Implementing open education practices is a multidimensional challenge for educators. In this session the presenters share data and findings from their research into the practical challenges of open education practices implementation in higher education. Using the analogy of mixing different audio tracks to produce a harmonious acoustic blend, they discuss the blend of elements that need to be considered and balanced in promoting open educational practices. The presentation is followed by small group discussions to further explore solutions to challenges raised.

1. Irwin DeVries
TRU Open Learning
David Porter
BCcampus
Getting
the Mix Right:
Implementing Open
Education Practices
Image licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
Share-Alike 2.5 generic license

2. How are instructors
implementing OER to
support teaching and
learning needs within
British Columbia
post-secondary
institutions?
How do we design and
build open courses for
use in massively open
university programs

3. Ecology
How do we move
news, good or
innovative ideas
forward in the higher
education ecosystem?

4. From
“What” to
“How”
From the “what” to the “how” of
openness”
Open Educational Practices (OEP)
“a set of activities and support
around the creation, use and
repurposing of Open Educational
Resources”
(Conole 2010)
4
4

5. Why Open?
• Removing barriers from access to
learning and credentials
• Being able to implement sharing
and use of educational resources
• Moving toward open and
collaborative processes
Similar concepts to Free and Open
Source Software
5

6. 6
What is
the OERu?6
• Global partnership of like-minded
postsecondary institutions – not
university per se
• Committed to free courses and
programs based on OERs
• Optional support, assessment and
credible credentials through partner
institutions
• Sponsored by a not-for-profit
foundation in New Zealand (OERu
Foundation)
• Virtual presence in WikiEducator wiki

7. 7
How does
it work?
“Parallel learning
universe” (Taylor, 2007)
7
OERu logic high level. Wayne Mackintosh. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.

8. 8
OERu
collaborations8
Diagram showing high-level logic model for OERu. By Wayne Macintosh. Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA Unported.

9. 9

10. Open design
process
• Sample processes
• Planning for OERu prototypes
• Learning design consultation
• Open planning
• Design artifacts
10

11. ART100
prototype
• TRU’s first contribution:
ART100 Art Appreciation
and Techniques
• Redesigned from existing
OER
– Course from
Saylor.com via WA
State Board of
Community Colleges
Open Course Library
– Modified/revised/remix
ed content, activities,
assessments, etc. 11

12. 12
Research
design12
• Comparative case study
– Scope: one course developed over a
fixed period of time in OERu
– Similar case study in OSS used for
comparison: (von Krogh et al., 2003)
– Highlight “relationships, contrasts and
similarities
– Extend learning from one case to the
other (Khan & VanWynsberghe, 2008)

13. 13
OSS design and
development
• Based on collaboration and communities
of volunteers
– Commitment to philosophy of sharing
– Personal and professional benefits
– Induction processes for newbies
– Communication and versioning
systems
– Decentralized but with some
leadership
– Visible design rules
13
Masque aux lépreux Bwa. Village de Boni. By Ji-Ell .
Licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 BY-SA
Unported.

14. 14
Sharing learning
design knowledge
“Traditionally design
has been an implicit
process, how do we shift
to a process of design
that is more explicit and
hence shareable?”
(Conole, 2008)
Quietly listening to the wind in the pines, 1246. Ma Lin. Public Domain.

15. 15
Collaborative design
in other fields
15
• Architecture, expert systems, telecommunications, engineering
– Multiple points of negotiation and evaluation (Kvan, 2000)
– Explicit sharing of design information using communication
tools (Chiu, 2002)
– Design teams need to explore and integrate differences
(Sonnenwald, 1996)
– Intentional communication processes are essential (Hixon,
2008)

