WP2 Cross-sector analysis and comparison
- D2.1 Transversal and categorised Inventory of OER Programmes and Initiatives
- Edition 1 - see File:POERUP D2.1 Transversal and categorised inventory of OER programmes and initiatives.pdf
- Edition 2 - see File:POERUP D2.1 edition 2.pdf
- D2.2 Country OER Summary Reports (33 countries) - see Country reports
- D2.3 Report on Comparative analysis of transversal OER initiatives
- D2.4 Country OER Summary Report - Canada
Month 1 thru Month 14 (14 months) - with later months for updating
University of Leicester leads this WP. In the first phase the research team will build upon the findings and results of relevant (inter)national/regional/major OER initiatives. The desk research will include a meta-analysis of previous publications, research and activities in the field and take into account previous project results concerning OER. We have already identified more than sixty sources both from our own work (http://poerup.referata.com) and from existing projects including OPAL, OLCOS, EDRENE and OER HE. We will also draw on the knowledge gained in the Re.ViCa project (http://revica.europace.org) (on virtual campuses in universities) and ongoing in the VISCED project (http://visced.referata.com, virtual schools and colleges) in creating a cross-sector categorised inventory of OER initiatives and programmes in Europe and the rest of the world.
Parallel with the inventory and informed by it we shall create country reports focusing specifically on the national policy level relevant to OER (including educational policies as well as wider policies). We will build on already existing country reports where they exist - detailed material is already available on a few countries such as the UK, France and Brazil. We have already identified relevant resources including: Re.ViCa and VISCED country reports, OPAL case studies and the country pages in the OER section of WikiEducator - see for example http://wikieducator.org/New_Zealand.
With the cross-sector inventory we want to go further than the traditional list of good practices so as to combine all relevant parameters: financing, educational structures, pedagogical approaches, quality procedures, content production methods, business models, organizational embedding, the role of communities and sustainability, etc. Based on the results a categorisation will be made. This will include a classification by the political scale of initiatives: National initiative (e.g. Wikiwijs) - but also regional and international. Partners have much experience on this from the prior/ongoing projects Re.ViCa and VISCED as well as national work (e.g. for Becta).
The project will be based round the use of a collaborative team of editors on a wiki, using the same software and some of the same naming schemes as Wikipedia. The wiki will be set up by Sero, using knowhow developed during VISCED and Re.ViCa. Where feasible, arrangements will be made for sharing wiki content and expertise with other agencies and projects. All resources developed under this work package will be Creative Commons licensed and will when finalised be publicly editable within the wiki platform.
Following completion of the initial inventory we shall conclude this WP with a comparison and analysis of trends in OER initiatives in the different educational sectors and countries. We shall use the data gathered to contrast the approaches from different sectors and look at the various kinds of communities.
Third Country Partner (Athabasca)
Bring knowledge of non-EU projects and initiatives in OER, especially but not only from UNESCO and COL circles, in order to ensure at least representative global coverage of OER initiatives (comprehensive global coverage is infeasible).
Create a country report on Canada - at the federal level and with sections on each province. (A starting point is available at http://www.virtualcampuses.eu/index.php/Canada - including links to province entries - but the pages need "OERising". Note also that the OER page for Canada at http://wikieducator.org/Canada is rather minimal, unlike that for e.g. Australia.)
Assist with liaison with WikiEducator.
Contribute to categorisation of cross-sector inventory - in particular to ensure that the categorisation is not Europe-centric.
Please explain how the overall project management will be implemented
University of Leicester is in charge of this output but all partners will be involved. Sero will provide key methodological and technical advice. Experience of Sero staff in similar projects indicates that:
- "national" must include region, state and province level, given the devolved nature of education in several countries
- a rigid template format is essential with tags used to facilitate categorisation and alternative views.
The International Advisory Committee will play a crucial role commenting on the outputs and contributing added insights.
While most items in the inventory will be entered by partners it will also be possible for others associated with the project (especially the IAC members) to enter or update details directly using the wiki's open features. This requires sensitive management.
Subcontractor funds are spread across three partners to balance the finances. Partners with subcontractor funds are chosen to be those most experienced in subcontracting these kinds of studies.
Explanation of work package expenditures
There is an average tariff of Category 2 days for a country report, supervision or zone initiatives report, dependent on size, complexity and degree to which existing research is relevant ((details omitted))
There is an average tariff in euros for a subcontracted country report.
Subcontract funds for P2: for at least five non-European countries Subcontract funds for P4: for at least three Southern European countries, certainly including Spain Subcontract funds for P5: for at least five North/East European countries, certainly including Sweden
Subcontracts will be allotted on a tender process with the aim of getting best value for money.
Selected WP2 deliverables