learning to share: understanding perceptions of repurposing oers in social science research methods...
DESCRIPTION
This is a draft of the presentation that will be given at the HEA Social Sciences annual conference - Teaching forward: the future of the Social Sciences. For further details of the conference: http://bit.ly/1cRDx0p Bookings open until 14 May 2014 http://bit.ly/1hzCMLR or [email protected] ABSTRACT We report on an ongoing study investigating the repurposing of social science research methods OERs by for use in Higher Education, focusing on an audit of license types used on Jorum, a survey of content ‘producers’ and a survey of perceptions of repurposing by the wider academic community. Particular attention is given to how academics interpret the Creative Commons license options and their perception of the protection that this affords them when sharing their work.TRANSCRIPT
Learning to Share?Understanding perceptions of repurposing OERs in Social Science research methods
Dr Luke SloanDeputy Director Cardiff Q-Step
School of Social Sciences, Cardiff UniversityE: [email protected] Follow: @drlukesloan
Outline
• Background
• True or False?
• Jorum Audit
• OER Survey
• Synthesis
• What’s Next…
Background
• OERs and research methods teaching
• Rational actor problem
• Producers vs Consumers
• Creative Commons as a solution?
• 84% use ‘Share Alike’ (Carter and Kernohan 2012)Lack of awareness of Creative Commons licenses or wilful deviance?
True or False?
Attribution (BY): not everything needs to be attributed
No Derivative (ND): content must be substantially changed before use
Non-Commercial (NC): content, whether original or derived, cannot be used for commercial purposes
Images from: http://creativecommons.org.au/learn-more/licences
Share Alike (SA): only derived content of over 50% originality must be shared
FALSE
FALSE
TRUE
FALSE
Unsurprisingly you did well (it’s not difficult!) so is this….
- Wilful deviance?- Like taping a song off the radio?- Ignorance?
Jorum Audit I
• Searched ‘research methods’ (JACS = ‘Social Studies’)
• Also searched for my own resources (improperly labelled)
• 92 resources identified
• Recorded:– CC license type– Whether original– Views & downloads
Jorum Audit II
• License types:– BY (x2)– BY-SA (x2)– BY-NC-ND (x1)– BY-NC-SA (x86)
• All original (as far as I could tell)
• Top 15 downloads as follows:
Jorum Audit IIITopic: Author: License: Downloads:
Quantitative and qualitative data Pete Richardson BY-NC-SA 835
Logistic Regression Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 670
Student Guide to SPSS Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 493
Qualitative Research Methods: A Module Summary Alison Anderson, Kevin Meethan BY-NC-SA 271
Approaches to Political Analysis Jonathan Parker, Keele University BY-NC-SA 236
Hypotheses, Probability, Chi-Square and T-Tests Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 187
Student Guide to NVivo Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 186
Research Methods: Final Year Project Toolkit: Developing your research question/formulating hypotheses Laura Lake BY-NC-SA 149
Coding qualitative data Kevin Meethan BY-NC-SA 137
Research Methods: Final Year Project Toolkit: Bivariate Analysis Laura Lake BY-NC-SA 121
Supporting Materials for M level Qualitative Research Methods Kevin Meethan BY-NC-SA 114
Frequencies, Central Tendency, Dispersion & Standard Deviation Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 107
Correlation and Simple Linear Regression Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 103
Hypotheses and Chi-Square (Pearson) Dr Luke Sloan BY-NC-SA 103
Research Methods: Final Year Project Toolkit: Primary Research Methods Laura Lake BY-NC-SA 94
Note that they are all under ‘Share Alike’ licenses… so where are the derivatives and the attributions?
Jorum Audit III
• Reasonable assumption that some derived material was created when downloaded 500+ times?
• Unlikely that original material is presented by adopters in the classroom?
• Still searching for any attributed and derived versions of my logistic regression slides…
62
436
205
74
67
58
51
Jorum Audit IV
Note: For my Logistic Regression slides…
Jorum Audit VCountry Code Country Total views and downloads
US UNITED STATES 12633GB UNITED KINGDOM 7372DE GERMANY 882IN INDIA 694CN CHINA 691CA CANADA 420BR BRAZIL 404AU AUSTRALIA 281ET ETHIOPIA 272UA UKRAINE 226PK PAKISTAN 215JP JAPAN 204MY MALAYSIA 203NL NETHERLANDS 194PH PHILIPPINES 162
Note: For all resources audited (gives an indication of the scale of use…)
Jorum Audit VI
• In summary, all very frustrating!
