An introduction to the OpenEdu framework on openness in higher education Andreia Inamorato dos Santos Yves Punie Jonatan Castaño Muñoz @aisantos

1. Joint Research Centre
the European Commission's
in-house science service
The 10
dimensions of
open education
An introduction to the
OpenEdu framework on
openness in higher
education
Andreia Inamorato dos Santos
Yves Punie
Jonatan Castaño Muñoz
@aisantos

2. 2
The JRC is the in-house scientific
service of the European
Commission. It provides the
scientific advice and technical
know-how to support EU policies
ICT for Learning and
Skills Team - IPTS

3. 3
1 2
Open Education OpenEdu
Studies
OpenEdu
Framework &
Dimensions
3

4. 4
Open Education is in Europe's Agenda
The framework was designed to support higher education
institutions in Europe to make strategic decisions on open
education. It is a hands-on tool created by the OpenEdu Project as
a response to the European Commission's Communication
'Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all
through newTechnologies andOpen Educational Resources'

5. OpenCases OpenCred MoocknowledgeOpenSurvey
OpenEdu Project
OpenEdu Framework
90+ stakeholders consulted
9 case studies 4 case studies 5 countries survey of learners
OpenEdu supports the 2013 Communication ' Opening up Education: Innovative Teaching and Learning
for all through New Technologies and Open Educational Resources
Tool:
OpenEdu Framework
in-house
research
Final
Report

6. 6
What are the main challenges for opening up higher
education?
What /How to
sustainability
collaborations
strategy
CHALLENGES

7. 7
A mode of realising education, often enabled by
digital technologies, aiming to widen access and
participation to everyone by removing barriers
and making learning accessible, abundant, and
customisable for all. It offers multiple ways of
teaching and learning, building and sharing
knowledge, as well as a variety of access routes
to formal and non-formal education, bridging
them.
What is open education?
Source: JRC IPTS Report: Opening up Education: a
support framework for higher education institutions.
(forthcoming, 2016 )

8. 8
OpenSurvey: Policy or mission statements in Open
Education
32.2%
60.1%
21.2%
28% 26.4%
18.9%
65.3%
39.9%
78.8%
64.1%
68.4%
81.1%
2.5% 0% 0%
7.9% 5.2%
0%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
OVERALL France Germany Poland Spain UK
Yes, policy or mission statement in support of Open Education
No, no policy or mission statement is available on Open Education
Yes, policy or mission statement expressing reservations concerning Open Education
%
Number of valid responses after weighting: 113 (for overall) and 141 (for country comparison) –Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS 2015.

9. 9
Has the engagement in Open Education produced so far
financial benefits for your institution?
23%
77%
Yes No
- Reach more students is
the most common
mentioned benefit for
institutions.
- Others: marketing,
small income directly
generated by OE
(external fund,
freemium..), more
quality and retention.
Source: OpenSurvey open
question
Number of valid responses after weighting : 43 (Only respondents who provide Open Education)–Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS 2015.

10. 10
Promoting OER – Planning to do so – No planning
51.4%
35.2%
10%
11.1%
38.6%
53.6%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Use Development and offer
Promotion Not ,but planned No plans or don't know
%
Number of valid responses after weighting: from 108 to 114 depending on the question -Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS 2015.

11. 11
Is offering MOOCs part of your institutions's official
educational strategy?
57.5%
42.5%
Yes No
Number of valid responses after weighting : 25 (Only respondents who offer MOOCs) –Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS 2015.

12. 12
Collaboration in MOOCs
55.9%
41.4%
12.6%
3.9%
39.6%
56.8%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
MOOCs development MOOC recognition
Yes, with institutions in own country Yes, cross-border (i.e. with institutions from other countries) No
%
Number of valid responses after weighting : 25 (Only respondents who promote the development and offer of OER) –Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS
2015.

13. 13
The lack of transparency and strategy
makes collaboration opportunities less
visible

14. 14
Collaboration in the development of OER
45.7%
21.4%
45.7%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Yes, with institutions in own
country
Yes, cross-border (i.e. with
institutions from other countries)
No
%
Number of valid responses after weighting: 38 (Only respondents who promote the development and offer of OER) –Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS 2015.

15. 15
Offer of MOOCs
21.8%
36%
10.1% 8.4%
33.8% 35.1%
19%
26.2%
13%
23.7%
14.5% 12.3%
59.2%
37.8%
76.9%
67.9%
51.7% 52.6%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
OVERALL France Germany Poland Spain United Kingdom
MOOCs offered MOOCs planned No plans or don't know
%
Number of valid responses after weighting :117 (for overall) and 144 (for country comparison) –Data from OpenSurvey study. JRC-IPTS 2015.

16. 16
OpenCred Research Design
2
2
2
2
In-depth interviews with
academics
In-depth interviews with
MOOC learners
In-depth interviews with staff
of employer bodies
4
Desk research on all 28
Member States
case studies

17. 17
OpenCred’s traffic light model
Source: OpenCred, 2016

18. 18
OpenCases:
catálogo de
mini casos de
educação aberta

19. 19
JRC-IPTS OpenEdu framework on behalf
of DG EAC
The framework was designed to support higher education
institutions in Europe to make strategic decisions on open
education.
It is a hands-on tool created by the OpenEdu Project as a
response to the European Commission's Communication
'Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all
through newTechnologies andOpen Educational Resources'

20. 20
Framework: universities’ executives of 19 European
countries participated in the validation

21. 21
Recognition dimension

22. 22
Why is a framework for OE important?
The framework challenges
conventional wisdom. It provides
a guide to think through critical
questions. No framework provides
definitive answers. The answers
come through the insights
generated by the process of
engaging with the framework.

23. 23
What does the framework look like?
For each dimension of open
education, the framework
brings:
√ Dimension definition
√ Rationale
√ Components
√ descriptors
• Dimensions:
• 6 core: access,
content, pedagogy,
recognition,
collaboration,
technology, research
• 4 transversal:
strategy, leadership,
technology, quality
Opening up education strategic
planning template

24. 24
Source: JRC IPTS report (2016, forthcoming):' Opening up education
in Europe – a support framework for higher education institutions
(OpenEdu)'
Opening up education framework

25. 25
Multiple ways of dealing with OE
.
The university
can choose
to work with all
dimensions or a
selection
The framework is
dynamic and always
evolving
The university
can add
descriptors and
practices to
customise the

26. 26
How should I/my institution use the framework?
The framework targets decision makers in universities, and anyone who can propose
practices and policies
3. Open
Education
strategy
development
1. Open
Education audit
and staff
engagement
2. Framework
as tool to
develop insight,
inspire vision
and develop
new
perspectives
and ideas

27. 27
Content dimension

28. 28
Core dimension: recognition
Recognition enables open education learners to make the transition from non-formal to formal education, to
complete a programme of tertiary education in a more flexible way, or to get recruited/ promoted at the
workplace. When submitting their credentials for recognition, learners expect to gain 'validated credits' which
will help them to move ahead professionally and in their personal lives.
Assessment | Identity validation |Trust andTransparency | RPL (recognition of prior learning) | FastTrack
Recognition |Qualification | Social recognition

29. 29

30. 30
Thank you
andreia-inamorato-dos.santos@ec.europa.eu