Simsek, Duygu; Sandor, Ágnes; Buckingham Shum, Simon; Ferguson, Rebecca; De Liddo, Anna and Whitelock, Denise (2015). Correlations between automated rhetorical analysis and tutors’ grades on student essays. In: 5th International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (LAK15), 16-20 March 2015, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA, ACM.
When assessing student essays, educators look for the students’ ability to present and pursue well-reasoned and strong arguments. Such scholarly argumentation is often articulated by rhetorical metadiscourse. Educators will be necessarily examining metadiscourse in students’ writing as signals of the intellectual moves that make their reasoning visible. Therefore students and educators could benefit from available powerful automated textual analysis that is able to detect rhetorical metadiscourse. However, there is a need to validate such technologies in higher education contexts, since they were originally developed in non-educational applications. This paper describes an evaluation study of a particular language analysis tool, the Xerox Incremental Parser (XIP), on undergraduate social science student essays, using the mark awarded as a measure of the quality of the writing. As part of this exploration, the study presented in this paper seeks to assess the quality of the XIP through correlational studies and multiple regression analysis.
As part of the Learning Analytics Community Exchange (LACE) project’s engagement with LAK15, we brought participants from across Europe together to talk about European perspectives on learning analytics.
Alejandra Martínez Monés from Spain talked about past work carried out as part of the European Kaleidoscope Network of Excellence that has implications for the development of learning analytics internationally. Alan Berg from The Netherlands provided links to a series of initiatives designed to bring researchers and practitioners together across national boundaries. Kairit Tammets introduced learning analytics work in Estonia, and Anne Boyer offered a French perspective. Members of the LACE project talked about their work to pull together research, practice and evidence across Europe.
Ferguson, Rebecca; Cooper, Adam; Drachsler, Hendrik; Kismihók, Gábor; Boyer, Anne; Tammets, Kairit, & Martínez Monés, Alejandra. (2015). Learning Analytics: European Perspectives. Paper presented at LAK16, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA.
Since the emergence of learning analytics in North America, researchers and practitioners have worked to develop an international community. The organization of events such as SoLAR Flares and LASI Locals, as well as the move of LAK in 2013 from North America to Europe, has supported this aim. There are now thriving learning analytics groups in North American, Europe and Australia, with smaller pockets of activity emerging on other continents. Nevertheless, much of the work carried out outside these forums, or published in languages other than English, is still inaccessible to most people in the community. This panel, organized by Europe’s Learning Analytics Community Exchange (LACE) project, brings together researchers from five European countries to examine the field from European perspectives. In doing so, it will identify the benefits and challenges associated with sharing and developing practice across national boundaries.
During January and early February I helped run a field trial of an android app for the MASELTOV project. The app is know as the MApp (short for MASELTOV app), and the aim of the field trial was to answer some research questions about participants’ use of the app to support their cultural and language learning (there’s a a quick overview of the trial and a report that include some initial data analysis).
We have collected a huge amount of data from participants’ phones during the 3 weeks of the trial, and having done some analysis of participants’ self reports of what they did I nnow startting to look at quantitative data collected from their phones. This includes identification of particular MApp services being used, and where and when they where being used.
So I’m straing to think about how best to preent this data, using maps, and sequences of maps over time, and my intial ideas are…….
- A map showing each participant’s use of various tools over a day.
So will have 17 (participants) x 21 (days) maps = 357 maps.
Each map would show use of a variety of services over time and space.
* Aim: to understand each individual’s overall usage of the MApp
- A map showing use of a particular tool by all users over space and time
E.g. for the forum tool, show where and when all participants are using it over a day (or longer?)
* Aim: to inform devlopment of particular services through knowledge of their usage patterns
- A map to show locations that participants frequently access (particular) services
* Aim: to compare with interview data, and to test our implicit assumptions
- A map to show services which are used when participants are on the move
i.e. which service is being used, the mode of transport, and the journey undertaken.
