Hi Mary,<div><br></div><div>Well, I've been thinking about writing something on UDL (universal design for learning). I e-mailed them about some issues (open source, gifted, twice exceptional, etc.) and am waiting to see if they'll get back to me. I'm also thinking on kindergarten students and how they begin to distinguish between fiction and non-fiction and how they might add OER as well.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I had a look at the OER site. I take it that they don't employ librarians or have looked at what UDL has been saying for years. As a historian, librarian, and parent of a kindergarten student, I found some areas that need work and addressing. There's some problems with precision and relevancy with their retrieval system, which needs to get sorted, or otherwise users will get frustrated and the vast majority will give up. </div>
<div><br></div><div>1. Tagging. It's a mess. Do they think about hiring librarians here? I think not.</div><div><br></div><div>Ancient City of Petra, for instance, has got the subject heading: social sciences and the following tags: ancient civilizations, anthropology, antiquities, archaeology, Jordan, pottery, science as inquiry. Do we notice any missing tags, such as world history? So this Ancient City of Petra is classified under science but not history. Why isn't it classified or cross referenced under both?<br>
<div><br></div><div>Another example. I used the top search engine to find something on Helen Keller. There's a resource under - People in Alabama History - with the tags Alabama and US history. That's it!</div>
<div><br></div><div>2. Search engines. When I tried to use the sidebar search engine for digital literacy and global citizenship, nothing came up. When I used the top search engine, I did get results. </div><div><br></div>
<div>3. Retrieval system. Lists, again. This is a cumbersome, tedious method of retrieving information. Can they not think of a better way to present results? Teachers are using <a href="http://www.livebinders.com">www.livebinders.com</a> to organize materials instead and there's a reason why. They're more user-friendly.</div>
<div><br></div><div>4. Science as an inquiry. Art as an inquiry. This is a good way to x off the historians and other fields. Way to go.</div><div><br></div><div>5. History. Sigh. I could go on and on here. History is under the humanities and social sciences, but not always under these categories I discovered. If you enter Henry VIII in the top search engine, you get no results. Renaissance England has more results, but I'm still kind of scratching my head here. I know there's more on the topic with OER from <a href="http://www.goodsitesforkids.org">www.goodsitesforkids.org</a>. Perhaps there's a licensing or copyright issue again.</div>
<div><br></div><div>6. Foreign languages? What happened to the category? I entered Chinese in the top search engine. Again, I know there are OER Chinese language lessons for children, but this site doesn't make such resources readily available and accessible. Not sure if this is a licensing or copyright issue or something else.</div>
<div><br></div><div>7. UDL vs. OER. There's a discrepancy in their educational approach to using digital technology. For instance, UDL's 5.1 guideline on using multiple means of expression - I can find many open web 2.0 tools to do it. With OER, this is more problematic to find as information is filed under subject areas, grade levels, and materials.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I don't either UDL or OER's website are easy to use for most users. Information is not tagged properly and therefore it's difficult to retrieve and inaccessible.</div><div><br></div><div>8. OER and audience. Seems to be aimed solely at teachers and schools - not at students except older children/adult learners. It doesn't seemed aimed at or designed with parents or homeschoolers/unschoolers in mind, though they certainly will use it. It does seem to be more standards, performance-driven. </div>
<div><br></div><div>9. OER and higher ed and accuracy. This may be a strength or weakness, depending on your point of view. If I enter UK university in the search engine, Open University courses are retrievable. Additionally, I retrieved a course from University of Nottingham. Of course, I also got University of Cape Town, but that's in a different continent - - so an issue with relevancy and precision again with their retrieval system. </div>
<div><br></div><div>10. Hot topics and retrieving information and accuracy. I tried the top search engine and witchcraft. I was surprised that I got only 7 results. I tried to find open books on the topic which I know exist, but discovered that it's not an option! Must be a copyright issue? Oh, no results using the terms ACLU or American Civil Liberties Union. Black Panthers worked though. Noam Chomsky is retrieved under University of Cape Town and Saylor Foundation, but not under his courses at MIT??</div>
<div><br></div><div>11. Advanced search and materials. Here I want to scream - hire a librarian, please. Audio lectures, readings, lecture notes, training materials - either poor terms or teacher expressions/colloquialisms being used. What happened to audio recordings or podcasts, Braille text, books? What is a reading?</div>
<div><br></div><div>12. OER and access/availability. I find the OER very much still a document-retrieval way of acquiring information rather than breaking new ground - except in compiling the resources into one website. It's still somewhat traditional library catalog way of retrieving information based on subject, topic, age - rather than on play-based, discovery approach to information and learning.</div>
<div><br></div><div>OER is still very much based on word retrieval rather than image or other means. Advanced search allows users to retrieve videos or interactive materials under media format or to retrieve simulations and games under materials format - but try seeing how Build an Atom is tagged and trying finding it other ways other than the title in the top search engine. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Sorry for the rant, but thanks. </div><div><br></div><div>Carolyn<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Mary Bitter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mbitter@redhat.com" target="_blank">mbitter@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
hi Education Friends. <span><span> :-) </span></span><br>
<br>
I wanted to check in to see if anyone has anything in the works or
ideas for new articles.<br>
<br>
I also wanted to spark a conversation about the recent <a href="http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=32177111dabb558fc401595e5&id=8e503a320f" target="_blank">Open
Educational Resources and the Common Core State Standards </a>announcement.
Opinions on the matter?<br>
<br>
Hope all is well. I know a lot of you are dealing with end of
semester fun. Good luck!<br>
Mary Ann<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Osdc-edu-authors mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Osdc-edu-authors@redhat.com">Osdc-edu-authors@redhat.com</a><br>
<a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/osdc-edu-authors" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/osdc-edu-authors</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>