• Looking for signatures that infer re-purposing
• Reminiscent of previous work
• Change of tack required!
OER Survey I
• In collaboration with Jorum User Survey
• Questions on level of experience in using/producing OERs
• Questions on confidence of applying and observing Creative Commons Licences
• 80 responses from FE and HE for closed and open questions
OER Survey II
Type of OER User:
Total
Confident/ experienced user
of Open Educational
Resources (OER)
Inexperienced user of Open Educational
Resources (OER)
New to Open Educational
Resources (OER)
I fully understand how I am able to use a Creative
Commons licenced resource:
Strongly agree 59.26% (n=16) 23.53% (n=8) 10.53% (n=2) 32.5%
Agree 37.04% (n=10) 38.24% (n=13) 15.79% (n=3) 32.5%
Neutral 0.00% (n=0) 17.65% (n=6) 21.05% (n=4) 12.5%
Disagree 0.00% (n=0) 8.82% (n=3) 5.26% (n=1) 5.0%
Strongly disagree 3.70% (n=1) 2.94% (n=1) 26.32% (n=5) 8.75%
N/A 0.00% (n=0) 8.82% (n=3) 21.05% (n=4) 8.8%
A clear pattern – the more experienced users have a ‘higher level of understanding’ (although not all)
OER Survey III
Type of OER User:
Total
Confident/ experienced user
of Open Educational
Resources (OER)
Inexperienced user of Open Educational
Resources (OER)
New to Open Educational
Resources (OER)
Confidence in attributing a Creative Commons License to
a resource:
Strongly Agree 51.85% (n=14) 8.82% (n=3) 5.26% (n=1) 22.5%
Agree 33.33% (n=9) 38.24% (n=13) 15.79% (n=3) 31.3%
Neutral 11.11% (n=3) 17.65% (n=6) 31.58% (n=6) 18.8%
Disagree 0.00% (n=0) 23.54% (n=4) 5.26% (n=1) 11.3%
Strongly Disagree 3.70% (n=1) 2.94% (n=1) 21.05% (n=4) 7.5%
N/A 0.00% (n=0) 8.82% (n=3) 21.05% (n=4) 8.8%
Surprising amount of ‘lack of confidence’ admitted for such a biased sample? More confident in using a product than allocating a license…
OER Survey IV
Type of OER User:
Total
Confident/ experienced user of Open Educational
Resources (OER)
Inexperienced user of Open Educational
Resources (OER)
New to Open Educational Resources
(OER)
Does your institution or organisation
support you to use OERs?
No 18.52% (n=5) 11.78% (n=4) 5.26% (n=1) 12.5%
Yes 55.56% (n=15) 44.12% (n=15) 21.05% (n=4) 42.5%
Don't know 22.22% (n=6) 35.29% (n=12) 68.42% (n=13) 38.8%N/A 3.70% (n=1) 8.82% (n=3) 5.26% (n=1) 6.3%
Institutional support increases use of OERs or vice-versa? What’s the causal direction? What are the confounding factors? Who do you turn to for
advice?
Synthesis
• Repurposing is not happening at the scale it should be
• Inexperienced users not familiar or confident with Creative Commons licenses (all potential users are ‘inexperienced’)
• The issue is international
• A need for clear communication about sharing
What’s Next…
• Survey participants agreed to be contacted about this HEA project
• Plan to create short videos to go on Jorum homepage and other websites about the following:– Experience of choosing a license– Experience of repurposing and sharing– Experience of receiving credit for created resources– Experience of seeking institutional support/advice
Discussion
Learning to Share?Understanding perceptions of repurposing OERs in Social Science research methods
Dr Luke SloanDeputy Director Cardiff Q-Step
School of Social Sciences, Cardiff UniversityE: [email protected] Follow: @drlukesloan