2011.11 OERu Recommendations for quality accreditation model

Dunedin Group 3: Discussions on quality accreditation model

Criterion of national accrediting is not sufficient
Individual accreditation of courses
Don’t want to close the OERu model to institutions --- anchor partners can endorse the course at other institutions based on a framework.
Tools: Commonwealth Framework, EFQUEL protocols.
Endorsement of courses for transfer credit -- OERu proposed process for endorsement
DE student has already done courses.
Use COL TQF as a staring point for definitions and protocols for OERu partners.
Consider request to COL for guidance and support for adapting modifying the TQF for the OERu initiative.
Recommendation -- member institutions need to avoid practices that would jeopardize stature or accreditation status.
Piece in the middle between the course and credential? How will the model work re academic volunteers, pedagogy. How do we scale the model cost-effectively.

Provide comments and list quality related issues which the OERTen will need to address

How do you identify a particular individual across accreditation boundaries?
Another issue – Would anchor partners recognise Accreditations Issued by each other – IE if I had X by Partner A ) (not in my country) – and took it to Partner B (in my country) … would they ‘give me credit for it’ ?
This calls for some international transfer standards and processes - invent the process - a nice design challenge
COL's model is one, but there needs to be others that are more technically-enabled to make OERu a nimble, agile entity

What models or approaches do virtual participants recommend for cross-border course articulation and credit transfer?

It has to be a combination of elements: Course content, demonstrated competence, a syllabus to aim at and measure competence against.

What high-level model or approaches are recommended for consideration by OERTen partners?

Take a look at challenge driven innovation as a model of practice for change on a large scale