Searching for "open educational resources"

open educational resources

A Librarian’s Guide to OER in the Maker Space

http://www.slj.com/2015/10/technology/a-librarians-guide-to-oer-in-the-maker-space

OER are teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits sharing, accessing, repurposing—including for commercial purposes—and collaborating with others. They include educational materials, such as lesson plans, games, textbooks, tests, audio, and video. In addition to being free, these no-cost teaching and learning materials are available online for anyone to use, modify or share with others.This use, reuse, and remixing of instructional materials is a powerful way to gain and share knowledge. Because OER are customizable and flexible, they can be used very effectively to support students to achieve their learning goals.

OER Commons is a digital library where educators can find resources to develop, support and amplify their maker space practices. The site is searchable by subject, grade level or standard. Users can also filter results to include topics, such as activities and labs, games, videos, lesson plans, and interactive tools.

Related blog entry:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/02/22/libraries-and-learning/

OER resources

The last IRRODL, Volume 19, Issue 3, contains numerous publications on OER (Open Educational Resources) from around the globe:

Arul Chib, Reidinar Juliane Wardoyo
Janani Ganapathi
Stacie L Mason, Royce Kimmons
Robert Schuwer, Ben Janssen
Adrian Stagg, Linh Nguyen, Carina Bossu, Helen Partridge, Johanna Funk, Kate Judith

 

++++++++++++++
more on OER in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=open+educational+resources

Open Education Southern Symposium

Opening Education: Using Open Education & Open Pedagogy to Transform Learning and the Educational Experience

The Open Education Southern Symposium at the University of Arkansas is accepting proposals for its day and a half conference on Monday, Oct. 1 and Tuesday, Oct. 2, 2018. Proposals should fall into one of three categories:

o    Presentations: 15-20 minutes (Please allow 10 to 15 minutes for Q&A after presentations.)

o    Panel Discussions: 45 minutes (Please allow 10 to 15 minutes for Q&A after panel discussions.)

o    Lightning Talks: 7 minutes (A short 5 to 10 minute Q&A will follow all lightning presentations.)

We welcome proposals from organizations, including colleges and universities of all sizes, community colleges, special libraries, and any others involved in open education and open pedagogy. We’re particularly interested in proposals with topics centering around:

o    Adoption and creation of resources

o    Publishing platforms

o     Best practices and the impact of Open Education

o    Creative Commons, copyright, and other licensing

o    Marketing and advocacy

o    Pedagogy and student success, including K-12 highlights

o    Instructional design strategies for OER

o    Trends and innovation

o    OER in community colleges

o    Tenure, promotion, and OER

o    OER community building

o    Assessment

o    Inclusion and diversity in Open Education

Submission Details:

  • The deadline for submissions is May 31, 2018 at 11:59 p.m. Central Time. The submission form can be found on our eventwebsite under the Call for Proposals page.
  • Proposal social media summaries should not exceed 240 characters (spaces included).
  • Proposal abstracts should not exceed 2000 characters or approximately 500 words.
  • All submissions will be evaluated based on the relevance of the topic and potential to advance the thinking or practice of Open Education and Open Pedagogy. Proposal reviewers will use similar proposal criteria to those being used by the Open Education Conference and OER18.
  • The planning committee will deliver decisions by June 29, 2018.
  • Presenters will be asked to accept or decline invitation to present by July 13, 2018.
  • All presenters will be required to register for the symposium.

If you have any questions, please contact Stephanie Pierce, Head of the Physics Library at the University of Arkansas (sjpierc@uark.edu), or the Open Education Southern Symposium Planning Committee.

Registration

Registration is $99 for our day and a half event on October 1 & 2, 2018 at the University of Arkansas. Registration covers full participation for both days, shuttle service between the hotel and event location, lunch on the first day, snacks and beverages, and event goodies.

Register now!

