opencourseware consortium planning meeting0 february 17, 2005 opencourseware consortium planning...

Opencourseware Consortium Planning Meeting 1

February 17, 2005

Opencourseware Consortium Planning Meeting


- Goals of the Meeting -

› Information sharing: Taking stock of where we are

› Working together: Reaffirming the vision, developing strategy for the movement and the Consortium



9:00 - 9:30 — Welcome and introductions9:30 - 9:50 — The case for Opencourseware at MIT

9:50 - 10:15 — Faculty perspectives on OCW10:15 - 10:30 — Break10:30 - 11:30 — Roundtable11:30 - 12:00 — International Consortium updates12:00 - 1:00 — The case for Opencourseware at other institutions

(Lunch)1:00 – 1:30 — Discussion: Common OCW vision and movement1:30 - 2:15 — Discussion: Diffusion of innovation and the OCW

movement2:15 - 2:30 — Break2:30 - 3:30 — Discussion: Building the movement3:30 - 4:30 — Discussion: Collaboration4:30 - 4:45 — EduCommons demonstration4:45 - 5:00 — Wrap up

Agenda


Context Setting



Context Setting — OCW and OER

The World of Open Educational Resources

ContentMaterials published for learning or reference

Learning Reference

Collections• UTOPIA• Library of Congress• Internet Archive• Google Scholar• Wikis• PLoS and other open journals

Courseware• MIT OCW• JHSPH OCW• Tufts OCW• UMich OCW• Utah St. OCW• Sofia

Learning Objects

• Rice Connexions• Merlot• UC-Berkeley videos

DevelopmentTools

• Rice Connexions

Groupware • H20 (at Harvard) • Wikis • USU’s OSLO research

Content Management

Systems (CMS) • USU’s Educommons

ToolsSoftware for developmentand delivery of resources

Licensing Tools

• Creative Commons

Best Practices • CMU (design principles)

Interoperability • OKI • IMS

StandardsShared conventions for

digital publishing of open resources

Learning Management

Systems (LMS) • Sakai • Moodle

The term “Open Educational Resources” was first adopted at UNESCO's 2002 Forum on the Impact of OpenCourseWare for Higher Education in Developing Countries, and is defined as Web-based materials offered freely and openly for reuse in teaching, learning and research.


› Structure Materials organized as courses Courses organized as curricula

› Comprehensiveness Depth of materials within each course:

• Planning materials• Subject matter• Learning activities

Breadth of materials — courses presented together:• Communicates institutional approach to

teaching a subject• Supports cross-curricular study and

innovation

Material Type All Roles

Lecture notes 64.70%

Full text readings 41.90%

Assignments 24.00%

Syllabi 23.40%

Top 4 types of content identified as among most

important by users

Source: 2004 Intercept Survey

“As a chemical engineering student, it's great to have somewhere I can come to get high quality notes and tutoring, including in math and other disciplines that intersect chemical engineering.”

— Student inNorth America

Context Setting — Unique value of OCW


› DepthSince 10/1/03, an estimated 3.4 million visits from:

Educators:• Enhancing personal knowledge• Planning a course• Preparing to teach a specific class

Students:• Supplementing materials from courses

at their institution • Enhancing personal knowledge

Self learners• Enhancing personal knowledge• Keeping current on field developments

“…MIT offers well organized courses and lecture notes making it simple to explore new subjects and understand in an organized way. The syllabus gives a great insight and makes learning a targeted goal. I don't really have to waste my time for searching the Web…”

— Self-learner in Egypt



James, affiliate instructor at the University of Idaho

› Adopted both course materialand site structure of an MITSloan Course

› Added his own material andmodified the MIT OCW site

› “I will probably differ in that I willintroduce the concept of ValueEngineering and I have a lectureprepared on FMEA. I haven’t seenthese topics discussed in the MITcurriculum. But… OpenCourseWaregives me a fast start on the designof the course.”



› BreadthSince 10/1/03, an estimated 727,000 visits from:

Educators:• Enhancing research• Planning curriculum• Advising students

Students:• Planning their course of study

Self learners• Planning institutional or independent study

“Higher learning institutions in developing countries, like Instituto Tecnológico de Santo Domingo in Dominican Republic, are constantly working hard on how to keep up with first-rate academic programs…under very tight budget and resource constraints. With this initiative, MIT reassures its commitment to academic leadership and knowledge transfer on a worldwide level.”

— Educator in Dominican Republic



› University of Ghana in Legon’s Computer Science Department is using MIT OCW materials to update its curriculum

“OCW reflects current trends and thus provides an immediate bridge of the digital divide that would otherwise take five years to cross… Other sources for curriculum review include so much hassle and bureaucracy that by the time the review is made the material is easily years old… OCW bypasses all of that by connecting everyone in real-time to MIT’s most up-to-date material.”

