OCWtool and dScribes – Pedagogy, Social Practices, and Tools

1. OCWtool and dScribes – Pedagogy, Social Practices, and Tools What a long, strange trip it’s being

2. OCW and Sakai Simple Assumptions – OCW is a good idea – see Hal’s talk and JSB slides below Sakai installations can/should become generators of OCW content on a very large scale – mutually beneficial to the academy and the OCW community How would we do that?

3. Publication Pipeline Digital Course Materials: (1) IP Management (2) Tagging OCW Categories (3) Exporting from CTools (4) QA and Review eduCommons tools UM OCW Web Site or other Institutional Repository Teaching Research Raw Course Content Vetted OCW Content Sakai Putting an OCW Pipeline in the LMS - OCW Publishing from Sakai Initial MIT OCW process has difficulty scaling. How can we support this process?

4. Sakai Resources Area – unorganized vis a vis OCW

5. Overall Goals (Vancouver) • Make Sakai an Open Educational Resources engine; a generator of OERs as OpenCourseWare sites • Make the process of OCW site generation economically feasible • Make it simple for faculty to tag and export their class materials to an OCW site • Couple Sakai and eduCommons (OCW site creation tool) to automate the process

6. Current Problems • Too expensive to create OCW sites • Little or no automation • No connection to CLE (eg, Sakai) • Only large institutional commitment can get an OCW site off the ground • Roadblock to growing the OCW community

7. Sakai in ProductionOpen Educational Resource Engines Text 4000 courses each year at U Michigan alone; more at UNISA (U South Africa)

8. Overview of ProcessBased on Hybrid Publishing ModelIntegrated with MIT Teaching Process Plan Build Teach/Manage Publish Support Upstream foundational prep Content development Live teaching and course administration Open publication Renewal, archiving, and preservation • Recruit faculty • Plan TEACHING version of course • Plan OCW version of course • Review existing content • Identify & resolve IP (except permissions) • Track IP by object in system • Collect/capture existing content • Build content into LMS sections/templates • Enter metadata • Create commissioned works • Process permission requests & make IP edits • Update/supplement materials • Post announcements • Assign, track, grade student work • Interact (faculty-student and student-student) • Perform course QA • Obtain faculty approval • Export to OCW site • Update course content • Archive course content HYBRID INTEGRATED PROCESS Color legend BLACK Normal teaching process BLUE Required for open publishing ORANGE Former OCW steps eliminated • Spec course/map content • Reformat/clean up/ restructure/contextualize • Enter content into CMS • Perform authoring QA • Perform final edit • Perform production QA • Respond to user feedback • Review/refine metadata (MIT Library) • Edit course for errors ELIMINATED STEPS MIT-Supported LMS Archive MIT-supported option Assume 80% participation Dspace Archive • Robust authoring • Easy capture • Easy update • Document managemt • Restricted teaching matls • Open teaching matls • Import/export • Offline authoring • Self-publishing • Multiple views • Course admin • Publishing tools • Embedded tracking code • Embedded license terms • IP tracking • Metadata tagging • Hi-design display templates • Preview capability • Downloadable ZIP files • Discussion group suppt • Archiving • Workflow ExternalOCWAudiences Publish OCW External Web Site ARCHITECTURE OVERVIEW MIT Faculty & Teaching Assistants - OR - Teach MITStudents Harvest for archi ving or publishing Individual/local supported option Assume 20% participation Individual Teaching Web Sites

9. OCW Tool – Support for the Hybrid Process • Support for Tagging in Sakai – • Helping faculty, students create tags (metadata) for: • IP status – Creative Commons+ • OCW Navigation – MIT Categories • Export – Choose what to put on • OCW site OCW Tool

10. We Like MIT’s Hybrid Model a Lot (Atlanta) Plan Build Teach/Manage Publish Open publication Content development Upstream foundational prep • Perform course Quality Assurance • Obtain faculty approval • Export to OCW site Live teaching and course administration • Recruit faculty • Plan TEACHING version of course • Plan OCW version of course • Review existing content • Identify & resolve IP (except permissions) • Track IP by object in system • Collect existing content • Build content into LMS sections or templates • Enter metadata • Create commissioned works • Process permission requests & make IP edits • Update and supplement materials • Post to email, wikis, blogs, announcements, discussions, forums, IM • Assign, track, grade student work • Interact (faculty-student and student-student) through all channels above BLACK Normal teaching process BLUE Required for open publishing

11. Build Teach/Manage Publish Planning Phase Includes “Training” for Faculty and Support Staff in Colleges and Departments Planning & Training Upstream foundational preparation All done within LMS faculty are already familiar with IP Object tracking comes along with the use of the system Training has additional benefits in educating faculty on IP Support staff distributed throughout university • Recruit faculty • Plan TEACHING version of course • Plan OCW version of course • Review existing content • Identify & resolve IP (except permissions) • Track IP by object in system

12. Build Teach/Manage Publish Teaching and Managing Course Materials All done within LMS faculty are already familiar with IP Object tracking can proceed throughout course Materials/Objects can be tagged with OCW categories (Syllabus, Lecture Notes, Assignments, etc.) wherever they come from, wiki, blog… Increasingly, objects tagged by system, eg, Assignments • Update and supplement materials • Post to email, wikis, blogs, announcements, discussions, forums, IM • Assign, track, grade student work • Interact (faculty-student and student-student) through all channels above • Collect existing content • Build content into LMS sections or templates • Enter metadata • Create commissioned works • Process permission requests & make IP edits

13. Tagging Course Resources RDF tagging in the future

14. Add or remove tags within specific site User can modify tags to fit their needs – But start with MIT tag set to encourage standard approach to navigation of resulting OCW site

15. Build Teach/Manage Content Development and Teaching Proceed Throughout Course Period This is a dynamic, emergent, iterative process • Take advantage of that – OCW Tool is available to add tags anytime in development or teaching • Capture IP and OCW category metadata as class proceeds, as new material is developed • Perhaps have a student ‘scribe’ who has permissions set to add metadata – when new document appears, they tag it – perhaps make this a class activity, develop student incentives (e.g., better future access) • Have system flag incomplete data on objects – direct faculty or students to places of needed metadata

16. How Do We Get This Done? • This currently costs MIT ~$10-20,000 per course • We can get some faculty to do it • But we need to get adoption supported by the administration, at first or eventually – top-down and/or bottom-up • And we need to support the faculty • How do we do all this?

17. 3 Incentive Structures Students Administration Faculty

18. 3 Incentive Structures for Adoption • Administration – why Chuck Vest adopted OCW, modified for non-first-movers, with local context added… why department heads… • Faculty – why your faculty would adopt, for exposure, then student demand… • Students – all the reasons on the following slide All 3 have initial, then self- and mutually-reinforcing aspects as the system becomes embedded, woven into fabric of university - similar to adoption of Sakai/CLE in the first place Can we build any of these, or other, incentives into the software?

19. Digital Scribes Basic idea – get students to help the faculty in courses they are taking – students become digital scribes – DScribes – and get access rights to OCW tool area, taking part of load off faculty Leveraging the students’ interests, creating student incentives Developing student incentives: (emerging list) Do to get access to course material in the future; Do to get closer access to TA’s and teachers; Become part of the online DScribe community; Do for the greater good; Do to learn better; Get a Tshirt; etc… 1 hour course credit for UG DScribes – learn a bit about IP, media management, how to use tools 3 hour course for Grad DScribes II – leveraging interest among SI students – more complete coverage of IP, multimedia, lecture capture, synopsizing, notes project – general ‘lite editing for web’ Goal of having the DScribes provide much of the ongoing infrastructure for the actual cleaning, tagging and preparing for export – two tiered: DS II’s help DS’s – maybe GSI’s, alumni

20. But, we hadn’t really looked hard enough at students (especially students), faculty and the teaching-learning process in the web eraSo, by way of working with students in my SI 514 ‘semantic tech and OCW’ class this past winter/spring… …a few moments with John Seely-Brown, Chris Anderson and some ideas on emerging pedagogies

29. Think of OCW as Helping to Fill Out the Long Tail With Quality Material,and,dScribe Activities asIntroducing People in the Academy to Models of Mentoring That are Fundamentally Participatory, as OS Models Are

30. Long Tail of Education Why fill it up • Where a lot of the action is • Personalization of learning examples and objects largely happen in the tail What about the head • Future Learning Environment has both – well populated head and tail

31. Students as Co-Producers • Emphasizes Mentor/Apprentice relationships • Participants in learning process • Not jugs to be filled up with knowledge • Povides value to faculty – students know the tech • Think of as a ‘Participatory Pedagogy’

32. HE Institutions Meeting needs of HE - for innovation and adoption of emerging methods Increases importance of teaching in HE – contributes to re-balancing vs research Creating virtuous cycles in HE institutions, and outside – publish, feedback, improvements, re-publish…thus, Showing the importance of “Open” in/to HE – introduction to web 2.0 dynamics in education Bridging formal and informal ed – classroom and self-learners OCW Communities Mobilizing our established communities of scholars Best place, in ways only place, for generation of enough material to fill the long tail Universities are one place where the mentors are…we are teachers Showing the importance of “Open” in/to HE – introduction of web 2.0 dynamics in education Bridging formal and informal ed – classroom and self-learners Higher Education Institutions and OCW Community -Both Benefit

