Difference between revisions of "A Professional Learning Community Approach for Teacher Development and OER creation - A toolkit/Developing capabilities for OER creation"

From Open Educational Resources
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 56: Line 56:
 
Once the resource is approved, the 'publishing team' can upload the resource on the state OER platform, following guidelines for the process   
 
Once the resource is approved, the 'publishing team' can upload the resource on the state OER platform, following guidelines for the process   
  
Resource - Check list for resource upload on the state OER platform
+
Resource - Check list for resource upload on the state OER platform  
 
 
Subsequently, interested and capable teachers can be identified and OER workshops can be organized with these teacher groups, again by subject.
 
  
 
=== Creation of OER in local languages ===
 
=== Creation of OER in local languages ===
Line 66: Line 64:
  
 
=== State Repository of OER (SROER) ===
 
=== State Repository of OER (SROER) ===
 +
Each state must have its own OER repository where all the content created by the department and by the teachers and teacher educators is shared for use of all. 
 +
 
The resources created by teachers and shared on the PLCs can be reviewed by expert groups, set-up by subject. The resources that are seen as valuable should be made available to all teachers on an on-line space. The on-line space can be designed using a FOSS Content Management System such as MediaWiki.  
 
The resources created by teachers and shared on the PLCs can be reviewed by expert groups, set-up by subject. The resources that are seen as valuable should be made available to all teachers on an on-line space. The on-line space can be designed using a FOSS Content Management System such as MediaWiki.  
  
For a country like India, with a federal structure, the national level repository [http://nroer.gov.in NROER] should be seen more as a role model (like NCERT text books) and states should set up their own OER platforms.  
+
As in the case of NROER, content may be of two types - content which has been reviewed for quality assurance and is 'published', i.e. visible to all. Content which has not undergone the process would be visible only to the person providing the content to the repository, and to the quality assurance team.  
 
 
State platforms can encourage greater participation of teachers in OER creation, revision and sharing. Over time SCERT should encourage DIETs / district groups to make their own localised resources and publish on state platforms, this can help bring to fruit, the 1995 MHRD guidelines for teacher education, which envisioned district level text books.  
 
  
In theory one platform for India can meet all requirements, in practice, states should have their own spaces for autonomous resource creation, revision, curation and sharing. Hence the resources created by the program should be hosted by the state governments as OER for wide use by teachers, and for adapting, revising and re-distributing. Telangana has developed the state OER platform using the MediaWiki CMS. Andhra Pradesh also has its state OER platform.
+
'''National Platform v/s state platforms''' - For a country like India, with a federal structure, the national level repository [http://nroer.gov.in NROER] should be seen more as a role model (like NCERT text books) and states should set up their own OER platforms. State platforms can encourage greater participation of teachers in OER creation, revision and sharing. Over time SCERT should encourage DIETs / district groups to make their own localised resources and publish on state platforms, this can help bring to fruit, the 1995 MHRD guidelines for teacher education, which envisioned district level text books. In theory one platform for India can meet all requirements, in practice, states should have their own spaces for autonomous resource creation, revision, curation and sharing. Hence the resources created by the program should be hosted by the state governments as OER for wide use by teachers, and for adapting, revising and re-distributing. Telangana has developed the state OER platform using the MediaWiki CMS. Andhra Pradesh also has its state OER platform. The [http://teacher-network.in/OER/index.php Teacher Network] (on which this toolkit is available) can be used as a initial state repository. This site has been established and being maintained by IT for Change. Commonwealth Educational Media Centre for Asia ([http://cemca.org.in CEMCA]), an inter-governmental organization of the Commonwealth countries helped establish this platform.  
  
 
Principles of SROER design
 
Principles of SROER design
Line 78: Line 76:
 
Features of the SROER design
 
Features of the SROER design
  
The small groups formed for the text book, will explore the OER repository, review the design, layout, organization and processes of the resource creation and suggest changes/ give feedback.  These will be incorporated and presented.
+
Maintenance of the OER platform
 +
 
 +
The platform wil require technological and acadeic maintennance
  
 
  Case - [http://troer.telangana.gov.in/OER/index.php/Main_Page Telangana Repository of OER] (TROER)
 
  Case - [http://troer.telangana.gov.in/OER/index.php/Main_Page Telangana Repository of OER] (TROER)

Revision as of 06:39, 10 January 2018

A Professional Learning Community Approach for Teacher Development and OER creation - A toolkit
Building Professional Learning Communities Developing capabilities for OER creation Designing and developing curriculum and syllabus for school education

Participatory OER creation by PLCs

After teacher professional development, the area in which ICT can make a significant difference is in the creation, revision and sharing of digital curricular content. Digital content creation and sharing provides the PLC an important rationale for its existence. Digital content becomes an important output (local and contextual learning resources) of the PLC.

