Research 2.0: researching the open world

Afternoon session of OLnet/CREET workshop

Martin Cooper talks about research bids. Martin describes the difference between novice and experienced bidders and focuses on the sorts of support that the university must provide to novices. There is a need for right timing when putting a bid together, where the ‘bright idea’ must be included in the work plan timely. Martin argues that researchers would be able to put forward many more bids if there was a higher level of administrative and project management support offered by the Open University. Martin was asked: How happy would you be to have your proposal out there in the world? He said yes, not a problem, whenever there are no confidentiality issues.

Kim Issroff was the next speaker on business models for open educational resources and web 2.0 research. A business model, as she explains,  is a framework to create social and economic values. It should sustain itself and generate revenue. Business models for OERs – various possibilities. Scholars that discuss these include: Chang, MIlls & Newhouse; Stephen Downes; Clarke 2007. Kim asks whether we do value more what we pay for and yet nowadays most things are offered for free (open source, open content).
Research questions arising:
What is the difference between business models of open source software and open educational resources?
What happens when we get to OER saturation point?
Is a financial model appropriate to think of open educational resources?
Will technological developments chagne these financial models?

Next, Chris Pegler talks about OER research beyond the OU: spotting opportunities. According to Chris, there are various opportunities for researching the use and reuse of OERs  in real communities of practice, such as TESSA (Teachers Education in Sub-Saharan Africa).

The day concluded with a group discussion of the outcomes of the day.

Interviews with all speakers sumarising their talks are available in the OLnet YouTube channel, with the tag ‘OLnet: Research 2.0′.

CETIS – VLE session

Phil Barker’s session [live blogged - needs cleaning]
on The Learning Content Management

Why do we still have VLEs? What is the reason that we use such systems rather than something focussed on content managment. This might just be a way of labelling but for OpenLearn where we adopted Moodle it did have an effect. On the plus side it meant that we led with a system that could support the individual learner and had tools that could support collaboration. On the minus it meant that tools that dealt with the sharing and management of content were not a strong as they might be. In terms of positioning OpenLearn using Moodle has been very helpful but now we have the content itself there is a good argument for providing a more managed environment.

In this session there are echoes of my own past – Phil Barker, Stephen Vickers & Richard irby are all ex Heriot-Watt people as am I.

Stephen is now at Edinburgh University and described the work he is doing to assess how they should/could adapt to a future VLE if they move from their current use of WebCT. He had analysed the way tools were used on WbCT and found that many were using simple tools with something under 10% using the novel and innovative tools.
Comments on strengths often referred to integration with other tools rather than the VLE itself. Weaknesses also tended to not be about functionality but instead user interface and reliability.
The key lesson then is reliability and workflow (marking) are concerns along with notification, content management, collaboration (between systems – perhaps interoperability ratehr than collaboration) and empowering student learning. One item was also the opening up of access to content – avoiding the VLE becoming a silo for content.

List of roles of VLE:
Authorisation
Registry
Roles and permissions
Group tool
Conditional release
Combining tools in learning sequences [Learning Design!]
Work management tools
Tracking student activity
SDK for integrating with other systems.

Other things are then added on beyond that.

Richard Kirby – CAPDM talking about single source publishing.

Capdm is a model as a design and information model. Capture/Author/Publish/Deliver/Manage
Single approach to store everything in XML (Docbook) with extension. Added a question format (pre -QTI but similar). Capture from Word but also author directly into XML aware editor.
This is similar to the process that OpenLearn has followed, however the OU adopted its own schema. I have wondered whether the Docbook format would be an alternative or mappable from the OUXML schema. Not sure but could be worth investigating?
Richard also described some neat features such as automated table of contents that could be used to keep track of e.g. learning outcomes. MSWord documents can be converted with “80%” accuracy. The content is then managed through RCS version control with linked multi-lingual versions to help pass information efficiently to the translators.

Sarah Currier from Intrallect covered the repository aspect. A run through of the features that are offered perhaps shows how a move to a repository approach could bring the availability to a lot of tools. Comment that there needs to be a person who will take responsibility for the repository aspect of a service including the metadata side. Sarah also pointed out that repository based initiatives needed institutional support as well as project support.

Mark Stiles took a broader view – pointing out the eLearning is now deprecated. His personal history showed mix of success and that full use of VLEs remains the excpetation (as reported in UCISA surveys. His current view is that learners will opt out unless we can provide something better or be prepared to “let go”.

Current work is using the Hive repository with XCRI not just for content but also to bring in validation comments and course descriptions. Approach to allow different solutions and sustain innovation.

Tony Hirst,
Showed figure:ground as an analogy for how people react to Web2.0 (the classic vase or two faces). Medium:Context is Marshall McLuhan’s take on this. Equally for the PLE – it is not just the media it is the context.
PLE v VLE
Personal – Institutional
Portable – Monolithic
Social – Privare
Lesson – Course

There are lots of tools – cannot tailor to all of these but need to be aware of them (not know them in depth). Do not see it as institution against the student. Key to working with all these tools though is RSS as a way to move content around. An even easier version is the embed code (e.g of the slides on slideshare such as Tony’s own talk – BUT this tends to be stripped out.

As an example he talked about Jim Green’s wordpress_mu use to provide easy learner blogs and republishing. This also interoperates with MediaWiki to pick up best http://tinyurl.com/6s92gw

VLE to SLE (S=Social, Syndicated, Scruffy)

CETIS 2008 conference opening session: Oleg, Adam and Andrew Feenberg

I am attending the CETIS conference in Birmingham – the first morning is arranged as a plenary keynote by Andrew Feenber. [Need to update this with links.]

Oleg Liber set the scene. He described it as a recession special. Reminding us that in this time of change we can spot new opportunities, or the need to entrench and close in around options.
Key reference points influencing the UK:

Leitch report – need to think about value.
Burgess report – how do we assess/accredit.

With decisions such as the non-funding of second degrees causing pause for thought – will it focus minds and impact on humanities? Big impact on OpenU. Demographic changes making everyone think about new sectors.

Technology changes – mobile computing finally (asus, iphone, Google android).
Web as platform – finally coming true as well
Cloud computing – but we should not abandon the ideas of elearning (even if we do abandon the term).
Lifespan of information is longer than the life of applications and devices.

These are challenges for all of us – but worth looking at IT services in particular. IT services are becoming important.

JISC CETIS describes itself as a place where it is ok to talk technical details. It is newly divided into two parts systems and content/peoples and activities. Over the next year will hole one event per month. Plus working groups – output oriented around specifications.

Format
- achievements of previous year
- Areas of actions for year ahead
- Special focus on demand on IT services.

Adam Cooper then took over to describe the “CETIS connections” linked connections similar to BBC’s comedy connections. He has put up his powerpoint with links through to the blog posts.

Oleg introduced Andrew Feenberg – a Canadian philosopher to talk about “The online education controversy”. An historical and analytic talk.

He took the approach of reading his talk – describing Educational Technology as an oxymoron (in some hands). He led with a quote (from Brody President of John Hopkins University) about the way that education has not recognised the opportunities that it has to lower cost. This view reflects a performance view of Higher Education (with salary costs half of education costs). He referred back to “Executive Computing U” using computer conference system to support distance learning. Startup problems – how to teach and learn online, developed dialogic pedagogy. Text based online discussion can be effective and should not be overlooked today.

Distinguished online from face-to-face. Encourages slower pace, better recognition
“little doubt that good teachers can achieve good results”. Question though whether there is greater value in multimedia over text. David Noble took a contrary view. Compared with Plato on writing – and the lack of ability for written text to adapt and converse. A humanistic bias against technology.

Key is that technology can replace dialogue with interacting with technology – but it does not necessarily follow. And perhaps the Internet is the technology that liberates.

Division of labour (John Smith) illustrated by the image on the £20 note. Andrew Yure? – quote about reducing the skills required from individuals to avoid intractable people needed in the system.

Image from army training manual depicting technology as a delivery mechanism to deliver ideas into the human brain.

Pinch? & Bijker – “…different inerpretations by social groups … lead to … different further developments”. The interlinked and co-consructed nature of social use of technology can be Illustrated by Escher’s drawing hands. There is no clear way to say what is the starting point.
Terms of relevance:
technical underdetermination
actors influence design
interpretive flexibility
closure on a successful design
co-construction.

Suggested rival models for how technology might function include the “factory model” or the “the urban ideal”. Factory implies control and narrowing, city view looks at potentials, communication and openness. While it seems obvious that the city view is more desirable – however viewing technology as cost cutting and automating means that the factory model could dominate.

Inviting email response and visits to his web page on early online education and online pedagoy. At wwwords.co.uk. He also mentions that he has developed an annotation tool for Moodle
www.geof.net

Q&As:
Online can support most activities that go on in the classroom.

Oleg Liber asked a key question prompted by the classic experience of listening to a lecture v watching the video. The key is that the live version is a performance that could change while the video cannot change. Bill Olivier made the point that this fits with Piaget that there is a point where you need to adjust mental framework and dialogue will enable people to cross that point better than anything else.
Andrew Ravenscroft – what does the recession change. In the first instance nothing needs to change – but it could be the end of the obsession with making money and greed. People may develop interests beyond making making money which drives people to do the same thing. How this impacts on technology is unclear but efficiency and output focus is part of Thatcher/Reagan era that may not carry forward.

