Talk:OER Handbook/educator/Compose/Creating a curriculum
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|Educator as Learner||3||05:44, 29 June 2008|
|Position of this section?||7||06:25, 28 June 2008|
|Compose and Adapt||1||05:25, 28 June 2008|
The point I was trying to make here was: Collaborate for Quality.
So, could we revise:
- Educator as Learner
- OER can be a valuable source for professional development. Ask among members of the OER community regarding trusted resources. As you begin learning from an OER, its quality should become more apparent. Be aware that some topics may not be covered sufficiently by OER (though that may change over time) and you have to look for other sources.
- Collaborate for Quality
- Whether you are composing OER for learners, for fellow educators, or for personal growth, developing OER is a learning experience in itself.
- Opportunities for social construction and peer production abound. Being part of a community of educators can greatly enhance your work.
- Engage with the community in all phases of the OER development cycle, even the early phases of composition. There will certainly be peers with common interests facing the same sorts of challenges.
- The result will be improved quality of the OER you produce, improving the overall quality of the global pool of OER.
<ref> tags exist, but no
<references/> tag was found
Originally (circa February or so) I titled the page "Creating a curriculum" and someone added "including for oneself as a learner" or something along these lines. So the first part of the page deals with an educator planning for learners and the last subheading is related to the educator composing an OER for their benefit (professional development).
You could argue that since the page has become less about curriculum and more about quality generically, that the professional development part is out of place.
There have been a few issues with the edits made on this page.
- Use of "we." I know it seems only natural, since we're using "you" throughout the document. But it is not used elsewhere in the document, so I would prefer it not be used.
- Paragraph structure. The revisions made to this page tend to be single sentences spaced out as individual paragraphs. This style is not consistent with the rest of the handbook.
- References to alternate OER life cycle diagrams. Currently we have one prevailing model for OER development. Even though the current outline can be improved upon, we need to have the document stabilized for a print version. Referencing alternate diagrams will result in confusion.
- References to socio-constructivist teaching. It's true that teaching using OER lends itself to socio-constructivist methods; however, given how large large of a topic socio-constructivist methods are, it should be largely left out. Any mention of socio-constructivist should take place in the Use OER chapter.
Given what I've mentioned above I believe the section should be reverted to my last version (and I'm open to revisions from there).
EDIT: I've added the Benkler pieces to the "Additional Reading" section in the Conclusion.
I suggest placing this earlier, perhaps at the beginning of the "Compose" (was "Build" which was "Create") section, unless we include a special chapter on Learning Design with OER which could precede the Build chapter. Scoping such a chapter will be vital as its scope defines the scope of the book as a whole.
At this stage, there will not be a learning design chapter (too broad). But I still think that "Creating a Curriculum" would precede "Adapt" and possibly even "Compose".
Social Bookmarking also seems misplaced to me. On the one hand it could be part of "Compose" but it also suggests another section/chapter which is represented in the LifeCycle (images recently updated): "Collaborate". Here we could talk about social software and Web 2.0. (i.e. move some of the existing references to these things into a "Collaborate" chapter and flesh it out.
I understand why you think it should go earlier, but I would prefer to keep it in either Adapt or Compose. As I stated on a separate talk page (I don't remember where off hand) this question is largely a matter of how we distinguish between adapting and composing OER (citing the mobile access section as an example). I've placed an issue in the tracker (1.12), and I would like to continue this conversation because my mind isn't made up and I think it would help to discuss it.
As for the social bookmarking, I put it in as simply a primitive means of creating a course, and less about the collaborative efforts. It has felt out of place for me as well. I'm intrigued by the idea of a collaborate chapter, but hesitate because of time. I think the best place for it would be Share OER. If there's absolutely no congruent place to put, I would rather jettison it from the handbook entirely.
For now, assuming limited flexibility, I agree:
- Compose for "Creating a Curriculum"
- Share for "Social Bookmarking"
However, perhaps for the next edition:
In the new diagram, most of the content of this section would go nicely under "Evaluate". If time, we could extend it beyond evaluating the resource itself to evaluating its success in the classroom (i.e. after Using it).
I have a reservation about the opening sentence:
> As you begin localizing and remixing your OER, > you will want to have an idea of how to fit it > into the curriculum.
The title of the page is "Creating a Curriculum" - so it seems we are about to start thinking about where to fit the OER into something that does not exist yet. The content is mostly about assessing/evaluating an OER before using it in a Composition.
Re: "Creating a course for yourself" - much if not all of this could apply to most educators. It points to Collaboration.
During the course of going through and helping to compose this handbook, there are several clear activities (find, compose, modify, use, share) and several cross-cutting concerns:
- licensing - find, compose, adapt, share
- file formats - find, compose, adapt, share
- accessibility - find, compose, adapt, share
- mobile access - find, compose, adapt, share
- collaboration - find, compose, adapt, share, use
- evaluation - find, compose, use
So, my (tentative) suggestion is: rename this section "Evaluate" and expand it to include a similar "Reflection" on evaluating effectiveness when in use - or simply blend in this section :-).
Consider separate chapters or sections for each cross-cutting concern. We already have one for "Licensing". "Collaboration" is perhaps a given throughout and we may not need a separate section on it (??).
Finally, here are some thoughts on the overall structure.
I've moved Social Bookmarking to Self-Publishing in Share OER. I've also moved Creating a Curriculum to Compose OER.
I don't we'll have time to create these cross-cutting chapters. The actual moving may be feasible, but refactoring the rest of the text to match would not. However, I do like the idea of multiple navigation templates that could tie them together. I think I will give them a try. Of course, this starts to impede on the visual layout (of the web page).
Renamed the section to "Quality" and left it in "Compose" which seems right now (it refers to "Adapt" which happens during composition).
It also refers to the more recent diagram. We could include representations of both diagrams - one is student-oriented and the other is about oer-development in the large (though it could be applied to OER development in the small too). Both diagrams would need artistic enhancement.
- (this issue is being thought about in another context)
- Copied this idea into Future Edition Suggestions
Quality spans both chapters Compose and Adapt (and adaptation occurs during composition). With this in mind I made a subtle change to the paragraph beginning "Based on your answers ...". The aim of the change was to keep the focus on Compose and allude to the Adapt chapter.