Availability of quality curricular resources has been identified as critical to Quality Education by the National Curricular Framework 2005 (NCF). Traditionally, materials are created at the state level and disseminated to teachers. This has two potential limitations - reduced teacher participation in development of the curricular resources, and relative non-contextual content. Participatory resource creation can address both. The NCF position paper on Teacher Education also talks about how spaces of resource creation (resource forums and resource centres) are important aspects of Teacher Professional Development.

Secondly, materials tend to be 'static'; once created, they are revised at infrequent intervals. This legacy approach is the limitation of a traditional 'print' based methods, which cannot allow for such continuous revision and publishing, as that would be far too expensive. However, 'content' is never 'complete' and needs continuous enrichment. Digital technologies can allow for more frequent revision of materials, which can lead to continuous enrichment.

PLCs of teachers can support a dynamic model of OER creation, revision and sharing. Digital resources can supplement and enrich the existing print based resources (existing print materials can also be digitised). The availability of new digital tools allows for multiple and richer representations of content using images, simulations, videos, info-graphics, semantic maps, etc.

Creation, revision, sharing and publishing

Digital tools and methods facilitate the production / development of curricular resources, in different formats. Teachers exposed to a variety of such digital approaches, can become competent in developing curricular resources, for different contexts and purposes. A large number of digital tools are available to create digital resources, in text, image, animation, audio and video formats. Moving beyond the ‘text book’ to include additional formats of resources can create a rich learning environment, in which teachers have a wealth of materials to chose from, based on their needs and priorities.

Since digital resources can be easily replicated, the marginal costs of sharing digital content is negligible. Teachers also need a common space where they can access resources for their classroom teaching, and also for TPD. The PLCs can serve as the forums where teachers can share the digital content accessed or created (or accessedand modified) by them, with their colleagues.

Resources so shared in the PLCs can be vetted and curated and those meeting quality norms can be made available on a on-line space.

Licensing digital content as Open Educational Resources (OER)

The size of the public education system in most states could help to create a sufficient volume of interaction in the professional learning communities. The networking of teachers using digital technologies can make the large size of the system as a strength, as the large number of teachers participating in the network could be a benefit in terms of the volume of resources created and shared by them. Even if only a very small percentage of teachers from the public education system participate, in absolute numbers, it is likely to be large enough to provide a base for OER creation.It is necessary to license all these digital resources as ‘open educational resources’ (OER), since that would enable the resources to be freely re-used, revised and re-distributed. This also needs to be formalized through state curricular policy, by which all materials developed using public funding would be released as OER.

Program for OER creation, revision and publishing

The initial phase of the PLC program can focus on building digital literacy and capacities for integrating ICT for TPD and practice. Subsequently, a program of OER creation can be designed within the PLC program. The steps for the OER program include:

  1. Establishing a resource creation group and an resource review group
  2. Designing the processes of OER creation, review, revision and publishing with the academic review group
  3. Workshops for capacity building of select teachers in OER access and creation
  4. Continuing OER creation by the OER teams post workshops, in virtual mode
  5. Review of OER submitted, by the academic review group
  6. Rework of the OER and final approval for publishing
  7. Publishing of OER on the state OER platform

Establishing structures for the OER program

Two teams are required for the OER program - a state resource creation/ editing group and a resource review group. The first group will collaboratively develop the OER on different topics and the second group will review these resources and provide comments and feedback for improvement. Both groups can comprise teachers and teacher educators. The second group will need to have people who have depth of knowledge of the subject matter, pedagogies as well as be familiar with the academic standards and processes of the state. The number of members will depend on the scope of the OER program, preferably, for every grade + subject, the resource creation group can have around 5 members and the resource review group can have 1-2 members.

Designing the processes of OER creation, review, revision and publishing

This will include the design of the content schema of the OER platform, considering parameters such as subject/discipline, class/grade, audience (teacher/student/public), language etc. The processes of content creation and review will need to be formalized, by identifying the people who would take responsibility for these. Parameters for resource review need to be established to provide the grounds for acceptance or rejection of a resource submission. The processes of making the content public on the platform (publishing) too need to be laid out, including identifying the person(s) responsible.

