Activity 5: Are OER both open and innovative?

1. How would you judge OpenLearn in terms of your definition of innovation?
   1. I am still working on a definition, and I am not quite sure how to make it "mine"? I am, however, very interested in the idea that innovation is about context (McAndrew et al, 2010) so can be something small rather than something that requires impact on "markets, governments and society" (Wikipedia)
   2. However, OpenLearn clearly seeks to impact on the market by attracting paying students to full time courses but it is also innovative in a smaller way, by allowing open access to modules that are now closed but that were, and are, still packed with good and useful information.
2. How open did you find OpenLearn? 
1. My first impression (today, I have visited before) was that it was not being used and that was a pretty big turn off. This was because the comments on the Get Started page are FIFO (oldest appearing first) rather than LIFO (newest appearing first). Having now gone to a couple more discussions I see that this is a site-wide setting. Isn't this a big mistake?
2. I don't find the concept of plodding through materials without feedback and participation attractive at all. Participation is via comments, relies on a critical mass which it doesn't appear to be achieving (at first glance).
3. Nevertheless, earlier today I offered the skills link to my students to help them with their study skills, so that is using the site a little differently.
3. How does OpenLearn challenge conventional assumptions about paying for higher education modules?
1. I agree with others, that because of the predominance of encouragement and signposting towards OU study it really doesn't challenge assumptions. There is also no assessment other than the self assessment tasks. Are automatically issued certificates enough to allow students to feel as though they have achieved something. Do they need to feel this? I know I do.
2. However, perhaps if used by other institutions and teachers, even in other contexts, for example using the materials from modules here in high school projects, perhaps it really is innovative but we cannot see the evidence of this.

Part B:

1. How would you judge OPAL (Open Air Laboratories) in terms of your definition of innovation?
1. Still haven't decided on a definition, however, this initiative, which encompasses others like iSpot, is very interesting. It is funded by major players in the world of natural science and so has an air of authority yet the learning projects incorporated in the site, and via the associated projects, are fun as well as educational. 
2. How open did you find OPAL?
1. It also is attractive to different age ranges, who could be doing some of the activities together or separately.  They could be incorporated into classes or something for the kids to do during half-term. The Kidszone also reminded me strongly of wet childhood saturdays spent following trails at the Natural History Museum.
2. It seems completely open, for anyone in the UK because the activities simply are not geared towards other environments. Does this mean that it isn't open? Well perhaps, but on the other hand the language is accessible and is not academic, so it is open in other senses of the word.
3. How does OPAL challenge conventional assumptions about paying for [higher] education [modules]? 
1. This question isn't appropriate as written so I have adapted it a little.
2. This is presented as fun and, often, social learning. The learning zone includes more obvious learning tools like video, quizzes, specific activities and background reading, but the majority of the site is jam packed with learning activities without expressly tagging them as such.