Pelc 2010 ugc final

Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)Open and user-generated content: strategies to address quality and

copyright issues in Higher Education

Thomas Kretschmer & Thomas FischerInstitute for Innovation in Learning (ILI/FIM)

Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg (GERMANY)

PELC, 08/09 April 2010, Plymouth

© Institut für Lern-Innovation 2008

Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Background

„CONtent Creation Excellence through Dialogue in Education“ – CONCEDE

Quality of User Generated Content in HE

„Open Educational Quality Initiative“ – OPAL

Quality of Open Educational Resources in HE



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Introduction

“…because quality is no objective characteristics of a learning resource or a service, but is constituted as a specific characteristic of a context which – in turn - is made up through the relation of the personal, organisational, social and structural interaction of the stakeholders involved.” Ehlers (2010)



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Explosion of User Generated Content

Time person of the year 2008



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Changing faces of e-Learning

From Distribution… Learning Management Systems

Materials online

PresentationInformation

…to Collaboration and Reflection

E-PortfoliosWeblogs

Communication Collaboration

WiKisCommunities

Transmissive Learning

Expansive Learning



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Definition UGC

User-generated content (UGC) (…) refers to various kinds of media content, publicly available, that are produced by end-users. (Wikipedia)

OECD (2008):Publication and sharing: be it on a publicly accessible website, a collaborative project work, or on a page on a social networking site accessible to a selected group of people Creative effort: often also has a collaborative element to it, as is the case with websites which users can edit collaboratively. Yet the minimum amount of creative effort is hard to define and depends on the context. Creation outside professional contexts: but possibility of feedback into organisational settings. It often does not have an institutional or a commercial market context. Motivating factors include: connecting with peers, achieving a certain level of fame, notoriety, or prestige, and the desire to express oneself.



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Examples UGC

Discussion boards

Blogs/Micro-blogging

Wikis

Social networking sites

News Sites

Memories

Mobile Photos & Videos

Customer review sites

Experience or photo sharing sites

Any other website that offers the opportunity for the consumer to share their knowledge and familiarity with a product or experience



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Definition OER

„OER are digitised materials offered freely and openly for educators, students and self-learners to use and re-use for teaching, learning and research“ (OECD 2008)

includes:Learning content

Tools

Implementation resources



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Scope of OER

Margulies (2005)



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

To summarise:

UGC may be an educational resource …or not

UGC may be an OER …or not

Both can be learning objects



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Universities and UGC

Inhibiting factors to the introduction of UGC into HE:

Lack of time, skills and reward system for teachers and still a significant share of learners Reluctance of many teachers to use or create UGC, since they challenge the concept of “authority”Ensuring quality of UGC is sometimes perceived as an additional burden instead of a key asset for learning experiences’ enrichment and knowledge managementMeasuring quality of collaborative UGC is not easy due to the difficulty of seizing individual contributionsThe use of UGC for learning is often considered a supplement to traditional pedagogic strategies instead of vehicle of pedagogic and organisational innovation. insufficient involvement of stakeholders, policy makers and users in the dialogue on quality into higher education



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

What is the object of quality assessment in the production of UGC and learning 2.0 approaches ? (QMPP, 2009)

Activity, behaviour, communicationSocial interaction and networks; process of communication; activity, behaviour, communication

Process of learningProcess more important than outcomes; control of activities

Structure of learning objectsUser satisfaction; standardization; tagging



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

What are methods and instruments to assess/develop quality in the production of UGC and learning 2.0 approaches? (QMPP, 2009)

Self assessmentEmpowerment of learners; supporting system; tools & guidelines

Peer reviews, external assessment and collaborative dialogue

Polls, surveys; wisdom of the crowds

Challenges and problemsAbsence of standards; „garbage-in-garbage-out“-problem



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Peer creation Peer validation

Editing

Updating

Enriching

Benchmarking

Peer reviews

Peer reflections

Peer learning

Enablingprocesses

Enablingtools Enabling

policies

Enablingpolicies

Peers‘ / learners‘ side



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Methods of quality development for eLearning 2.0 (Ehlers 2009)

Methods of quality development

Quality assessment

by

Self-evaluation Learners with the

help of/ feedback by teachers

Assessment of e-portfolios

Teachers

Social recommendation

Peers, learning communities

Evaluations aimed at target group

Teachers



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Copyright / licensing

Traditional approach

OER: by definition not possible

UGC:•Limitation of creativity

•Problem to define contribution of individuals in collaborative outputs

Creative-Commons-alike approaches

OER: by definition included

UGC: •Increased reputation

•One problem disappears (there are enough left)



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

The CONCEDE quality framework(www.concede.cc)

Quality Procedures of LEARNERS

(discussed through peer reviews, comments and

rating)

INSTITUTIONAL Quality Procedures

(primarily represented by

teachers)

Dialogue & Negotiation



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

The vision

Open Educational Practices (OEP) are defined as practices which support the (re)use and production of high quality OER through institutional policies, promote innovative pedagogical models, and respect and empower learners as co-producers on their lifelong learning path



Institut fürLern-

Innovation(FIM

NeuesLernen)

Thank you for your attention!!

[email protected]

www.fim.uni-erlangen.de

www.efquel.org

Skype: kre.fim

SecondLife: Hildegard Morpork

Follow-up at the:

EFQUEL Innovation Forum

Sept. 8-10, Lisbon (Portugal)

Pelc 2010 ugc final

Education

Transcript of Pelc 2010 ugc final