Abstract

Title of session: Creation of a Statewide Survey of Incentives and Disincentives
for the Use of OpenCourseWare in Utah

Overview
This session examines the creation and distribution of a survey tool used to assess Utah resident views of incentives and disincentives for use of OpenCourseWare (OCW) and how they fit into the theoretical framework of perceived innovation attributes established by Rogers (1983).

This was a descriptive study that employed a survey method. This study consisted of three stages: a preliminary Delphi technique questionnaire based on Rogers (2003) attributes of innovation, a pilot study, and the primary study. In the primary study, a mail survey was given to 753 Utah residents using the Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000). Several strategies were employed in data collection which included:
(a) detailed introductory letters with the questionnaires and postage prepaid envelopes,
(b) monetary incentives to potential participants, and
(c) a series of three follow-up letters to remind non-responding participants.

A survey instrument was developed using attributes that emerged from a Delphi technique with input from experts in the OCW field. Eleven experts where asked to participate and five were actively involved. After the attributes were identified they were placed into Roger’s attribute characteristics. It was then pilot tested with 44 individuals. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to assess inter-item consistency for the pilot test and required a reliability of .70 or higher before the survey instrument would be used (Schumacker, 2005). The survey was then sent via postal mail to a randomized group of 753 individuals residing in Utah between the ages of 18 and 64. The names and addresses, along with associated demographic information, were obtained from Alesco Data Group, LLC of Fort Myers, Florida. The demographic information used for this study included (a) gender, (b) age, (c) education, (d) income, (e) occupation, and (f) ethnicity.

Purpose of session (why is this important and who is the target audience):

This research has a direct relationship to education and particularly higher education since approximately 33% of all OCW visitor population at MIT are students in formal educational programs, and another 16% are educators (Carson, p. 13, 2006). Equally, open educational resources are becoming increasingly prevalent for self-directed learning. This research has a direct relationship to education because it will give a needs assessment of end user’s perceived incentives and disincentives for OCW style resource use throughout Utah.

Objectives of the session (what are you planning to do):
Review the survey that was completed in 2009 of 753 individuals across Utah and how said survey was created, distributed, and analyzed.

Practical applications (how can your results/strategies be used by others)
Others can incorporate best practices as well as lessons learned from this survey experience; they can also review and assess the questions that were formulated using the Delphi Technique with topic experts.

Information (data or theoretical base) to support what is advocated.
This study examines Utah resident views of incentives and disincentives for use of OCW and how they fit into the theoretical framework of perceived innovation attributes established by Rogers (1983). Rogers identified five categories of perceived innovation attributes which include relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability.
The full report can be found at http://works.bepress.com/anne_arendt/1/

Hands-on experience (if applicable), and what particpants will need to bring to the session.
No hands on in this session

References

Carson, S. (2006). 2005 Program Evaluation Findings Report MIT OCW. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys the tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

Presenter

Anne Arendt
Web Resource Director
Utah Valley University

http://www.mydeskdrawer.com

I currently work for Utah Valley University as the Web Resource Director in Marketing and Communications. Prior to this I worked in Distance Education as a resource manager. I was the Director of Web and Application Development at Walden University and Web Team Manager at Smyth Companies prior to working at UVU.
I have a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in English from the University of Minnesota, a Masters in Business Administration (MBA) from the University of Minnesota Carlson School of Management, a Master of Science (MS) in Educational Change and Technology Innovation from Walden University, and a recently completed Doctorate of Education (Ed.D) from Utah State University in Higher Education. My dissertation topic was “An Assessment of Utah Resident Incentives and Disincentives for Use of OpenCourseWare Resources.” As you can likely guess, I like learning. I will always like learning. I think education is and should be enjoyable.

This presentation will (1) introduce the open education movement and, specifically, open educational resources; (2) explain work done to identify and match OER to Open High School of Utah curriculum needs; (3) describe implications and recommend directions for instructional designers and teachers interested in working with and creating OER.

Purpose of the Presentation

A significant movement in education concerns the use of open educational resources. By “open” it is generally meant that the resource is available at no cost to others for adaptation and reuse in different contexts. These resources could include books, lesson plans, syllabi, slide shows, etc. There are several examples of individuals and institutions providing open educational resources. The open education movement is introduced, and we discuss how to find and organize open educational resources, specifically within the context of the  Open High School of Utah.

