 |
 |
Hi folks, I’ve been following this discussion with interest. Many of the points raised here by Pat and others are well known, long standing issues that we’ve struggled to address for a long time, though not for want of trying. E.g. URL permanence, the dynamic nature of open educational content, deposit vs aggregation, etc. As David said, the original UKOER guidelines encouraged projects to deposit content in multiple places, including Jorum. Jorum was never intended to be the sole repository for UKOER content, but we had hoped it would provide a ’shop window’ for UKOER resources and a safeguard to prevent content from being lost. FWIW, I think there is still a role of a central repository of open educational content in the UK but I also think that aggregators like Solvonauts are the way forward. By it’s very nature, open educational content will always be scattered all over the web and we need flexible technology strategies to deal with that. I was encouraged to hear from Christa’s mail that Jisc are still committed to the open agenda and I hope Jisc will work closely with the open education community so we can move forward on some of these issues. Cheers Lorna > On 24 Sep 2015, at 15:55, Pat Lockley (Pgogy) <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > On 2015-09-24 10:00, Thomson, Simon wrote: >> Thanks Pat for the detailed info. Yes, sorry about the Leeds Met >> change (due to a university name change). >> I think you make a good point about permanency of the resource access. >> At Leeds Beckett (Met as it was) we actually deposited the resource in >> Jorum (not just a link to the resource in our repository) for that >> very reason. >> I think that Jorum (or any other national open repository) is valuable >> because it can hold a physical copy of that resource permanently (and >> overcome issues where institutions change their name!??) > > From a vague recollection, the Leeds Beckett OAI feed had a weird characteristic and I had to code in a change so it could pick up your youtube videos. So perhaps some lived on youtube? Nick could confirm. > > I think holding a physical copy of something is perhaps too content focused on what an OER is. I get a lot of WordPress blog posts as OER, and these do not tend to being a single physical copy, lest you PDF the page or some such on submission? Also, then, sooner or later what of revisions and so on - each change leads to a replacement, or a new deposition? Something akin to the Xpert / XOT relationship? Or possibly git. > > This is perhaps a problem with repositories - they are perhaps more built for a static end product than a living evolving thing. > > I suspect the space required to host all the content would be huge - not sure how much AWS would cost, or even if amazon would be something we'd wish to support in using their products. — Lorna M. Campbell Open Education Technology and Practice Blog: lornamcampbell.wordpress.com <http://lornamcampbell.wordpress.com/> Mail: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> Twitter: LornaMCampbell Skype: lorna120768