 |
 |
Pat, it would be useful if you did publish that feedback in a paper so as to keep drawing attention to these issues. There are costs for creating transcripts in English as we all know and this is where big MOOC providers have invested where individual institutions putting their lectures onto e.g. iTunesU and YouTube have not been able to compete. Autotranscription technologies will help in part depending on the quality of the recording but we are just not there yet so human services or crowdsourcing are still the play of the day. Investment in transcription services is something to look at seriously, however. And, determining which languages benefit, sadly, will be a part of that debate. On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Pat Lockley <[log in to unmask] > wrote: > <leaking feedback no one write a paper on this> > Our surveys show one of the most common requests was for lecture > transcripts in other languages > I'd have loved to have done this, but the cost / scale is huge - and how > do you pick languages. > Discussed this earlier as we're into stats mangling phase - do you choose > the languages of those that complete, or the languages of those at the > start? > </leaking feedback> > > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 6:10 PM, alannah fitzgerald < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Thanks, David, for sharing Kate's blog. She has made some very important >> points about English-medium MOOCs and their policies which I am also >> looking into for my doctoral research and which I will be sharing in due >> course with this discussion list and the OER Research Hub at the OU. >> >> I have seen participating institutions in Coursera and edX issue >> statements about English being the only language of communication allowed >> for their respective MOOCs, and these do read as ignorant and jingoistic, >> but I think we've all also seen the encouragement from those big MOOC >> players and others for learners to form meet-ups in their own countries or >> discussion groups in other modern languages in the forum sections on the >> MOOC platforms. >> >> The majority of big brand MOOCs are in English and different providers >> are experimenting with different technologies and approaches for course >> assessments that are required in English. Coursera has opted for peer >> review with mixed results (First humanities MOOC professors road-test >> Coursera's peer grading model<http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/08/30/first-humanities-mooc-professors-road-test-courseras-peer-grading-model>) >> and edX are looking at automated essay scoring<http://www.rpajournal.com/dev/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/SF4.pdf> >> systems which are based on algorithms for identifying 'correct' answers >> based on language patterns. They are all attempts at English language >> support with the technologies currently available. I'm currently building >> academic English language support collections out of open MOOC content to >> make the content more accessible to learners for whom English is not their >> native language through linguistic analyses tools and linking to other open >> content e.g. dictionaries, thesauri, encyclopedias etc. One collection that >> I'm developing is on virology and the language of virology is arguably a >> foreign language to native as well as non-native speakers of English due to >> the technical nature of the language used. So, I am coming at this from a >> language support angle where English-medium MOOCs and OERs are concerned. >> This is another reason why it is so important for institutions to go open >> with their MOOC content so developers such as myself and all of those >> working on translation and linguistic analyses software can develop >> derivatives from this content for language access and support. >> >> The massive elephant in the room with FutureLearn and their English >> mandate is their partnership with the British Council. It will be >> interesting to see how this partnership evolves as the BC has quite rightly >> been criticised for being one of the key promoters of, and profiting from, >> linguistic imperialism with ELT. Like Kate, I read through FutureLearn's >> terms and conditions with much concern and also jumped over to where the BC >> talked about themselves in partnership with FutureLearn. They say nothing >> about how they are going to support English in FutureLearn, instead it's >> just the usual propaganda about how they are one of the UK's widest >> reaching 'charities' and a source of good for bringing English to the >> world. FutureLearn is a real opportunity for the BC to lead with English >> language support while encouraging multilingualism to be present in >> FutureLearn's engagement with the world. Let's hope they both realise and >> take up this opportunity. I for one would be willing to volunteer my >> services. >> >> To give due credit, the BC are aware of how they and many international >> development and education initiatives aka charities are being criticised >> and at this year's IATEFL conference in Liverpool (sponsored by none other >> than the BC) they invited Robert Phillipson, author of Linguistic >> Imperialism (1992), to a debate on the issue. Phillipson has condensed his >> serious reservations about the role of the BC in international education >> and development in the Guardian<http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/mar/13/linguistic-imperialism-english-language-teaching>and predictably this article was met with ignorant comments from trollers >> who it seems aren't very dissimilar in their views and understandings as >> many of those responsible for putting together English language policies >> for MOOCs. >> >> I can see things going one of two ways: >> >> 1. FutureLearn and the BC can choose to act quickly to turn things around >> in favour of multilingualism and effective academic English language >> support that is specific to the MOOCs on offer (and not just some random >> general everyday English language resources that they are going to recycle >> from their previous projects), or; >> >> 2. Carry on London and hope for the best of British. >> >> Excerpt from Phillipson in the Guardian on Linguistic Imperialism - alive >> and kicking: >> >> "British policies in Africa and Asia have aimed at strengthening English >> rather than promoting multilingualism, which is the social reality. >> Underlying British ELT have been key tenets – monolingualism, the native >> speaker as the ideal