Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.
Dr Namrata Rao1
, Dr Anesa Hosein2
, Dr Philippa Hunter Jones3
DRAFT PRESENTATION
Passing the baton: Trusting students wit...
This presentation is based on the interim findings of the HEA
funded Changing Learning Landscapes project.
Key aims of th...
What are OER?
“The open provision of educational resources, enabled by
information and communication technologies, for con...
What Are Open Educational Resources?
What are Open Educational Resources? (2)
Core attributes:
• Open access
• Open licence
• Open format
• Open software
• OER are commonly deposited and
accessed through content sharing
systems, open source platforms, portals
and repositories...
Where might we find them? (2)
• Web 2.0 technologies play a pivotal role in OER.
• These tools include:
• social networkin...
Why should we bother with them ?
• Sharing knowledge
• Breaking down barriers to education
• Enhancing formal and informal...
Why should we bother with them ? (2)
• Inspiration
• Reputation
• Marketing
• Publishing
• Challenging thinking
• Public g...
How might our students contribute to their
development?
“Our students have changed radically. Today’s students
are no lon...
Phases of the project ( Sept to May 2014)
Key ideas explored in the presentation
 Interest in this pedagogical
approach
 Issues around trusting their
peers’ abili...
Developmental Phase (Sept to Dec 2013)
The study guide repurposed OERs
(particularly videos and audio files)
together wit...
An initial evaluation with students from two
universities from Education and Business
Studies disciplines
Students used ...
Evaluation Phase II (Jan to April 2014)
Further development of the study guides
following feedback from phase I evaluatio...
https://sites.google.com/site/researchmethodsoer/
(Each of prepared one study guide: Interviews, questionnaires and obser...
Participation profile
Order of viewing
resources
The order in which they
reviewed the resources in
60% of the cases was th...
Format and content on the study guides
Similar views on format and
content across the three
different guides
Exceptions:...
Source of Information
“More information on secondary data analysis.”
“Probably more detailed information for areas
that I ...
Presentation of the study
guides
“The presentation of the guide is a bit
dull, more colour would make the guide
more inter...
Other comments
“ Embed YouTube videos.”
“ In the recap questions have a brief outline
of the answers so you don't have t...
Focus groups?
Useful resource to recap and learn about these
research methods.
Study guides had useful questions to help...
Where next?
More responsibility and trusting each other by
co-creating and sharing of knowledge in their
learning probabl...
Passing the baton: trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs - Namrata Rao (Liverpool Hope University),...
Passing the baton: trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs - Namrata Rao (Liverpool Hope University),...
Passing the baton: trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs - Namrata Rao (Liverpool Hope University),...
Passing the baton: trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs - Namrata Rao (Liverpool Hope University),...
Nächste SlideShare
Wird geladen in …5
×

Passing the baton: trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs - Namrata Rao (Liverpool Hope University), Anesa Hosein (University of Surrey) and Philippa Hunter-Jones

935 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

This is a draft of the presentation that will be given at the HEA Social Sciences annual conference - Teaching forward: the future of the Social Sciences.
For further details of the conference: http://bit.ly/1cRDx0p
Bookings open until 14 May 2014 http://bit.ly/1hzCMLR or external.events@heacademy.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
The paper presents the findings of a HEA-CLL funded project focussing on encouraging students to cocreate
and use OERs via interdisciplinary study guides on research methods. Students were asked to
review the tutor-produced study guides developed on a Google website/wiki and to add resources to the
study guide via a comments feature. In focus interviews, they were asked if they were willing to take
ownership of the guides. Students’ views on student-led guides indicated an interest in this pedagogical
approach, but had issues around trusting their peers’ ability to make reliable judgements. These findings
will be explored in our paper.

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung, Technologie
  • Login to see the comments

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

Passing the baton: trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs - Namrata Rao (Liverpool Hope University), Anesa Hosein (University of Surrey) and Philippa Hunter-Jones