— Professor Jacob Aryeetey, head of

Computer Science Department



Region

Extremely Positive/ Positive

Moderately/ Somewhat Positive Not Positive

North America 85.6% 13.8% 0.6%East Asia 85.8% 13.2% 1.0%Western Europe 88.2% 10.5% 1.3%South Asia 89.3% 10.5% 0.2%Latin America 97.3% 2.7% 0.0%Eastern Europe 82.4% 16.7% 1.0%MENA 88.2% 9.1% 2.7%Sub-Saharan Africa 93.6% 3.8% 2.6%Pacific 78.7% 17.3% 4.0%Central Asia 76.9% 19.2% 3.8%Caribbean 94.1% 5.9% 0.0%All Regions 87.6% 11.5% 0.9%

StatementStrongly

Agree/ Agree Neutral

Disagree/ Strongly Disagree

Helped me be more productive and effective 81.1% 18.3% 0.5%Helped me learn 88.0% 11.6% 0.5%Improved my courses using OCW (Educators) 84.5% 12.9% 2.7%Increased my motivation and interest in learning 80.2% 19.0% 0.8%I would recommend OCW to others 92.5% 7.1% 0.5%

Visitor Impact Statement Agreement

Regional Impact Perceptions

Source:2004 Intercept Survey

Source:2004 Intercept Survey

Context Setting — OCW impact


Afternoon Discussions



› What is an opencourseware?

› What is our vision for the opencourseware movement?

Common OCW Vision — Key questions


› What is the theory behind successful movements?

› How is the theory relevant to the OCW movement?

› What are the drivers and barriers for a successful OCW movement?

Diffusion of Innovation — Key questions


› A century of research in the field of diffusion of innovation

Tardes (1903): S-curve

Ryan & Gross (1940s): Diffusion/adoption of hybrid seed among Iowa farmers

Rogers (1980s – 1990s): Theory of diffusion of innovation

Many others

› Of interest in broad array of professions

Advertising and marketing

Product development

Healthcare policy

Education

› Four interrelated concepts:

Decision/Adoption Process Steps an individual or organization goes through in adopting (or rejecting) an innovation

Kinds/Characteristics Factors that influence if and when an individual or organization willof Adopters adopt an innovation over time

Stages of Diffusion Macro view of how an innovation catches on and when it crosses theand Adoption “tipping point” from experiment to mainstream product or method

Drivers and Barriers Factors that may accelerate or impede diffusion and adoption andwhether/how these factors can be influenced

Be not the first by whom the new is tried,Nor the last to lay the old aside.

- Alexander Pope

Diffusion of Innovation — Background


› Process by which innovation is communicated over time to members of a social system

› Decisions not authoritative or collective – each individual makes own decision on adoption

› Adoption process follows 5 steps:

1 Awareness Individual exposed to innovation but lacks complete

information

2 Interest Individual persuaded toward favorable opinion,seeks more information

3 Decision Individual evaluates innovation, decides to try it

4 Trial Individual implements innovation

5 Adoption Individual commits to innovation based on results of

trial

Diffusion of Innovation — Adoption process

The most striking feature of diffusion theory is that for most members of a social system, the innovation-decision depends heavily on the innovation-decisions of the other members of the system.

- Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations (1995)


If the opinion leaders observe that the innovation has been effective for the innovators, then they will be encouraged to adopt.

- Everett RogersDiffusion of Innovations (1995)

Innovators Venturesome, reasonably well-resourced, able to understand and apply complex knowledge, comfortable with uncertainty

Early Adopters

High degree of opinion leadership, role model for other members of system, successful

Early Majority

Interactive with peers but seldom opinion leaders, deliberative about new directions

Late Majority

Cautious and skeptical, reactive to peer pressure, sometimes economically strained

Laggards Isolationist, suspicious of innovation, point of reference in the past

Diffusion of Innovation — Adopter types


Stage 1Innovation

Stage 2Diffusion

Stage 3Adoption

Experiment

Mainstream

Tip

pin

g P

oin

t

Innovators Early Adopters Early Majority Late Majority Laggards

Diffusion of Innovation — Stages


› Drivers and barriers are specific to the particular innovation and the context or environment to which it applies

› Generally, drivers and barriers include some variation on these themes:

Awareness of innovation

Perceived importance/efficacy of the innovation

Demand for/applicability of the innovation among target group

Cost of the innovation

Resources available for implementation

Desire to be perceived as leader/innovator

External factors such as economic/political/regulatory climate

Diffusion of Innovation — Drivers and barriers


Op

en

cou

rsew

are

Sit

es

Stage 1Innovation

Stage 2Diffusion

Stage 3Adoption

Innovators Early Adopters Majority Adopters

• Pilot Sites• Definitions/Standards• Clear Messaging• Recruiting

• Critical Mass• Breadth/Quality• Recognition/Acceptance

of Concept

• Widespread Adoption/ Use of Materials

• Broad Acceptance of IP/Licensing Practice

Diffusion of Innovation — Stages of OCW movement


› What are the most effective strategies for leveraging the drivers?

› What are the most effective strategies for overcoming the barriers?

› What should be the sequence for implementing these strategies?

Building the Movement — Key questions


› How do we work together to implement the strategies identified in the earlier session?

› What are our key messages about the movement and consortium?

Collaboration — Key questions


› Working groups

› Pilot sites

› Meetings and communications

› Other ideas?

Collaboration — Working together


Collaboration — Key messages

› Movement Common definition of an opencourseware

• “

Importance of opencourseware• Examples:

– Equalizes access to knowledge and information– Democratizes education– Eliminates reinvention of course materials

› Consortium A group of institutions are working together on creation of

opencourseware pilot sites Soft launch, with no mention of “c” word to media for now


Collaboration — Goals of Chronicle article

› Clear definition of what is an opencourseware

“

› The “movement” is catching on at other institutions

› Other institutions will offer high-quality, complementary content to what is available on MIT OCW

opencourseware consortium planning meeting0 february 17, 2005 opencourseware consortium planning...

Documents

impact of opencourseware

common ocw vision

meeting information

educational technology3

chemical engineering

webbased materials

developing countries

intercept surveyas