Elevation gain

Format ImagePosted on by Lena

Week 4: Open Ed MOOC + signals from the network

I’m writing this post at high elevation. I’m in the mountains of Colorado after spending the week at the WCET conference. In addition to my very important role as sole Canadian representative present, I spent my time listening and trying to translate differences between the American and Canadian education systems.

This post is a mash-up of ideas that have been floating around the network for #OpenAccessWeek and #OpenEdMOOC and have combined with some of the conversations I had at WCET.

There are two undercurrents:

The textbook: I’ve heard it won’t be with us for long.

The end of the textbook narrative has been coming primarily from brilliant educators who believe everyone should put 100% of their creative effort into teaching. These people can make the case for a mash-up of openly licensed materials in their sleep and it sounds so right. I think it is.

But, I’m also hearing from administrators and others who are working hard to get the idea of openly licensed materials into the culture of their institution. For them, the open textbook is the gateway to the larger culture shift. Even if an educator adopts an open textbook it is likely they will still want their students to have a print option. Digital itself is still a bridge too far for some.

As we heard in Week 4 of #OpenEdMOOC, it takes a couple of cycles to fully understand the pedagogical affordances of open. You need to experience the process of iterating and sharing before you have your Bodhi moment. Before you can see the space beyond free.

‘point break rip bodhi’ by Rollan Budi, September 21, 2010

In the meantime, we need to build infrastructure that allows educators to easily find, adapt and retain OER. That infrastructure needs to allow for discovery and adaptation of open textbooks, course materials, modules, streaming video, course outlines – anything that aids teaching.

Commercialization: several zones of the network have expressed concern over commercialization of publicly funded resources.

Jenni Hayman articulated this concern through an analysis of the Cengage announcement.

Geoff Cain chose the otherwise routine commute video as his setting to ask the big question: why is CC-BY the gold standard of open licensing?

It is going to be increasingly important that we support our educators to choose the open license that works best for them. Especially if they are coming to open for the first time. I have been returning to the “How to Destroy Open Ed” live notes from the #OpenEd17 Ethics workshop. There are so many interesting ideas captured here. A few of my favourites to close this post:

How do we ensure that Open Ed is not open?

  • Have commercial publishers who already create open educational resource additives (that have a cost) take over the creation and sale of OER altogether.
  • Not empower teachers/teaching & learning
  • Engage in double-speak where my work is “not really open” because it is not available for a corporation to sell (CC-by-nc)

Questions about Creative Common’s licenses

Format ImagePosted on by OpenEdMOOC – Brainstorm in Progress
This has certainly been an issue for some faculty. I think part of the issue is trust. Open education is more than just the content – once it all becomes just about the “OER” then we lose that sense of trust and the spirit of collegiality. We have reduced faculty work and possibly the teaching and learning itself into a transaction. This faculty member I am talking about is sharing her materials to help students and faculty and is not interested in enabling corporations to monetize, however indirectly, her work. I don’t see an issue with non-commercial licenses, but I am interested in hearing why “CC-by” is such the gold standard ?

What is Open Education #OpenEdMOOC

Format ImagePosted on by NurseKillam
Today’s MOOC experience is really challenging my reflective brain as so many questions are being raised about open education. As expressed in previous posts I share a core value with the open education community, but today I am struggling to fit Wiley’s (2015) definition of open with my reality. Below is an honest reflection on the open education movement as I consider if I can be on the cutting edge of this movement in Ontario.

