecommons.org
  • EE: Good support tools, e.g. Edufeedr
  • EE: Template, different editing options, e.g. on the web, mobile
  • EE: Learning analytics for quality / usage understanding
  • EE: Designing platforms for content AND community
  • LV: Inclusion of resources from other sources, e.g youtube, wikipedia
  • LV: Financial support
  • LV: Maintenance of resources, common platforms (updated, maintained, Open Access Directory)
  • International: IPR, connectivity

Pedagogy Level

  • UK: Clear need to share practices 
  • NO: Quality assurance and continuous improvement
  • LT How to integrate OER in educational practices
  • FIN: Learning Objects into PERSONAL curricula
  • FIN: Creating personal didactical interfaces to materials
  • FIN: Training of users such as teachers, students,
  • LV: Full course provision
  • LV: Professional OER creators / quality (correctness, unbiased)
  • LV: update technologies / infrastructures in schools

 Collaboration & User Level

  • NO: Higher Education teaming up for Open Education (Mathematics)
  • NO: Involvement of people
  • NO: People need to have fun
  • NO: Keep momentum, continuous improvement, quality
  • LT: Involvement of stakeholders - state, teachers, pupils, parents, ...
  • LT: Community involvement, combination of professionals and enthusiasts
  • LT: sharing good examples, cross-institution, cross-border
  • FIN: Instructions for colleagues how to use materials
  • EE: Strong connection between research, development, users
  • EE: Involvement of teachers, e.g through competitions
  • EE: Providing training courses for users / teachers (also mini-courses), close feedback loops
  • SE: No national (strategic) initiatives on schools / Higher Education, driven by enthusiasts
  • SE: Lack of sharing culture, low awareness on management level, lack of strategy
  • LV: Initative, Creatity
  • LV: Collaboration and teamwork
  • LV: Trust and copyright, Awareness on IPR/CC
  • LV: Coordination of efforts

Internationalization

  • FIN: Issues regarding curriculum compatability
  • LT: How to exchange good practices across borders
  • EE: How to design new materials for international use, e.g. science simulations including translation tool
  • EE: Complexity (e.g. experiences in LeMill with Finland, Norway, Hungary; however, most important user from Georgia) -> language issues
  • LV: Languages issues
  • LV Cultural differences
  • LV: More visual objects
  • LV Common pedagogica values
  • LV Sharing scenarios
  • LV: Opportunities through a common web culture
  • LV: Translation engines, subtitles?
  • International: language and cultural diversity

 Session 3: Identifying the key challenges

 adressing the main challenges to make Open Education happen in the Nordic Baltic Area

Policy


Pedagogy


Technology


Collaboration / Internationalization

Session 4: Towards an OER Declaration

 Candidates

Concept of the Summit

The final Nordlet conference depends highly on the input of the participants. The wiki is just a simple tool to provide input, ideas, issues for the discussion. Just add your comments, good practices and recommendations, so you share it already in advance with fellow educators and colleagues.

  • Add a good practice
  • Add a success factor
  • Add a recommendation for the Open Education Declaration

Good Practices:

Add a link to a good practice here - who uses the educational offer, why was it successful, what did you learn?

  • OpenScout: A project opening up management content. Even though the scope is European, OpenScout enables educators in education as well as SME training to access management content around the world. One of the key success factors is the provision of tools to modify and change contents. OpenScout on the Web
  • LeMill: Initially and initative between Estonia and Finland, this offer is used by more than 20000 teachers in more than 60 countries. LeMill on the web. 
  • Rather a lot from the UK, and it doesn't fit neatly under these categories but I've got a heavily-linked blog post as a starting point
  • add more here

Success Factors:

What is necessary to make open education successful, just state your experiences here!

  • Finding is the key - if users do not find what they are searching for, they will never use the offer again.
  • Quality is a key - if the offered courses and resources do not fulfill users' expectations, they will not consider open content as an alternative for them?
  • Policy and strategy support: Many users do not really consider open content for their own work. It needs encouragement from the top level (university rectorate, top management, minstry) for example in the strategy.
  • Understanding the range of benefits - it's not just about a virtuous cycle of release and reuse, there are other reasons to do OER and some of these may be more viable in the long term.
  • Add your success factor or recommendation here...

Recommendations: The Open Education Declaration

The Conference will develop the Open Education Declaration consisting of the 10 most important recommendations for policy and practice - add your recommendation here. All recommendations will be discussed and further developed in the workshop.

