1. Teaching and Research - Supporting Each Other Joseph Hardin
Shaping Collaboration 2006
A Conference Sponsored by the
and CERN Large Hadron Collider Users December 11-13, International Conference Centre, Geneva, Switzerland

2. Sakai - An Open Source Collaboration and Learning Environment
A community and foundation—a group of people and resources supporting the code and each other, realizing large scale Open Source efficiencies
A collaboration and learning product with a set of tools—written and supported by various groups and individuals—which have been tested and released as a unit, freely distributed for anyone to use
An extensible, modular, framework for building collaboration tools and services - in a services oriented architecture - providing basic capabilities to support constructing a wide range of tools and services to support teaching and research. A services oriented architecture (SOA).
The one sentence elevator speech is “Sakai is an Open Source LMS”. But it is much more than that...

3. Support Teaching and Learning

4. Support Distributed Research
Note many of the same buttons on the left nav bar, collaboration is common to both ed and research tools

5. NEESGrid – Sakai v. -1.0
Dan Atkins

6. Bringing research to the
classroom

7. Bringing it all online Tests & Quizzes Tool Discussion Tool
OnLine Class Support
Research Team Support

8. Sakai in Production PRODUCTION SCHOOLS Indiana University
Universidade Fernando Pessoa
Universitat de Lleida
University of Cape Town
University of Michigan
University of California, Merced
University of South Africa
Yale University
PRODUCTION RELEASES, FALL 06
Boston University, School of Mgmt
Etudes Alliance (15-21 California community colleges)
Lübeck University of Applied Sciences
Portland State University
Rice University
Roskilde Universitetscenter
Rutgers University
Stanford University
University of California, Berkeley
University of Cambridge
Virginia Tech

9. Sakai Production — cont.
EARLY ADOPTERS: PILOTS
Claremont Colleges
Charles Sturt University
Coastline Community College
Community College of S. Nevada
Columbia University
Franklin & Marshall University
Hong Kong U. of Science and Tech.
Johns Hopkins University
Lancaster University
MIT
Moody Bible Institute
NorthWest University (NWU)
Northwestern University
Pacific Lutheran University
New York University
Ohio University
Oxnard College
Stockholm Universitet
SURF, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Texas State University, San Marcos
UCLA
Universidad del Valle de Guatemala
University of Arizona
University of British Columbia,
Land & Food Systems
University of California, Davis
University of East Anglia
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Missouri
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
University of North Texas
University of the Pacific
University of Virginia
Universiteit Twente (Fall 06)
Walsh University
Whitman College
Wofford College

10. Teaching and Research in Sakai
Sakai does all the mundane work of supporting traditional classes online, and supporting forms of distance education
Also supports Projects – ‘classes’ are just a form of collaboration; Sakai lets anyone set up a project and use all the tools (which here include GRID tools);
Faculty, scientific researchers can set up collaborations using the same system, and do (at UM this semester – 3,100 classes, 2,400 projects)
Such a distributed system allows for rapid experiments in ‘virtual organizations’ or ‘participation environments’
Later talks today will talk more about support of research collaborations

11. Challenges for LHC – Bringing Teaching to Research
Change will happen quickly when LHC cranks up
Ed materials must flow rapidly
Innovative ideas will come from many places, need to be disseminated quickly
A grad class somewhere has valuable material
Need to get it to everyone
New material needs to be published
Needs the context of the class, and supporting materials – problems as well as lectures
Needs to be high quality, captured and reproduced well

12. Where do we get these educational resources
Where do we get these educational resources? Well, Sakai generates educational resources.
At end of each semester you may have:
Syllabus
Reading Materials
Lecture notes
Assignments
Problem sets
Lab exercises
Discussion materials
Tests and quizzes
Wiki-generated material from students
Blogs from students
Lectures – audio or video
All things that a self-learner, student, or faculty developing a course would find useful

13. What Do We Do With These Educational Resources?
We save them for faculty re-use
In their fullest form, including material with use restrictions, like copyrights (journal articles, book chapters, etc)
We could save them for our students’ use
So they could review when taking next course, or look at as they choose what courses they take next e.g., as UMichigan does)
We could make them available for others to learn from, to add to, to improve and to reuse – (to support a rapidly changing research community)
This is what MIT has done with their ‘Open CourseWare’

14. The Big Idea — Vision
“OpenCourseWare expresses our belief in the way education can be advanced — by constantly widening access to information and by inspiring others to participate.”
— Charles M. Vest,
President Emeritus of MIT 3

15. The Big Idea — What is OCW?
MIT OpenCourseWare IS:
MIT OpenCourseWare IS NOT:
A Web-based publication of virtually all MIT course content
Open and available to world
A permanent MIT activity
An MIT education
Intended to represent the interactive classroom environment
Degree-granting 4

16. The Big Idea — 1550 courses Syllabus Lecture notes Problem sets Exams
Reading lists
Simulations
Video lectures 5

17. The Big Idea — Use requirements
Obliges users to meet three use requirements
Use must be non-commercial
Materials must be attributed to MIT and original author or contributor
Publication or distribution of original or derivative materials must be offered freely under identical terms,
or “share alike” 6