Workshops for capacity building of select teachers in OER access and creation

The OER creation team will participate in face-to-face workshops, which should be organized by subject. In these OER workshops, teachers can be organized into teams and each team assigned (based on interest and or capacities) one or more topics from the state syllabus. Teachers can access existing resources for that topic, create resources using different digital tools, revise available and relevant OER to make new resources. The teams can also do an internal review of the resources and the plenary of teachers can review the work done by different teams during the workshop.

 Resource - Agenda for a OER creation workshop - Mathematics, Science

Continuing OER creation by the OER teams post workshops, in virtual mode

The processes of resource creation does not have to stop with the workshops. The department could have a program of having teachers create resources, in a collaborative manner, over virtual networks and submit the same to resource review teams electronically. The queuing of these could be automatically configured such that resources created for a subject automatically would go to the relevant reviewer / review team.

In addition, the review team can also be part of the virtual forums, so that they can review resources that are shared on these forums as well. Teachers can also be invited to contribute resources to the state OER platform, through a form on the OER platform or by email.

Resource - Specimen contribution form

Review of OER submitted, by the academic review group, rework by creator and approval

The review group will review the resources submitted by teachers. Resources that are 'approved', meaning those that meet pre-specified criteria, can be passed by the review group to the publishing team, for uploading on the state OER platform. If resources need to be reworked before they can be approved, the review team will share back the resources with the creator(s) with feedback for improvement. This process can iterate till the review group approves the resource.

Publishing of OER on the state OER Platform

Once the resource is approved, the 'publishing team' can upload the resource on the state OER platform, following guidelines for the process

Resource - Check list for resource upload on the state OER platform

Creation of OER in local languages

Collaborative OER creation could provide supplementing and complementing resources that are contextual, to teachers.  A second aspect is that of language. Most of the OER developed and available are in the English language, and relatively much lesser in the ‘home’ languages spoke by the learners. For instance the Kannada Wikipedia (Kannada is the official language in the state of Karnataka, and spoken by vast majority of its people) has around 16,000 pages in contrast to the nearly 5 million pages in English. One of the focus areas of the 'participatory resource creation' of teachers in the sub-project 5 of ROER4D research program was the creation of resources in the local language. The study suggested that teachers have been able to create a large volume of resources in Kannada, including by translating and trans-creating materials available in English.

This model can thus enable the creation of contextual OERs in many more Indic languages. What makes this model even more potentially useful for India, is that in each state, the dominant language is different. Most of the 30 state governments in India have their own (distinct) state languages. As per the 2001 census of India, 13 languages are spoken by more than ten million native speakers and 21 languages by more than a million.

State Repository of OER (SROER)

Each state must have its own OER repository where all the content created by the department and by the teachers and teacher educators is shared for use of all.

The resources created by teachers and shared on the PLCs can be reviewed by expert groups, set-up by subject. The resources that are seen as valuable should be made available to all teachers on an on-line space. The on-line space can be designed using a FOSS Content Management System such as MediaWiki.

As in the case of NROER, content may be of two types - content which has been reviewed for quality assurance and is 'published', i.e. visible to all. Content which has not undergone the process would be visible only to the person providing the content to the repository, and to the quality assurance team.

National Platform v/s state platforms - For a country like India, with a federal structure, the national level repository NROER should be seen more as a role model (like NCERT text books) and states should set up their own OER platforms. State platforms can encourage greater participation of teachers in OER creation, revision and sharing. Over time SCERT should encourage DIETs / district groups to make their own localised resources and publish on state platforms, this can help bring to fruit, the 1995 MHRD guidelines for teacher education, which envisioned district level text books. In theory one platform for India can meet all requirements, in practice, states should have their own spaces for autonomous resource creation, revision, curation and sharing. Hence the resources created by the program should be hosted by the state governments as OER for wide use by teachers, and for adapting, revising and re-distributing. Telangana has developed the state OER platform using the MediaWiki CMS. Andhra Pradesh also has its state OER platform. The Teacher Network (on which this toolkit is available) can be used as a initial state repository. This site has been established and being maintained by IT for Change. Commonwealth Educational Media Centre for Asia (CEMCA), an inter-governmental organization of the Commonwealth countries helped establish this platform. 

Principles of SROER design

Features of the SROER design

Maintenance of the OER platform

The platform wil require technological and acadeic maintennance

Case - Telangana Repository of OER (TROER)

Toolkit for creating OER

For more information on how teachers can use these tools, please refer to the Teachers' toolkit for creating and re-purposing OER using FOSS