Children have to go to school to gain the models for interactions and vicarious learning to learning. Then can progress to online. Text base can then offer enough engagement to allow construction of connections.

OLnet – proposal to Hewlett

I have just submitted a proposal to the Hewlett Foundation to develop an Open Learning network. This has involved working with Candace Thille at CMU and several people here at the OU including Grainne Conole, Andy Lane and Simon Buckingham Shum. Much of the drafting took place in a public wiki which was an interesting process.

Anyway this short post is just to point to the earlier draft on the wiki and the later PDF submitted version that can be reached from there.

Great ideas at SideCAP kick off workshop

Today I joined in a workshop that marked the start of the SideCAP project – Staff improvement in distance education for Carribean, African and Pacific universities. There were representatives from Mauritius, West Indies and Fiji reflecting work in supporting distance education. Those involved have links to the Commonwealth of Learning supported Virtual University of the Small States of the Commonwealth, a great idea to build enough effort jointly to offer a range of subjects. SideCAP though is a separate project led from the OU by Prof Robin Mason and she has created an EU supported project that focuses on capacity building.

At the stage I joined the kick off meeting there seemed consensus around a real need – to develop as an open resource guidance and materials about the finding and reuse of open resources. Other people have also seen this as a gap but the SideCAP plan has strengths in the diversity of the the group involved, the skills they have and also the plan to build up from OpenLearn and similar OER bases to be able to present concreted examples. 

In showing OpenLearn I showed the now award-winning free FM videoconferencing that can be used to arrange flashmeetings that are recorded – for this particular group it could represent a chance to reduce their carbon-footprint as they stay in touch with each other.

Making connection – ICT support

I am presenting in a session that focuses on the changing learner experience. The first of four talks is given by Mick Jones and Ingrid Nix. Mick is extremely good at connecting up all the opportunities that occur in the OU – he is someone who seems to always be able to put some effort into any worthwhile initiatives. He has support OpenLearn in various ways but today the focus is more on how such things as our VLE, customer experience work, ICT support, changed help desk etc. have impacted on the faculty and on the learner. Ingrid presented results showing decreasing posts from learners over the last few years as a measure of  success. I guess this makes sense but feels a bit wrong as we spend some of our effort trying to increase posts into forums. The need for a more common set of measures included suggestions for a new IET student use of media survey (like an old approach we called PLUM Programme for Learner Use of Media). The problem is the division of data into many places that make monitoring difficult.

Making Connections – Phil Candy

Phil has a deep background in thinking about self direction and learning. He opened with a quote from Linus (of Peanuts) about the challenge of potential. Which very much applies to the OU (and also OpenLearn). He the led into discussion of the work of Boyer – the scholarship of engagement, and how this is part of the challenge while under pressures and trying to protect our values. Again bringing it back to Boyer and his four scholarships:

• Teaching,
• Discovery (Research)
• Application
• Integration

Phil brought together the research and integration about drawing in, with teaching and application about disseminating out. He pointed out the need to take part in all four aspects: avoid putting people into a single “box”. He listed pressures that seem to hold back scholarship, but also new opportunities such as outreach, novel learning opportunities, build bridges with outside, true-learner centredness using new technologies. There are also similar challenges and opportunities such as the shift from mode 1 (peer assessed) mode 2 (user assessed).

A broad range of changes were outlined leading to a revist to Boyer’s approach nd how this matters towards how we need to support people training for new types of work. He pointed to Paton – search of the knowledge worker (2005) to show how to combine attributes. The learner’s needs can themselves be mapped back to Boyer’s list – leading back to a more inclusive view of teaching and learning. He pointed out things that could be addressed:

• Content
• Structure
• Teaching methods
• Assessment
• Student support
• Culture of inquiry

His final point was to put up a quote “ not just ‘What does your machine produce?’ but also ‘How does your garden grow?’” Pace (1971).

 

In his questions and answers – he put the pressure on achieve this in leadership that is charismatic and setting realistic goals.

He was asked whether there ought to be people who are teaching only – his answer was that people should not be locked into single roles, either as teachers or researchers.

He then answered a question about the skills that people need – but do not necessarily see as learning. The language that we used to describe what we do matters in this and then we need people to recognise the cross between life and learning.

