Senior executives and OERu thought leaders answer questions on issues and opportunities

[Wayne Mackintosh]

Founding #OERu anchor partners and the open education community were invited to to submit issues and challenges which the OERu network will need to address.

These questions were answered by senior university executives and selected OERu thought leaders at the recent OERu meeting of founding anchor partners.

If you missed the live session, we have posted a recorded version in our report being developed on the wiki where Judith Murray (Vice President, Open Learning, Thomson Rivers University), Prof Narend Baijnath (Pro Vice-Chancellor Unisa),  Prof Jim Taylor AM (University of Southern Queensland), Prof Rory McGreal (UNESCO-COL Chair for OER and OERF Board Member) and Dr Wayne Mackintosh (Director of the OER Foundation) answer many of the questions you may be asking about the OERu initiative.

See:

http://wikieducator.org/OER_university/2011.11_OERu_Meeting_summary#OERu_Context.2C_challenges_and_potential_solutions

David Porter, Executive Director of BCcampus Canada tweeted: "The cast of players at OERu meeting gives this event and its outcomes instant credibility"

We are going to need your help if we are going to achieve success in our collective vision to deliver free learning opportunities for all students worldwide, especially those learners who are currently excluded from the formal system.

--
Wayne Mackintosh, Ph.D.
Director OER Foundation
Director, International Centre for Open Education,
Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand.
Founder and elected Community Council Member, WikiEducator
Mobile +64 21 2436 380
Skype: WGMNZ1
Twitter | identi.ca
Wikiblog

[Wayne Mackintosh]

Hi Simon,

During our 2012 prototype phase we aim to keep things simple, doable and within our means to achieve a successful outcome. 

We're not intending to host a networked LMS instance under one domain for the protoypes, but rather to provide easy ways to integrate OERu learning resource which we can deliver to any LMS from WikiEducator with a few clever javascript implementations to remove redundant wiki navigation for the target delivery technology.

As a small educational charity -- we do not have the financial resources to consider enterprise scale federation solutions at this time.  Moreover, the OER Foundation will not use non-free software solutions we host as a matter of policy. We respect the freedoms of learners and anchor partners to use the technologies of their choice which is why we are using the current approach for the prototypes which need to be up and running in 2012. 

I hope other networks with advanced knowledge and capacity to design, develop and provide support for federated solutions you are talking about will take the lead and address the gaps the OER Foundation is not equipped to tackle.  This is one of the reasons we conduct all our meetings transparently -- others can see what we are doing and where they can fit in to add value to the OERu network. 

The OERu is a large, complex and ambitious international project. The OER Foundation is very focused on what our role is within the network and we will avoid the temptations of mission drift.

Message: Bring your partners to the table to provide these solutions. The OERF does not have the capacity to do this.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 7:30 PM, simonfj <sim...@cols.com.au> wrote:

I'd like to focus on this one by Jim at USQ.

What about the cost of existing institutional licensing agreements with (i)the vendors of LMS software and (ii) publishers who provide access to e-library resources, including full text e-content? These financial agreements are usually a function of the number of "seats" which are provided only for an agreed number of officially registered mainstream students

"The suggested solution to these potentially problematic issues is to offer OERu courses (based solely on OER and embracing the pedagogy of discovery) via Moodle on WikiEducator thereby avoiding financial and administrative system interface complexities".

Statement: One primary role for OERu in all of this is that it becomes a "services provider/broker" to various Access federations.

Hosting a Moodle on the Wikieducator domain is a logical approach, just as it does a wiki at the moment. Other open source applications would naturally follow (depending on the communities' wants).

We can see the usual (institutional- centric) approach as SUNY begins to outsource its Moodle needs to MoodleRooms, as a host, in a cloud. This institutional centric approach is something aggregators like bccampus already aim to overcome by brokering, on behalf of a number of institutions, relationships with commercial service providers like Adobe, Elluminate as well as hosting opensource "apps" like Moodle. http://www.bccampus.ca/partnerships/ 

I've been suggesting that one of OERu's role is to act as the broker between National "access federations" like the aaf as well as other smaller (state wide) ones like bccampus. USQ, for example, is already a member of the ANZ federation. http://www.aaf.edu.au/subscribe/subscribers/ They share access to a range of catalogued services with other institutional subscribers. I can't see any reason why wikieducator/OERu services wouldn't be hosted in the aaf cloud, and could be spread from there.

