[Oer-community] Week 3 OER mapping summary

Susan D'Antoni susandantoni at gmail.com
Fri Dec 7 16:20:28 MST 2012


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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/private/oer-community/attachments/20121207/afacfcf9/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OERMapping_Week3_Log.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 37341 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/private/oer-community/attachments/20121207/afacfcf9/attachment.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OERMapping_Week3_Log.odt
Type: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text
Size: 32488 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/private/oer-community/attachments/20121207/afacfcf9/attachment.odt 


More information about the Oer-community mailing list