Log-ins to Moodle version

Hi Pat,
 
Thanks for those reflections and insights from teaching the course in the
real world!
 
TL;DR:
> - I agree, initial course should be pedagogically neutral.
>
Wise decision! Trying to find consensus among a group of educators on the
"ideal" pedagogical approach is about as easy as nailing jelly to a tree.
 
>
> - I want to re-emphasize the "course pack" model.
>
Yep - I think we can do that. We will have a "generic" website which will
effectively be a "wrap around" asynchronous course guiding learners through
Karl Fogel's text. The product will include a "course pack" for
instructors. Pat, please list the "standard" items found in a typical
course pack that a US faculty member would recognise. I think this is a
terminology issue - we don't use the term course pack in this part of the
world
 
>
> - Who wants a login to the Modole site?
>
I would like a log in please.
 
>
> - If we're not using Moodle, where is the content repository?
>
The content is authored in Mediawiki and we have a script that publishes a
course web site on Wordpress. For more information, see this page on the
OERu authoring and publishing model:
 
http://wikieducator.org​/OERu​/OERu​_authoring​_model
 
This gives us version control for collaborative authoring which is not
possible in a LMS. Moreover, having a "single source" provides flexibility
to publish to different environments. It would still be possible to "build"
a Moodle instance based on the generic course site.
 
>
> - How do we start?
>
I've nearly completed the Kanboard template which outlines a typical OERu
collaborative development - this is a new addition to our FOSS support
tools. The idea is to embed support resources associated with the
individual Kanboard cards. We'll send out invited to join the Board soon
and then schedule our 1st team meeting to consider our design decisions.
The process is iterative - we'll agree a design concept, develop a
represenative sample of materials to test the design, refine and move
forward. Aka rough consensus, running code!
 
 
>
>
> As Ken mentioned here, Moving Forward with Some Questions/Discussion
> (http://*groups.oeru.org*​/groups​/oss​-production​-
> course​-team​/messages​/topic​/6p9kBiCUMlM80h3nTVIMhE)
>
<http://groups.oeru.org​/groups​/oss​-production​-course​-team​/messages​/topic​/6p9kBiCUMlM80h3nTVIMhE>
> Clark Shah-Nelson and I began developing a course based on my current
> offering at the State University of New York at Albany (UAlbany).
>
> I think I messed up...
>
> I think Wayne has it right, this should be a very basic course that
> adopters can use as they like (format, content, activities, etc.). The only
> "hard-coded" aspect would be the use of Karl Fogel's text, Producing Open
> Source Software. The online resources should replicate the current
> "standards" for a course pack (ugh, I just threw up a little bit in my
> mouth).
>
> My course at UAlbany uses Team Based Learning (TBL), which I really like
> and which I think compliments the open ethos of open source software. But I
> realize, most faculty probably want to "teach the book" and are looking for
> straight forward materials that do not require them to adopt a new pedagogy.
>
> This opinion was recently reinforced, twice. By a co-worker who also
> teaches an open source course, and wanted to use my materials, but was
> scared off by the TBL approach.
>
> Secondly, as part of my OSI role, I recently joined the "Professor's Open
> Source Software Experience" (http://*foss2serve.org*​/index​.php​/POSSE)
> <http://foss2serve.org​/index​.php​/POSSE> and after several meetings, it is
> clear attaching a pedagogical style is a bad idea.
>
> So, I defer to the experts. I think Karl as the author, and I, as one who
> has taught the course for four years, can provide the content "expertise"
> but will defer to the course and instructional designers to lead the
> development effort.
>
> Considering the above, I still think we should use Moodle as a foundation
> (although I also understand having a content repository, which does
> eliminates a pedagogical bias and would be happy to shift to that).
>
> OK, how do we start?
>
> Patrick
> ------------------------------
> ⮪ Reply
>
<oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org?subject=Re%3A%20Log-ins%20to%20Moodle%20version>
> 🖂 New topic <oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org> View topic…
> <http://groups.oeru.org​/r​/topic​/7xbDqhSeZqNkDq9eU7BpPd>
> Unsubscribe
>
<oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org?subject=Unsubscribe&body=Hello%2C%0A%0APlease%20remove%20me%20from%20OSS%20production%20course%20team%0A%3Chttp%3A//groups.oeru.org/groups/oss-production-course-team%3E%0A%0AThank%20you.>
> • Switch to a daily digest
>
<oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org?subject=Digest%20on&body=Hello%2C%0A%0APlease%20switch%20me%20from%20receiving%20one%20email%20per%20post%20to%20the%20daily%0Adigest%2C%20which%20summarises%20the%20all%20the%20posts%20made%20each%20day%20in%0AOSS%20production%20course%20team%0A%3Chttp%3A//groups.oeru.org/groups/oss-production-course-team%3E%0A%0AThank%20you.>

Hello,
 
There are a whole lot of great “requirements” being raised, that I think tend
not to be addressed when design is limited to a specific course instance or
even within a single institution.
 
It strikes me that if we approach this from a position of pedagogical
simplicity with strong commitments to low barriers for reusability and
technology agnostic deployment, we could be doing everybody a great service.
I know that these are the issues that Wayne and Dave, Jim Taylor, and the rest
of the OERu team have grappled with for a number of years. I am not sure that
the way that we are framing the requirements will challenge the approach
currently adopted by OERu. I for one, think that we are well advised to
approach this quite incrementally to ensure that the quality of
low-barrier(ness), modifiability, and technology neutrality (in this regard
functioning like a course pack) are meeting the project needs.
 