Open is not Free

Open Educational Resources (OER) are free, but they are more than free. In fact, David Wiley (2015) suggests that “open is not free.” This statement makes sense when he explains it, but really causes me to think about my own views and experiences of openness in education. When I first learned of the open movement in Ontario this August I immediately knew I would love it. I thought I was already producing open resources, but YouTube videos are not necessarily open. They are freely accessible online but not truly open. This realization is pivotal one for me. What Wiley (2015) defines as open comes with certain permissions for how the resources can be used. In the course they say that:
Open = Free access + Open Licensing
Open educational resources are licensed under creative commons licenses (or something similar) in order to decrease barriers for users to access and use them. David Wiley and George Siemens talk about the 5Rs of open content in a course I am currently taking Introduction to Open Education through edX. Click here fro more about the 5 Rs. Below I discuss some of my questions and concerns about moving from free to open. Retain Content needs to be owned by the user – they need to be able to retain a copy. In order to engage in the rest of the “Rs” of open content the user needs to be able to own content. For textbooks, this ownership means the ability to download a keep a copy of the book. As a textbook writer I have no concerns about this R for my books. Kindle, Amazon, Google Play etc. all allow offline reading of their books. Downloading and owning a copy of a book would not harm the reach of the book from what I can tell. In fact, the more people that download it the better. For YouTube videos the same would not be true. I have no fears around allowing people to download and keep copies of my videos, but it would hurt my YouTube analytics and therefore my reach. If my goal is to empower as many students as possible I need to play the YouTube game to be found through search. While I do not have a full understanding of the YouTube search algorithm I know that a major consideration is watch time. The higher a video’s watch time the more likely it is that the video will be found in subsequent searches. If people decide to download a video and watch it offline instead of on YouTube that video would be less likely to be found in subsequent searches. If my goal is to reach students allowing downloads seems counter-intuitive. Below is one video that looks at the impact of watch time on a channel’s success. Reuse / Revise / Remix / Redistribute  For traditional textbooks to me it makes sense to allow educators to take a verbatim copy of the book and use it (reuse), make changes (revise) or combine it with other OERs (remix). In fact, I am in the process of reviewing one now and hope to adapt it at some point. I would love to take an OER textbook and have students work with me to adapt it to the needs of our class, but for some courses I can’t find one to use as a starting point yet. I have some hope as this course has made me aware of more places to look. Perhaps I will be able to write one but I first need permission and time to do so. Again, I am uncertain of the implications of allowing YouTube videos to be reused and redistributed. My fear is that it will harm my ability to reach students. I assume that the YouTube Creative Commons option means that people would be free to download the video and upload it to their channel or wherever else. That could be problematic or it could be equivalent to the growth strategy of collaboration that I have used in the past depending on how the videos are presented on the other channel.  I created a video for EmpowerRN that is on her channel and mine. As you can see she introduces the video and credits me for the video. In the context of YouTube, revise and remix makes sense to me. However, colleagues have suggested it may tarnish my reputation if OER are used without appropriate context. When I collaborate with other YouTubers as above I do have some control over how they are used. Is that necessary? Oer GIFs - Find & Share on GIPHY Creative Commons licensing would allow me to place restrictions on the types of permissions I grant to users through their website. However, YouTube offers only one Creative Commons licensing option – the CC BY license (YouTube’s description). Maybe I would feel more comfortable with the other options being made available. I like that they say my original video will automatically show up under source videos, but I think I will need to look into how that works. I am not sure how they would know if someone downloaded it and made major edits. In my next video I am going to test out the user end of things to see how YouTube reacts to the uploading of Creative Commons content. Why to embrace the 5Rs  Adopting an open approach and the 5Rs could be amazing. The impact of my work on students could be enhanced and built upon by other educators more readily. If we as educators can build upon the work of others more easily we can be more effective in sharing knowledge, which is what education is all about. Some really insightful things to consider are being raised in the #OpenEdMOOC course. I feel like I am at a turning point in my career. Do the potential benefits of going fully open outweigh the risks? To what extent am I able to go open beyond YouTube? Who will go open with me? Am I allowed to go open in aspects of the courses I teach? Thankfully I have some friends at my institution and outside my institution at eCampusOntario that will be able to support me in this journey. Questions to Explore What they are proposing is a paradigm shift for education. While there are obvious benefits for openness in education, for many that I have talked to it raises questions and fears about the future of educational institutions. There is this sense that in order to protect what makes a professor or institution unique it is essential to keep things closed and copyrighted. I disagree. Based on my not quite “open” educational experience on YouTube I see the value in sharing everything I create at no cost to students. However, I still struggle with some aspects of openness in education as it applies to real-world experiences. Will being truly “open” hurt me? Evidence seems to suggest quite the opposite. Hopefully by the end of this course I will have figured some of these issues out or identified what needs to be discovered. Since I have been involved in this discussion since August I can tell you that there is no quick solution. As an innovator it can be challenging to be on the cutting edge of such a movement when systems are not yet in place to facilitate such a movement. Maybe it is because my union and management are still in contract negotiations, but I was held back from trying some open education ideas this semester (by both sides). In a previous blog I expressed some of these frustrations. I can’t wait for the strike to end so I can get back to discussions about what is allowed or not in terms of high impact open education within the context of the courses I teach. Open education should, after all, decrease student costs and increase their success in learning.  