18. Making a Difference — Access
Educators
17%
Self-learners
49%
Students
32%
Useful to both students and faculty, self-learners and enrolled students
Visitors most frequently interested in courses in electrical engineering, business, physics, and mathematics – would be different depending on your content 14

19. Making a Difference — Benefits for MIT
Institute-level benefits
Advances MIT’s institutional mission
Enhances MIT’s image around the world
Generates community pride (alumni)
Stimulates collaboration among faculty
Department-level benefits
Showcases individual departments and their curricula
Enhances faculty and student recruitment efforts
Accelerates adoption of the Web 20

20. Professor Triatno Harjoko
Making a Difference — Institutional use
Professor Triatno Harjoko
Head of Department of Architecture at University of Depok in Indonesia 15

21. Making a Difference — Institutional use
“Critical thinking and creativity demand the liberalization of learning and information. But I also believe that it’s not simply the information that’s valuable, but also the glimpse OCW offers into how MIT has structured its teaching and research.” 15

22. Professor Richard Hall
Making a Difference — Educator use
Professor Richard Hall
Recent Ph.D. from LaTrobe University in Melbourne, Australia, now teaching information systems, beginning microprocessors, and advanced computer-aided software engineering 16

23. OCW saved him “an enormous amount of time and stress.”
Making a Difference — Educator use
OCW saved him “an enormous amount of time and stress.”
“I was delighted by the way the material is so coherently presented. It is truly inspiring to see this level of excellence.” 16

24. Engineering student at Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria, Nigeria
Making a Difference — Student use
Kunle Adejumo
Engineering student at Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria, Nigeria 17

25. Making a Difference — Student use
“Last semester, I had a course in metallurgical engineering. I didn’t have notes, so I went to OCW. I downloaded a course outline on this, and also some review questions, and these helped me gain a deeper understanding of the material.” 17

26. Traffic from MIT.EDU since 9/4/04
Making a Difference — MIT student use
More than 300,000 visits from MIT.EDU since 11/1/03
35% of Fall 2005 freshmen aware of MIT OCW prior to attending MIT indicate OCW was a significant influence on their choice of school
71% of all MIT students (undergraduate and graduate) make use of MIT OCW in their research and studies
Traffic from MIT.EDU since 9/4/04 21

27. Making a Difference — MIT student use
“… OCW was one of the main reasons why I decided to come [to MIT] … I knew the contents of the courses, had a look to the materials, and a good understanding of what I was going to get ... that's the reason why I ended [up] here, and not in Stanford or Columbia.” — MIT graduate student
“Even before joining MIT last year I started watching and enjoying many of your superb lectures. Needless to say, they were much better and captivating than anything I had attended before on the subject. These lectures have really enhanced my appreciation for physics.” — MIT student in Department of Materials Science and Engineering 22

28. 74 percent of MIT’s faculty are now participating in MIT OCW
Making a Difference — MIT faculty use
74 percent of MIT’s faculty are now participating in MIT OCW
40% of faculty using MIT OCW report that the site is a helpful tool in revising/updating courses
38% of faculty use the site for advising students 23

29. Professor Karen Willcox
Making a Difference — MIT faculty use
Professor Karen Willcox
Teaches foundational course to MIT juniors in Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics 24

30. Making a Difference — MIT faculty use
“I realized there was this huge disconnect between the math department and the engineering department – who are the downstream users of the material that’s taught in the math classes… I had no idea how or what was being taught.” 24

31. So, Why Do This?
MIT’s reasons, and other institutional, departmental and individual faculty and student benefits
Support National and Regional Development
Make our school’s offerings more widely known, recruitment
Increase use of web and online tools by faculty, students
Increase value of materials by having others comment, add to them, contribute back
Focus on value of Mentoring, our core value-add
That last is one reason we are doing this at the University of Michigan – we realize our strength is in our faculty, and their interaction with our students

32. Also, Remember LHC Challenges
Change will happen quickly when LHC cranks up
Ed materials must flow rapidly
Innovative ideas will come from many places, need to be disseminated quickly
A grad class somewhere has valuable material
Need to get it to everyone
New material needs to be published
Needs the context of the class, and supporting materials – problems as well as lectures
Needs to be high quality, captured and reproduced well

33. Already hundreds of thousands of users, thousands of courses in Sakai
So, how can we leverage the growing installed base of Sakai to support OCW material creation?

34. Moving Restricted Materials Into the Open Site
Main concerns are:
IP – moving from ‘fair use’ to open site -
Allowing faculty to choose which of their material they want on the OCW site
Some will want more, some less
Tagging with consistent categories for navigation
Building in a QA and Review step
To guarantee quality, allow for review before publishing
Making this all easy for faculty

35. Putting an OCW Pipeline in Sakai - OCW Publishing from Sakai
Publication Pipeline
Digital Course Materials:
(1) IP Management
(2) Tagging OCW Categories
(3) Exporting from CTools
(4) QA and Review
eduCommons tools UM
OCW
Web Site or
other
Institutional
Repository
Teaching
Research
Raw
Course
Content
Vetted
OCW
Content
Sakai
Focus on IP, OCW navigation categories, ease of movement to eduCommons workflow… then we’ll get more complicated
Initial MIT OCW process has difficulty scaling.
How can we support this process?

