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.

Student access decision maker

1.868 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

A series of questions to help universities and colleges determine which students can be allowed access to online resources

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

Student access decision maker

  1. 1. Student AccessDecision MakerFind out which students should be allowed to accessonline resources. www.eduserv.org.uk
  2. 2. When a student wants access to an online resource licensed by your institutionthere are three possibilities:1. they are your student(s) so you can allow access.2. they are the student(s) of one of your partners so you can allow access if you have a standard licence extension.3. the students association with your institution is too informal or remote to justify access even if a licence extension has been purchased.Its not always easy to work out if a student is technically yours.This tool aims to help you reach a decision.Were assuming the standard Chest licence applies to all the affected onlineresources. However, the guidelines will apply in varying degrees to resourceslicensed on different terms.If you do use the Decision Maker for online resources licensed under differentterms then do take some care interpreting the licence terms and conditions
  3. 3. Q1: Will your institution include the student(s) in its reports to regulatorybodies?For HE institutions “reports to regulatory bodies” means the HESAStudent Record and Staff Collection.For FE institutions it means;• in England, the Individualised Learner Records (ILR) reported to the Information Authority and used by the SFA• in Scotland, the Further Education Statistics (FES) reported to the Scottish Funding Council Knowledge Management Group (SFC)• in Wales, the Lifelong Learning Wales Record (LLWR) reported to the Welsh Assembly Department for Education and Skills• in Northern Ireland the Further Education Statistical Record (FESR) reported to the Department for Employment and Learning.
  4. 4. Interpreting Q1:It would seem to be a reasonable starting point that if the authoritiesconsider someone to be your student then publishers should too.
  5. 5. Q2: Does your institution receive fees or funding for thestudent(s) either from the student(s), or from funding authoritiesor from another educational institution?
  6. 6. Interpreting Q2:If your institution gets funding or payment for this student fromanother institution, then you should record them as your own studenteven if you do not award their qualification.You need to be sure that the funding or payment relates to thestudent and not to educational services or products that you aresupplying to another institution. For example, if you get paid fordesigning and supplying certain course materials to anotherinstitution, the students at that other institution cannot be treated asyour own. Such students may be allowed to access your licensedresources if you have an extension to the standard Chest licence.Some care may be needed if the funding or payment comes from aprivate company as this might imply commercial usage which isprohibited by the standard Chest licence.
  7. 7. Q3: Would you include the student(s) in the user numbers orbanding that determines the fees to be paid for your onlineresources?
  8. 8. Interpreting Q3If you consider that you‟ve paid for this type of student or this groupof students then, ignoring other considerations, this is a reasonableargument for allowing them access.But if the fee you paid wasn‟t intended to cover the student(s), thenyou should be thinking in terms of not granting them access – butyou can take other factors into account before arriving at a finaldecision.
  9. 9. Q4: Will the student(s) receive the majority of their educationor research supervision from personnel engaged by yourinstitution?
  10. 10. Interpreting Q4:If your people will teach or supervise the students, then in isolation,this suggests they can be classified as your students.The people teaching or instructing the student don‟t need to be youremployees, they could be engaged under any sort of contractualarrangement. This recognises the many variations in today‟smarketplace.A „yes‟ answer to this question is not conclusive on its own butcontributes to a positive decision when other answers are taken intoaccount.
  11. 11. Q5: Will your institution provide most of the online resourcesthat the student(s) will use?
  12. 12. Interpreting Q5:Again the answer to this question can‟t be conclusive on its ownbecause of the mobility of students these days and the accessibilityof resources.However, taken along with other positive answers, a „yes‟ answerhere helps build the case that for licensing purposes the student canbe treated as your own.
  13. 13. Q6: Are you happy that the online resources that thestudent(s) must access aren’t part of a resource sharingarrangement or collaboration between your institution andanother educational institution or party?
  14. 14. Interpreting Q6:This question is driving at whether the resources are properlylicensed to your institution. If your institution is the sole licensee, thenclearly there isn‟t a problem granting access to your own students.But you may have concerns where, for example, students from otherinstitutions use the resources. If the resources are in some wayjointly licensed with a partner or partners of your institution, then carewill be needed because access is likely to be limited to specificstudents.If resources are actually licensed by one of your partners then theyneed a licence extension in order to be able to grant access to yourstudents.
  15. 15. Q7: Will the student(s) be entitled to use the same range offacilities and systems offered to all your institution’sstudents?
  16. 16. Interpreting Q7:Here we‟re not just talking about library resources but all sorts offacilities and systems. For example, will this type of student or thisgroup of students have access to all the same ICT systems, sportsfacilities, etc. as all other students? If these students will have morelimited rights than others, or they‟ll be treated in some other waywhich distinguishes them, they probably can‟t be treated as yourstudents without taking other factors into account.
  17. 17. Q8: Are you happy that no other educational institution or partywould consider the student(s) to be theirs rather yours?
  18. 18. Interpreting Q8:This question looks at what the parties themselves feel. It‟s a validsubjective test (called „mutuality of intent‟) that‟s used in manydifferent legal situations, where the views of the affected partieshelps determine the type of legal relationship that exists.Where there are no conflicting claims over the „ownership‟ of astudent, this helps to arrive at a decision to grant access to youronline resources.More generally this question is aimed at provoking thought about thetypes of partnerships that your institution has and the nature of therelationships created between the various students and yourinstitution. It‟s useful to consider what the student might think – doeshe consider himself to be one of your students or does he moreclosely associate himself with another institution?
  19. 19. Q9: Will your institution have overall responsibility for theeducation and conduct of the student(s)? For example ifthere’s a serious instance of misconduct, can your institutiontake disciplinary action directly without reference to any otherparty?
  20. 20. Interpreting Q9:Again we‟re looking at the broader picture. It doesn‟t just relate tomisuse of online resources.If your institution has authority and responsibility for the student‟sacademic progression, personal development, welfare and wellbeing,it‟s indicative of the type of relationship you‟d expect an institution tohave only with its own students.In a serious disciplinary situation your institution could deal with itsown students as it deems fit but this would contrast with a similarsituation where your institution would feel obliged to defer to orconsult with another institution or party before taking action.Again the „direction and control‟ test is used in many situations tohelp determine the nature of the legal relationship that exists.
  21. 21. Your resultsWhether you should treat students as your own depends on a rangeof factors.You‟ll have noticed that not all questions have the same significancebut if you have answered „yes‟ to most questions, it‟s likely that yourlicence allows the student or group of students to access your onlineresources.However you should look at the whole picture to see if on balance it‟sreasonable to treat the students as your own.If you have any doubts you should refer to your legal department orcontact the Chest Team at Eduserv.
  22. 22. Essential licence conditionsEven if you decide that a student can access your licensed onlineresources, terms and conditions apply to the use that the studentcan make of the resources.Some of the key restrictions that you‟ll find in most licences, includingthe standard Chest licence, are:• resources can only be used for educational purposes.• resources can‟t be used for commercial gain.• limitations apply to the extent to which material can be copied or incorporated into other works.• resources can‟t be sold, leased or sublicensed .
  23. 23. Chest Licence ExtensionsIf the Student Access Decision Maker suggests that a group ofstudents would not be allowed access to your online resources undernormal licence terms, access might be allowed if you buy a Chestlicence extension.Extension for Educational PurposesIn essence this allows the students and staff of your partners to useyour online licensed resources for educational activities that involveyour institution and the partner.Extension for Commercial ProjectsThis allows access to incubator companies or knowledge transferpartnerships that your institution is involved with.