* Aim: to compare with interview data, to test our implicit assumptions, to see if there’s anything surprising occurring.
Originally posted on OEPScotland:
Yesterday Bea, Martin, Pete and I visited Heriot Watt University for the first of our Thinking About Open workshops. We had a great day with the Heriot Watt team exploring different facets of openness and sharing examples and experiences. A slide deck of activities is available on the OEPS project Slideshare account.
In the morning participants explored the concept of openness and examined different examples of open practice. We also utilised an adapted version of an activity Catherine Cronin had developed, which encourages people to reflect on their own practices and which generated some interesting discussion (thank you, Catherine!) You can see some of the morning’s activity below. During the afternoon we looked at examples of where openness is making a real difference (including OpenStax College textbooks and the DigiLit project in Leicester) before finishing up with a look at Creative Commons licensing. There was a strong interest in…
View original 111 more words
My main paper at LAK15 analysed engagement patterns in FutureLearn MOOCs. In it, Doug Clow and I began by carrying out a replication study, building on an earlier study of Coursera MOOCs by Kizilcec and his colleagues. Although our cluster analysis found two clusters that were very similar to those found in the earlier study, our other clusters did not match theirs. The different clusters of learners on the two platforms appeared to relate to the pedagogy (approach to learning and teaching) underlying the courses.
Ferguson, Rebecca, & Clow, Doug. (2015). Examining engagement: analysing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Paper presented at LAK 15 (March 16-20), Poughkeepsie, USA.
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are now being used across the world to provide millions of learners with access to education. Many learners complete these courses successfully, or to their own satisfaction, but the high numbers who do not finish remain a subject of concern for platform providers and educators. In 2013, a team from Stanford University analysed engagement patterns on three MOOCs run on the Coursera platform. They found four distinct patterns of engagement that emerged from MOOCs based on videos and assessments. However, not all platforms take this approach to learning design. Courses on the FutureLearn platform are underpinned by a social-constructivist pedagogy, which includes discussion as an important element. In this paper, we analyse engagement patterns on four FutureLearn MOOCs and find that only two clusters identified previously apply in this case. Instead, we see seven distinct patterns of engagement: Samplers, Strong Starters, Returners, Mid-way Dropouts, Nearly There, Late Completers and Keen Completers. This suggests that patterns of engagement in these massive learning environments are influenced by decisions about pedagogy. We also make some observations about approaches to clustering in this context.
The 5th international Learning Analytics and Knowledge conference (LAK15) at Marist College in Poughkeepsie NY opened with two days of workshops.
Organisers: Authors: Hendrik Drachsler, Adam Cooper, Tore Hoel, Rebecca Ferguson, Alan Berg, Maren Scheffel, Gábor Kismihók, Christien Bok and Weiqin Chen.
Drachsler, Hendrik; Cooper, Adam; Hoel, Tore; Ferguson, Rebecca; Berg, Alan; Scheffel, Maren; Kismihók, Gábor; Manderveld, Jocelyn and Chen, Weiqin (2015). Ethical and privacy issues in the application of learning analytics. In: 5th International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (LAK15): Scaling Up: Big Data to Big Impact, 16-20 March 2015, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA.
We aim to understand ethics and privacy issues in learning analytics with greater clarity, to find ways of overcoming these issues and to research challenges related to ethical and privacy aspects of learning analytics practice. This interactive workshop aims to raise awareness of major ethics and privacy issues. It will also be used to develop practical solutions for learning analytics researchers and practitioners that will enable them to advance the application of learning analytics technologies.
In the second part of the plenary Kathleen Egan, Programmes Manager at Age UK London, presented the valuable work done by the charity on digital inclusion. She discussed a project to use teenagers as volunteer mentors, and referred to the Digital inclusion evidence review, 2013 (PDF).