References

Wiley, D. (2015). OER summit at LLC – Dr. David Wiley. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/sOhaJZMZ-rc  

Awareness of aaRRRRRgh’s

Format ImagePosted on by Rebecca Heiser
In the recent #OpenEdMOOC we reviewed the “5 R’s” to consider licensing curriculum. And here’s where it gets tricky… its not that educators don’t want to use OERs in their courses, it’s that creators aren’t sure they want to be contributors to OER. There’s serious concern with incentivizing and prioritizing OER adoption at a large, research institutions. Who “owns” the content? The creator or the institution? For example, in a course development process, the course author (faculty member) will vet and select the course readings required for the course. This is typically a very time-consuming process. Typically, course authors are aware and interested in providing course materials that can be distributed at lower or no additional cost to the student. Anyway, once the author chooses the course materials,  I determine:
  • How much of the text will be used, is it under the 10-15% rule?
  • If course materials be accessed electronically through our library?
  • If we need to request copyright permission to embed the content in our course?
After working through the above processes to incorporate materials and all the other steps to finalize the course, we move course content from a MASTER development space to a LIVE course space. The course author does not “own” the course. Neither do I. The university does. The current model of education does not actively support ($$$$$) an open community of faculty (and specialized staff) to develop a course space  to distribute their expertise for free while working in an iterative development cycle to improve quality. How can we support a community of faculty and specialists to volunteer their resources, time, expertise and knowledge to create a body of work to share openly, without concerns of recourse?  Some may suggest MOOCs as a possible solution. Education systems value MOOCs as marketing-tools and therefore, offer incentives to have courses produced. The MOOC model can support the disconnect, but has many flaws, including costly production. The OER cultural shift has begun and the biggest challenge is the current business model of education.

On the OER Hunt!

Format ImagePosted on by Alexa Tyler
This week in the edX course, Introduction to Open Education, there is a strong focus on “creating, finding, and using OERS.” This is a nice change from the general focus of copyright and creative commons. I have decided to look into different OER databases and provide them to you with short summaries. Not only could this help you in your future courses, but, it serves as a nice reminder for myself. OpenStax According to the “About Us” page, OpenStax “is a nonprofit based at Rice University, and it’s [their] mission to improve student access to education” (OpenStax, n.d. pp.1). While exploring this site I found that it only covers five different categories of materials: math, science, social sciences, humanities, and AP.  Looking deeper into the resources they are fairly basic in the nature of their content – this content could be used in a entry level course or a general core course at a university. These OERs look and operate just like an eBook from a commercial publisher. While I personally would not use this site as it does not cover the subjects that I teach, I would recommend it to those in the previously states disciplines. OER Commons This website is a digital public library and covers a wider range of topics and concentrations than OpenStax. This website also offers instructors the ability to create using their resource builder, lesson builder, and module builder. The types of material available for use are very diverse, anything from case studies to simulations, you could find anything your academic heart desires. Under each OER there is a “conditions of use” which lets the user know how the user can manipulate the artifact – most are remix and share. I personally plan on using this website for my future courses as there are so many artifacts to choose from and all are at no cost to the student! OER Knowledge Cloud At first glance this site does not offer much visually which could turn-off some viewers who are already familiar with the previous two resources. The website does have an FAQ which does a decent job of answering the most basic questions regarding OERs and creative commons. When searching their database the list of items that appear are hard to read and uninviting despite how good their content may be. Honestly, this website did not offer much and I would not really recommend it to anyone searching out innovative OERs for their classes. Keep in mind there is a vast amount of OER databases and I only covered three for the sake of time – plus no one wants to read while I drone on about my opinion on websites all day. Instead I will include a link where you can find a list of high quality OER databases that I hope you will enjoy: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/infotech/chapter/oer-database-list/