teacher, the earlier the better etc ... They underpin >> linguistic imperialism. >> British goals both in the colonial period and today are primarily >> political and commercial. The British Council's Annual Report 2009-10 >> states that for the equivalent of every $1.60 of taxpayer's money it >> receives, it earns $4 through its English teaching and examining worldwide. >> ELT is of massive importance for the British economy. This underlies >> expansion efforts in India and China, where it has had very mixed success, >> except perhaps in commercial terms. David Graddol's 2010 report English >> Next India<http://www.britishcouncil.org/learning-english-next-india-2010-book.htm>, >> commissioned by the British Council, uses similar arguments to those >> articulated 180 years earlier by Thomas Babington Macaulay, a senior >> British administrator, in making a case for British involvement in Indian >> education." >> >> With all good wishes, >> >> Alannah >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Andy.Lane <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >>> ** ** ** ** ** ** ** >>> >>> David**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Kate makes a very important point with which I agree and disagree for >>> different reasons. I am constantly discomfited being in meetings on >>> European projects where I am the only native English speaker and yet all >>> business is in English. However I am not concerned when some of them break >>> into their native language for other conversations/discussions. >>> Nevertheless, if I invite those same people into my home for a conversation >>> I do feel excluded and discomfited myself if they talk in their language >>> which I do not understand. The point of this is that my view is dependent >>> very much on the nature of the ‘invitation’ and purpose of the event. In >>> the case of FL there is no obligation to participate but the nature of this >>> invitations seems to be trying to be inclusive in that actions on the >>> courses should not ‘exclude’ others for some reason. This does not get >>> around the fact that some are excluded because of their language skills. As >>> I understand it the learner interaction is a key feature of FL and they, I >>> assume, want maximum inclusion within the official ambit of the >>> courses/site. It does not preclude folk having other conversations in >>> others places and spaces in whatever language or form they want. Native >>> English speakers are both blessed and cursed in equal measure in the global >>> fish bowl.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Andy**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> A.B.Lane, Professor of Environmental Systems, Programme Director for >>> EDIS and Qualification Director for BSc Environmental Management and >>> Technology **** >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* David Kernohan [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >>> *Sent:* 18 September 2013 16:27 >>> >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Re: A big week for open learning in the ****UK**** >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> FL have always been open about the fact that they are learning as they >>> go, and I think they have been upfront about what is being launched today. >>> Like many, I’d have loved to have seen the platform and looked at the way >>> some of the pedagogic assumptions that Mike Sharples has been talking about >>> have been implemented. But we will have plenty of time to look at that as >>> the courses themselves begin to launch and we can see them work in practice >>> with learners.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Just seen this fascinating post from regular Australian MOOC commentator >>> Kate Bowles: >>> http://musicfordeckchairs.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/for-all-to-understand/ >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> She raises a very interesting point about language and global education… >>> I wonder if others had any thoughts on this?**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> David**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> --**** >>> >>> David Kernohan, eLearning Innovation Team, Jisc**** >>> >>> [log in to unmask]**** >>> >>> @dkernohan/@ukoer**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On >>> Behalf Of *Frank Manista >>> *Sent:* 18 September 2013 15:47 >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Re: A big week for open learning in the ****UK******** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> From my perspective, the information has been consistent from the >>> beginning: in December of 2012, Martin Bean delivered a podcast, where he >>> announced the creation of FutureLearn, and offered that those who want to >>> be engaged should make contact. Since then, reports have been >>> enthusiastic, discussing which institutions had joined, etc., but they >>> always seemed to be in the future tense, e.g., “sign up for courses, which >>> will be available …”. The regular offerings for the coming term with the >>> OU don’t start up until October, so the connection, to me, seems clear: >>> some of these courses will begin with the familiar OU starting point, and >>> then FutureLearn will stagger new courses in. I’ve looked at the blog, and >>> there were discussions about its creation, the offerings which will be >>> available, the alpha testing, the result of the alpha testing, the beta >>> testing, etc. and now this launch of the platform all seems to be within >>> the realm of what was stated and promised. There are OER services out here >>> which repeatedly make promises and then revise the time frames, but it >>> seems to me here that FutureLearn and the OU have been both consistent and >>> enthusiastic (so maybe it was the press officer or the journalist;).**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Regards,**** >>> >>> Frank**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>] >>> *On Behalf Of *Haydn Blackey >>> *Sent:* 18 September 2013 15:37 >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Re: A big week for open learning in the ****UK******** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Hi Patrina,**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Thanks for the update – FutureLearn as platform as opposed to >>> FutureLearn as a brand for the courses on the platform is a distinction I >>> hadn’t made.