The final session of the morning was by Paul Smyth, Head of IT Accessibility at Barclays Bank. Paul Smyth and his colleagues have acheived a high-level of buy-in and ownership of Web accessibility from the bank's senior management.Afternoon
I was happy to have lunch with Roger Wilson-Hinds and Natasha Beauharnais. They are both involved with Georgie Phone, a suite of low-cost Android mobile phone apps for the vision-impaired. These look very promising – I must take a look. And, I think I've met Roger at previous events...
The afternoon started for me with setting up for the round-table discussion that I was chairing, title "OU Media Player: Mainstreaming video accessibility". My colleague, Peter Devine, put a lot of work into an A0 poster, that I hope the participants found useful.
I'm fairly used to giving presentations. However, this was my first time chairing a discussion, and I was feeling nervous. We had a good number of attendees for the discussion – between 9 and 11. People attended from a wide variety of organizations, including the RNIB, the University of Southampton, and the Worshipful Co of Information Technologists.
Here are some of the questions that were asked and discussed:
- Did I have documentation on how to make a media player accessible? (Answer: not yet)
- How had we made the player accessible? (Answer: heavily customized MediaElement.js + testing + iterate...)
- What formats/ file types did the player support? (Answer: generally those formats supported natively by browsers - via HTML 5; and those supported by Flash. So: mp3 audio, mp4, m4v and FLV video)
- Did it support, eg. YouTube/Vimeo? (Answer: the underlying MediaElement.js framework does support YouTube; OU Media Player doesn't yet – watch this space)
- Was it going to be open sourced? (Answer: yes)
- When? (Answer: at the time of the conference I couldn't say. Now I can say, within the next 6 months)
- What about DRM? (Answer: not considered yet. )
What I learnt about chairing a panel:
- Have ideas jotted down for things to discuss - if there is a lull in conversation (I found there was a lull, and I wasn't quite prepared for it)
- Be prepared to drive or guide things;
- Try to include everyone, not just the most vocal (not sure I managed that);
- Find a way to take notes;
- Do a "register" at the start, so that you have everyone's contact details (should be obvious);
- Go round at the start asking people to introduce themselves, explain what they want from the discussion (I think I did this – not sure how well though);
- Hand out "feedback questionnaires" (meant to print some, ran out of time);
Possibly useful links:
Thank you to all who attended the discussion. And, thank you to the event organisers, Dan Jellinek and his team.
Next week team OER Hub will be Westward bound as we head to Cardiff, Wales for OER15!
This year’s conference is focused on “Mainstreaming Open Education” and will be held at the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama on Tuesday 14 and Wednesday 15 April. Keynotes include Cable Green, Sheila MacNeill, Josie Fraser and our very own Martin Weller.
With six conference tracks (including Impact Research, OEP and Policy and Open Education in Schools and Colleges) and no less than seven parallel sessions including workshops and panel presentations happening simultaneously there’s plenty to check out. Head on over to the conference schedule for an overview and the abstracts for talks.
We’re also excited to be participating in several sessions across the conference:
Tuesday 14 April
- Get a double dose of Hub goodness with Bea debuting the latest findings from our impact research PLUS Beck talking about whether openness…
View original 139 more words
I’ve finally worked some Manics lyrics into my blog post..
Why the title Design for Life? – Well there is a very good reason why I’ve not been blogging these past three months. I’m currently on secondment to the big production engine of the Open University (Learning and Teaching Solutions) and heading up the development of a new area there called TEL (Technology-Enhanced Learning). This new sub-unit is responsible for the aspects of Learning Design as we apply it within the Open University context, so we’re referring to this as “TEL Design”.
