Case study 1 |
Document Management 1 |
|
School or Department |
School of Medical Sciences Educational Development |
|
Institution(s) involved |
Newcastle University |
|
Contact + Email |
Rebecca McCready (rebecca.mccready@ncl.ac.uk) Lindsay Wood (linday.wood@ncl.ac.uk) |
|
Date |
10 February 2010 |
|
Tags |
word 2007, IT skills, coursework, existing open resource, licence syncing, creative commons licence |
|
Questions |
Explanation and further information |
|---|---|
|
1. What is the curriculum context of the resource or resource collection? |
A highly generic learning resource for undergraduates and postgraduates in several disciplines. Currently used for undergraduate medicine, dentistry, biomedical sciences and psychology and also MSc, MRes and PhD postgraduate programmes to teach information technology skills in document management. Training is delivered using an online resource, 2-3 weeks prior to a course work assignment. |
|
2. What were the aims and objectives of the resource or resource collection? |
Development of Microsoft Word 2007 document management skills, including; employ good file management practices; use styles to format your documents; insert images and tables from other sources i.e. Irfanview, Excel; use captions and cross-referencing to link figures; insert headers and footers; employ good printing practices; effectively use the spelling and grammar checker and autocorrect features. |
|
3. How was the resource or resource collection implemented? |
Online material located on host institution web servers using HTML, PHP, and JavaScript. No access restrictions applied. Material complied with web accessibility guidelines. |
|
4. What technologies and/or e-tools were needed to deliver this? |
Visual Understanding Environment (http://vue.tufts.edu/) was used to construct decision tree maps for OOER guidance package advice. Open Labyrinth (http://sourceforge.net/projects/Open Labyrinth/) was used to create an online application to deliver the decision tree maps. SurveyMonkey (http://www.surveymonkey.com/) was used to survey partners and collection data on their methods used in pedagogy and resource discovery. JorumOpen (http://www.jorum.ac.uk/ ) was used as a repository to which learning resources were uploaded to. |
|
5. What guidance and/or support did you develop? |
Patient Consent guidance was used and as this resource did not involve patient data no further actions were needed. Institutional Policy guidance was not available. The location of institutional policy documents governing the member of academic staff’s IPR, for use in commercial or non-commercial applications, were not known. Internationalisation guidance was not available. IPR/Copyright guidance was followed and proposed a CC Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license. More of an introductory explanation and examples of the concepts of a license, copyright and IPR would have been useful in this guidance. This resource was published with a University copyright statement, but without specific license instructions. More explanation on how published learning resources have a license would be beneficial. Pedagogy/QA guidance was not available. The preliminary guidance survey was completed. No modifications were made to the resource. Answering a few of the questions was more difficult when the resource author had the intent to do something, but had not done so yet. Some of the terminology (i.e. IMS standard) was not known to the survey participant, it was thus assumed that the learning resource did not use this standard. Resource discovery was not available. The preliminary guidance survey was completed. Resource upload guidance was followed. The issue of syncing between the CC license in the repository and the license on a learning resource that was retrospective made open was highlighted. An explanation of the CC licensing system terminology was needed. |
|
6. Uploading and hosting resources. |
The resource was successfully uploaded as an open educational resource to the JorumOpen repository by the Learning and Teaching Advisor who authored the resource. The repository upload system was found to be simple to use. The repository publishing environment was satisfactory. A specific field to give direction on how the resource could be re-used (pedagogy) was thought a useful future addition. |
|
7. What are the key outcomes of the resource or resource collection? |
The outcome for staff is to clarify the institutional policies that oversee their IPR and how their teaching materials are licensed. Specific Institutional direction on IPR associated with non-commercial OER would be useful. The Pedagogy/QA guidance confirms that good practice has been followed prior to release. The most effective approach for a resource to be discovered and used by learners will be highlighted by the Resource Discovery guidance. This resource has provided a source of testing material to be used to develop the OOER guidance packages. Most users will require some basic instruction of the CC license terminology. There needs to be syncing of CC licenses on the resource and the repository link. The resource was previously available in the public domain hosted on the University web server. There will be a CC label, stating how the resource is to be licensed. The resource is now available for discovery on JorumOpen and has been indexed by the Google search engine. An ‘.ac.uk’ specific Google search of relevant keywords to this resource returns the JorumOpen hosted URL in a preferential position to the Institution hosted page. |
|
8. What follow-up activity will be/has been carried out as a result of the resource or resource collection? |
Monitoring of resource discovery. Syncing of CC licenses. Find location of relevant Institutional IPR documents |
|
9. What are the lessons learned from the resource or resource collection? |
This resource has proven successful in providing a source of testing material to develop the OOER guidance packages. The sustainability of the resource is expected to be approximately 3 years, with an annual review. Any changes in the resource status will need to be reflected in the JorumOpen repository by updating it manually. The risks in making this an OER were perceived as low. There is a potential for people to contact the resource author with questions regarding resource, thus increasing workload. An unexpected outcome was the need to sync repository and learning resource licenses. Resource further details: |