QUESTIONS: What will the future of higher education look like? What impact will the open education movement have? How will we get there from here? What will be the effects of open education movement upon K-12 education? (alessandro giorni) What will be the effects of open education movement upon high school education? (emanuela z.) What role can OERs play in developing countries? (Stian Haklev)
Due to the advent of technology and the emergence of the OER, there are more ways to achieve higher education. I imagine that people probably can get their degree through free materials besides entering to university the normal way. Courses in University are more flexible and broaden than course in K-12. Most of time, students in university not only read textbooks that are required for class, but they also have much more chances to look for other related learning materials.
Learning through free materials with high quality will be feasible in the future. However, there are still things that we need to deal with to make OER sustainable, such as licenses of OER, the mechanism to make sure the quality of OER, peer production, etc. Localization is also an important factor which influences the dissemination of OER. Languages, cultures, the availability of technology, and so on also have a great impact on the development of OER. For those people from poor areas, the access to technology will be a problem. If they are not provides enough technology facilities, those abundant online free materials might be useless to them. Besides, most websites are English-based, but not all learners are English-native speakers. Hence, extending the idea of OER and have local places to produce their own free materials based on their cultures, languages, etc. would be a better way to sustain the development of OER.
As for the effects of OER on K-12 education, I think it will be a trend in the future. OER will influence not only the learning ways of K-12 students, but also the teaching styles of instructors. Instructors are able to utilize more free learning materials based on their own needs to make their teaching more interesting and diverse. Some free interactive online materials provide students chances to operate some experiments and get feedbacks directly from the software. Problem-based learning environments will be able to be provided with the assistance of the interactive software. It helps students engage in the learning processes.
Similarly, high school education will be also influenced by OER movement, but I am not sure how much of the effect that OER brings to high school students in other countries besides USA because different countries have different education systems. In terms of my experiences, I think OER can make learning easier especially for math and science subjects. There are lots of equations or rules used in math or science. Usually, students may probably just memorize them and do not know the underlying meanings of those formula. Generally, teachers are hard to draw the picture that corresponds to the formula. If there are free materials that can show the results of the formula or equations, it will help students to understand abstract concepts more easily.
As for what role OER plays in the developing countries, I think OER can bring more learning opportunities for those people in poor areas. But before they access to those free materials, they need to have a basic technology facility and know how to use those technology. Even in the developing countries, the digital gap between cities and the suburbs is high. Students growing up in the city might know how to use since they are 3 or 4 years old, but students in the suburbs might get chances to know when they enter to elementary school or junior high school. Students in the city might have their own computer, but the students in poor areas might know what computer it without chances to have their own computers. Overall, I think OER bring lots of advantage to people in developing countries, but the availability of technology will be a great issue.
2007年11月25日 星期日
2007年11月18日 星期日
OpenEd: Week 12
Jessie said that “I think the open educational resources and learning objects are very similar, leaning objects seems just a newer name of open educational resources in most cases as the time passed.” Yes, I agree that it seems a little hard to distinguish open educational resources from learning objects. In the definition of open educational resources, learning objects are mentioned. However, I think that compared to open educational resources learning objects are more limited for the present online learning environments.
Elisa compared the definition of learning objects from wikipedia, Wiley, and the UNESCO, and mentioned that “one can assume that open educational resources should include, among other things such as full courses, course materials, content modules, collections etc., learning objects as well.” I agree with her, and think that open educational resources bring a broader meaning than learning objects. As I indicated in Week 11 in my blog, learning objects have more limits than the open educational resources.
Elisa also indicated that “Openness, localization and technological improvements are the paths to follow for the future to solve the problems of the state of the art of learning objects.” The idea is great. Keeping learning objects open to users can make them more useful and help the sustainability. Localization makes learning objects more adaptive to people from different cultures.
Greg talked about Artificial Intelligence, and indicated that “the costs right now are too expensive to create such a system for the average instructional design group. When the cost of production is less than the value of what is created, then these systems will be a good idea.” I agree with what he said. If it costs too much to build an artificial intelligence system and doesn’t get many rewards when learning through it, then maybe we will consider another kind of training methods which utilize pieces of learning objects which cost much more less, and probably can bring more to learners.
Houshuang pointed out that “just plugging in quizzes and sections into your course is unlikely to generate a course that is very pedagogical or interesting, it will take reworking and refashioning either way - and the important part is lowering the barriers to reuse, whether those barriers are intellectual property, or file formats, or lack of easy tools.” I agree with him. It would be nice to have the chances to refashion learning objects based on the needs of instruction. Then the learning can be improved.
Elisa compared the definition of learning objects from wikipedia, Wiley, and the UNESCO, and mentioned that “one can assume that open educational resources should include, among other things such as full courses, course materials, content modules, collections etc., learning objects as well.” I agree with her, and think that open educational resources bring a broader meaning than learning objects. As I indicated in Week 11 in my blog, learning objects have more limits than the open educational resources.
Elisa also indicated that “Openness, localization and technological improvements are the paths to follow for the future to solve the problems of the state of the art of learning objects.” The idea is great. Keeping learning objects open to users can make them more useful and help the sustainability. Localization makes learning objects more adaptive to people from different cultures.
Greg talked about Artificial Intelligence, and indicated that “the costs right now are too expensive to create such a system for the average instructional design group. When the cost of production is less than the value of what is created, then these systems will be a good idea.” I agree with what he said. If it costs too much to build an artificial intelligence system and doesn’t get many rewards when learning through it, then maybe we will consider another kind of training methods which utilize pieces of learning objects which cost much more less, and probably can bring more to learners.
Houshuang pointed out that “just plugging in quizzes and sections into your course is unlikely to generate a course that is very pedagogical or interesting, it will take reworking and refashioning either way - and the important part is lowering the barriers to reuse, whether those barriers are intellectual property, or file formats, or lack of easy tools.” I agree with him. It would be nice to have the chances to refashion learning objects based on the needs of instruction. Then the learning can be improved.
2007年11月11日 星期日
OpenEd: Week 11
QUESTIONS: Some people believe that open educational resources "fix" many of the problems experienced by those who work with learning objects. Why do you think they would say this? Do you agree? Why or why not?
There are lots of different definitions for learning objects so far. Those definitions differ due to different purposes. Though there are dozens of definitions suggested, slight difference existing in them. Merrill prefers the term knowledge object, Gibbons prefers the instructional object, etc. Wiley suggests the definition that “any digital resource that can be reused to support learning.”
Learning objects can be used for quick instruction or incorporation into an online education curriculum. Learning objects that are digital, re-usable pieces of content can be used to accomplish a learning objective. A learning object could be a text document, a movie, a mp3, a picture or maybe even a website. Describing why something is a learning object and in what context a person might learn something from it will be important.
I agree that open educational resources fix some of the problems experienced by those who work with learning objects. I think people think that the concept of OER supplement the weak parts of learning objects, and make learning objects much more fit into the online learning environments we have today. As we understand, Open Educational Resources are defined as “technology enabled, open provision of educational resources for consultation, use and adaptation by a community of users for non-commercial purposes.” OER include learning objects such as lecture material, references and readings, simulations, experiments and demonstrations, as well as syllabi, curricula and teachers’ guides. From the definition we can find that learning objects are viewed as part of OER.
Learning objects have some weaknesses which do not fit the modern approaches to teaching and learning. As we know, the more context a learning object has, the more a learner can learn from it. However, the smaller learning objects are, the more likely it is that only humans will be able to assemble them into meaningful instruction. That is, the internal context of learning objects impact the way that they are used. The more specific the internal context of the object, the fewer instructional contexts into which it will fit. Decontextualizatio is one of the weaknesses behind learning objects. Wiley suggests the use of learning object use is better described a “contextualization.” Context should be taken account into learning because decontextualized educational resources does not produce a meaningful context for learning though it seems decontextualized learning objects work more well for economically sensibly. OER pays attention to the influences of cultural, historical, and institutional settings. Contextualiztion is embedded in the idea of OER, and it supplements the weak part of learning objects.
Usually, learning objects are used as content chunks or information containers. Wiley indicates that learning objects are just like a megaphone with large information, not mediator. It is useless for learning objects just to provide lots of information or knowledge. What more important during learning is how to use learning objects as semiotic tools that are able to mediate and shape learner actions. That is, learning resources can not be isolated from the online learning environments. Learning objects should not be used out of context, and should be part of mediational actions, just as OER pay attention to properly utilizing educational resources which satisfy the needs of learners and fit the context with a variety of cultures. Similarly, as the concept proposed by Wiley that “any digital resource that can be reused to mediate learning,” it is better for learning objects to be mediators.