For more information, check out the symposium website:

https://openedss.uark.edu

oped ed resources

The open educational resources movement is redefining the concept of online textbooks

The movement is also aiming to reimagine and democratize learning technologies.

By SUZANNE BOWNESS | April 4, 2017

+++++++++++++
more on etextbooks in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/04/06/e-textbook-ad-hoc-team/

educational resources

Guide to the Best Homeschooling and Unschooling Resources

http://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2014/06/17/guide-to-the-best-homeschooling-and-unschooling-resources/

* Khanacademy.org

* Hippocampus.org

* Free online college courses can be found on many sites, with directories available at sites like MIT’s Open Coursework Consortium. Big players in the open-educational resources movement include Coursera and EdX, which offer MOOCs. FutureLearn is UK-based, with free online courses from UK and international universities. More information about these can be found in MindShift’s guide to free quality higher education, plusprevious collections of open educational sites and resources.

* iTunes University

* Audiobooks Free public-domain audiobooks, read by volunteers, can be found at librivox.org. (Print versions of public-domain books are available at Project Gutenberg.)

 

 

 

differences between classroom, blended, online and open learning

10 key takeaways about differences between classroom, blended, online and open learning

http://www.tonybates.ca/2015/02/21/10-key-takeaways-about-differences-between-classroom-blended-online-and-open-learning/

Tony Bates shares his thoughts on the difference

differences between classroom, blended, online and open learning

Chapter 10 of Tony Bates online open textbook, Teaching in a Digital Age:

– See more at: http://www.tonybates.ca/2015/02/21/10-key-takeaways-about-differences-between-classroom-blended-online-and-open-learning/#sthash.MOymkn9F.dpuf

More on F2F, blended/hybrid and online learning in this blog:

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=blended

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=hybrid

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=online+learning

2014 Best Educational Web Sites

Best Websites for Teaching & Learning 2014

http://www.ala.org/aasl/standards-guidelines/best-websites/2014

Media sharing

Digital Storytelling

Manage and organize

Social Networking and Communication

Content Resources

Curriculum Collaboration

 

textbooks transformation

https://www.wired.com/story/digital-textbooks-radical-transformation/

Pearson “digital first” strategy.
My note: see our postings
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/07/09/pearson-selling-us-k12-business/
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2019/04/19/change-in-the-k12-sector/
It also enables Pearson to staunch the bleeding caused by an explosion in the second-hand market. A company called Chegg launched the first major online textbook rental service in 2007; Amazon followed suit in 2012. Both advertise savings of up to 90 percent off the sticker price.

But more technology doesn’t always mean better results. Within K-12 learning environments, the digital divide means that students in low-income and rural households have less access to reliable internet and fewer connected deviceson which to complete the online portions of their homework. And while Pearson’s initiative applies only to textbooks in higher ed, the shift to digital has implications at the collegiate level as well.

Just as traditional software has a thriving open source community, textbooks have Open Educational Resources, complete textbooks that typically come free of charge digitally, or for a small fee—enough to cover the printing—in hard copy. And while it’s not an entirely new concept, OER has gained momentum in recent years, particularly as support has picked up at an institutional level, rather than on a course by course basis. According to a 2018 Babson College survey, faculty awareness of OER jumped from 34 percent to 46 percent since 2015.

One of OER’s leading proponents is OpenStax, a nonprofit based out of Rice University that offers a few dozen free textbooks, covering everything from AP Biology to Principles of Accounting. In the 2019–2020 academic year, 2.7 million students across 6,600 institutions used an OpenStax product instead of a for-profit equivalent.

The knock against OER is that, well, you get what you pay for. “One faculty member told me only half-jokingly, that OER is like a puppy that’s free. You get the free puppy, but then you have to do all the work,” says Cengage’s Hansen, who argues that traditional publishers provide critical supporting materials, like assessment questions, that OER often lacks, and can push more regular updates.