More Credits – Less Commercial Textbooks

Format ImagePosted on by Alexa Tyler
In regards to textbooks, the question has been posed: “Why don’t faculty come together, collaborate, and create their own textbooks and resources for their courses?” The most common and simple answer is time. Faculty do not perceive having the time to invest in creating and regularly updating course materials. However, a group of faculty may be able to achieve more when collaborating than they think. Currently, at the University I am employed at, the director of my department has found a way to increase the number of new online courses created through a cohort model. This model allows for multiple faculty members to work together, review work, and give suggestions to one another during the course of the design process. Each faculty member is also given a list of individuals within the university that could assist them in various areas – from media productions to library services. My question is, can this cohort model be applied to the creation of OERs? While it may not be feasible to do this for every online course, could it be used for the required core courses? Are we really taking full advantage of the talent and the knowledge of our faculty by using commercial textbooks? I don’t think that we are. To me, using commercial textbooks is an indication of the priorities of the faculty in that department. While I do not want to demonize or scrutinize those who use commercial textbooks, I do think it is feasible for faculty to come together to design OERs. As stated in the week 3 lectures in the edX Introduction to Open Education course, Dr. Wiley discusses the idea of incentives and the alignment of incentives. Faculty currently may not see the benefits of using an OER because they are not being “compensated” for their time. However, if students do not have to pay for course materials, it is more likely that students will take more class, and isn’t that the goal of a University? The university does not get paid for adopting commercial textbooks, the university gets paid for students enrolled in courses. With all of this in mind, is it really that wild of an concept to have faculty come together and create OERs for their courses?

Exploring my YouTube Copyright #OpenEdMOOC

Format ImagePosted on by NurseKillam
In week 2 of a course I am navigating at my own procrastinator’s pace we have been asked to consider Copyright, the Public Domain and the Commons. I am actually really excited to delve into this week’s content because it is a critical think to understand as a content creator. Lawyers, Librarians and Educators please jump in and comment on this post to help me get my head around this issue.

Copyright

I live in Canada. Since the MOOC I am taking says that laws are specific to where you live I decided to visit the Government of Canada’s guide to copyright. If I am interpreting it correctly the Copyright Act “protects” materials that I produce (written work, sound recordings, videos etc.) since I am a Canadian citizen for 50 years after I die. Interestingly, “copyright exists automatically when an original work or other subject-matter is created, provided the conditions set out in the Copyright Act have been met.” These conditions, from what I can tell, are tat the work is original and produced in Canada (or another treaty country). There is an optional registration process explained on that page for those who are interested. From what I can tell Canadian law is a lot like what is explained in the video below. As our course instructors point out, copyright in an educational context is complicated. Much of the discussion over intellectual property and copyright is yet to be settled in the current discussions between faculty and their employers. Individual institutions may also have policies on intellectual property. That may be a topic deserving of further exploration in the upcoming months. Educators need to be careful not to share content that they do not actually own. To complicate things further, “Fair use” in Canada is a topic that is actually going through some clarification in the courts, but as I understand it that does not apply to public dissemination, a core component of open education. My librarian would have a lot to say about that topic. Recently, York University lost a legal battle over this issue (Read more here). Personally, I have avoided any potential “fair use” in my classroom because I am fuzzy on the boundaries of such laws. If you want to show a movie in class, play music or even post sections of a book make sure you run that by your local librarian expert before you get you and your institution sued. Or, better yet, move towards open educational resources so you don’t need to worry about getting sued. Copyright by Default  Copyright is assigned by default to creative works. Instead of opting-in to copyright, creators who want to share openly need to opt out. Take a look at what I just found hidden under the advanced options on my YouTube channel.
YouTube Copyright

YouTube Copyright

By default my videos are licensed under a Standard YouTube License. I didn’t read through all of section 6, but I did notice that “you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content.” Now I know why I get emails asking if educators can use my videos in their courses. I always say yes, of course, it is on YouTube, that means it can be used right … maybe. I thought that was a given when I posted videos online, but I guess the default is not that way. I am still a little fuzzy on this point since it is quite common for educators to give students links to YouTube videos to watch before/after/during classes. Maybe embedding a video in the course is different.