Learning objects are designed for learners in independent use or learning. Little chance of communication or interaction is delivered. Learners are just like passive receivers of a large amount of information or knowledge, but don’t know how to grasp them efficiently or effectively. No worldview can be observed in this kind of the isolated learning processes which preclude learners from other learners. In contrast, OER emphasize the importance of collaborative learning, and it encourages interactive dialogues among learners. Under this ideal of OER, learners are not oppressive to accept any learning information provided by learning objects. Conversely, learners can understand how these learning objects make sense to them, and connect them to the life experiences during communication with other learners.
Copyright will be another vital issue for learning objects. OER are licensed with open-source-style licenses, such as Creative Commons licenses or GFDL. Under the concept of OER, each of millions of learning objects “everything from modules to textbooks to courses” is licensed with CC or GFDL. The use of learning objects will be aggregated or adapted by users without worrying about the license or transaction costs. So the idea of license of OER also fix the copyright problem that might happen in learning objects.
There are lots of different definitions for learning objects so far. Those definitions differ due to different purposes. Though there are dozens of definitions suggested, slight difference existing in them. Merrill prefers the term knowledge object, Gibbons prefers the instructional object, etc. Wiley suggests the definition that “any digital resource that can be reused to support learning.”
Learning objects can be used for quick instruction or incorporation into an online education curriculum. Learning objects that are digital, re-usable pieces of content can be used to accomplish a learning objective. A learning object could be a text document, a movie, a mp3, a picture or maybe even a website. Describing why something is a learning object and in what context a person might learn something from it will be important.
I agree that open educational resources fix some of the problems experienced by those who work with learning objects. I think people think that the concept of OER supplement the weak parts of learning objects, and make learning objects much more fit into the online learning environments we have today. As we understand, Open Educational Resources are defined as “technology enabled, open provision of educational resources for consultation, use and adaptation by a community of users for non-commercial purposes.” OER include learning objects such as lecture material, references and readings, simulations, experiments and demonstrations, as well as syllabi, curricula and teachers’ guides. From the definition we can find that learning objects are viewed as part of OER.
Learning objects have some weaknesses which do not fit the modern approaches to teaching and learning. As we know, the more context a learning object has, the more a learner can learn from it. However, the smaller learning objects are, the more likely it is that only humans will be able to assemble them into meaningful instruction. That is, the internal context of learning objects impact the way that they are used. The more specific the internal context of the object, the fewer instructional contexts into which it will fit. Decontextualizatio is one of the weaknesses behind learning objects. Wiley suggests the use of learning object use is better described a “contextualization.” Context should be taken account into learning because decontextualized educational resources does not produce a meaningful context for learning though it seems decontextualized learning objects work more well for economically sensibly. OER pays attention to the influences of cultural, historical, and institutional settings. Contextualiztion is embedded in the idea of OER, and it supplements the weak part of learning objects.
Usually, learning objects are used as content chunks or information containers. Wiley indicates that learning objects are just like a megaphone with large information, not mediator. It is useless for learning objects just to provide lots of information or knowledge. What more important during learning is how to use learning objects as semiotic tools that are able to mediate and shape learner actions. That is, learning resources can not be isolated from the online learning environments. Learning objects should not be used out of context, and should be part of mediational actions, just as OER pay attention to properly utilizing educational resources which satisfy the needs of learners and fit the context with a variety of cultures. Similarly, as the concept proposed by Wiley that “any digital resource that can be reused to mediate learning,” it is better for learning objects to be mediators.
Learning objects are designed for learners in independent use or learning. Little chance of communication or interaction is delivered. Learners are just like passive receivers of a large amount of information or knowledge, but don’t know how to grasp them efficiently or effectively. No worldview can be observed in this kind of the isolated learning processes which preclude learners from other learners. In contrast, OER emphasize the importance of collaborative learning, and it encourages interactive dialogues among learners. Under this ideal of OER, learners are not oppressive to accept any learning information provided by learning objects. Conversely, learners can understand how these learning objects make sense to them, and connect them to the life experiences during communication with other learners.