16. 16
Aspect Open Design and Development Traditional Instructional Design
Contributors
Volunteers, motivated by open
philosophy and personal
/organizational benefit
Paid faculty or staff
Makeup of design
team
Distributed Centralized
Induction into the
development team
No specific method
Employment orientation and
training
Access to contribute
Member community open to
public including students
downstream
Private — but some possible
input by students
Roles of design
team members
Loosely defined, overlapping,
broad skills
Specialized, clearly defined
Organizational
structure
Flat, collaborative,
representational, some
meritocratic
Hierarchical or faculty based
Communication
F-F and virtual meetings, mailing
lists, wiki pages, microblogs
Mostly business communication
tools (email, meetings)
Intended uses
As originally intended or
repurposed for multiple uses
and settings
Defined purpose determined in
learner, job, institutional or
market analysis
Traditional/Open design and development comparison

17. 17
Aspect
Open Design and
Development
Traditional Instructional
Design
Content copyright
Open licensing (CC) with some
rights reserved
Mostly rights reserved
Content versions Multiple possible via forks Official version
Design processes Informal design processes
More formal design processes
and documentation
Authoring
environment
Open source social software Proprietary
Delivery
environment
Wiki, LMS, other options
Dedicated proprietary
application
Pedagogy
Varied, depending on
individual development teams
and their preferences
Generally in line with
overarching institutional
model
Maintenance Ongoing, community based Episodic, managed
Traditional/Open design and development comparison

18. Citizenship in an
OER ecosystem
• Design challenges with use
of OER
– File formats
– LMS
– Multiple versions
– Schedules and timetables
– Embedded cohort model
– Copyright issues
– Cultural biases
18
• Developing as OER
– Maintain editable source
files
– Open environment
– Transparent versions/forks
– Maintain flexiblity
– Design for choices
– Go CC!
– Consider cultural diversity

19. Community
• Importance of developer
community
– Developer motivations
(want to make a
contribution)
– A community of volunteers
(attrition) – needs to grow
– Division of labor - developer
specializations (multiple
roles)
– Mentoring
– Shared and standardized
communication habits
(essential for shared
understanding of project)
– Mediating artifacts
19
19
“When code [open
curriculum] and
community do not
develop in parallel, the
learning curve can be
steep” (O’Mahoney,
2007)

20. Institutional
cultures
20
http://wikieducator.org/Art_Appreciation_and_Techniques/Module_3a
Upon successful completion of this course, students
will be able to:
PICK 3 Assignments (Summative)
1
Interpret examples of visual art using a five-step
critical process that includes description, analysis,
context, meaning, and judgment.
Also use Module 4 Assignment 3
(Saylor)
2
Identify and describe the elements and principles of
art.
Assignment "Worksheet 3"
Module 3 (Saylor) - tweak it -
3
Use analytical skills to connect formal attributes of art
with their meaning and expression. Assignment 5 0 Module 7 (Saylor)
4
Explain the role and effect of the visual arts in
societies, history, and other world cultures. Assignment 1 (Saylor) Module 1 -
5
Articulate the political, social, cultural, and aesthetic
themes and issues that artists examine in their work. Assignment 4, Module 5 (Saylor)
6
Identify the processes and materials involved in art
and architectural production.
Formative quiz in relevant
modules
7
Utilize information to locate, evaluate, and
communicate information about visual art in its
various forms.
Worksheet 6 - Module 6 (Saylor)
and Discussion Question 12 from
Module 8 (Saylor) and Worksheet
10, Module 10 (Saylor)
End of
course Final comprehensive assignment
Build portfolio through course -
integrate as final portfolio piece -
Curatorial statements -
Assignment 6, Module 10 (Saylor)
Activities
Module Goals Individual Group
Define ‘art’ within a cultural perspective. Quizzes for each Module (Optional)
Reflective questions Discussion questions
Assignment example
Institutional
constraints –
assessment and
credit, curricular
oversight
- Need for new
flexibility
- Change
management
and advocacy
- Policy
- Culture

21. 21
Potential and
promises
• Collaboration towards open learning opportunities
beyond traditional constraints
• Develop global community of instructional design and
development expertise using OER
• See OER from viewpoints of creation and reuse
• A new way of thinking and working together
• Process stays grounded at grassroots level
• Use OER projects as catalyst for institutional innovation

22. Join us!
• Planning groups under way
22
Demonstration of Reification in Perception. S. Lahar. Public Domain.

23. David’s research
Looking at open
systemically

24. How it began
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WABAC_machine
• 1996 - 2001
• Reusable content will
revolutionize higher
education
• New pathways to learning
for students can be
created
...For most institutions,
courses continue to be the
standard units of
instruction, the “one-size-
fits-all” building blocks of
academic credit, even
within the virtual
education arena

25. Research question
25
What is the lived experience of educators
who are implementing OER to support
teaching and learning needs within British
Columbia post-secondary educational
institutions?