Gellinger / Pixabay

I want my videos to be used for education. What I need to wrap my head around is the consequences of moving to a creative commons license instead of the default license. Will I be misinterpreted when people remove the context in a remix of my video (one of the fears expressed by a colleague)? What about plagiarism? I have actually found one of my videos, unchanged, uploaded to a different channel without attribution in the past. Despite my commitment to openness, that kind of bothered me.  

Creative Commons 

Here is a helpful video explaining Creative Commons licensing. Creative Commons makes it easy for creators to grant permissions to others to share and use content they create.   Reach more people. That is a huge benefit of creative commons licensing. Generally speaking, I would like my videos and other creative works to be revised, remixed, reused and redistributed like Wiley and Green (2012) discuss. However, a lot of work goes into the creation of YouTube videos. As a creator I want to be credited (cited) for that work. There are a lot of creative commons licensing options. It gets a little confusing. YouTube has simplified things for my by offering me only two options – Standard or Creative Commons. The Creative Commons license that YouTube allows creators to select is a CC BY license (read more here). Conveniently, I think that is the one I want. Today I learned that it layers on top of Copyright and allows a creator to say what others can do with their work. If someone uses a video but doesn’t meet the terms set by the creator they can no longer use the work. Neat. I am just not clear on how that will be enforced on YouTube. I am fine with a remix of my videos – I just want to be cited. I also don’t want a pure copycat. Can I still make a copyright claim against someone who downloads a video of mine, doesn’t edit it at all, and re-uploads it without citing me? Creative Commons goes both ways.  Guess what – I have also discovered the potential to use other videos in my work. YAY! Now that I know about this feature of YouTube I might be able to cut down some of my own video production costs. I pay yearly for a lot of the images you see in my videos. The only problem is that I don’t like the YouTube video editor. This nifty website helps you find content licensed under creative commons licensing that I can download, edit and use! Awesome … I am going to add that to my to-try list. https://search.creativecommons.org/   Experimentation time I am working on a video about Open Educational Resources – it would only make sense to license that video using creative commons and test out this new approach.

Why you should Embrace Openness as a Value #OpenEdMOOC

Format ImagePosted on by NurseKillam
I first heard of the open education movement during a life changing experience that ran in August called Ontario Extend. Since then I have dove into the movement head first by engaging with peers on Twitter, exploring opportunities through eCampusOntario, adopting (and reviewing) an open textbook, and taking a course called Introduction to Open Education through edX. This journey has been exciting and challenging as you may be able to tell if you follow my blog. Please join my connected community as I delve deeper into the open education movement, exploring the evidence around it.

What is Open Education

Good question – the definition of “open education” or “open educational resources” will vary based on who you talk to.  There is no standard definition in the literature (Wiley, Bliss, & McEwen, 2014) that I have come across to date. In a future post I hope to explore this concept in more depth, but for now let’s consider open educational resources as characterized by
  • Free high quality learning materials
  • Visible and accessible to the public
  • Can be used for teaching and learning

Why Embrace Open Education

There are so many reasons to embrace openness in education. Some of the ones that stood out for me include removing barriers to learning, therefore increasing access to education and creating new ways of engaging with learners around the world. One of my favorite take-aways so far in this OpenEdMOOC course is that No longer do I need to sit in front of a computer being my own critic. With a simple press of the “publish” button inside word press I can invite discussion around evolving ideas in my head that will ultimately increase my reflection and promote a higher quality end product. [Side note: Yet, in academia these open resources are traditionally not regarded as acceptable sources of information (a topic for another post someday)].   Openness should be widely accepted in education, in my opinion. After all, education is about sharing knowledge … If you are an educator you have probably dealt with students who have not been able to afford text books. Think about the difference it would make for them if you could remove that barrier to education – good news! you can. More an more high quality open textbooks are being published. There are not nearly enough yet, but it is a work in progress.   With an open approach to education you can literally break down the walls of the classroom and create more meaningful learning opportunities for students. Students can interact with people from all over the world and get answers to their questions. Openness is also beneficial for educators. Being open invites critique on a public platform where ideas can be shared and developed. It has made me stronger as an educator.