In addition, some frameworks for those interested in creating OER will be provided. The “open” in “open educational resources” is not a simple dichotomy; rather, there is a continuum of openness. We discuss four separate aspects of reuse and demonstrate how these describe different levels of openness. Licensing and technical aspects of open educational resources are also discussed

Presenter

John Hilton III is a doctoroal student in Instructional Psychology and Technology at Brigham Young University.

Do the implications of digital media turn our educational institutions inside out? Can educators learn to stop worrying and love the remix?  Is originality overrated?  What’s the difference between reuse and plagiarism? Is openness our only hope? Where’s the RSS feed? What does “data literacy” look like? Are Web 2.0 companies a teacher’s best friend, or a bunch of creeps converting our work, our relationships and our private data into marketshare? Has the Web 2.0 bubble popped, and if so now what? How do we teach our students, our colleagues and ourselves to be technology strategists? How many copyright violations can be jammed into one presentation?

Brian Lamb’s presentation and discussion will review the opportunities and initiatives resulting from the convergence of open source, free culture, open access and open educational resources.

Abstract

The development is a loosely coupled (i.e. standalone) gradebook is an essential component of BYU’s long-term strategy of providing an open learning network for faculty and students. Our intent is to develop it in-house then make it freely available to the academic community.

This project is funded for development in 2009 and will be well underway by the time of the conference. We propose to provide session attendees with an update on our progress, including screenshots and demos of the product to date.

We will also solicit feedback and input regarding the product and its future.

Presenter

Jon Mott

Jon Mott currently is the Assistant to the Academic Vice President – Academic Technology. He reports to the Academic Vice President and provides strategic guidance on academic technology issues. He also works closely with the University’s Chief Information Officer and serves as the liaison between the Academic VP’s office and the Office of Information Technology. He serves as chair of the Academic Support Coordinating Committee and the Academic Technology Advisory Committee. Jon is currently a member of the Blackboard’s customer advisory board and the Adobe Higher Education Advisory Board.

Jon previously served as Managing Director at the Center for Instructional Design (now the Center for Teaching and Learning). He earned a B.A. in political science from BYU in 1992 and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Oklahoma in 1998. He is an adjunct faculty member in Instructional Psychology & Technology, Political Science and Public Policy.

* Purpose of presentation (why is this important and who is the target audience)

The purpose of this presentation is to familiarize conference attendees with the “open education” movement, which draws inspiration from the “right to education” and “open source software” movements. The topic is important because the idea of openness is already affecting the way teaching and learning occur at hundreds of universities throughout the world, though only a handful of US universities are participating. The target audience includes teaching faculty, policy makers, and instructional designers.

* Objectives of the presentation (what are you planning to do)

- Provide an overview of open education, including the Cape Town Declaration on Open Education and NIH Open Access Mandate
- Take a tour of representative open education projects
- Explain the relationship of open education to copyright and intellectual property
- Discuss how to leverage openness to improve your own courses by reviewing example courses

* Practical applications (how can your results/strategies be used by others)

Attendees will come away with immediately implementable strategies for improving their own classes, as well as ideas for updating organizational policy to be more forward-looking and, to the degree possible, future proof.

* Relationship to the conference theme

The open education movement relies heavily on both “high technology” and “low technology” to reach its teaching and learning goals.

* Information (data or theoretical base) to support what is advocated.

The presentation will draw on statistics and reports from UNESCO, the OECD, the European OLCOS project, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and other literature, as well as the presenter’s expertise.

2nd-Day Hands On: How To Create “Open” Educational Experiences
Learn where to find open educational resources and free online services for using them to improve your students’ learning experiences.

Biography
David Wiley is Associate Professor of Instructional Technology at Utah State University and Director of the Center for Open and Sustainable Learning. He has previously been a Nonresident Fellow at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School and a Visiting Scholar at the Open University of the Netherlands, and is a recipient of the US National Science Foundation’s CAREER grant. His career is dedicated to increasing access to educational opportunity for everyone around the world.