Re: [OERU] An OOC on 'Storyboarding for Learning Design' - of interest to the OERu?
Gabi Witthaus
- Course description: https://artofelearning.wordpress.com/sldooc/
- Dates: 12 Jan to 20 Feb 2015
- Platform: CourseSites
- Resources: all resources created for the OOC will be licensed under a Free Cultural Works licence. Participants will also be encouraged to make their storyboards openly available.
- Time commitment: the OOC will be run entirely asynchronously; participants are advised to set aside 3 hours per week for it.
- Number of participants currently registered: 41
- For a description of how we are going about planning the OOC, see 'Storyboarding the Storyboarding course'.
Why storyboards?
- Do you think the Storyboarding OOC could be a useful addition to any existing or planned OERu courses?
- Are there particular questions you would like us to consider when planning the research?
- We need a 'hub', where OOC participants can share links to their storyboards, and also give brief descriptions of the courses that the storyboards represent. Would it be of value to the OERu community if we created a page in Wikieducator for this purpose?
- Any other comments or suggestions?
- Course description: https://artofelearning.wordpress.com/sldooc/
- Twitter #sldooc
Wayne Mackintosh
- Yes, Storyboarding will definitely be a useful addition to OERu courses. In fact, early in the new year I'll be developing an OERu mOOC on Digital Skills for Collaborative OER Development (see announcement here) and would like to include a substantive storyboarding e-Activity in the course.
- A key research question from my perspective is: What are the design implications for developing MOOCs for reuse and delivery across multiple platforms?
- Sure - anyone who wants to use the wiki for developing Storyboards is most welcome to use the platform. It may not have the visual design appeal of other technologies, but certainly worth exploring.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "OER university" group.
To post to this group, send email to oer-uni...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
oer-universit...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/oer-university?hl=en?hl=en
Visit the OER univeristy page on http://wikieducator.org/OER_university
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OERu" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to OERu+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Director OER Foundation
UNESCO, COL and ICDE Chair in OER, Otago Polytechnic & OER Foundation
Twitter: Mackiwg
Gabi Witthaus
- It's great that you can see a possible connection between the Storyboarding OOC and the new Digital Skills for Collaborative OER Development mOOC you will be developing. We'd be happy for you to use any or all the content from the OOC. (See point 4 below.)
- Thank you for the research question - we will include that in our research plan.
- The participants will develop their storyboards in spaces of their own choosing (e.g. Google Spreadsheets, Prezi, Popplets, Linoit and Gliffy). I would like to encourage them to share the links to those Storyboards via Wikieducator, as a way of disseminating their work for the benefit of the the sector, and particularly the OERu.
- The course activities will take place within CourseSites so that people can get feedback from peers in the course before disseminating their storyboards or reflections publicly. However, the course materials will all be made available publicly via Google Docs. To see our evolving storyboard for the OOC, with links to drafts of some of the activities, go to http://goo.gl/EFXmKH. (Warning: in keeping with the OERu's belief in 'radical transparency', this is work-in-progress and has many gaps and many half-baked resources at the moment, and you may see it changing before your eyes over the next few weeks!)
Gabi Witthaus
Wayne Mackintosh
Gabi Witthaus
Gabi Witthaus
Stephen Downes
Hiya all,
Thanks to Gabi for posting this and please allow me a few words.
> It stings a bit because Brenda and I are doing this as individuals with no institutional backing and zero funding, and we are sincerely trying to make a contribution to open education.
I appreciate that, and I’m sympathetic, because I’ve spent many years in a similar situation. By the same token, as I’m sure you would agree, this doesn’t render you immune from criticism. Much of the work I’ve done over the years has been criticized (and in turn, I’ve criticized my share of people along the way). It’s all dialogue and discussion, and intended to result in a better outcome.
> We are certainly not trying to limit openness
I hear this a lot – usually right after someone has taken some of another measure that limits openness. And that, I’m afraid, is how I would interpret the present circumstance.
In my view (and not everyone agrees with me) if you are requiring a login in order to access course materials, you are limiting openness:
- you are requiring that people give something (specifically, contact information) in order to access the material (there’s a reason Blackboard would want to force this)
- you are making it impossible for other sites to simply link to or embed the content you are sharing
- it is not accessible to search engines and aggregators
You might say that these aren’t very significant limitations. True enough. But my point is that they are limitations. You’ve created costs and barriers to the material. It is not open, at least, not open in what I would consider a meaningful sense of the word. Stuff behind userids and passwords has a very different status – a closed and presumptively private status.
> I don't believe that the idea of groups in open courses runs counter to the spirit of openness.
There are groups and then there are groups.
If people gather around open content and organize themselves into groups then that is very much in the spirit of openness. But that’s not what’s happening in this case. You required logins “to be able to set up and manage the groups effectively.” This makes the groups something you create and control, and not something people create and control for themselves.
I’m not sure exactly of the range and scale you had in mind of ‘managing’ the groups – it reminded me of some ill-fated attempts to automatically generate small groups in some previous MOOCs – but to the extent the groups are managed the course becomes less open. For example, are you telling people what groups they can join and what groups they can’t? Are discussions being limited to specific topics? Must groups be located on the course website?
Finally, what if a person doesn’t want to be in a group? This is true for many may people. All they want to do is read the course content and now you’re putting them into a group and giving them (presumably) unwanted messages and email.
You don’t have to agree with me about this. But it’s the sort of criticism of groups I have made many times in the past and would not be at all surprising for someone to see coming from me in this case, especially when it’s used as a justification for closing the course behind a login.
> I really don't want to go into battle with Stephen, but I can't let him give people the impression that the OOC is not open!
Then remove the login.
> by that logic, the MOOCs on all the major MOOC platforms are not MOOCs.
I’ve made that argument many times as well. J
In fact, many of the MOOC engines are closing their content behind subscription walls. Many also have licenses prohibiting sharing and reuse of the content. Some of them (and most of the ‘major’ MOOC engines) are now even charging for content. They keep chipping away at the definition of MOOC until it comes to resemble exactly the same sort of course that institutions were offering before MOOCs came along, except maybe at discounted prices.
The whole point of MOOCs is that you make them massive by eliminating the bottlenecks in traditional courses that made massive enrollments impossible. These limitations include:
- tuition or other fees
- logins and registration to view content
- centralized discussion forums
They also include things like heavy content (such as video), processor-intensive functions, personal interaction with the professor, etc.
Now I know, the Storyboarding course is not massive. My take is that this is because it couldn`t be massive. And it couldn’t be massive because it is closed or limited in certain ways that make massiveness impossible.
This is your choice. I understand the reasons behind the design decisions that you’ve made. But my observation stands: this makers it just like every other traditional online course – it’s being designed as a hands-on artisan course with specific interactive intent designed into the structure. That’s fine if that’s your choice. But you shouldn’t brand it as the other thing. Because it isn’t one.
Anyhow, I’m sorry the criticism made you feel bad. That wasn’t my intent.
-- Stephen
Gabi Witthaus
Wayne Mackintosh
- The OERF has developed a script which will harvest an outline of wiki pages and generate a static website snapshot for a course. (This is a prototype example before we progressed professional graphic design work - see below.)
- We commissioned a graphic designer to develop a responsive CSS framework which we will apply to future course snapshots. Here is a demo page - note as a demo, there are dead links.)