OSI-EDU-WG-notes-7feb2014

* [[OSI-EDU-WG-notes-31jan2014>>doc:Working-Groups-Incubator-Projects.flow-syllabus.OSI-EDU-WG-notes-31jan2014.WebHome||title="OSI-EDU-WG-notes-31jan2014"]]

26

* No revisions suggested.

27

28

== 3. "Form Follows Function" ==

29

30

=== (a) Venue for Syllabus ===

31

32

* http://osi.xwiki.com/bin/Projects/draft-flow-syllabus

33

* The OSI Board wants to use osi.xwiki.com as its platform for collaborative content and discussion of issues;

34

* Refined content is then pushed to opensource.org website

35

* The "current version" can be occasionally updated. The dev environment remains the wiki.

36

37

=== (b) What's the best structure and environment for us to maintain the master? ===

38

39

Maybe breaking up the current long page and use of a multi-page table of contents extension would be useful but first...

40

This needs to be asked as: "What is the most useful structure and environment to instructional designers?"

41

If it's to be a guide to "best-of-breed" resources, it should not expand too much.

42

We need to refine "what the resource needs to be".

43

44

* Need to write specific learning objectives for each module;

45

* Each section should follow a template, with guidance from instructional designers

46

* This syllabus provides a quality-control and structuring service that educators can use in preparing their online learning, online campuses, open educational resources, open textbooks. That's to say the educational specialists should be able to rely on this OSI-coordinated syllabus output, as input to creating their courses;

47

* The WG thus needs the participation of educators to advise on the most useful generic structure and process to supply this content as learning objects, for their use in creating their delivery

48

* The focus is practical implementation of free/libre/open, and how to introduce it in organizations

Meanwhile:

* Tagging items of course would be useful

53

* Should change to CC-by license, to be consistent with majority of free/libre/open educational content

54

55

Note that Github is popular for the technically inclined, but:

56

57

* Github is limiting for diverse users. We need to ensure accessibility for the less technical.

58

* We want to advance this as a genuine OSI-hosted effort, so OSI would visibility if this was located on Github

59

* It is also important to retain the OSI visibility avoid open-washing.

60

* It's valuable to ensure the primary presence of OSI as "the trusted aggregator" of the legitimate free/libre/open educational material (i.e. not "open-washed" material that would confuse)

61

62

=== (c) Working Group Participation ===

63

64

* The OSI-EDU-WG can be comprised of several "Theme-Based" Subject Matter Experts and Content Contributors

65

* Example 1: "License Compliance Theme" with a community of lawyers;

66

* Example 2: "Project Management Theme" with a community from the PM discipline;

67

* **Follow-up thought by Joseph (after the meeting):** //I think we should be careful to NOT segregate the WG into discipline ghettos (lawyers, economists, project management methodologists). The risk is that they end up taking past each other. The WG themes are currently topic-based and inter-disciplinary. I just suggest we be cautious about subject matter experts and content contributors operating as discrete working communities by professional field. Interdisciplinary discussions are inherently harder to do, but they force us to address the very issues that make them difficult.//

68

* We need an initial draft an email explaining the FLOW Syllabus resource << Joseph will provide an initial description for the introductory emails

69

* We should say where the initial funding is from (Joseph will check on permission)

70

* The intro email invite participation via the weekly teleconf call

71

* Seek content contributions, sharing of training materials, build a working consensus on an approach to documentation and dissemination

72

73

=== Notes prepared by: ===

74