Hoping that you can provide some advice; what is the best mechanism for posting our meeting notes? Should I construct this as an Open Office document and post on the Project page? I noted for that for other groups and meetings, the notes were posted via a linked wiki page.
I have added a “Meetings” subheading so you can see the wiki sytax for adding a subpage. The advantage of using the wiki is that:
The group can help with adding omissions or tweaking the notes. This makes “approval of minutes” so much easier because everyone can contribute and the wiki keeps a detailed history of the changes.
The meeting sub-pages can be used for posting agendas, meeting dates and links, summary of decisions and any action items which we can strikeout as progress is made. (see for example here)
In the future, I recommend recording the web meetings. then you can embed this in your notes with time stamps to the discussion. (Here is an example.)
You won’t be able to upload an Open Office Document / or Word document to the wiki as that presents a security risk. Folk intending to do harm could embed dangerous scripts in the documents. … And we all agree that pdf is not ideal ;-).
Indeed - at the OERu we’re into sustainable longevity! @AdrianStagg, if you get stuck with any wiki sytax when populating the notes, remember you can ping us on the #quality channel over at chat.oeru.org. Team OERF does a good job of monitoring the channels during NZ daylight hours.
For convenience, here again are the links, below. The Google Doc includes a column on the far right where the Quality working group discussed points in the rubric. The second link seems to be the result of applying those comments. Perhaps it would be useful for the QRP team to review the Google Doc and build on the existing comments.
Thinking out loud. Reading the comments in the Google doc again suggests that we may need two documents:
An OERu style-guide - developed for the OERu authoring and publishing model (Eg navigation, “standard course structure”, references and attributions, good practice avoiding complex tables for responsive design etc. Many of the layout related quality guidelines would not apply because they’re fixed by virtue of the theming templates.)
Quality guidelines which focus more on the pedagogical quality aspects which are design / author driven. (Eg incorporating learner interactions, pedagogy of discovery etc.)
I’m pleased that these resources will have a life after the unfortunate demise of eCampusAlberta - a leading initiative which had the foresight to license these works openly. The financial pressures associated with the fall of the oil price and cost of oil production in Alberta Canada no doubt contributing to financial sustainability pressures. But as you can see - open has “life after death”.
Look forward to connecting and meeting colleagues as USP next week.
I think that the two documents you suggest here have a lot of synergy and could be the basis for an excellent OER Course Authoring package. This approach would also separate out the technical quality from the learning and teaching quality, but demonstrate an interaction between the two.
Do we need to include a ‘Guide to remixing/reusing’? If so, where would you see this sitting?
This is worth exploring in our next meeting, I think, especially as we now have the documents on the Project page.
Can I have your advice on one more technical issue for posting meeting notes please? I have the recording of our last meeting - where should this be hosted? I take it that we host the videos somewhere and then simply link from the meeting page?