Policy recommendation candidates:

  1. Open Content should be considered in publically funded projects to improve participation
  2. A Nordic Baltic steering group should be built to monitor and promote share and re-use across the Baltic and Nordic region
  3. Inclusivity and community ownership is essential - be open to different ideas and interpretations.
  4. Add your recommendation here

Implementation recommendation candidates:

  1. Build small but efficient sharing communities
  2. Show Open Educational Practices - this will lead to more awareness and attention and show interested educators how to make use of OER.
  3. Show clear integration steps for the curriculum, this is the main argument against OER
  4. Ensure quality if you are a provider of Open Content repositories
  5. Build strategies and guidelines in your organization how to incorporate OER into the daily operations..
  6. See OER as a natural extension of current practice, not as a new "project" dropped in to the middle of current work.
  7. Add your implementation recommendation here...

 Results of the Stockholm preparation workshop

On Oct. 14th, a small preparation workshop was held in Stockholm with a small group of experts on OER - the result was an unexpectedly huge list of recommendations, here listed in an unreflected format...what is missing still? Still to be sorted...

  • Accreditation authorities: It is mandatory or a criteria for good evaluation of institutions or research centres to use/publish OER resources
  • Open Standards should be used in order to give real access to OER You should be able to use, reuse, mix and remix a resource
  • The author rights should be “addressed”, i.e., the author should be convinced to give his resources away
  • Technical Identification of resources gives a key to sharing
  • Career part of authorship should be separated from the commercial side
  • Make it much easier to attribute resources - people are in a hurry
  • The institution has to support the authors in their authoring and publication process, ensuring that the attribution and carrier aspects of producing resources are fulfilled
  • Make it more “attractive” to reference OER authors - make it cool to build on your peers
  • Unpack the possibilities of accreditation institutions to promote OER practices --teachers should have OER --include work of other colleagues --use international resources
  • Providing OER to the community should be valued in assessment systems as community & research contributions
  • Investigate if the tools work contrary to OER, e.g., using the digital whiteboards to push things to your own “teaching web” –
  • Turn the teachers right to his/her own resources as a means to open up access to resources
  • Give easy control of what is available or not
  • Explore the differences in HE and Schools
  • Evaluation of HE academics and K12 teachers is very different
  • Collaboration support built into the solutions we provide to our institutions
  • Ensure that authorship is not lost - traceability, tools...
  • Cushion the lazy people Incentive from above, collaborative work is needed more than ever
  • Fight “what is free is not good” - or at least prove that they are wrong
  • Learn from the Open Source community and history - the Darwinistic solution to promote OER. The dinosaurs will die (well, then we wait for the next meteorite)
  • Self-flagellate the OER apostles (when the reach a critical mass) 
  • Test 
     the assumptions
  • Globish Observe the differences (levels, domains, etc.) -- some resources travel better then others
  • Language matters - technology (translators) may come to help Make language technology used by the intelligence community free!!!!
  • Bridge up with other communities, e.g., the library sector, the open data community...
  • The Ministries must provide risk funds, to allow schools and universities to take risks supporting OER (allow you to guarantee that you have all rights to a work)
  • Wrong doers should get absolution Explore the danger of being sued if you do anything wrong ➔ explore the barriers from the individual’s perspective OER as a mandatory element of teacher professional practice, teachers education
  • digital (OER) literacy is key to progress
  • Ontology work in the ED domain should be encouraged.
  • Google should be the only solution for finding resources --work with Google --work besides Google --prepare if Google defaults
  • Liaise with the forest department - to unhide the trees from the forest
  • Build OER practices into the socio-technical practices of LET
  • Is OER the top level term (what we want to achieve)? Open access more important than OER?
  • Buy a hen. Make an egg. Get a chicken. Open and Accessible Resources Remember that OER are used within LET - and the context rules
  • What is Open? -- don't forget to have a nice discussion on this question Identify the barriers the end users experience, e.g., language, technology, licence, competence, etc.
  • Easily share stuff with defined groups of people. So, we need some Enterprise stuff in place to support efficient sharing.
  • Standards’ contributions --Groups (G+?) --Sharing interface
  • Recognise the licence etc
  • Aspects of classification
  • Open within boundaries – is it still OER?
  • Quality - community based quality mechanisms
  • Quality assurance close to the end users





 

Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.