36. OCW Tool – Support for the OCW Process
Support for Tagging in Sakai –
Helping faculty, students create tags (metadata) for:
IP status – Creative Commons+
OCW Navigation – MIT Categories
Export – Choose what to put on
OCW site
Will use Creative Commons, plus some other options, such as choices desired by particular school, if they have any such choices…
OCW Tool

37. All done within LMS faculty are already familiar with
Planning Phase Includes “Training” for Faculty and Support Staff in Colleges and Departments
Planning
&
Training
Build
Teach/Manage
Publish
Upstream foundational preparation
All done within LMS faculty are already familiar with
IP Object tracking comes along with the use of the system
Training has additional benefits in educating faculty on IP
Support staff distributed throughout university
Recruit faculty
Plan TEACHING version of course
Plan OCW version of course
Review existing content
Identify & resolve IP (except permissions)
Track IP by object in system
How we view the hybrid model…

38. Tagging Course Resources RDF tagging in the future

39. Add or remove tags within specific site
User can modify tags to fit their needs –
But start with MIT tag set to encourage standard approach to navigation of resulting OCW site

40. Teaching and Managing Course Materials
Build
Teach/Manage
Publish
All done within LMS faculty are already familiar with
IP Object tracking can proceed throughout course
Materials/Objects can be tagged with OCW categories (Syllabus, Lecture Notes, Assignments, etc.) wherever they come from, wiki, blog…
Increasingly, objects tagged by system, eg, Assignments
Collect existing content
Build content into LMS sections or templates
Enter metadata
Create commissioned works
Process permission requests & make IP edits
Update and supplement materials
Post to , wikis, blogs, announcements, discussions, forums, IM
Assign, track, grade student work
Interact (faculty-student and student-student) through all channels above
As we bring in more and more “tools” like the authoring and assignment or exam tool, more and more objects get auto-tagged.

41. This currently costs MIT ~$10-20,000 per course
How Do We Get This Done?
This currently costs MIT ~$10-20,000 per course
We can get some faculty to do it
And, we do need to get adoption supported by the administration, at first or eventually – top-down and/or bottom-up
But, mainly, we need to support the faculty
How do we do this?

42. 3 Incentive Structures
Students
Administration
Faculty

43. 3 Incentive Structures for Adoption
Administration – why Chuck Vest adopted OCW, modified for non-first-movers, with local context added… why department heads…
Faculty – why your faculty would adopt, for exposure, then student demand… or, to support research
Students – all the reasons on the following slide
All 3 have initial, then self- and mutually-reinforcing aspects as the system becomes embedded, woven into fabric of university – sometimes similar to adoption of Sakai/CLE in the first place

44. Digital Scribes – making this work
Basic idea – get students to help the faculty in courses they are taking – students become digital scribes – DScribes – and get access rights to OCW tool area, taking part of load off faculty
Leveraging the students’ interests, creating student incentives
Developing student incentives: (emerging list)
Do to get access to course material in the future; Do to get closer access to TA’s and teachers; Become part of the online DScribe community; Do for the greater good; Do to learn better; Get a Tshirt; etc…
1 hour course credit for UG DScribes – learn a bit about IP, media management, how to use tools
3 hour course for Grad DScribes II – leveraging interest among SI students – more complete coverage of IP, multimedia, lecture capture, synopsizing, notes project – general ‘lite editing for web’
Goal of having the DScribes provide much of the ongoing infrastructure for the actual cleaning, tagging and preparing for export – two tiered: DS II’s help DS’s – maybe GSI’s, alumni

45. Students as Apprentices
What happens when we encourage, support and integrate student efforts
S-OCW is an example…
The students have, and recognize they have, positive incentives
This discovery of new incentive structures parallels the recent research done on open source (see S. Weber), which shows that complex artifacts can be constructed by distributed communities with unexpected incentives
Investigating such alternative incentive structures is driving the social part of the development of the S-OCW tool

46. UM-eduCommons Pilot I

47. UM-eduCommons Pilot II

48. Sakai + OCW Supports distributed research teams collaboration needs
Helps integrate teaching and learning – faculty uses in both environments
Allows for rapid development and publication of learning materials – essential for a rapidly developing, rapidly changing field
Involves students directly in learning materials production
Reinforces mentoring focus of teaching
Natural activities are modified slightly to become contributions to the educational efforts - OCW

49. Open Educational Resource Engines
Text
These are the sites that are running 24x7 with real user bases that are teaching significant number of classes. UM 9/04, IU 1/05, Yale 1/05, Foothill 4/2005, Rutgers 9/ Merced is starting with Sakai and nothing else classes a semester are taught at U Michigan alone. That’s 4000 this year alone. How much OER could this generate after a few years?
Sakai in Production: courses each year at U Michigan alone; more at IU, UNISA (U South Africa)

50. Thanks. Questions…