My Commitment to Open Education

If one perceives openness as a value (Wiley, 2016) then I have been committed to the idea of open education since before I became an educator. As a student I remember making my study notes “open” in a way by sharing them with my peers. If I had a website back then I would have posted everything I had. Sharing knowledge is just part of who I am as an educator. The idea is that sharing in study groups or with everyone would ultimately make us all more successful as nurses. Flash forward a few years and I became an educator who freely shares whatever I can wherever I can. The values underpinning open education resonate with my own values. It feels like I have found a home among friends who share common beliefs as I get more and more connected to open educators. While exciting this new journey I am on comes with scrutiny from those who fear their jobs will be replaced by open educational resources. The videos from week 1 briefly touched on this fear, dismissing it, but I hope there will be more discussion in the future.

Fotomek / Pixabay

I am particularly interested in Week 2’s content about Copyright, the Public Domain and the Commons.

NDE / Pixabay

     

References

Wiley, D. (2016). Iterating toward openness. Retrieved from https://opencontent.org/blog/archives/4828 Wiley D., Bliss T. J., & McEwen M. (2014) Open educational resources: A review of the literature. In: Spector J., Merrill M., Elen J., Bishop M. (eds) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer, New York, NY.

Resolving the Reusability Paradox (Part 4 of 6)

Format ImagePosted on by Peter Nilsson

Being reminded of the Reusability Paradox (something I had been introduced to a handful of years ago, but had no context for deeply understanding then) might have been one of the most critical components of this course to date for me.  

In brief (and in my own words), the Reusability Paradox states that the more useful something is in a given moment in a given classroom, the less useful it is in other moments in other classrooms.  The more a question serves a particular purpose for you, the less it will be useful for others.  Conversely, the more generally useful something is for everyone, the less useful it is at any given moment.  But once you customize it to make it useful in a given moment, the less useful it is to others.

The example of this in my mind has been the discourse surrounding growth mindset.  Everyone is excited about growth mindsets.  But how is that useful for a math teacher who is teaching how to factor polynomials?  In order to make it useful in that context, the math teacher says to a struggling student, "let's try completing the square" or "have we tried all strategies for factoring?" Because these encourage different strategies, questions or activities help a math student believe that their intelligence isn't fixed, and that they can improve at math by learning and trying different strategies for factoring polynomials.

But now that the particular learning approach/object/experience has been customized to be relevant to math teachers only.  Once customized with the language of a discipline the intervention is no longer useful to English teachers, history teachers, language teachers, etc.  This is the Reusability Paradox.  The more useful something is to you, the less useful it is to someone else.


~

This paradox had been lodged in my mind as something unresolved, and even in my notes from this week’s lecture, I included Wiley’s follow up statement—“The permissions granted by open licenses are the escape hatch from the reusability paradox.”—almost as an afterthought.  In the context of this week, the Reusability Paradox arose in discussion briefly, was lightly brushed aside, and then the lecture moved on.  The paradox was an accepted fate, and something of a non-issue.

But revisiting notes from old conversations and rooting around in recent blog posts by Audrey Watters (9/2017) and David Wiley (4/2015) led me to the realization that there has been contentious, exasperating, protracted discussion about "learning objects" (usable, portable bits of curriculum) in the context of the Reusability Paradox.  


And, it also led me to the rediscovery that the paradox has a solution, and that Wiley's offhand remark about an "escape hatch" is actually quite significant.

So, I created a simple image—graph and text—as a reminder that the learning object isn’t doomed, but that if it is to be (re)incarnated, it must be done so in a way that is remixable, fully. If we are to share bits of curriculum, we need to be sure that they are customizable, that they are fully open.  Without this capability, their usefulness to others is limited.  This is crucial.

I wonder if I should be confident in this conclusion, that I can take it as fact, or whether, as Watters cautions, I should dive more deeply to better understand the history of the debate.  We have time to only know so much...


~

Upon reflection, I've seen this borne out in my own work on a local sharing platform.  We administered a survey to participants in a summer fellowship built around sharing resources.  What did they say they were looking for online?