National Access Federations all share one primary focus = to enable National institutions to share "services=apps". They all do this on an uncoordinated (between federations) basis already. So each national federation has their separate list of service providers. https://refeds.terena.org/index.php/Federations

At present  Access federations are attempting to work though how they share services (i.e. ConFederate) on a global basis. The focus for these activities always comes down to focussing on a "Virtual Organisation", of which OERu is one of the few global ones. OERu is the only I've seen that works in the "common services" space (moodles wikis, etc). Most others are based around large specialised research production networks like the Hadron Collider.

So, as I see it, one of OERu's roles in developing an International network is being the entity which aggregates a range of "services" under the one domain, which will be common to all access federations; An "honest broker" if you will. The main services (in such a platform) will be the kind that will support these governance meetings.

WE have seen during this open meeting that there "is there a model where students get some recognition that is perhaps skills / outcomes based that is not as bound by governance and accreditation" (as mentioned by SNHU, even if their names haven't been mentioned so far:). It's based on, not only capturing/distributing these open governance meetings on a(n increasingly) professional basis, but also working through the development/Confederation of (open access) platforms, which will include other institutions. (if for no other reason than it saves duplication and money)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org
To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator
To post to this group, send email to wikied...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
wikieducator...@googlegroups.com

[Wayne Mackintosh]

Simon,

The OERu can't innovate on too many fronts at this time. To achieve success in the short to medium term we must avoid the temptation to innovate beyond the capacity of society, the economy and our formal education institutions to implement the innovation. In this sense, I see innovation is creativity successfully implemented.

The power of the open governance and open philanthropy model is that the network federation innovators have the freedom to  mature as a node within the OER ecosystem in parallel with what we are doing. In time the "Eureaka" moment to which you refer will occur. Experience shows that many successful innovations occur between the grey areas of overlap between core movements and ideas.

There is a substantial risk for the OER Foundation to try and be the umbrella which brings all these parts together to soon because then we risk becoming a "Leatherman" tool that tries to do everything, but none of the individual "apps" of  the "Leatherman"  tool really works well. We need to leave the global federated network innovations to those who are better positioned and experienced to achieve the vision. It will happen in time through the open philosophy.

The OERu imperative and strategic focus is to achieve free learning opportunities for all students worldwide in the shortest possible time. 98 million learners who will be excluded from the formal education sector in the coming years depend on our success.  The OER Foundation aims to develop the prototypes which wiill demonstrate the model within the next year. We need to keep our focus.

Wayne

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:20 PM, simonfj <sim...@cols.com.au> wrote:

I always find that good minds underestimate themselves. I'm not sorry to say that you do too. Mind you, considering your work pace, you've gotta say "enough" sometiimes.

You've got your feet planted firmly on the ground; with the head not (yet) in the "clouds". And thank God for that.

Just give it time. The penny will drop. As you've pointed out, the aim is to "provide easy ways to integrate OERu learning resource (at one domain I would think) which we can deliver to any LMS from WikiEducator" (which is the domain you're going to integrate at, I would think). You can host the domain anywhere. If you do it at an IP address which is accessible via a federation's memberships institutional account, you have your network. Probably saved yourself a lot of hosting and bandwidth charges as well.

We can't stop the slow evolution of the new network model. i.e. sharing apps on an open network; any more than the OERu members want to share their content (at the moment) on separate ones. One is a federation of (access to) shared content, the other a federation of (access to) shared applications=services.

The network federation guys have done their thing, so far as their little (National/ANZ) perspectives are concerned. And they are floundering because most content communities expect them to look outside their National domains and say, "we're a global community." (look at out get togethers!)

From my perspective you are one of the leaders in the art of "open governance", which is quite an imaginative art. If you'd like to see what one of your peers in the .gov.au space is doing, it's here. http://digiculture.wikispaces.com/ You can see the commonality in approaches (on a national basis, not global like your own).

So let's not rush at this. As I track down others peers in different countries, the commonality in the tools they prefer to use becomes more apparent. You know how de Bono's "ah ha" effect works. The logic of a new model is perfectly obvious once all the pieces are understood.