26. Page |
2003-2012
$10 million invested
144 grants awarded
100% participation across system
83% partnerships
47 credentials developed in whole or part via OPDF
355 courses, 12 workshops, 19 web sites/tools and 396 course
components (learning objects, labs, textbooks, manuals, videos)
100% open license for free and open sharing and reuse by all
BC post-secondary institutions
Online Program Development Fund (OPDF)

29. Review of literature
• Open educational resources, open licenses and OER
projects
• Issues, criticisms, gaps in knowledge about OER use
• Methodological challenges and potential approaches
to research
29

30. Status of scholarship
• Culture of sharing and
collaboration
• Quality assurance
• Localization
requirements
30
• Instructional design and
development processes
• Technologies and tools
• Business models and
policy structures

31. Culture of sharing and collaboration
• Establishing “openness” as a virtue (Carey, 2011;
D’Antoni & Savage, 2010)
• The culture of the academy
• Designing for reusability from the outset
• Community and team building as a strategy
31
Question: Under what conditions could a group of developers at different institutions
cooperate on the development of an OER?

32. Localization and community requirements
• Adapting, refining or revising design processes to match
the potential for OER reuse (Conole, 2010; Petrides,
Nguyen, Karliani & Jimes, 2008; Wiley, 2006
• OER as a “supply-side” phenomenon
• Implications for changing design practices
• Articulation and transfer—program planning
32
Question: How do instructional developers, instructors and faculty approach the use
and reuse of learning resources in their current practices and what are the
implications for new practice afforded by openly licensed resources?

33. Technologies and tools
• Technology and technological decisions as a governing
force—function following form (Kehrwald, 2010;
Feenberg, 2004; William & Edge, 1996; Smith & Marx,
1994)
• Deterministic practices or democratic
rationalization
• What tools, practices and processes are actually
needed?
33
Question: How do instructors, faculty and instructional developers use OER in
institutional contexts where technology selection and deployment decisions may be
beyond their influence? Do they have the right tools to promote adoption,
adaptation, or creation of open resources?

34. Third generation activity theory
34

35. Answering the research questions
35
Academic culture
* tenure and promotion practices
* extension of collaborative practices
Educational practices
* OER as trigger for pedagogical discussions
* collegial engagement and trust
OER concepts and practices
* training needs, library engagement
* spirit of openness and collaborative practice
Instructional design
* labour-intensive, requiring new skills
* moving from content to pedagogy in the discussion
Institutional contexts
* articulation and transfer concerns
* clarity around copyright and open licensing
Quality assurance
* quality assurance rubrics and processes needed
* twofold effect: build confidence and a community of
practice for sustainability
Professional support
* multi-level marketing and training; discipline-based
* better tools and process for OER use and remixing
Funding support
* the incentive approach works
* catalytic effect when open textbooks were
announced
* sustainability is an issue
Technology factors
* rationalization vs. determinism
* need for an experimental “sandbox”

36. Conclusions and recommendations
• For OER to become mainstream in the British Columbia higher education
sector
• It will require promotion of OER concepts, attributes and value propositions at all
levels: with administrators, department chairs, instructors and students within
institutions, as well as with articulation committees on a system-wide basis
• It will require intentional and targeted training programs for individuals and discipline-
specific groups to move beyond a small cadre of early adopters associated with the
OPDF
• It will require better tools for search and storage, and support for communities of
practice that are willing to evaluate and curate quality assured digital OER collections
36

37. 18
Write Once
Publish Many