OSI-EDU-WG-notes-4mar2014
Version 1.2 by Joseph Potvin on 2014/03/11 15:07
OSI-EDU-WG Meeting Notes from 4 March 2014
Participating
Joseph Potvin
Patrick Masson
Wayne Mackintosh
Ken Udas
Discussion Notes
1: Presentation about the OSI-EDU-WG in May 2014
- At "PM-Connect" https://wiki.state.ma.us/confluence/display/projectmanagerforum/Home
- Massachusetts government employees, project managers
- OSI was invited to put together a presentation
2. Participation in OSI-EDU-WG
- We'll be preparing a general invite soon, but if you have colleague who may like to participate in the OSI-EDU-WG, feel free to bring them along to the teleconf
- New content on project management in the Syllabus needs feedback, eg the "learning outcomes". Good responses so far
3. FLOW Syllabus Usability
- It's a bit overwhelming
- Being able to tag the modules/items would be helpful
- Tag at what level of granularity?...hard to say, but that will be an emergent process
- Joseph will communicate with someone involved with Protege Ontology Manager at Stanford for some ideas ...if you haven't seen http://protege.stanford.edu/ take a look. Very cool for the relatively sophisticated folk who organize information. It's been around a long time (it has a quarter million users today, and had 50,000 users back in 2006). There might be an existing ontology that the FLOW Syllabus ought to conform to (or at least map to)
- There are a few different aspects:
- "What my students would learn"
- "Outcomes"
- "Learning activities"
- It may be useful to write short "use case" scenarios for using the Syllabus
- Each use case will have implications
- This will help the WG to understand the audiences
- And will help a course designed understand what
parts/emements of their course would likely be essential/useful to each audience type
- Basically, we now need to provide "tour guides" through the syllabus... By analogy, "Going to Venice":
- ...for architects
- ...for culinary arts
- ...for business
- ...for etc.
- These can supply some audience-tailored guidance
- granular (bullet point level)
- tags would enable the separate views
4. FLOW Syllabus Scope
Question: Should "activities" be in or outside the syllabus?
- This would help to outline the topics and sources
- Courses include activities
- Educators/community can create courses and share those
- Activities help learners engage and practice the use of the information to develop understanding
- What we should not do...
- We don't want to poorly usurp the role of online learning sites, rather we want to provide them useful resources
- We don't want to miss engaging those partners by only having the learning activity collection distributed amongst multiple environments
- Narrow the potential community because learning activiteis are designed for a particular audience (there's an inverse relationship between embedded pedagogy and reusability)
- Learning activities can form a coherent package however
- What is the ideal nature of content developmemt to hand-off from the syllabus and the course designers?
- Technical
- Conceptual
- Operational
- OSI-EDU-WG would structure the syllabus
- Independent educators (including folks on the working group) can contribute supplemental content and learning activites
- One can't quite take the syllabus on its own and say "This is my 7-day course"
- One can take a section and add it to something else, or take specific items
Notes prepared by:
Joseph Potvin
Chair, OSI Working Group on Management Education About Free/Libre/Open Methods, Processes and Governance
jpotvin@opman.ca
Mobile: 819-593-5983