Dig prof oer_mqb_sh_v4_june2011
47
Digital professionalism and consent commons - helping to engender trust? Megan Quentin-Baxter & Suzanne Hardy Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Medicine Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine [email protected] [email protected]
-
Upload
suzannehardy -
Category
Education
-
view
827 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Dig prof oer_mqb_sh_v4_june2011
Digital professionalism and consent commons - helping to engender
trust? Megan Quentin-Baxter & Suzanne Hardy
Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Medicine Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine
Outline
• Digital professionalism and consent commons– Ease of copying digital learning resources in health– IPR, copyright and Creative Commons– Using recordings of people in learning resources– Understanding and managing risk– Organisational policies and disclaimers
• Towards a consent commons for teaching materials • What tools, mechanisms and architecture are available
“learners' information literacies are relatively weak but learners have little awareness of the problem”
Beetham et al 2009
“many medical students seem unaware of or unconcerned with the possible ramifications of sharing personal information in publicly available online profiles even though such information could affect their professional lives”
Ferdig et al, 2008
UK policy context
• Patient voice, societal change• Law (devolution), PSRBs, associations• HEFCE JISC/Academy open educational resources (OER)
programme (publishing and sharing educational content)• Projects in health and social care• Health and social care educational context• Educational context• Recommendations• Attribution and disclaimer
UK HEFCE JISC/Academy OER programme
• Organising Open Educational Resources (OOER)
• [PHORUS – HSaP]• Phase 1 OER project
• 250K - Apr 2009-Mar 2010
• Investigated institutional practice, developed toolkits, disseminated widely
• 15 UK partners
• www.medev.ac.uk/oer/
• PORSCHE & ACTOR• [SWAPBox – SWAP]• Phase 2 OER projects• £125K & £20K respectively• Linking NHS and academic
networks• Disseminating through
‘clinical education’ programmes (training the trainers)
Sharing openly is good
• Use of public funds/money, cost savings, collaboration• Transparency and accountability• Legally defensible• Advantages for student recruitment and participation,
learning, satisfaction and retention• Equality of access, helping the developing world• Students are using OER and it does save time:
blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/learningtechnology/2011/02/08/it-turns-out-that-oer-does-save-time-and-students-do-use-them/
www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/value/
Digital professionalism• To be a digital professional
every member of staff who contributes to curriculum delivery, in both NHS and academic settings should be able to identify, model and understand professional behaviour in the digital environment.
CC-BY Official US Navy Imagerywww.flickr.com/photos/usnavy/5509486066/
• Information/resources increasingly easy to find• Blurring of personal and professional identities online• Increasing need to manage issues of disclosure• Changing public expectations• Misunderstandings of digital spaces• Consequence
• Permanence• Lack of understanding of ownership
and licencing in online environments
Intellectual property rights (IPR)
• There are four main types of IP rights (www.ipo.gov.uk)– Patents protect what makes things work (e.g. engine parts,
chemical formulas)– Trade marks are signs (like words and logos) that
distinguish goods and services in the marketplace– Designs protect the appearance of a product/logo,
from the shape of an aeroplane to a fashion item– Copyright is an automatic right which applies when
the work is expressed (fixed, written or recorded)• Copyright, Design and Patents Act, 1988• Copyright arises automatically when an original idea (author
uses some judgment or skill) is expressed/created
www.medev.ac.uk
Copyright owners
• The owner of the copyright is the person (or persons, if jointly owned) who created/expressed the work
• A copyright owner has economic and moral rights• Economic rights cover copyright owner acts, including rights to
copy the work, distribute (e.g. making it available on-line), rent, lend, perform, show, or adapt it
• Owners can waive, assign, licence or sell the ownership of their economic rights
• Moral rights can be waived (but not licensed or assigned) and include the right to (www.cla.co.uk)– Be identified as the author – Deny a work (that an author did not create) – Object to derogatory treatment of the work
www.medev.ac.uk
Using licenced works
• A licence (a set of rules) describes how copyright items may be used by others
• Licensing schemes (such as Creative Commons) that both authors (owners) and users can access for free – If both sides observe the rules then both parties are instantly
protected – Owners licence others to use their content– Users obey the terms of the licence– Creative Commons provides different licences that can be
combined together– Policies can be developed to guide owners what licences to
use www.medev.ac.uk
www.medev.ac.ukCreative Commons: creativecommons.org/about/licenses/
Policies, disclaimers and risk
• In order to safeguard yourself against litigation for copyright or data protection (consent) violation– Have a policy/disclaimer– Clearly publish your policy and keep it up to date– Train your staff in the use of the policy– Follow your policy (do what you say you will do)
• You may also want a disclaimer ‘this resource has been provided… use it at your own risk. If you have any concerns about any material appearing in this resource…’
• Actively manage your risks• Take out liability insurance
www.medev.ac.uk
www.medev.ac.uk
Good practice compliance table (managing risk)Explanation Risk of litigation from
infringement of IPR/copyright or patient consent rights
Action
3 Institutional policies are clearly in place to enable resources to be compared to the toolkits.
Low. Institution follows best practice and has effective take down strategies. Institution able to legally pursue those infringing the institution’s rights.
Periodically test resources against policies to keep policies under review. Keep abreast of media stories. Limited liability insurance required.
2 Compliance tested and policies are adequate in most but not all aspects to allow the compliance of a resource to be accurately estimated. A small number of areas where policies need to be further developed for complete clarity.
Medium. Ownership of resources is likely to be clear. Good practice is followed in relation to patients. Take down and other ‘complaint’ policies are in place and being followed.
Review those areas where developed is required, possibly in relation to e.g. staff not employed by the institution e.g. emeritus or visiting or NHS. It may be that a partner organisation requires improvement to their policies. Some liability insurance may be necessary.
1 Compliance tested but too few policies available or insufficiently specified to allow the compliance of any particular resource to good practice guidelines to be accurately estimated.
Medium. It is unlikely that the ownership and therefore licensing of resources is clear. Resources theoretically owned by the institution could be being ripped off.
Collate suite of examples of best practice and review against existing institutional policies. Follow due process to amend and implement those which are relevant to the institution. Take out liability insurance.
0 Compliance with the toolkits unknown/untested.
Compliance has been tested and materials failed to pass.
High/Unknown. Risk may be minimal if resource was developed based on best practice principles. Institutional policy status (ownership, consent) is unknown.
Establish a task force to test some resources against institutional policies; then follow 1-3 below. Take out liability insurance.
October 2010 cc: by-sa
Consent as distinct from IPR
• Defined by the principles in the Data Protection Act 1998 and Human Rights Act 1998
• Recognises the need for more sophisticated management of consent for recordings of people (stills, videos, audios, etc.)– Teachers (academics, clinicians, practice/work based learning tutors, etc.)– Students and ‘product placement’ (branded items) – Role players/actors/performers/hired help (including recording crew)– Patients/patient families/care workers/support staff/members of public in
healthcare settings (sensitive personal data) – GMC guidelines for consent/patient recordings
www.medev.ac.uk
Proposing a “Consent Commons”
• A human subject version of Creative Commons• Accepts a basic human right to refuse their image/voice
appearing and, where they have previously consented, their right to withdraw their consent
• Would work like Creative Commons in that you hallmark material with the consent status and when consent needs to be reviewed (if ever)
• Has levels of release (e.g. Closed; ‘medic restrict’; review [date]; fully open)
• Terms of the consent needs to be stored with/near the resource
www.medev.ac.uk
Consent everything-even where ownership and patient/non-patient rights appear clear, and store consent with resource
Engendering trust
Institutional policy recommendations
• That authors should ‘hallmark’ all their content with CC licences e.g. CC ‘by’ (attribution only)
• Consent everything-even where ownership and patient/non-patient rights appear clear, and store consent with resource
• Review institutional policies against good practice• Include disclaimers in resources• UK HE enters a dialogue with publishers to increase the
potential for re-using upstream copyrights• Have sophisticated‘take-down’policies
www.medev.ac.uk
Attribution and disclaimer
• This file is made available under a Creative Commons attribution share alike licence
• To attribute author/s please include the phrase “cc: by-sa Megan Quentin-Baxter and Suzanne Hardy, June 2011, http://www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/ “
• Users are free to link to, reuse and remix this material under the terms of the licence which stipulates that any derivatives must bear the same terms. Anyone with any concerns about the way in which any material appearing here has been linked to, used or remixed from elsewhere, please contact the author who will make reasonable endeavour to take down the original files within 10 working days.
www.medev.ac.uk
Breakout/workshop
• Are we/students already ‘digital professionals’?• Is there a need for a ‘consent commons’?
