Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
OOER OER10
1. Workshop: Organising Open Educational
Resources - OOER!
Suzanne Hardy Dr Jane Williams
Senior Advisor Director eLearning
MEDEV Centre for Medical Education
Newcastle University University of Bristol
www.medev.ac.uk
2. Background
• History of developing and sharing learning resources
in our subject areas
• Already multiple places to choose to deposit
• Academic identities - e.g. UK Council for Teaching
Communication Skills in Undergraduate Medical
Education
• How resources are used in teaching, how they relate
to the curriculum - e.g. Dynamic Learning Maps
(http://learning-maps.ncl.ac.uk/)
• 18 partners ready and raring to go.....
www.medev.ac.uk
3. Partners
• Imperial College • University of Aberdeen
• Keele University • University of Bedfordshire
• London School of Hygiene and • University of Bristol
Tropical Medicine • University of Edinburgh
• Newcastle University • University of Liverpool
• Queen’s University Belfast • University of Nottingham
• Royal Veterinary College • University of Oxford
• St George’s University of • University of Southampton
London
• University of Warwick
www.medev.ac.uk
4. OOER is about:
• Exploring barriers - what is preventing us from
sharing, and trying to overcome that
• Empowering people to overcome these barriers
themselves as they relate to their own contexts
• Surveying
– what’s already out there
– how people find ‘stuff’
– what support exists
• Identifying and sharing good practice across the
sector
• Bringing together expertise from a fluid CoP
www.medev.ac.uk
5. OOER
• Filled a gap allowing us to work together more formally
• Organising Open Educational Resources
• Bid can be downloaded from www.medev.ac.uk/oer
www.medev.ac.uk
7. Group activity - 15 minutes
• Introduce yourself together with one barrier,
challenge or question you have identified in your
context
• What are the top three in your group?
• Feedback
www.medev.ac.uk 7
8. Feedback
• IPR: perceived • Is this going to • Quality issues -
risk, process was take me extra what level to be
barrier time? Lack of able to be
• Licensing: what motivation or shared?
you can and can’t recognition of • The best being
actually do e.g benefits the enemy of the
disaggregating • People barriers good
PDFs, clipart and managing • Programme does
• Lack of time: retro expectation not support
fitting existing • Open licenses - technology
resources to fit sharealike • Branding -
the ‘OER’ shape, implications not marketing tool,
unsustainable recognised but how far to go
• Potential to have with branding
work ‘defaced’ • Lack of use
www.medev.ac.uk 8
9. OOER: Workflow diagram for uploading a resource – what does the project look like?
Star
t
Identify ontent type
Refer to
Image/ Y Y patient
Patient
video/ consent
data?
audio? workflow
N N
N Text?
Y
Refer to Is the
Refer to N
interntiona IPR
IPP
lisation status
workflow
workflow clear?
Y
Refer to
IPR/
copyright
workflow
Collect basic
metadata about
resource
www.medev.ac.uk
10. OOER Project: Workpackage flow diagram for uploading a resource – what does the project look like?
Collect basic
metadata about
resource
Map against
readiness scale
Refer to
Is it a N quality and
quality
pedagogy
resource?
workflow
Y
Refer to
categorisa
tion
workflow
Is the Make any
resource N technical
ready to adjustments
upload? necessary
Y
Choose APIs
and add
appropriate
metadata
www.medev.ac.uk
11. OOER Project: Workpackage flow diagram for uploading a resource – what does the project look like?
Choose APIs
and add
appropriate
metadata
Refer to
resource
discovery
and reuse
workflow
Upload resource
Refer to
upload
workflow
Syndicate
metadata by PIMP
End
www.medev.ac.uk
12. What does this actually look like?
• www.medev.ac.uk/oer
www.medev.ac.uk 12
15. Upload? Share? Publish? Deposit?
• As easy as possible to end user
• API toolkit
– Put stuff
– In
– Many
– Places
– Syndicates resource info
www.medev.ac.uk
17. Summary
• Toolkits available so far (all feedback gratefully
received!):
– IPR and copyright
– Patient consent
– Institutional policy and procedure - available but very draft
form
– See www.medev.ac.uk/oer
• Ready soon:
– Quality and pedagogy
– Resource discovery and reuse
– Metadata and API
– Impact on existing projects – senior manager briefing paper
www.medev.ac.uk
19. Group activity
• We want your feedback!
• Pros and cons of our approach
• What might be the outcomes of this approach?
www.medev.ac.uk 19
20. Feedback
• Consistency of approach - pro and con - how do we
align the subject strand processes with institutional
processes?
• Air of sustainability
•
www.medev.ac.uk 20
21. Our experiences so far....
• All partners are testing the processes and toolkits
• Feedback loop for iterative improvement
• Capturing the process
www.medev.ac.uk 21
25. Summary: demonstrating impact of this and
other related projects
• GMC patient consent guidance (revised)
• eVIP – embedded IPR process
• Policy development e.g. Southampton, RVC,
Warwick, Bristol
• Already working with over 50% of UK schools of
medicine, dentistry and veterinary medicine
• In discussions with the NHS eLearning Repository
www.medev.ac.uk
26. Find out more....
• Showcasing the toolkits at MedBiquitous/eViP
conference at County Hall in London, late April
• JISC conference, London, mid-April
• AMEE in Glasgow, early September
• Workshops and conference - join MEDEV JISCmail
for advance notice www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/
medev.html
www.medev.ac.uk 26