Copyright will be another vital issue for learning objects. OER are licensed with open-source-style licenses, such as Creative Commons licenses or GFDL. Under the concept of OER, each of millions of learning objects “everything from modules to textbooks to courses” is licensed with CC or GFDL. The use of learning objects will be aggregated or adapted by users without worrying about the license or transaction costs. So the idea of license of OER also fix the copyright problem that might happen in learning objects.
2007年11月4日 星期日
OpenEd: Week 10
ASSIGNMENT: Catch your breath, read your classmates' blogs for Week 9, and post your interlinked thoughts on what everyone is saying.
I read some posts, and there are some ideas that attract me. I will write them as follows:
1.
Argomenti indicated the concept about globalization. I agree with that globalization is am important issue. It is vital to recognize the potentialities of people around the worlds. Globalization influences the development of OER. With the advent of technology, learners around the world who have the internet access are able to achieve a variety of learning resources, and create their own learning materials based on their own needs, or build on the learning objects that have been created by someone. People from different places can exchange ideas and work on the same learning materials collaboratively to make more wonderful learning stuff. Through online interaction and ideas from different persons, the construction of knowledge is underway.
2.
Greg indicated that most OER are from a rich and powerful places of the world because those rich places have the money and enough resources to create them. Those places are usually the creator of the OER, and it seems that they have a lot of influence on the direction of OER. However, we can not neglect the voices from the minorities. For instance, we need not only to listen to the voices from teachers, we also need to listen to the voices from students. Though teachers are the one who can decide the teaching style, the learning results of students may reflect if this kind of teaching method works. The voices from students can not be neglected even though they are not the policy makers. Similarly, people who use OER may come from different countries with different cultures. People may have different needs for OER. Localization would probably be the way to satisfy different needs of users from different worlds.
3.
Elisa pointed out that Lessig thinks that the extrems of "all rights reserved" and "no rights reserved" are disruptive of creativity. The most proper way will be the idea "some rights reserves" of the Creative Commons with which both rights of authoers and users are safeguarded. From my point of view, I also think "some rights reserved" would be proper for both authors and users. But I don't think "no rights reserved" is that bad. I think it is ok if an author who just wants to create some useful contents beneficial for world, and he allows other people to modify, remix on what he creates, or use them even for business purpose. But probably most authors will not choose this way for their own works. They may want to keep some of rights of their works. If the contents are put in the public domain, then any user can do anything they like on the contents. They do not need to worry about if there are any restrictions for the use of the contents. It provides users more freedom on the utilization of free contents or materials.
I read some posts, and there are some ideas that attract me. I will write them as follows:
1.
Argomenti indicated the concept about globalization. I agree with that globalization is am important issue. It is vital to recognize the potentialities of people around the worlds. Globalization influences the development of OER. With the advent of technology, learners around the world who have the internet access are able to achieve a variety of learning resources, and create their own learning materials based on their own needs, or build on the learning objects that have been created by someone. People from different places can exchange ideas and work on the same learning materials collaboratively to make more wonderful learning stuff. Through online interaction and ideas from different persons, the construction of knowledge is underway.
2.
Greg indicated that most OER are from a rich and powerful places of the world because those rich places have the money and enough resources to create them. Those places are usually the creator of the OER, and it seems that they have a lot of influence on the direction of OER. However, we can not neglect the voices from the minorities. For instance, we need not only to listen to the voices from teachers, we also need to listen to the voices from students. Though teachers are the one who can decide the teaching style, the learning results of students may reflect if this kind of teaching method works. The voices from students can not be neglected even though they are not the policy makers. Similarly, people who use OER may come from different countries with different cultures. People may have different needs for OER. Localization would probably be the way to satisfy different needs of users from different worlds.
3.
Elisa pointed out that Lessig thinks that the extrems of "all rights reserved" and "no rights reserved" are disruptive of creativity. The most proper way will be the idea "some rights reserves" of the Creative Commons with which both rights of authoers and users are safeguarded. From my point of view, I also think "some rights reserved" would be proper for both authors and users. But I don't think "no rights reserved" is that bad. I think it is ok if an author who just wants to create some useful contents beneficial for world, and he allows other people to modify, remix on what he creates, or use them even for business purpose. But probably most authors will not choose this way for their own works. They may want to keep some of rights of their works. If the contents are put in the public domain, then any user can do anything they like on the contents. They do not need to worry about if there are any restrictions for the use of the contents. It provides users more freedom on the utilization of free contents or materials.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)