– Is it reasonable to assume that we should consent everything if it is to be made ‘OER’?
– How should we manage a person’s right to withdraw consent?
• What is missing (do we need to consider/do)?
What tools, mechanisms and architecture are available?
“most learners are still strongly led by tutors and course practices: tutor skills and confidence with technology are therefore critical to learners' development”
Beetham et al, 2009
www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer
www.nottingham.ac.uk/xpert/
University of Warwick Anatomy collection as part of their iTunes U presencedeimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/warwick.ac.uk.1885881473.01885881478.1882421734?i=2066269580
Give credit where credit is due
Principles
1. Acknowledge that patients’ interests and rights are paramount.2. Respect the rights to privacy and dignity of other people who are included in recordings, such as family members and health care workers.3. Respect the rights of those who own the recordings and the intellectual property of those recordings, and check and comply with the licences for use.4. Take professional responsibility for your making and use of recordings and alert colleagues to their legal and ethical responsibilities where appropriate.
Email: [email protected]
23thingswarwick.blogspot.com/p/programme-outline.html
Manage risk by adopting good practice
• Know how to find appropriately licenced content• Use the most openly licenced content wherever
possible• Attribute 3rd party material• Explicitly attribute your own work with disclaimer and
licence as openly as possible• Pass on good practice to peers and students
Mitigating risk by adopting good practice to save time and money
OER is irrelevant(but a nice by-product )
Attribution and disclaimer
• This file is made available under a Creative Commons attribution share alike licence
• To attribute author/s please include the phrase “cc: by-sa Megan Quentin-Baxter and Suzanne Hardy, June 2011, http://www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/ “
• Users are free to link to, reuse and remix this material under the terms of the licence which stipulates that any derivatives must bear the same terms. Anyone with any concerns about the way in which any material appearing here has been linked to, used or remixed from elsewhere, please contact the author who will make reasonable endeavour to take down the original files within 10 working days.
www.medev.ac.uk
References• Beetham, H., L. McGill, et al. (2009). Thriving in the 21st century: Learning Literacies for the Digital Age.
Glasgow, Glasgow Caledonian University/JISC. Online at http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/projects/llidareportjune2009.pdf
• Chretien, K. C., S. R. Greysen, et al. (2009). "Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students." JAMA 302(12): pp1309-1315.
• Ellaway, R. (2010). "eMedical Teacher # 38: Digital Professionalism." Medical Teacher 32(8): pp705–707.
• Farnan, J. M., J. A. M. Paro, et al. (2009). "The Relationship Status of Digital Media and Professionalism: It’s Complicated " Academic Medicine 84(11): pp1479-1481.
• Ferdig, R. E., K. Dawson, et al. (2008). "Medical students’ and residents’ use of online social networking tools: Implications for teaching professionalism in medical education." First Monday 13(9). Online at http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2161/2026
• Thompson, L. A., K. Dawson, et al. (2008). "The Intersection of Online Social Networking with Medical Professionalism." J Gen Intern Med 23(7): p954-957.
• Mostaghimi,A., Crotty, B.H., “Professionalism in the digital age” Annals of Internal Medicine 19 Apr 2011;154(8):560-562.
• The Higher Education Academy OER pages: www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/teachingandlearning/oer/
• The JISC OER pages: www.jisc.ac.uk/oer• The OER InfoKit from JISC InfoNet:
openeducationalresources.pbworks.com• The OER Synthesis and Evaluation Report:
www.caledonianacademy.net/spaces/oer/• The JISC Legal IPR Toolkit:
www.web2rights.com/OERIPRSupport/index.html
References
• http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/xpert/attribution/• http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm• http://oerwiki.iiep-unesco.org/index.php?title=UNESCO_OER_Toolkit• http://www.creativecommons.org• http://wylio.com/ • http://openattribute.com
References
openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/ www.elearningreadiness.org/ stemoer.pbworks.com/w/page/6799480/User-Guide-to-OER www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=415115&c=1 blogs.unbc.ca/open/2011/02/03/finding-and-using-open-educational-resources/ www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/ http://stemoer.pbworks.com/w/page/40417233/Release-Checklist
URLs
• www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer• www.nottingham.ac.uk/xpert/• http://creativecommons.org/• www.jorum.ac.uk/• www.flickr.com/search/advanced/• www.google.com/advanced_image_search/• www.nottingham.ac.uk/xerte/• www.glomaker.org/• http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/