By virtue of being free, OER materials also heavily skew toward digital, with hardcover as a secondary option. (Or you can download the PDF and print it out yourself.) The same caveats about efficacy apply. But at least OER doesn’t lock you into one digital platform, the way the major publishers do. OpenStax alone counts around 50 ecosystem partners to provide homework and testing support.

Like and Subscribe

Or you could always split the difference.

That’s the territory Cengage wants to stake out. Late last summer, the educational publishing behemoth—it announced a planned merger with McGraw Hill in May; the combined company would surpass all but Pearson in market capitalization—rolled out Cengage Unlimited, a “Netflix for Textbooks” model that rolls all textbook rentals and digital platform access into a single rate: $120 for a semester, $180 for a full year, or $240 for two years. Almost a year in, the US-only program has a million subscribers.

My note: more about Cengage and McGraw Hill in this blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/22/textbook-model/

this added Sept 13, 2019:

 

+++++++++++++
more on textbooks in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=textbooks

ICT information and communication technology literacy

The Role of Librarians in Supporting ICT Literacy

May 9, 2019,

https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2019/5/the-role-of-librarians-in-supporting-ict-literacy

Academic librarians increasingly provide guidance to faculty and students for the integration of digital information into the learning experience.

TPACK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Many librarians have shied away from ICT literacy, concerned that they may be asked how to format a digital document or show students how to create a formula in a spreadsheet. These technical skills focus more on a specific tool than on the underlying nature of information.

librarians have begun to use an embedded model as a way to deepen their connection with instructors and offer more systematic collection development and instruction. That is, librarians focus more on their partnerships with course instructors than on a separate library entity.

If TPACK is applied to instruction within a course, theoretically several people could be contributing this knowledge to the course. A good exercise is for librarians to map their knowledge onto TPACK.

Large dotted line circle labelled Contexts. Inside large circle are three smaller circles overlapping to create a Venn diagram. Pink Circle: Technological Knowledge (TK). Blue Circle: Content Knowledge (CK). Yellow Circle: Pedagogical Knowledge (PK). Pink/Blue overlap: Technological Content Knowledge (TCK). Blue/Yellow Overlap: Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). Yellow/Pink Overlap: Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK). Center where all 3 overlap: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK).

ICT reflects the learner side of a course. However, ICT literacy can be difficult to integrate because it does not constitute a core element of any academic domain. Whereas many academic disciplines deal with key resources in their field, such as vocabulary, critical thinking, and research methodologies, they tend not to address issues of information seeking or collaboration strategies, let alone technological tools for organizing and managing information.

Instructional design for online education provides an optimal opportunity for librarians to fully collaborate with instructors.

The outcomes can include identifying the level of ICT literacy needed to achieve those learning outcomes, a task that typically requires collaboration between the librarian and the program’s faculty member. Librarians can also help faculty identify appropriate resources that students need to build their knowledge and skills. As education administrators encourage faculty to use open educational resources (OERs) to save students money, librarians can facilitate locating and evaluating relevant resources. These OERs not only include digital textbooks but also learning objects such as simulations, case studies, tutorials, and videos.

Reading online text differs from reading print both physically and cognitively. For example, students scroll down rather than turn online pages. And online text often includes hyperlinks, which can lead to deeper coverage—as well as distraction or loss of continuity of thought. Also, most online text does not allow for marginalia that can help students reflect on the content. Teachers and students often do not realize that these differences can impact learning and retention. To address this issue, librarians can suggest resources to include in the course that provide guidance on reading online.