Learning Design in it’s purest form is technology and pedagogy neutral but within TEL design we are seeking to to use evidence based approaches to the production and presentation of modules so that they are designed appropriately considering learning outcomes (LOs), tuition/support approach, assessment and the overarching student experience. The OU has already being doing this for some time through the Learning Design team in IET who have been working with module teams on activity planning and module mapping processes to ensure that a sound pedagogic approach is being considered which is appropriate for the level of study and disciplinary context. This work however needs to be scaled up as we have perhaps in the order of 100-150 modules being refreshed every year from a provision of around 600 modules which form the OU curriculum. I’m therefore simplifying what is a very complex activity, working with module teams to turn these sound pedagogic approaches into practical module/course designs suitable for each disciplinary context which form part of a coherent student journey and consider appropriate use of technologies.
So tackling each area of my role:Evidence-based Practice
Within TEL we have a group of around 20 very seasoned practitioners in module production or aspects of teaching, either within or outside the OU. This group have excellent experience in what works, is appropriate for design of online learning activity and which enhances the student experience. i.e. lots of empirical knowledge.
(a) We are building a library of examples of best practice
(b) We are establishing, through a survey, the evidence bases that are currently being used within the OU to establish what is “best practice”. (we have huge amounts of of evidence to draw upon – see our Learning Analytic colleagues such as Doug Clow for details of that work!).
(c) We are considering where evidence is needed and of what type. For example in some cases a “deep dive” approach may be more suitable. We are working with colleagues in IET on projects exploring analytics and evidence to support decision making for both improving design during production and also for in presentation adaption and improvement.
(d) We are also considering how much to rely on phronesis or discretionary practitioner judgement. There is a lot of interesting literature in this area, I particularly enjoyed the McNamara Fallacy and the problem with Numbers in Education article by Carl Hendrick on the dangers of using data for decision making on very complex models.Scholarship, Development and Training
I’ve been working on a development plan for “TEL Design” practitioners. I’ve been co-ordinating work on this, looking at job descriptions both internally and externally and mapping the skills and competencies into a framework which also matches to the UK Professional Standards Framework for teaching and supporting learning (UKPSF) from the Higher Education Academy. During March 2015 I released a questionnaire to TEL staff to ask then to rate themselves against areas of this framework. We are currently creating plans to meet these needs which will be through:
(a) Identifying the most urgently needed skills and competencies required by the majority of people and consequently running workshops and training sessions to up-skill our staff, for example Grainne Conole ran a workshop in March for us on “Strategies for designing and evaluating effective learning activities”.
(b) Exploring what specific skills and competencies are required by individuals and creating personal development plans (PDPs) to meet those needs
(c) Using practice-based approaches to improve competency, for example mentoring and encouraging staff to engage in HEA fellowship programme through the OU OpenPAD scheme as a method to encourage reflection and improve practice.
(d) Developing a scholarly culture within the unit, this includes encouraging TEL staff to be involved in publishing and attending events relevant to their practice and to recognize and reward achievement in areas of specialism and knowledge within the TEL group.Strategy and Culture
This is by far the biggest challenge as we are having to carve out a shape for the design process within the OU’s current production methodology and management processes.
The good news is that we are doing this at a time when the curriculum systems are being refreshed, when the OU curriculum itself is being refreshed through a curriculum: fit for the future programme and the Learning and Teaching Vision and Plan 2025 provides us with imperative to establish the evidence based design approach within production and presentation. I’m also located within a unit which is currently going through a re-focus process so the design processes can be considered within an overhaul of the whole production life-cycle processes to make them more efficient and effective. In order to make this stick we need a cultural change and that’s perhaps my biggest challenge. OU module production has become very risk averse and procedural and the people are necessarily used to that safety blanket of knowing what’s coming up six months before they need to start work, things need to change here and the ability to be agile and adaptive is increasingly important.
We are doing this successfully in MOOC design where the timescales are shorter and the methods used are bespoke and usually outside of regular process, the challenge now is to make that the norm rather than the exception.
I don’t have all the answers here but I have a number of ideas which I’m currently exploring. I’m also looking, with my colleagues in TEL and LD, at the activity structure for the TEL Design workshops and I’m considering a model which I want to share for discussion. More on that in my next blog post.
