Feedback
Hi Gail, Irwin and the team, It has taken me a whole lot longer than I had hoped to get back to you on this proposal. I'd like to commend you on it - the amount of information you've provided on the learning outcomes and assessments and showing the link between the 2, and the planned flow of topics - it's all very solid. I took a look at the open-text, it also looks really good. My only concern is with the exam component of the assessment - how can an exam be offered for the open, online OER students?
I am currently in the process of developing a course for UOW and was interested to see your thoughts about the links between your Blackboard LMS and the Wiki-educator site. I am facing similar questions and issues. Will look forward to staying in touch and seeing if we might give each other some support on this aspect.
If I could put on my other 'hat' - that of Convenor, OERu Course Approvals and Quality Working Group - and provide feedback from that perspective. We have decided via this workgroup to use the OER Course Blueprint as a key aspect of the quality process - it is to be a bit of a template to be followed in the design process, to make sure all important aspects are considering in planning and to ensure that just enough info can be conveyed to partners to allow them to assess the level and focus of the course with a view to potentially giving credit for it at their institution. So on top of the Learning Outcomes, things like - are you using an OER-wrap around design model, or building course and materials from scratch. And how will you be approaching identify management of the students who submit items for assessment and credit. And are the assessment do-able in the open, online space?
So from this perspective I am keen to create a standard Blueprint template for people to work from. The idea would be to make it as easy as possible for OER reps to scan that info, and provide high-level feedback and get some conversations happenning before the whole Outline is completed. As it stands, the headings/content you have used in your Blueprint look more to me like a fully fleshed out Subject/Course Guide or Course Outline. There is a lot of information and detail there (and as noted, all great). Where as the Blueprints used in the 2012/13 developments were roughly like this: • 1.1 Metadata summary • 1.2 Intended target audience • 1.3 Delivery model • 1.4 Assessment model • 1.5 Interaction strategies
And here are some live ones if you want to see how they looked: http://wikieducator.org/OERu/Planning/OERu_2012_Prototype
I am wondering if you would consider shifting the "Blueprint" info to an "Course Outline" page, and having another "blueprint" page for the shorter summary info? My reason for asking is partially this: i'm wanting to create a 2014/15 course developments hub page that links through to a standard blueprint page and have it set up in advance so the new members can fill in the blanks, rather than working from scratch. And we can all have the one URL to use as a 'hub' to facilitate communication around the developing subjects.
I note that in Wayne's current diagramatic representation of the OER workflow (to be discussed at the Sprint) the process is nomination to blueprint to audit of resources (which you've done by finding your open text for example) and then 'course outline'. THe flowchart is on this page - what do you think? http://wikieducator.org/Digital_skills_for_collaborative_OER_development/Design_blueprint/Workflow
Sarah thanks for the comments. Here are our responses (Gail and Irwin). You'll notice that we think some of the questions are better answered by other groups working specifically on those issues.
- Exams – Arrangements can be made for an authenticated and invigilated challenge exam delivered by TRU at credible sites. TRU Open Learning already does this in many distributed locations. Alternatively any partner institutions may be able to deliver the exam (or a credible alternative assessment), assign credit and transcript for transfer credit within the partnership.
- LMS question – we think it’s best to talk to the Technology group.
- Identity – this should go to the Assessment group.
- Assessments (formative) – will vary from course to course. In terms of visibility, some may be presented in the open wiki (WikiEducator) with the student’s work displayed in the site or with the method of their choice. Some assessments may be completed and shared in the open, while others may need to be more privately completed. This needs to be considered course by course.
- Course blueprints – we’re ok with any templates and nomenclature that you provide. We can reorganize accordingly.
Hi Sarah,
All good questions.
Contents
Identity validation[edit]
The OERu model separates teaching and formative learning activities from summative assessment. This means that identity validation for summative assessment will need to meet the local OERu partner institutional requirements for identity management in order for transcript credit to be awarded. Some partners use proctored challenge examinations with verified photo ID as in the case of TRU and other ODL providers. Some partners who are using an assessment portfolio will incorporate a short remote interview with the student (skype or teleconference) where photo ID can be verified to determine whether the student actually completed the assessments.
LMS integration[edit]
Technically its a simple process to integrate teaching materials from the course site into an LMS. It can be as simple as an external link, or more sophisticated ways to import the content into the LMS. The issue here is to separate summative assessment components (like quizzes which may contribute to the summative assessment score) from formative assessment where authenticated identity validation is needed. The OERu open courses use a PLE model where interactions are distributed across the Internet (blogs, micro-blog and forum posts.) which are aggregated into a central course feed. It's easy to integrate or mirror a copy of the aggregated feed into the local LMS using a simple iFrame (or even external link).
The local LMS challenge arises when the course designers want students registered in the LMS to post contributions to the aggregated feed via an internal LMS forum designated as a public forum with the understanding that all other support forums remain closed for full-fee students. (Remember that external OERu learners will not be able to read the designated public forum posts in the LMS because they do not have password access. This means that a solution is required to replicate the content of a designated public forum post onto an open server.) They way we do this is to register an OERF account as a student account in the course (as a trusted partner) and this student account monitors the public forum in the LMS. If a post is made, it will be harvested for the aggregated feed and will will mirror a copy of the post on our servers so that the free OERu learners can read the contribution. Of course this requires collaboration with the local IT systems support team. In the event that this is not possible, the only solution is to direct full-fee students to the open web, or to consider hosting an external LMS or other delivery platform.
Blueprinting process[edit]
At the timing of the blueprint phase, we need to maintain a delicate balance between minimum information needs for the OERu network and freedom of the host institution to develop their own pedagogy. We are adamant not to dictate pedagogical design, a principle we stressed at the 1st meeting of anchor partners. We should allocate some time during the partners meeting to discuss these issues in more detail.
From my perspective, I think we need to develop a solution which is fit for purpose. At the blueprinting phase, I think there are three objectives:
- Soliciting open feedback and peer-review from the network to improve the design concept.
- Providing sufficient information on the outcomes of the course to identify opportunities for collaborative development and/or future credit transfer potential.
- Sharing examples of different design blueprints to assist OERu partners in developing their own courses.
The detail of summative assessment is something which comes later in the process, particularly in future scenarios where partners may choose to reuse the assessment models of the contributing institution for local assessment services.
I think we need to keep our blueprint guidelines simple, with enough flexibility for our partners to do their own thing avoiding the temptation of generating a bureaucratic straight jacket ;-).
The challenge of open design[edit]
Developing courses for multiple reuse scenarios, as in the case of the OERu is fundamentally a design challenge. Our problem is that few academics and designers within the network have authentic experience in doing this. In time, we will be able to build capability in the network in open design methodologies - but we need to work with what we have where the network is at this juncture in our evolution. We are designing new educational futures!
Agreed. The templates don't tell you what kind of design model you have to use, but just ask for what you've decided on - it's a communication device and a list of things to think about rolled into one. The tone is attempting to be "please let us know your thoughts on these range of factors that experience tells us are important."
