Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: I don;t think the eMM serves any purpose more than a reference model. For example Teaching and Learning would only be applicable to that, it would need to be more abstract to apply across all open projects/organizations.

1. Process Categories

Note

added based directly on eMM. Need to revisit and decide if these categories are on point or not.

Process Category

Brief Description

OrganizationProcesses associated with institutional planning and management
Teaching/Learning Processes that directly impact teaching and learning
ResourcesProcesses surrounding the creation, delivery, use and maintenance of resources
SupportProcesses surrounding the oversight and management of community/institutional support
Evaluation

Processes surrounding the evaluation and quality control

2. Processes

Note

attempt below at drilling down on the process categories above based on discussions from the Educause Openness CG. There may be redundancies or items that apply to multiple categories. Ideas are bulleted to be later added to the table.

Organization Processes

CriteriaDefinitionMetrics
BusinessDay to day operations

Communication
Transparency
Self-organization
Collaboration
Evidence-based
Self-Direction

Governance  
Management  
Policy  
   

 

  • Curriculum (programmatic coherence)
  • Certification
  • Assessment

Teaching/Learning Processes

Objective

The term open has become popularly used to describe a variety of objects (software and technology, educational resources, education, etc.). Ambiguity exists in the meaning of open, for example open education where anyone can enroll with the only requirement a fee, or open education that is available to anyone, and without a cost. In addition to the ambiguity of open (what it enables), there is also ambiguity with how organizations might operate to allow openness.

The Openness Maturity Model attempts to define open attributes and a means to assess the type of openness within the community of practice responsible for the design, development, and distribution of the open artifact.

Other possible dimensions or indicators to potentially throw into the mix and organize:

OER/OCW

  • accessibility of material formats (PDF vs RTF, etc.)
  • licensing (CC vs. copyright, etc.)
  • portability/interoperability (scorm, cartridges, IMS, etc.

Also, looking again at emm and Ken's comment above- going to enter those process categories at least preliminarily into the above doc.

1. Process Categories

 


2. Processes

Organization Processes

 

CriteriaDefinitionMetrics
   
   
   
  • The Artifacts Created During Participation in an Open Course
  • Pedagogical Intent
  • Learning Activities
  • Assessments
  • Assessment
  • Externally Used Resources
  • Credentialing (course and program level)
  • Course Content
    • Access Dimensions: non-discriminatory: open to everyone–non restrictive.
    • Licensing Dimensions:
      • Use
      • Reuse
      • Derivative Works
      • Economic Access (open to everybody irrespective of their financial means)
  • Learning Design
  • Instruction and Support
  • Delivery Technology

Resources Processes

CriteriaDefinitionMetrics
   
   
   
  • Open Access - publishing of research data
  • Externally Used Resources
  • Licensing Dimensions:
    • Use
    • Reuse
    • Derivative Works
    • Economic Access (open to everybody irrespective of their financial means)
  • Software used
  • Public Contribution
  • Public comment
  • Interoperability - resources are distributed with cross-platform interoperability in mind (for example RTF vs. PDF)

Processes

...

...



...

Processes

...

ResourcesProcesses surrounding the creation and maintenance of resources  
R1. 
R2. 
R3. 
R4. 
R5. 

...