I don’t engage very heavily with either Research Gate or with academia.edu for several reasons
(1) Time is limited, and there are only so many networks I can engage with
(2) All my work is available via my institutional repository (ORO) or via this blog
(3) Neither Research Gare nor academia.edu seems to be particularly open about its business model. How are they making money out of my time and my resources?
I thought for a while that ResearchGate might be making money via targeted job ads, but they’re currently suggesting I might be interested in the post of associate dean for veterinary research at Ross University, Saint Kitts and Neots. As my only qualifications for that job are that I once had a pet cat and I like visiting tropical beaches, I don’t think their targeting algorithms are very sophisticated.
Despite my overall lack of engagement, both sites now know a fair amount about me and my work, and my co-authors often upload papers. This means I sometimes get email updates on my downloads. This week, apparently, my work was downloaded 101 times, with 72 people downloading a technical report on social learning analytics and 16 downloading an editorial that came out this week. I even get a national breakdown of downloads (see pic). In addition to those shown, my work was accessed from Taiwan (3), Italy (3), Canada (2), Finland (2), South Korea (2), New Zealand (2), Indonesia (1), Romania (1) and Ecuador (1). That’s 20 countries this week.
Meanwhile, back at the institutional repository, my work has been downloaded over 1000 times this month. I’m not sure what to make of this. If these figures are typical (I’ve no idea if they’re high or low), then there is an enormous amount of scholars out there who are doing an enormous amount of reading. And it also looks as if the digital divide is growing – I see no African countries at all on that download list, and this reflects my experience at conferences.
It may seem a little quiet here at the Hub of late but rest assured we’re hard at work behind the scenes! Since the new year we’ve been particularly focused on writing up our research for journal publication. Simultaneously, the team is also involved in a number of other OER projects. Rob is working with HBZ on the OER World Map project; which is currently focused on building the technical architecture. Beck and Bea are developing the research strand of the Opening Educational Practices in Scotland (OEPS) project and Bea is also collaborating with the ExplOERer Project to design of an open course to train teachers in OER reuse. The course will be available on the Peer 2 Peer University (P2PU) platform early next year.
Open Education Week 2015 (9-13 March 2015)
There’s not long to go now until this year’s Open Education Week!
As you might be aware…
View original 509 more words
First, a mention for #AXSchat – an online conversation that happens each Tuesday 20-21:00 UTC/GMT on Twitter – on all things accessibility and inclusion-related in business on the web and beyond. Run by @neilmilliken and @akwyz.
On the 24 February, I attended the e-Access'15 conference chaired by the excellent Dan Jellinek of Headstar and Nigel Lewis of AbilityNet. This is the ninth year that the conference on digital accessibility has been successfully run. As in previous years it was a one-day conference in central London.
To start us off, Amar Latif gave a great speech about his life as a documentary maker, actor and entrepreneur. He talked about his three Is - independence, inspiration & innovation. And, he discussed his work on the 2005 documentary, Beyond Boundaries, founding the international travel agency for blind and sighted travellers – Traveleyes, and his personal experience of sight loss.
Kevin Carey's talk on "The future of accessibility policy", read by Nigel Lewis in his absence, was as you'd expect, thought provoking and challenging. I'm still digesting it now… He provocatively argued that accessibility evangelism, advocacy, and software development over the past two decades had largely failed. He called for a complete re-think of our approach. His proposal centred around analytics,"task completion rates" and peer-normative comparisons.
