Teachers time is valuable (OE global2015)

1. Teacher’s Time is
Valuable
Colin de la Higuera and Camila Canellas
University of Nantes, France
|| OPEN EDUCATION GLOBAL CONFERENCE 2015 ||

2. The paper in a nutshell
• Creating quality OER is expensive in teacher’s time
• Failing to address the question can be a cause of
failure
• Creating technology to address this issue should be
a key challenge: let me show you some we are
working on
2

3. So, what’s new?
• This has been analysed with care since the
beginning of OER times
• Why bother to write another paper (hear another
talk) on this topic?
3

4. • The fact that the question has been solved
elsewhere is making the price even higher for the
latecomers
• “Why pay the teachers for this? The Americans aren’t
doing it anymore. Surely this must mean that it is not a
good idea”
• “This is just a natural evolution of the system: the time
saved by not having to do photocopies can be used to
prepare OERs”
1
4

5. • Technology is making us want ever better OERs
• More technology seems to mean
2
More quality resources
More time spent by the teachers
5

6. • The enthusiasm of the promoters of OERs can be
counter-productive
• “If I am prepared to spend my week-end preparing cool
resources, why can’t you?”
• “Hey, why is it that I have to prepare the OER and you
get to publish a paper on it?”
3
6

7. So, what’s well documented?
• A framework of issues proposed by Stacey & Rominger
(2006)
• “Time” mentioned as the most significant barrier for not
adopting OER (Hylén, 2005)
• The question of effort is a crucial one on the perception of
OER production: teachers do not perceive OER as a means
to save time (Masterman et al., 2011)
• A range of incentives have been identified by West & Daly
(2014)
7

8. Some possible consequences of
opening your lectures
Material is made
public
You may be
filmed
Material should
be impeccable
You have to
solve copyright
issues
You are asked to
enrich the
content
You are asked to
sign agreements
8

9. The usual solutions (when the
problem is understood)
extra
funding,
direct
rewards
promotion
of teaching
quality
adding
support to
the teacher’s
tasks
convincing
the staff
9

10. Two misconceptions
free
=
open
OER
=
technology
=
time saving
&
10

11. About introducing technology
• Many initiatives aiming to produce technology
• For instance, the K4A supported « Opening up
Slovenia » effort
• In Nantes, project COCo
11

12. What are we doing wrong?
• Technology is introducing new constraints
• Technology should aim at making our life simpler
(our refers to the teachers)
12

13. Two proposals we make
time-saving
technology
crowdsourcing
metadata
peer
evaluation
enrichment
via quizzes
13

14. Enrichment via quizzes
• The teacher builds a set of simple quizzes
• The learner reaches a quiz and is asked
• To answer a question (self assessment)
• To vote for the question
• To propose an alternative question
• The system (by AB testing) runs a match between the
teacher’s question and the one proposed by the
teacher
• The goal is to end with better questions
14

15. An idea
15
The teacher builds a set of simple quizzes
• The learner reaches a quiz and is
asked
• To answer a question (self
assessment)
• To vote for the question
• To propose an alternative
question
• The system (by AB testing)
runs a match between the
teacher’s question and the
one proposed by the teacher
• The goal is to end with
better questions

16. comin-ocw.org
video enrichment
CominOpenCourseware
16

17. A final question
How do we convince the teachers that saving their
time thanks to software does not necessarily oblige
to consider replacing them by machines?
17

18. References
Cuban, L. (1996). Techno‐Reformers and Classroom Teachers. Retrieved November 27, 2014,
from www.edweek.org/ew/vol ‐16/06cuban.h1
Hylén, J. (2005). Open Educational Resources: Opportunities and Challenges. OECD’s Centre
for Educational Research and Innovation. Paris. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/edu/ceri
Masterman, L., Wild, J., White, D., & Manton, M. (2011). The impact of OER on teaching and
learning in UK universities: implications for Learning Design. International LAMS and
Learning Design Conference, 135–144. Retrieved from
lams2011sydney.lamsfoundation.org/docs/RP/Masterman_Wild.pdf
Schuwer, R., Kreijns, K., & Vermeulen, M. (2014). Wikiwijs : An unexpected journey and the
lessons learned towards OER. Open Praxis, 6(2), 91–102. Retrieved from
openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/116
Stacey, P., & Rominger, R. (2006). A Dialogue on Open Educational Resources and Social
Authoring Models. In Open Education 2006 Conference Proceedings (pp. 107–115). Utah
State University
West, Q., & Daly, U. (2014). OER Incentive Models Summaries. Retrieved November 30,
2014, from https://cccoer.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/oer
‐faculty‐incentive‐models‐2014.pdf
18

19. 19