I would like to invite Adrian Stagg, Clark and others to pose a few questions
to help orient the design/production/authoring team (all of us).
 
Best,
 
Ken
 
 
 
Professor Ken Udas
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic Services) & Chief Information Officer
Office of the DVC (AS) & CIO
University of Southern Queensland
Ph: +61 7 4687 5863 | Mobile: 0459 030 110 | Email:
<email obscured><mailto:Ken.Udas@usq.edu.au>
 
[cid:<email obscured>8D608C0]
 
Let knowledge grow from more to more, and thus be human life enriched.
 
From: OSS production course team
<oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org<mailto:oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org>>
on behalf of Patrick Masson
<<email obscured><mailto:masson@opensource.org>>
Reply-To:
"oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org<mailto:oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org>"
<oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org<mailto:oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org>>
Date: Thursday, 16 March 2017 at 4:56 AM
To:
"oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org<mailto:oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org>"
<oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org<mailto:oss-production-course-team@groups.oeru.org>>
Subject: [[OSSP]] Log-ins to Moodle version
 
Groups.OERu<http://groups.oeru.org>
 
 
[Photo of Patrick Masson]<http://groups.oeru.org/p/1zoZTCaiNnJ2XbWpiWdZxk>
Log-ins to Moodle
version<http://groups.oeru.org/r/topic/7xbDqhSeZqNkDq9eU7BpPd>
by Patrick Masson<http://groups.oeru.org/p/1zoZTCaiNnJ2XbWpiWdZxk>
in OSS production course
team<http://groups.oeru.org/groups/oss-production-course-team>

Good morning Pat; it's great to meet you virtually, especially after all I have
heard about you from Ken. I did send around a reply to an email of Ken's this
morning, but I'll report here so that we have an open record of activity.
 
I'll be acting as a co-ordinator/facilitator for the USQ work and I'm lucky
enough to be surrounded by very knowledgeable folk who bring a lot of skills to
this project.
 
In order for us (USQ) to have a better understanding of the course, could I ask
for a few things from you please?
 
• Would you be able to grant access to the existing course to the USQ team?
This would be Angela Howard (<email obscured>); Hazel Jones
(<email obscured>); Sarah Cahill (<email obscured>), and I.
 
• Could you also send through a copy of the syllabus document for the course?
This will give us a good overview of the current course and insight into the
current design and educational outcomes.
 
• A link to Karl Fogel's book would also be useful please.
 
Once the USQ team has those three information sources, we can start to plan out
our support, and I can schedule some regular project meetings. It would be
good to have you and Clark in as many of these meetings as you feel
appropriate; we can work out the timezone logistics.
 
I'm looking forward to working with everyone on this course; there are a lot of
very exciting opportunities. Additionally, I would like us to consider the
possibility of some collaborative research around this project as I feel that
the course design, evaluation, and even the proposed flexible structure of the
offering would lend itself quite well to dissemination.
 
Kind regards,
 
Adrian
 
Adrian Stagg
Manager (Open Educational Practice) | Program Quality & Enhancement | Office
for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching | Y221
 
T: +61 7 4631 2917
E: <email obscured>
 
Scholarly Information and Learning Services | Academic Services Division
University of Southern Queensland | Toowoomba, Queensland | 4350 | Australia

Hi all,
 
It's great to see this taking off and all the great minds from around the
globe collaborating on it!
 
I think another aspect of course packs in case anyone is unfamiliar, is
that they are typically an IMS common cartridge format
<http://www.imsglobal.org​/cc​/index​.html> These can then be imported into
various LMS environments with the same end result of content and activities
that are LMS agnostic.
 
However/wherever this ends up getting built, the idea was to publish the
bits and pieces via something like Github - so that people could
copy/edit/fork and put back their own iterations of pieces into the
project, as well as serve up a fully baked exported IMS cartridge that
people could easily plop into their own environment and use as is. As Pat
mentioned, this could contain content, quizzes, discussion forums, etc.
What we figured out from Moodle was that the IMS cc export
<https://docs.moodle.org​/32​/en​/IMS​_Common​_Cartridge​_import​_and​_export> is
fairly limited to these few types of activities, but if we develop it
elsewhere, that won't be a constraint. (Some of the IMC cc's I've seen are
basically SCORM packages of a/v slides/content and quizzes.)
 
At any rate, we could potentially get started in a wiki somewhere, (perhaps
the OERu wiki?), because that may be the most
raw/open/collaborative/exportable tool?
 
We could start with mapping out primary chunks (based on what Pat has
done?): learning objectives - assessments - materials/readings -
activities for each unit/session/module. Or perhaps start by talking more
generally about principles and practices surrounding the creation of the
course, etc. (which, I guess, we are, already?)
It does seem like, if we are providing something that is relatively
pedagogically agnostic as well, that we are focusing on content,
assessment, materials and activities that support the reading, digestion,
and application of the concepts and ideas from Karl's book. In doing so,
perhaps we can create something which individuals can then use and add to
using their own pedagogical framework, such as team-based learning,
problem-based learning, asynchronous self-paced, blended, etc... ?
 
Here's the link to Karl Fogel's book from the syllabus:
http://producingoss.com​/en​/index​.html
 
Kind regards,
Clark
 
 
Clark Shah-Nelson
Assistant Dean, Instructional Design and Technology
University of Maryland School of Social Work