Kevin's speech took me back to learning ergonomics (in the context of Applied Gerontology) back at Uni.. A simple ergonomics/ anthrometry example - as a 1.9m (6 foot 3 inches) person, with around a 34 inch inside leg, when I get on a bus or into an economy airline seat, I know I'll be cramped. This is because the space is designed to suit the vast majority of the population, for example the "95 percentile" (or 93, 94, 96... percentile) who fall below me in a standard distribution of heights or thigh-bone length measurements. This approach lets designers, and their clients, know who they will design for, and who will be discomfited or excluded (or endangered) by a design. It is an optimization technique that appears to date back to the ancient Greeks, predates anti-discrimination legislation, and when used appropriately is borne of good design, good business and pragmatism. That is, if they built buses and planes to sit tall people in comfort, then more people would stand in the rush-hour, and fewer of us could afford to fly.
Kevin's suggestions may indeed be the way to go, as long as we can collect sufficient data to help drive decisions. It may hang on people's willingness to self-declare their disabilities in online tools and services.
(To be continued…)
I’m pleased that our paperLearning Analytics in Context: Overcoming the Barriers to Large-Scale Adoption has just been published by the Journal of Learning Analytics.
The paper begins by looking at why introducing learning analytics within an institution often proves to be difficult. It goes on to set out a framework that offers a step-by-step approach to the introduction of learning analytics, and shows how this can work in practice by focusing on developments in two very different institutions: a distance university in the UK and a university of technology in Australia.
The paper’s authors bring together a wealth of experience that is grounded in strategy, research and practice. Co-authors with a strategic perspective are Belinda Tynan, pro vice chancellor at the UK’s Open University who is leading on the development and roll-out of a programme of learning analytics across the institution, and Shirley Alexander, the deputy vice chancellor taking the lead on developing University of Technology Sydney as a data-intensive university. Leah Macfadyen from the University of British Columbia and Shane Dawson from the University of South Australia bring a research perspective that draws on an intensive study of the roll-out of analytics at an institutional scale, while Doug Clow from The Open University draws on his practitioner experience as a data wrangler, as well as his research experience in this area.
A core goal for most learning analytic projects is to move from small-scale research towards broader institutional implementation, but this introduces a new set of challenges because institutions are stable systems, resistant to change. To avoid failure and maximize success, implementation of learning analytics at scale requires explicit and careful consideration of the entire TEL technology complex: the different groups of people involved, the educational beliefs and practices of those groups, the technologies they use and the specific environments within which they operate. It is crucial to provide not only the analytics and their associated tools, but also to begin with a clear strategic vision, to critically assess institutional culture, to identify potential barriers to adoption, to develop approaches to overcome these and to put in place appropriate forms of support, training and community building. In this paper, we provide tools and case studies that will support educational institutions in deploying learning analytics at scale with the goal of achieving specified learning and teaching objectives. The ROMA Framework offers a step-by-step approach to the institutional implementation of learning analytics and this approach is grounded by case studies of practice from the UK and Australia.
Greetings iSpotters! (This is a similar post on our team blog.)
I'm happy to say that this morning we made a number of significant bug fixes live on the iSpot web site.
Here's a roundup of what's changed...
First up, we've added a "Please wait" spinner to the add/ edit observation wizard. This disables buttons on the form while slow operations like uploading photos occur. We hope this will reduce or eliminate the incidence of duplicate observations. This is a situation where we're eliminating a probable cause of the bug (duplicate observations), which may reveal further causes. In which case it will require further fixes. Time will tell.
Bear in mind that slowness in the add observation wizard can be caused by slow networks and low bandwidth. Something that is outside our control.
We've tested the spinner across a range of devices. In the Chrome browser on iOS (iPads, iPhones), the spinner will not appear, but the text "Please wait" will. A known issue. All other device/ browser combinations appear to work as expected.
Next, we fixed the peculiar "1970" date that was appearing if the first photograph used in the add observation wizard contained no EXIF data. (For those of you who are interested, you can read why the erroneous date was the 1st January 1970...)
There was another date-related bug, namely dates "disappearing" when you went back to edit an observation or project. This was a puzzler, however in the end the fix involved updating the third-party date module that iSpot employs. Job done!