It was clear that our teachers wanted flexibility.  They didn't want fixed objects.  Reusability comes from being able to tweak other people's practices.  They wanted ideas that they can fine tune, or conceptual frames that they can then design within. 

And this validates Wiley's "escape hatch."  The Reusability Paradox isn't a paradox at all if what matters most is a teacher's ability to edit, revise, tweak, or remix what other teachers have done.  The ability to change is all.  To adapt.  Teachers want to customize for their own settings.  They want to design it anew.

It's no wonder.  Teaching is the most creative profession I can think of.  We are designing experiences every single day, and delivering/performing them (even when we are the guide on the side) every single day.  The thrill is as much in preparation and delivery--in the design and execution--as it is in the relationships we form, the learning we structure, and outcomes we foster.

Learner Activity Hub Guide for #OpenEdMOOC and #YogaMOOC

Format ImagePosted on by Matt Crosslin

For those that are taking The Science and Practice of Yoga (YogaMOOC) or Introduction to Open Education (OpenEdMOOC), you might have noticed that we have a learner activity hub for both (OpenEdMOOC here and YogaMOOC here). We did this so that learners could create their reflections on their own websites, but still be connected in manner that is better than posting links in the discussion forum.

After putting many people in the hub, I realized it would have been a good idea to create a more comprehensive guide to creating a blog for these hubs. Better late than never. If you have created a blog and got the email that you were successfully added, this guide might still help you improve your blog. If you got an email saying there is a problem, this guide will hopefully help trouble shoot what caused that. If you are thinking of submitting a blog, please read this guide fully before doing so (even if you are an experienced blogger – not all blog platforms work the same in the hub).

I will start off by going over setting up a blog for the hub, and then cover the parts of the form to sign up for the hub (OpenEdMOOC here and YogaMOOC here) and why we need that info. First, the most important part.

You Need to Have a Blog

A blog is optional in either course, therefore you will have to set one up on your own (or use an existing one). We do not create a blog for you (some people filled out the form thinking that was the case). The blog you use will need to be public (private blogs do not work with the hub). Putting your blog in the hub is also optional, so no problem if you want to keep it private.

WordPress.com blogs are the best option to use with the hub, so if you are new to blogging (or want to create another blog just for this course), then I recommend starting there. The Hub uses WordPress itself, so it works best with those blogs that also use WordPress. Blogger/Blogspot blogs also work well (just read the exception to tags/categories below). Other blogging platforms – Tumblr, Weebly, Wix, Web.com, etc – are hit and miss. The Hub uses a technology called RSS to pull in posts, and some of those platforms have RSS feeds turned off it seems. If you use those platforms, you will have to turn on RSS. If you want to use one of those platforms with tags/categories (see below), you will also need to turn on RSS for tags/categories.

Setting up a Blog

Once you create your blog, you will need to set it up so that we can pull in your posts to the Hub. A newly created blog will generally need a few things to be ready for the hub. Since I am recommending WordPress, I will cover how to this on WordPress – but other blogging platforms should have similar functions.

First, you need to decide if the blog is going to only be used only for the course, or if it will have other topics covered (or already has). Either way is fine – if you want to cover a wide range of topics, but only want to have the ones on your course feed into the Learner Hub, we can do that with tags and categories.

Once you have decided how to use the blog, come up with a title for it that matches how you want to use it. Then change the title in the General Settings. We have probably 30 or so blogs currently in the Hub just called “Site Title” because many don’t change this setting :)

Next, you will probably want to edit the About page that most blogs come with. It is a good idea to put a picture you want to use in the Hub on that page. You have probably noticed that the Hub shows pictures of some people with their post, and generic ones for others. This is because I was able to find images of some people on their websites. I start with the About page and use any image there. Then I look on the sidebar or any other places for images. I also look on Twitter for an avatar there if you put that in there. I then look for any other images on the blog, even if they are stock images from the default template. If I can’t find anything, or the only image I can find has already been used, then I put your name in jdenticon. Note that you can use any image of yourself you want, or even something else to represent yourself like your favorite animal. Just note in the comment forms where the image is that you want me to use, or respond to the confirmation email from me with the image or link to it. Whatever you are comfortable with – your picture or some other image – is fine with me.