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> In addition I suspect it was the journalist at the BBC who >>> misrepresented it this morning as I drove into work – 20 courses now >>> available from UK Universities – either that or an enthusiastic press >>> officer.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Note that the focus of this article: >>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24109190 is on courses not the >>> platform, so the error seems endemic. That level of consistency makes me >>> think it is the press office who are spinning it that way.**** >>> >>> Cheers,**** >>> >>> Haydn**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>] >>> *On Behalf Of ***Patrina.Law** >>> *Sent:* 18 September 2013 14:29 >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Re: A big week for open learning in the ****UK******** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Hi Haydn,**** >>> >>> As a partner of FutureLearn, the OU is currently in production for the >>> first of its MOOCs via the platform. We were always told that the beta >>> platform launch today was to be just that – a platform launch – and that >>> the first MOOC will go live in October. Perhaps the PR message wasn’t clear >>> in getting this across…**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Happy to say that the OU’s content will be based on OER already released >>> into the public domain. All its MOOCs on FutureLearn will be adapted and >>> published as OER when the FutureLearn presentation has finished. Hoorah! >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Patrina**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> *Patrina Law***** >>> >>> *Head of Third Party Online Commissioning***** >>> >>> *The Open University***** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> *From:* Peter Reed [mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>] >>> >>> *Sent:* 18 September 2013 11:48 >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Re: A big week for open learning in the ****UK******** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> I thought the same Haydn, but then I suppose they will have to allow a >>> few weeks minimum for word to spread and people to sign up….**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Peter **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On 18 Sep 2013, at 11:33, Haydn Blackey <[log in to unmask]> >>> wrote:**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Hi David,**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On the ‘big pink thing’ I note that none of its courses are ready yet – >>> the first is available on the 14th of October. Slightly less than a >>> launch then.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> 12 of the 20 will not be available until the New Year. Was the launch to >>> early, or did the project run behind time I wonder.**** >>> >>> Cheers,**** >>> >>> Haydn**** >>> >>> *Haydn Blackey >>> Head of the Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching* │*Pennaeth >>> Canolfan Rhagoriaeth Dysgu ac Addysgu >>> **Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching* │*Canolfan >>> Rhagoriaeth Dysgu ac Addysgu** >>> University of South Wales* │*Prifysgol De Cymru ** >>> Pontypridd *│*Pontypridd** >>> Wales*│*Cymru** >>> CF37 1DL***** >>> >>> Tel │Ffôn: *+44 (0)1443 654331***** >>> >>> *[log in to unmask]* <[log in to unmask]> >>> *http://www.southwales.ac.uk***** >>> >>> <image001.png>**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> *From:* Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On >>> Behalf Of *David Kernohan >>> *Sent:* 18 September 2013 11:10 >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* A big week for open learning in the ****UK******** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> HUGE respect is due to the **UK** in general and Jonathan Worth (and >>> the team at ****Coventry****), and Josie Fraser and her team based >>> around Leicester City Council and DMU) for winning 2 out of the 5 “Reclaim >>> Open” prizes available.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> http://open.media.mit.edu/contest.html - details of the contest, which >>> is kind of a big global deal.**** >>> >>> http://dmlhub.net/save-date-reclaim-open-learning-symposium - the >>> announcement, and details of the Reclaim Open Symposium, which will be >>> live-streamed on 25-26th September.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> >>> http://lccdigilit.our.dmu.ac.uk/2013/09/16/the-award-winning-digilit-leicester-project/ >>> - details of the Digilit project**** >>> >>> http://phonar.covmedia.co.uk/ - Phonar, one of the courses offered by >>> the Coventry Open Media Courses team.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Both these examples of the cutting edge of open learning make a point of >>> using and sharing openly licensed materials that can be re-used and >>> re-purposed, and both have a huge focus on fostering communities of >>> learners.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Also in the ****UK****, our government published a very well done (by ** >>> Stephen** Haggard) literature review on the current wave of open/online >>> learning courses “The Maturing of the MOOC”: >>> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/massive-open-online-courses-and-online-distance-learning-review >>> . Though there have been a few examples of literature reviews in this >>> area (with CETIS offering one of the earliest), this is a nicely argued and >>> well presented survey.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Oh, and some big pink thing launched ;-)**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Any views on any of the above?**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> David**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> <~WRD001.jpg><image002.jpg> <http://www.jisc.ac.uk/>**** >>> >>> *David Kernohan >>> *Programme Manager**** >>> >>> T 0203 697 5826 >>> M 07917 599296 >>> Skype david.kernohan >>> Twitter @dkernohan, @ukoer >>> One Castlepark, Tower Hill, ****Bristol**, **BS2 0JA******** >>> >>> *jisc.ac.uk* <http://www.jisc.ac.uk/>**** >>> >>> Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by >>> guarantee which is registered in ****England**** under Company No. >>> 5747339, VAT No. GB 882 5529 90. Jisc’s registered office is: One >>> Castlepark, Tower Hill, ****Bristol**, **BS2 0JA****. T 0203 697 5800. >>> jisc.ac.uk <http://www.jisc.ac.uk/>**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an >>> exempt charity in **England** & **Wales** and a charity registered in ** >>> **Scotland**** (SC 038302). **** >>> >> >> >