Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
contextualised course or available as external links, depending upon copyright con-
siderations. The course designers then specify the additional requirements for a
learner to be able to utilise these learning materials in a structured manner that could
lead to an academic award (but need not necessarily always do so). These additional
requirements would include the following:
(1) a measure of peer-to-peer interaction;
(2) an amount of tutor support and supervision;
(3) an opportunity to be assessed on the course contents;
(4) an opportunity to obtain recognition (certification) for the assessed work.
A crucial factor is that in identifying these additional requirements (for each
element of which the educational institutions may charge learners fees) the course
designer does not need to proscribe a rigid form of learning delivery. (One of the
consistent barriers to sharing and collaboration is that while institutions frequently
exhort staff and students to use the virtual learning environment (VLE) or the e-
portfolio, they really want them to use
their
version of the VLE or e-portfolio,
which does not easily import/export with other such platforms). Instead, each edu-
cational institution could choose to use the common pool of learning materials, but
to support their learners in ways that are consistent with their own existing educa-
tional procedures. An example from Fig. 13.2 would be that University X would
utilise the common pool of learning materials but would use Moodle to provide
email exchanges for the peer-to-peer interaction and computer conferencing for the
class interaction with the tutor(s). The university would select a variety of online
submissions as the assessment instrument of choice and would award a comple-
tion certificate that is consistent with their own quality assurance procedures. On
the other hand, University Z might choose to utilise the same pool of common
learning materials, but to teach the class only on a face-to-face basis, providing the
web-based resources to assist supplementary learning, but with a final face-to-face
formal exam. The common link is the shared pool of high-quality learning materi-
als that have been structured for academic consistency and can be jointly updated
and amended by the member academics participating in the different universities.
Additions and improvements to the pool of teaching resources by one trusted expert
would benefit all those using the open access resource pool—staff, students, and
casual web-users.
Conclusions
Our initial interest in OER was sparked by some of the particular problems faced
by universities in less-developed countries, mainly the lack of detailed benchmarked
quality standards, the geographical and resource challenges in extending higher edu-
cation to remote students, the need to provide educational opportunities for remote
students, and the lack of know-how in effective course design for Internet-based
teaching. In the course of investigation it became clear that most of these problems,