BTW. Most community's same the same thing. "Bring your partners to the table. We don't have the resources". Most of the time that's only because they don't understand how networks work and what is possible. e.g. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1111/S00035/internet2-and-ipv6-provide-new-opportunities-for-music.htm
But hey! We're all learning. (in the art of open governance) me especially.
All the best.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org
To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator
To post to this group, send email to wikied...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
wikieducator...@googlegroups.com

[Wayne Mackintosh]

Glen,

There are neat ideas underpinning the NIXTY platform. 

Are you planning to open source the NIXTY code? You are using a python engine so this should not be too hard. If the value proposition you propose has benefit -- then I think institutions could consider this as a serious contender on a user pay basis. The pricing model as it stands will not scale imho. Your model is loading a 20% overhead on institutions who aim to serve OER learners.  While we may not be able to provide all the features NIXTY provides -- the OER Foundation can implement a solution for a fraction of the comparable cost. So why would institutions consider NIXTY from a cost perspective?. Existing technology deployments are already sunken cost and we can do what we aim to do with existing infrastructure.

As you know, the OER Foundation will not support or endorse non-free software for infrastructure components of the model. The risks of enclosure are too high for a global  open education initiative.

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Glen Moriarty <glen.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Simon, Wayne, and Others,

We created NIXTY with this type of federated model in mind. It is SaaS and there is no cost. I'll write more below about the business model/sustainability. Please forgive the length of this post, there is just a lot to share and I know that a few of you will have questions, so I'm trying to be comprehensive here.

The idea is that the platform provides a number of advantages over an isolated, institution based LMS. Here are a few of the advantages:

-Complete solution for OERu Institutions - Channel, Courses, Assessments, Payments, and Certificates. Doesn't mess with internal reporting of institution's own LMS and SIS.

-Persistent student data - students have an identity outside of the institution's LMS, so that they can take courses across universities and can continue to exist once they graduate (i.e., they are not deleted to save money on cutting 'seats).

-Facilitates collaboration across universities - Faculty and students can work with one another across institutions because they are not silo'd off in an isolated LMS.

-Enables easy reuse and remixing of content - courses can easily be cloned over across universities. We have an open course cloud in place and we could easily add the OERu courses so that they could be cloned over and adopted to each university.

-Enhanced Learning Analytics - Member institutions could opt to share data on learning outcomes across the courses to iterate on the content. 

There are several other advantages as well, but those the primary advantages to a shared network approach. Here a few helpful links that illustrate the platform:

Test Account - www.nixty.com - Login at top right - username: OERu Password: tester

Channel - each institution can create their own channel, which consists of a branded space with logos, an about area, courses, and instructors. You can see an example from Teachers Without Borders here:  www.nixty.com/c/twb 

Courses - Your typical LMS course capability - http://nixty.com/course/Introduction-to-NIXTY ; here is an example of one of MIT's OCW Lesson Tool:  http://nixty.com/lessons/lessonStudentLessonItem?course_id=1042&lesson_id=48

ePortfolio - includes CV in line browser doc display, work display/examples, recommendations, comments/posts etc. - http://nixty.com/eportfolio/fredmed1

Regarding our history, business model, and code. We launched last year and have focused explicitly on supporting open education. We've worked with the OCW Consortium, Teachers Without Borders, and other NGOs. We didn't want to make this a non-profit, because we didn't want to be dependent upon grant funding, so we needed to come up with a sustainable business model. The service is free. We will charge people 20% if they charge others. e.g., you create a course for $100, then we'll charge you $20. Additionally, we'll eventually roll out more sophisticated services (SIS integration, LDAP etc. that will cost a bit more, but still be wildly less expensive than current LMS models). Finally, code - NIXTY is written in Python. It is built to scale and the architecture is based on the federated model Wayne and Simon have discussed. At present, we are not open source. We started a conversation with Wayne and others about establishing whether or not the entire system needs to be open source or just "key elements". Once we identify the key elements we will immediately move towards open sourcing those pieces. We haven't yet, b/c of resource limitations and the need to get other features rolled out first. For example, in the next few weeks we'll be releasing IMS common cartridge support via EduCommons integration, Portuguese support (right now we have Spanish and English), payments etc. 

Simon, I'll ping you separately as it seems you've done a lot of thinking around this and it'd be great to talk more. I'd also welcome the opportunity to connect with others who are interested in solving these problems.

Thanks,

Glen

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 "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