Some strange text was appearing at the bottom of the add interaction wizard - on the location step. This turned out to be "debug" text (stuff added by developers to help them solve a problem). It took a little while to find where the text was being introduced. A fairly straightforward fix once we'd found the cause.
Hopefully, all this will help us make the most of Richard Greenwood's work on the add-observation wizard.
We updated the Twitter link in the page footer, to use @iSpotnature.
Finally, we've removed extraneous and commented-out HTML markup from Richard Lovelock's excellent Bootstrap-based theme. This shaves some kilobytes off each page request, and should provide a small performance boost, particularly on slow connections.
So, what do we have to look forward to?
Our performance guru, Greg, is still ironing out issues with the planned upgrade of the iSpot database to MySQL 5.7. This will provide us with a significant feature called "row-level locking" (in place of current table-level locks), which will significantly reduce a bottle-neck and improve performance. Our challenge is to maintain the geo-spatial database capabilities that iSpot requires, while making the most of feature improvements.
We've worked out the cause of the "missing" location title auto-complete options for our southern African cousins. The problem stems from significant differences between the global and ZA iSpot sites. There are data and even tables that aren't present in the legacy ZA site, because it only contained one community and species dictionary. We think we'll need significant down-time to fix this issue (a number of hours), so we're discussing how best to tackle this while minimizing disruption.
That's all for now. I hope that these fixes help you enjoy iSpot and reduce the frustrations.
Thank you for your patience. And for your enthusiasm - it's what makes the iSpot community tick!
(The iSpot team)
(This is a similar post on our team blog.)
Originally posted on UK Sartre Society :
Didn’t manage to make it to last year’s conference? Enjoy a particular session but wish you could hear it again? Never fear, you can now revisit our 2013 and 2014 conference with today’s release of eight recordings!
- Watch last year’s keynote Ron Aronson (Wayne State) on Surviving the Neoliberal Maelstrom: A Sartrean Phenomenology of Social Hope or listen to Jon Webber (Cardiff) on The Root of the Disagreement between Camus and Sartre
- Hear Andrea Walsh (Michigan State) on Freedom and Fetishism in Sartre’s Search for a Method or review David Mitchell’s (Liverpool) talk on Existentialism is not a Humanism: Nothingness, Perversion and the Non-Humanist Conception of Man in Early Sartre
- Listen to Benedict O’Donohoe (Sussex) on Roquentin and the Autodidact, or the Critique of Humanism in La Nausée or Oliver Downing (Liverpool) on Sartre and Love…
- Check out Elizabeth Benjamin (Birmingham) on Étranger à moi-même: Sartre, Camus…
View original 92 more words
The four-week course explored the concept and practice of open research, ethics in the open, dissemination and the role of open reflection and evaluation. To read more about how the course was created, you can check out:
- One Year On: The Journey of Open Research
- Interested in Open Research? Sign-up for our School of Open course!
- Open Research Course Update
- Open Research: OER Research Hub course launches June 2014
- Open Research
A massive thanks to everyone who supported us or participated in the course; we couldn’t have done it without you!
Photo credits: OER Research Hub team photo (Chris Valentine), all other photos (CC-BY, Beck Pitt)
Originally posted on OEPScotland:
by Beck Pitt (OEPS project)
I’m excited to be able to tell you a bit more about what the research component of the OEPS project will be doing over the duration of the project and how we fit with the rest of the project. So, without further ado…
Who is responsible for the research?
Researchers based at the Institute of Educational Technology (IET), The Open University (UK) will be responsible for delivering the research components of the OEPS project. Led by Professor Martin Weller with researchers Dr Beck Pitt and Dr Bea de los Arcos, and expertise from across IET including our Learning and Teaching team (for example in relation to learning design or accessibility) we will work collaboratively with different stakeholder groups to ensure that the research and materials we deliver have real impact and build capacity across Scotland through our research.
Martin, Beck and Bea also work on…
View original 976 more words