  1. 1. Dr Namrata Rao1 , Dr Anesa Hosein2 , Dr Philippa Hunter Jones3 DRAFT PRESENTATION Passing the baton: Trusting students with the co-creation and ownership of OERs 1 Liverpool Hope University, UK 2 University of Surrey, UK 3 University of Liverpool Management School, UK
  2. 2. This presentation is based on the interim findings of the HEA funded Changing Learning Landscapes project. Key aims of the project were to: To develop a research methods study guide based on OERS for student use particularly to reinforce their learning about research methods.  To encourage a culture of use of OERs for student use. The key guiding principles when developing these OERS were to encourage: Experiential learning of research methods via the OERs Reflective learning of research methods via the OERs
  3. 3. What are OER? “The open provision of educational resources, enabled by information and communication technologies, for consultation, use, and adaptation by a community of users for non- commercial purposes” (UNESCO, 2002). • Freely accessible and downloadable resources • Usually released under an open license (Creative Commons) • Often digitized to allow for ease of access, re-use and re- purposing.
  4. 4. What Are Open Educational Resources?
  5. 5. What are Open Educational Resources? (2) Core attributes: • Open access • Open licence • Open format • Open software
  6. 6. • OER are commonly deposited and accessed through content sharing systems, open source platforms, portals and repositories • Some of the more popular sites include: • JORUM • Scribd • Slideshare • Institutional repositories (library?). Where might we find them?
  7. 7. Where might we find them? (2) • Web 2.0 technologies play a pivotal role in OER. • These tools include: • social networking sites (e.g. Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn) • Collaborative tools (e.g. Wikipedia) • Self-expression tools (e.g. blogs, micro-blogs, vlogs, podcasts) • Content tracking tools (e.g. url).
  8. 8. Why should we bother with them ? • Sharing knowledge • Breaking down barriers to education • Enhancing formal and informal learning • Supporting lifelong learning • Widening participation • Capacity building • Quality enhancement • Financial • Impact
  9. 9. Why should we bother with them ? (2) • Inspiration • Reputation • Marketing • Publishing • Challenging thinking • Public good • Efficiency • Ethics • Networking and connectivity
  10. 10. How might our students contribute to their development? “Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our education system was designed to teach… We need to invent digital native technologies for all subjects, at all levels, using our students to guide us” (Prensky, 2001, p1, 6) Hence the study guides using OERs
  11. 11. Phases of the project ( Sept to May 2014)
  12. 12. Key ideas explored in the presentation  Interest in this pedagogical approach  Issues around trusting their peers’ ability to make reliable judgments.
  13. 13. Developmental Phase (Sept to Dec 2013) The study guide repurposed OERs (particularly videos and audio files) together with guided text from the co-investigators. The study guide was developed using a creative common licence and was deployed via a Google Sites.
  14. 14. An initial evaluation with students from two universities from Education and Business Studies disciplines Students used the study guide in a computer labs for about 30 to 40 minutes.  The students participated in two focus group interviews,. Students also filled in an evaluation questionnaire. Students were also encouraged to put in the comments box any comments on the guides and contribute any further resources they wished to. Evaluation Phase I (Dec 2013)
  15. 15. Evaluation Phase II (Jan to April 2014) Further development of the study guides following feedback from phase I evaluations Integration with undergraduate courses. Students review of the study guides via: comment on them via the comments box. And an online evaluation questionnaire. Students were also encouraged to share resources via the comments box.
  16. 16. https://sites.google.com/site/researchmethodsoer/ (Each of prepared one study guide: Interviews, questionnaires and observations.) Introductory page OER FAQs Interviews Observations Questionnaires Evaluation of the resources: General info: University, Level of study, discipline/degree Order they viewed the resources Feedback on content and style Likeliness to leave comments/add resources? Recommendations for improvements What did we find?
  17. 17. Participation profile Order of viewing resources The order in which they reviewed the resources in 60% of the cases was the order in which the resources were presented.
  18. 18. Format and content on the study guides Similar views on format and content across the three different guides Exceptions:  one final year student rated the format and content of the questionnaires ‘3’ One second year student rated lay out of interviews as ‘3’ and content at ‘4’ while for other study guides lay out and content were both ‘5’
  19. 19. Source of Information “More information on secondary data analysis.” “Probably more detailed information for areas that I may be stuck with.” “ Just a bit information and more detailed.” “ Perhaps something that shows what form of research method is not valid/credible/reliable to give the researcher better understanding.”
  20. 20. Presentation of the study guides “The presentation of the guide is a bit dull, more colour would make the guide more interesting to look at.” “Prezi is a good way of making everything look more interesting. the font used is boring, and hard to read.”
  21. 21. Other comments “ Embed YouTube videos.” “ In the recap questions have a brief outline of the answers so you don't have to go back and look through every link to check if you are correct for each section on each page to use recap reminders at the end.” “ also for each page to have a reference list at the bottom of.” “finally for each page to have a pros and cons section for each method.”
  22. 22. Focus groups? Useful resource to recap and learn about these research methods. Study guides had useful questions to help further understanding.  Positive towards lecturers adding OERs to the guide  Mixed views towards students adding to OERs.  Issues of trust/judgement in knowing whether the resources were reliable. Lecturers were better able to provide this judgement rather than their fellow students. These comments provided some indication on how best to create study guides to meet the student needs.
  23. 23. Where next? More responsibility and trusting each other by co-creating and sharing of knowledge in their learning probably will probably not exist. Passive engagement rather than active engagement with creating resources A need for someone to sanction the knowledge which is shared.  These trustees of knowledge will probably continue to be the lecturers/tutors who have done this for generations. OERs to use as an add-on to a tutor Information gathering exercise rather than how to apply it to my context

×