[okfn-br] Fwd: [Oer-community] Week 3 OER mapping summary

Sábado Dezembro 15 12:54:34 UTC 2012

This is a summary of the discussions of the mailing list on Open
Educational Resources, previously  runned by UNESCO.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Susan D'Antoni <susandantoni em gmail.com>
Date: 2012/12/7
Subject: [Oer-community] Week 3 OER mapping summary
To: oer-community <oer-community em athabascau.ca>

Dear Colleagues,

The summary of our last week of discussion is attached.  This week
Sara had assistance from Pete Forsyth of Wiki Strategies
(http://wikistrategies.net/).

Now we will move on to preparing a draft final report to share with
you for your comments - and for your own use in any follow up action
with your colleagues, contacts and networks.

My very best,

Susan

=======

Mapping the Landscape of OER Institutional Initiatives

Summary of Week Three (25-30 November 2012)

Reflection and next steps

Design of an “OER World Map”

Organisation

Resources available/needed

Next steps

This document provides an overview of key points addressed during week
three of the Athabasca University supported OER mapping discussion
(https://unescochair.athabascau.ca/oer-mapping-exercise), building on
the interaction of the previous weeks.

* Week one summary:
https://unescochair.athabascau.ca/oer-mapping-exercise/summaries/week1

* Week two summary:
https://unescochair.athabascau.ca/oer-mapping-exercise/summaries/week2

Please feel free to share these summaries among your colleagues and networks.

= 1. Why Map the OER Landscape? (Revisited) =

Discussion of this topic remained active during the third week, with
clarification of issues and building toward some consensus.
Participants largely agreed upon the following principles:

* A geographical map is a simple and effective way to represent
information about OER initiatives.

* A map could promote a social network, connecting people (even those
isolated) and organisations to each other, serving a variety of ends –
e.g. a “LinkedIn for OER.”

* A map could similarly connect OER users, not just developers and advocates.

* As an awareness tool, a map could help people identify others with
whom they might collaborate, avoiding duplication of effort and
identifying local resources.

* A map could visually highlight networks of activity around different
aspects of OER. (As one participant noted, maps can “help us ‘see’
things we may not otherwise have seen

and to make connections we might not otherwise have noticed”).

* A map could track trends: for example, the growth in the number of
OER initiatives as well the number of initiatives terminated.

* While collecting a substantial amount of information about
initiatives might be desirable, it would be appropriate to start with
a modest approach: if basic information were collected first,
additional information and links could be added later.

= 2. Design of an “OER World Map” =

Specific ideas and examples were examined that are indicative of the
type of design that could be envisioned.

* A collaborative approach (“crowdsourcing”) using a data entry form
would allow adding and updating entries in a uniform way, contributing
to the quality of the information.

* A number of new technical and visual models were cited and explored,
with links provided.

* Whatever representation is chosen must be free/open, scalable and
interoperable (where possible), to anticipate future linkages and
growth.

= 3. Organisation =

Several members of the OER community volunteered preliminary
suggestions about how they might contribute in a manner appropriate to
their own context(s), which indicates the beginning of a network.
There is particular enthusiasm in areas where English is not the
primary language.

* There are offers to translate mapping discussion outcomes into other
languages, and to share them with regional or language-based networks.

* There are offers to act as representatives, collecting and
organising data, and liaising with appropriate regional bodies.

* Several suggest leveraging the principles and outcomes of the UNESCO
World OER Congress (2012) to engage governing bodies and international
organisations in this project.

= 4. Resources Available/Needed =

The general acceptance of collaboration/crowdsourcing as a primary
means of keeping OER map information up-to-date suggests that
individuals will themselves serve as resources – and providers of
resources – going forward.

Members were generous in offering information about the wide range of
existing OER repositories, and repositories of repositories, which
would be relevant to this map.

= 5. Licensing Issues Arising =

A lively discussion about the merits and problems associated with
various licensing provisions emerged, described by one participant as
"one of the most productive discussions on licensing alternatives and
their implications."  It is not possible to capture the richness of
the interaction in one paragraph, but the following points are
indicative of the range of the discussion.

* The opening post described a scenario in which it is a practical
impossibility to seek permission from the many authors of
non-commercial (NC)-licensed work that has evolved over many years.

* There was discussion of "enclosure", i.e. the act of placing
restrictions on access to one instance of an otherwise free work; and
whether provisions like NC impact this dynamic.

* Tuition-bearing courses were likened to paid movie theaters, with
free resources compared to the "free" popcorn inside (described in a
related blog post).

* The lack of a clear, shared understanding of what is meant by
"commercial use," and the associated problem of seeking clarification,
was discussed.

* The significance of perspective (e.g. of the learner, the author,
etc.) was noted, leading to proposed definitions of OER that reflect
the author's beliefs, rather than prescribing specific license terms.

= 6. Next steps =

Ongoing discussions within the list suggested these areas of concern:

* A set of basic information was put forward for a start, with several
items added by participants, continuing the reflection on what
information is “essential” as opposed to “nice to have.”

* Participants were encouraged to hold local discussion in their own
areas, using/translating any of the documentation that would be useful
for that purpose.

* Linkages with related communities were strongly recommended and
could be established, e.g. with Open Source Software and
Libraries/Librarians, and particularly with Open Access.

* A draft report will be circulated to the community for comment.

= 7. Week Three Conclusions =

Week three discussion built on that of the preceding weeks, clarifying
outstanding issues and continuing a wide range of related
considerations. The conversation concluded with a general affirmation
of the topic of the discussion – that the OER community could work
together to begin to build an OER world map.

This summary © 2012 Sara Frank Bristow and Pete Forsyth. Available
under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

--
Susan D'Antoni

Advisor to the President
International OER Initiatives
Athabasca University
Canada
tel 613 232 6496
skype iiepsusan

_______________________________________________
Oer-community mailing list
Oer-community em athabascau.ca
https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/listinfo/oer-community

-- 
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
Open Knowledge Foundation Brasil
-------------- Próxima Parte ----------
Um anexo não-texto foi limpo...
Nome: OERMapping_Week3_Log.docx
Tipo: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Tamanho: 37341 bytes
Descrição: não disponível
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-br/attachments/20121215/a1133ae9/attachment-0002.docx>
-------------- Próxima Parte ----------
Um anexo não-texto foi limpo...
Nome: OERMapping_Week3_Log.odt
Tipo: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text
Tamanho: 32488 bytes
Descrição: não disponível
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-br/attachments/20121215/a1133ae9/attachment-0004.odt>