My note – why specialist like Tom Hergert and the entire IMS is crucial for the SCSU library and librarians and how neglecting the IMS role hurts the SCSU library
Similarly, other types of media need to be evaluated, comprehended, and interpreted in light of their critical features or “grammar.” For example, camera angles can suggest a person’s status (as in looking up to someone), music can set the metaphorical tone of a movie, and color choices can be associated with specific genres (e.g., pastels for romances or children’s literature, dark hues for thrillers). Librarians can explain these media literacy concepts to students (and even faculty) or at least suggest including resources that describe these features

My note – on years-long repetition of the disconnect between SCSU ATT, SCSU library and IMS
instructors need to make sure that students have the technical skills to produce these products. Although librarians might understand how media impacts the representation of knowledge, they aren’t necessarily technology specialists. However, instructors and librarians can collaborate with technology specialists to provide that expertise. While librarians can locate online resources—general ones such as Lynda.com or tool-specific guidance—technology specialists can quickly identify digital resources that teach technical skills (my note: in this case IMS). My note: we do not have IDs, another years-long reminder to middle and upper management. Many instructors and librarians have not had formal courses on instructional design, so collaborations can provide an authentic means to gain competency in this process.

My note: Tom and I for years have tried to make aware SCSU about this combo –
Instructors likely have high content knowledge (CK) and satisfactory technological content knowledge (TCK) and technological knowledge (TK) for personal use. But even though newer instructors acquire pedagogical knowledge (PK), pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) early in their careers, veteran instructors may not have received this training. The same limitations can apply to librarians, but technology has become more central in their professional lives. Librarians usually have strong one-to-one instruction skills (an aspect of PK), but until recently they were less likely to have instructional design knowledge. ICT literacy constitutes part of their CK, at least for newly minted professionals. Instructional designers are strong in TK, PK, and TPK, and the level of their CK (and TCK and TPK) will depend on their academic background. And technology specialists have the corner on TK and TCK (and hopefully TPK if they are working in educational settings), but they may not have deep knowledge about ICT literacy.

Therefore, an ideal team for ICT literacy integration consists of the instructor, the librarian, the instructional designer, and the technology specialist. Each member can contribute expertise and cross-train the teammates. Eventually, the instructor can carry the load of ICT literacy, with the benefit of specific just-in-time support from the librarian and instructional designer.

My note: I have been working for more then six years as embedded librarian in the doctoral cohort and had made aware the current library administrator (without any response) about my work, as well as providing lengthy bibliography (e.g. http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/08/24/embedded-librarian-qualifications/ and have had meeting with the current SOE administrator and the library administrator (without any response).
I also have delivered discussions to other institutions (http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/12/embedded-librarian-and-gamification-in-libraries/)
Librarians should seriously consider TPACK as a way to embed themselves into the classroom to incorporate information and ICT literacy.

+++++++++++++
more about academic library in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=academic+library

more on SAMR and TRACK models in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/05/17/transform-education-digital-tools/

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/07/29/mn-esummit-2015/

OER more proof needed

Open Educational Resources: What We Don’t Know

Regan A. R. Gurung November 14, 2018

https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/views/2018/11/14/what-we-dont-yet-know-about-open-educational-resources-opinion

One of the first reviews of OER efficacy tests included 16 studies (Hilton, 2016). The abstract stated that “ … students generally achieve the same learning outcomes when OER are utilized.”

All nine studies had major confounds such as method of instruction (e.g., comparing OER sections that were taught online or blended versus traditional texts used in a face-to-face class). Some studies switched exams between comparisons and some changed course design (e.g., went to a flipped model). Most study authors acknowledged that the type of textbook was not the only factor that changed.

There is promise in the use of OERs. Beyond the “as good as” findings, some studies suggest they could be beneficial. Jhangiani, Dastur, LeGrand and Penner (2018) found students using print OERs (versus digital) did better on one of three exams tested (no differences on the other two, still good news). Is the promise of OER fulfilled? There is not enough to know yet. We have to be tighter in how we assess the efficacy of such materials in particular and higher education innovation in general.

Methodological challenges abound in classroom research on teaching, as learning is complex. Many challenges can be overcome with strong research design. There are benchmarks for conducting research on teaching and learning (Felton, 2013; Wilson-Doenges and Gurung, 2013), and it would be prudent for more educational researchers to use them.

+++++++++++
more on OER in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=oer

1 2 3 9