33. Why Do OCW?3 Incentive Structures for Adoption • Administration – why Chuck Vest adopted OCW, modified for non-”first-movers”, with local context added. Why Provosts, Deans, Department Heads… • Faculty – why your faculty would adopt – e.g., for exposure, then student demand, new form of publication, build into evaluations… • Students – see following slides… All 3 have initial, then self- and mutually-reinforcing aspects as the system becomes embedded, woven into the fabric of university – sometimes similar to adoption of Sakai/CLE in the first place

34. Digital Scribes – making this work Basic idea – students help the faculty in courses they are taking – students become digital scribes – dScribes – get access rights to OCW tool area, taking large part of load off faculty Why would students do this? – (see following early research) Leveraging the students’ interests, creating student incentives: Developing student incentives: (emerging list) Do to get access to course material in the future; Do to get closer access to TA’s and teachers; Become part of the online dScribe community; Do for the greater good; Do to learn better; Get a Tshirt; etc… 1 hour course credit for UG dScribes – learn a bit about IP, media management, how to use tools 3 hour course for Grad dScribes II – leveraging interest among SI students – more complete coverage of IP, multimedia, lecture capture, synopsizing, notes project – general ‘lite editing for web’ Goal of having the dScribes provide much of the ongoing infrastructure for the actual cleaning, tagging and preparing for export, using the tools – two tiered: dS II’s help dS’s – maybe GSI’s, alumni in future

35. Students as Apprentices and Co-Participants in Teaching/Learning • What happens when we encourage, support and integrate student efforts, as we are in the dScribe/OCW project • We are encouraging both students and faculty to engage in more participatory pedagogies • The faculty (and admin) incentives we know a good bit about • The students’ incentives we don’t know much about, but they have, and quickly recognize they have, multiple, significant positive incentives • This mobilization of new incentive structures parallels results of the recent research done on open source (see S. Weber), which shows that complex artifacts can be constructed by distributed communities, with unexpected incentive structures, in an open environment • Investigating such alternative incentive structures is driving the social part of the development of the S-OCW tool • And cracking the last nut of sustainability – cost

36. dScribes • Catalyzing new relationships between faculty and students and among students – institutionalizing collaborative apprenticeships at the earliest possible level • Finding places the students can become “peers in the process,” can become contributors, using their ‘digital native’ tech knowledge and experience • Introducing faculty gently, in the process of their teaching, to new (digital/social) technologies and their use, with the help of the students • New partnership construction in the academy • Practical engagement as a part of learning at all levels, building it into the learning process – Dewey would be pleased

37. Building a dScribe Community -Building into a Curriculum • What a student might do if taking the 1-credit OCW dScribe class: --Learn about IP issues related to making course materials available--Learn about useful metadata standards relevant to open courseware (eg, marking up citations to enable use of open URL resolvers; ).--Publish a course they are taking - work with faculty to --get permissions; generate substitutions where necessary  --mark up citations; perhaps find open versions  --tag materials, using MIT's navigation categories, or faculty’s • What students might do in a 3-credit SI 501 dScribe class: --Go into more depth on IP, metadata issues above --Learn about effective, easy, low-touch capture, production, editing of A/V, include screencasts, podcasts, videocasts of lectures, discussions--Learn about appropriate techniques for capturing different types of events, from interviews to lectures to conferences, includes setting up wikis or other tools for distributed capture of events and their activities --Mentor students taking the 1-credit OCW dScribing class – to Learn, Teach --Act as dScribe for some of their own classes, and for professional event (e.g., a conference)

38. “dScribes” at U Toronto • Potential example of ‘student volunteerism’ on scale we need • The University of Toronto engages hundreds of students each semester to take notes for classes, those notes then are put online and used to support accessibility to the course materials for those who need them (like hearing or sight impaired students).  • The students are recruited and trained each semester – largely by each other; some staff, but not much • Is this an existence proof for the idea of large dScribe communities at universities? Maybe.

39. Baseline & Investigation of Benefits vs IncentivesUMichigan Survey – April 2007 • All instructional faculty, including graduate student instructors, were invited to respond (n=7,244). There was a 20% response rate to the survey (n=1,481). • A random sample of 25% of the student body, stratified by college/department, was invited to respond (n=8,790). There was a 26% response rate to the survey (n=2,281).

40. Student

41. Student

42. Student

43. Student

44. Student

45. Student

46. Faculty

47. Faculty

48. Faculty

49. Faculty

50. Faculty