OER Evaluation Matrix
RE- USQ LIN8020: Digital Literacies in Practice: EVALUATIVE MATRIX
The range of possible OER's is very broad, and hence there is a lot of flexibility involved. To clarify the context, from an interchangeable perspective, it’s still important to understand one of the reasons for OER. That is, to provide an organic like existence for ongoing development [growth]. Resources now come in a variety of programming languages; e.g. XML and HTML/5 such as online for Internet delivery, or learning objects and other assets linked or embedded into it via front end design construction; e.g. Website content with moving pictures, audio and documents. Web2 technologies, and other digital tools use a lot of backend programming to get them to work seamlessly. Some are open source for programming and improvement agenda's and not marked as OER via the Creative Commons copyright where learning resources are provided copyright free, so some not all are adaptable for sharing across the globe.
In other words, some resources and/or applications are not OER related because they do not have an open copyright, but they can still be used for free, although most cannot be revamped like many OERs can unless they have 'open source' adaptability. There are some virtual language environments (VLE's) that are OER for the purpose of learning another language where chat applications are embedded into the software. As a result, they could for e.g. be used in conjunction with OERs in a flipped classroom by joining in membership scenarios.
It's different where students use HelloTalk for practice at home or out and about with their student, 'ePal' buddies and other resources like Randall's Listening Lab. It's extending the learning into other authentic environments and this is beneficial for a language and culture mix. So, the drawback with VLE's is that many people engaged with eChatting do not use VLE'. The majority of eChatters can be found in Cyberspace using their favourite, hip or trending applications. To confuse you more, another interchangeable OER name search is 'OER learning objects'; the name probably comes from object orientated programming or 'oops' which has been around for some time; however there are some good learning objects around.
Furthermore, there is also the need to adhere to education philosophies and approaches plus online safety. So, there is a wealth of interactivity happening between OER’s. The very reason evaluation is a necessary evil. Without it, the quality and effectiveness of education suffers. The USQ in LIN8020 Digital Literacies in Practice stated that: "Open Educational Resources (OER) are digitised materials offered freely and openly for educators, students and self-learners to use and reuse for teaching, learning and research" (USQ, 2017). This concept cannot delimit OER's to only downloadable materials that are used off-line.
There are the other resources mentioned in this blog: Web2.0 technologies [social media], digital tools; e.g. applications such as Skype and WeChat, yes Facebook, Instagram and SnapChat.
To the point, OERs are CCC initiated open learning opportunities; e.g. 'learning objects' where some can be evaluated by more technical evaluation tools as most evaluation is design orientated; e.g. diagramming sentences and online Website resources and more. Universities have OERs at HE levels; e.g. the University of Texas has a good collection. Hence, we can use the acronym OER interchangeably to understand the taxonomy with OER at the top of the hierarchy and pigeon holing the others into sub-categories, or subordinates and superordinates, with an external link that helps to further authentic learning opportunities.
OERs can be used online or offline in class or in a flipped class and in collaboration within a collective education environment. The advance of digital technologies during the past few years has been extraordinary. This has been one of the limiting factors with education for all. So, change is eminent, as education strives to create a prosperous existence with the broad context of OER in a collective world. The matrix below as a whole is quite broad and open to further development. Although many resources will not need to undergo such rigorous quality control measures. There are many open resources that will take a while to decipher due to the amount of content available; e.g. syllabus type linked to a curriculum like the Australian Curriculum. Especially where they have many different types of components, changes in delivery, changes in content, approaches, participants, and so on.
Finally, digital tools (DT) like applications have a large repository and flexibility with functionality purposes, as they come in many different forms and engage learners in different ways. Therefore, the matrix has tried to accommodate this reality; e.g. the learning objects are educational raw materials of varying degrees of complexity that can be used combined with other learning objects to create more complete or comprehensive sets of learning materials. Check out these learning material OER examples 1). here and 2). here.
In conclusion, OER evaluation tools, allow educators to rate the quality of these resources, and enable educators to align content to the Common Core Standards directly within OER Commons. The one thing that would change the most then is the regional education standards in differing countries. However, now it’s possible for educators to curate lesson plans, courses, and learning modules with readily available information about how these materials meet the superior standards for learning. Here is a compressed version of OER Evaluation Criteria.
Below is a link to a synthesised OER Matrix I developed from OER:
