Comments on: Open Education 2007: Conference call for papers http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/323 pragmatism over zeal Wed, 17 Mar 2010 06:59:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Wandering the World… » David Wiley on a False Dichotomy in Online Education (Scalability vs. Expensive Human Interaction) and on Localization http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/323/comment-page-1#comment-34859 Wandering the World… » David Wiley on a False Dichotomy in Online Education (Scalability vs. Expensive Human Interaction) and on Localization Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:06:22 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/323#comment-34859 [...] The upcoming conference looks promising - Open Learning 2007: Localizing and Learning [...] [...] The upcoming conference looks promising – Open Learning 2007: Localizing and Learning [...]

]]> By: Jeremy http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/323/comment-page-1#comment-34532 Jeremy Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:48:17 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/323#comment-34532 I just read your post, and with my new job paying for conferences to which I get papers accepted, I'm thinking about Open Education 2007. Over the last year, I've heard multiple people talk about "checkpoints" and "progress," etc. in Open Learning, Instructional Design, and Instructional Technology. My opinion, heavily influenced by my realm of expertise, is that both fields are missing fundamental assessment components. At SITE this year, Curtis Bonk showed a bunch of statistics demonstrating that major universities are moving "learning" online. I took issue with his comment because, without assessment, all you know is that they're moving people and credits online, not "learning". (A group of students at BYU let me know clearly that they consider online courses, "the quick and easy way" to a grade.) Twice in the last year, I've heard David Merrill say that we haven't achieved widespread instruction that is (stop me if you've heard this before)" effective, engaging, and efficient," and then respond to questions of how we will know when we get there with, "That's a measurement problem." The need for assessment to accompany OER is latent in your post: "If our open education efforts aren’t supporting learning, we’re failing as a field." -How do you know that/if learning is taking place? "Do open educational resources support learning in ways different from non-open resources? In what concrete ways do open educational resources support learning?" -We know they "support" learning differently because everything about them, from the social and psychological theories that underpin them to their underlying delivery mechanisms, is different. What we don't know is if OER results in the same outcome as traditional education. -Regarding OER assessment, it had better be different from traditional assessment. The validity issues associated with free and open assessments, digital or otherwise, are much more complex than those typically faced by test developers. The only problem I see is deciding whether this issue fits into your second focus for Open Education 2007, "Learning from open educational resources," because it isn't a localization issue. Let me know what you think. I just read your post, and with my new job paying for conferences to which I get papers accepted, I’m thinking about Open Education 2007.

Over the last year, I’ve heard multiple people talk about “checkpoints” and “progress,” etc. in Open Learning, Instructional Design, and Instructional Technology. My opinion, heavily influenced by my realm of expertise, is that both fields are missing fundamental assessment components.

At SITE this year, Curtis Bonk showed a bunch of statistics demonstrating that major universities are moving “learning” online. I took issue with his comment because, without assessment, all you know is that they’re moving people and credits online, not “learning”. (A group of students at BYU let me know clearly that they consider online courses, “the quick and easy way” to a grade.)

Twice in the last year, I’ve heard David Merrill say that we haven’t achieved widespread instruction that is (stop me if you’ve heard this before)” effective, engaging, and efficient,” and then respond to questions of how we will know when we get there with, “That’s a measurement problem.”

The need for assessment to accompany OER is latent in your post:

“If our open education efforts aren’t supporting learning, we’re failing as a field.”
-How do you know that/if learning is taking place?

“Do open educational resources support learning in ways different from non-open resources? In what concrete ways do open educational resources support learning?”
-We know they “support” learning differently because everything about them, from the social and psychological theories that underpin them to their underlying delivery mechanisms, is different. What we don’t know is if OER results in the same outcome as traditional education.
-Regarding OER assessment, it had better be different from traditional assessment. The validity issues associated with free and open assessments, digital or otherwise, are much more complex than those typically faced by test developers.

The only problem I see is deciding whether this issue fits into your second focus for Open Education 2007, “Learning from open educational resources,” because it isn’t a localization issue.

Let me know what you think.

]]>