The challenge was raised as to how to combine all the pushes on academics with the need for “effective management”. Answering as he said from the luxury of being a critical friend and an outsider, he had now seen that there are effective managers in the world – combining detailed work with genuine interest. For working in universities a shadow infrastructure may help – heads of school, with administrative managers that work well in partnership.

 

For OpenLearn I felt that this talk was a pointer to the complications and need for diversity that can be partly met by free and open resources. Phil Candy’s comments about how everyone needs to be addressing the four aspects of scholarship (teaching, discovery, application, and integration) sits well with an expectation of self directed learning, but also suggests that we need to put extra effort into making it clear how the resources we provide can fit into such a framework.

Making Connections – tools in use

Karen Kear with John Woodthorpe were looking at the ways that people were moving from more conventional forum approach towards newer tools (blogs, wikis and online journals). The approach was to adjust tasks from posting to allow wiki uploads as a route. A survey was the main route to getting data, with 111 respondents. While the work is definitely worthwhile to understand the learner experience to introducing tools such as these, I also felt that it illustrated the difficulty of trying to add new technologies alongside the existing routes.  In particular aspects with doubts about shared editing rights, usability of unfamiliar tools wiki less easy than firstclass), with blog usage much lower and again not as usable as the familiar firstclass. On the other hand those who use it are positive about the concept and interest in innovation.

 

In OpenLearn we have found the provision of tools highly motivating when we present OpenLearn, but the investment in time in the new tools has also meant that usage is much lower than overall registration, which in turn is much lower than use of OpenLearn without registration (which means that the user cannot use the extra tools). The cross over between open blogs and closed private journals was raised, with a main take away point being privacy and control– as a sometime blogger I feel this as well: are these my notes or a message to the world!

CETIS Multi user virtual environments workshop

The afternoon sessions are organised as parallel workshops and I join the strand looking at MUVEs and games. Apparently the most popular workshop.

Daniel Livingstone is presenting about Sloodle a crooss between Second Life and Moodle. I have been meaning to find out more about this for quite some time as we have a lot of free and re-waorkable material in Moodle that could well be the raw material for some interesting experiments. Dan showed the architecture for Sloodle as consisting of an extra communicaton layer to reach from Second Life into the Moodle database. Andy Powell from

Educause made the interesting observation that this meant that in effect the Sloodle team had needed to engineer an API for Moodle. Dan said that this had been constructed only to work with the proprietary Second Life at the moment but certainly it could be the basis for something like that. Michael Gardner then commented that if so he and his team working with the open source Sun Wonderland would be able to draw on the same basis and that would be a good way to go.

The examples Dan showed were a calendar reflected from Moodle into 2^nd Life, deadline poles (an object drops down a pole as deadlines approach), a drop box for sending things back from 2^nd life and a feed for a chat between 2^nd Life and Moodle. All interesting and another prompt to think about how best to build on this work in OpenLearn.

Mark Bell then presents about his work with Ted Castronova at the Synthetic Worlds Institute at Indiana. The team at Indiana involves people from the game industry. He mentioned a few projects – London Town (interact with Sherlock Holmes and Charles Dickens), dusk and a virtual Congress. But mainly he plans to talk about Arden, the world of Shakespeare. He positioned his work as based on a view that the virtual world is a valid place for experiments and could be seen as a “petri dish” for social science experiments. They used the Multiverse engine to build a version of “Shakespeare’s Somerset”. The result was not a working system – needed to switch platform NeverWinter Nights (not good enough), Second Life (too expensive), Metaplace (still alpha). There were fundamental tensions in trying to produce such a big project, Academic investigation v fulltime development team. He did suggest that it was just possible that developing a core support team to produce e.g. 2nd Life environments for academic use might just work. But his main solution is to switch to smaller scale expermiments and specific questions – the result was a less ambitious London Nights Shakespeare that worked. Mark’s own research looks at economics theory and he wants virtual worlds to test money supply theory. Mark is working in second life on a game called dusk, based on Ray Bradbury’s Carnival books – pay outs on games varying across spaces built.

His lesson from his work was make more mistakes, he felt he had learnt so much. Four approaches recommended in the end:

Little experiments

Creation of new, vast worlds

Observation of natural experiment

Work with commercial sector

www.storygeek.com

Mark also mentioned that Second life is offering an http-requester that allows data to be exported. Worth noting if we do develop some use of 2nd Life with Moodle.

In the questions accessibility came up with the suggestion that a 3d environment represented by sound. This reminded me of the work that my colleague Martyn Cooper carried out on “Human Factors in 3D Audio Virtual Environments”.

Learning about learning in Wikiversity through Action Research

Note this is a passive map and not actionable – proper map will be uploaded to OpenLearn in the next couple of days