Finally, you need to have at least one blog post about the course you are taking, even if the whole blog is going to be used for the course. People try to spam the hub with their… whatever, so having content on your website about the course let’s me know you are legit. WordPress blogs start off with a sample blog post already there. The Hub seems to ignore these if they are left as is, so make sure to change that post to something about the course, or delete it and write a new one. If you want to use tags or categories to designate which content to pull into the Hub, then make sure to add a “YogaMOOC” tag or category to your post (these are called “labels” in Blogger). This is probably the biggest mistake people make filling out the form – they say they are using a tag or category, but then I can’t find a post with either one. I respect people’s wishes on this, so make sure to do what you indicated in the form. If you need help on tags/categories/labels, see these links:

Final note – if you don’t like the way your blog looks, there are thousands of different themes you can choose from to change it.

Filling Out The Form

Once your blog is ready to go, it is time to fill out the form for your course. I wanted to make a couple of notes about the fields on the form:

Name / Pseudonym: We use this to sort the posts in the Hub. Each person is given a category based on their name or a pseudonym. Please note: if you put just your first name in here, there is a chance that will get taken up quickly, and I will have to improvise a longer name for you. Names like “Kat”, “John”, etc get taken up quickly.

Email: This is where we will send confirmation or notification of failure. These are bulk emails, so be sure to check your spam folder.

Twitter Name: Not a requirement, but if you have an avatar there you would like to use in the Hub, then fill this out.

Blog URL: This is the second place people often make a mistake. This is the link to your blog for the people that read it, not to the control panel for your blog. Make sure to view your blog and share that full URL. Also remember: if you can’t copy what you put into this field and put it in a browser to pull up your website, then neither can I. Please make sure it is a full web address. Also, make sure it is not a link to your Facebook page or Instagram account – these are not blogs.

Hub Options: Make sure to choose the one that you will use (full blog dedicated to course, using blog category for course, or using blog tag for course). This is where I find the most mistakes in the form – people say they will use a tag or category and then do not. Also, make sure to use the tag/category designated for your course (YogaMOOC or OpenEdMOOC). Please note that using hashtags like #YogaMOOC or #OpenEdMOOC in the title or body of a blog is not the same as using the label or category feature of your blog.

Comments or Concerns: Let us know any comments/concerns you have here. Also, if there is a specific image you want to use in the Hub, let us know where it is in this field.

You will only need to submit the form once. The process of getting your blog into the hub is a manual one, so there could be a delay before I get it finished (especially if you submit outside of business hours in my timezone). If your blog makes it in the Hub, I will send a confirmation email. If there is problem, you will get an email about that (a generic one that repeats some of this blog post). Once you have fixed any issues with the Hub, respond to the email to let me know your blog is ready to try again. Due to the large number of learners in our courses, I can’t go back and check each one to see if errors have been fixed or not – you will have to let me know when it is ready. Don’t fill out the form again – just respond to the email.

Also, no need to fill out the form every time you create a blog post. The process of pulling in new posts is somewhat automated once you are in.

New blog posts have to go through a process of moderation in order to make sure no spam slips through. Therefore, there may be a delay from the time you publish your post and when it appears on the Hub.

Finally, if you want to change anything about the way your blog appears in the Hub after it has been successfully added, just respond to the confirmation email. No need to fill out the form again.

I hope this covers anything, but feel free to let me know if I left anything out. Have fun, and thank you for your participation!

Matt Crosslin
Matt Crosslin
Matt is currently the Learning Innovation Coordinator with the UT Arlington LINK Research Lab. His research focuses on Learning Theory, Innovation, and learner empowerment. Matt holds a Ph.D. in Learning Technologies from the University of North Texas, a Master of Education in Educational Technology from UT Brownsville, and a Bachelors of Science in Education from Baylor University. His research interests include instructional design, learning pathways, sociocultural theory, heutagogy, virtual reality, and open networked learning. He has a background in instructional design and teaching at both the secondary and university levels and has been an active blogger and conference presenter. He also enjoys networking and collaborative efforts involving faculty, students, administration, and anyone involved in the education process.
http://www.mattcrosslin.com