 Thank you for coming to our presentation. I'm Virginia Clinton-Losell and my co-author Allison Kelly and I did a study on how public sharing of student work influences motivation for that work. In this study, we're specifically looking at memes being shared on the Instructor Social Media account Twitter. I realize many are familiar with open pedagogy and OER-enabled pedagogy, but just a quick primer so that we're all on the same page. The opportunities afforded by open licensing are practices known as OER-enabled pedagogy. There are many names for OER-enabled pedagogy or many synonyms for it, including open pedagogy, open educational practices, and depending on the licensing involved, nondisposable or renewable resources. The key characteristics are innovation, creation, collaboration, and participation by both instructors and students, so it's definitely using an active learning constructivist approach. But unlike many authentic assignments that are valuable for student learning, OER-enabled pedagogy goes beyond the classroom. According to Wiley and Hilton, there is a four-part test as to whether a task is OER-enabled pedagogy. And what this study focuses on is that third question, specifically, how does public sharing make a difference in students' experiences with open pedagogy? This research question was motivated by a systematic reviewer conducted where I found that one area in which studies varied was whether publicly sharing and openly licensing materials was optional or required. Generally, public sharing and open licensing were optional. There were two studies in which it was explicitly required. In the Bonica study, students had the option of using a pseudonym rather than the real names if there were concerns about privacy. And in the Zeng and Colleague study, the students were required to post on public social media platforms in their findings a need to better support and adapt activities for shy students who was noted. The reaction to public sharing from students has been mixed. In some of the studies, all of the studies in which involved public sharing, just they didn't all require it, some students reported anxiety that their work wasn't good enough to be seen by anyone outside of the classroom. Conversely, other students found that the public sharing made their work more meaningful and increased the pride they felt in that work. In addition, many studies embraced a view of open pedagogy in terms of multiple components, making it difficult to examine perceptions about specific features. That's where this study comes in. In this study, we're going to look at how student motivation for creating course artifacts vary based on whether or not they publicly share their artifact. Our hypothesis is that sharing will lead to more pride and ownership of the work because they know it will be seen to others. Our counter-hypothesis to that, which is the concern about having public sharing, is that it could lead to anxiety and demotivation, making it students less engaged in the learning process. In order to test this question, students in multiple courses that were psychology-related, so educational psychology, developmental psychology, and child development, in courses that I and my co-author, Alison Kelly, taught, were randomly assigned, using a learning management system, to have instructions and that their memes that they would make for the course would be publicly shared on their instructor's Twitter feed with a link to their instructor's Twitter feed. Then there were also students in the controlling, controlled, or not sharing condition in which students were not told it would be shared and then it wasn't. For students in the public sharing condition, they were told in the instructions that they did not want it publicly shared to please let the instructor know and that would not be shared. Then students created research memes based on course content, had peer review of the final memes in the course, submitted their final memes and during the time of submitting the final memes, they were also asked to complete a questionnaire on motivation, of which 74 students completed. In this questionnaire, it was based on theories of motivation, specifically expectancy value cost theory, and the idea is that your motivation for something is how well you think you'll do it, how valuable it is to you, minus the cost. We also wanted to look at their self-evaluation of skill development and academic emotions related to pride and anxiety that were developed by Packron. In terms of types of value, we looked at intrinsic value, which is how inherently enjoyable it is with items such as the ones in blue, and utility value, which is how useful or practical a task is with the items that are in black. Based on our results, you can see that intrinsic value and utility value were not affected at all by whether or not students were told that their work would be publicly shared. In terms of emotional cost, this was obviously a concern that this public sharing would increase emotional cost. It was assessed using these items, and as you can see that one emotional cost was quite low, which is good. The scale was out of a maximum of 25 points, and the average was about 10, and that there was no evidence that public sharing increased emotional cost. In terms of self-evaluation of skills, we did see a difference. We found a rather robust and significant finding that those who were publicly sharing their memes or that were told that their memes would be publicly shared thought that the project helped their communication skills and helped develop their scientific knowledge better than those who were not told that they would be publicly shared, and then they were also not publicly shared. In terms of academic emotions, we found that thankfully there were no differences in how uneasy or embarrassed students felt about it, but unexpectedly, students reported higher levels of confidence and pride if they knew their memes were not going to be publicly shared. We had some open-ended questions, and here are some examples of the comments. In general, students just found this to be a fun way to express their scientific knowledge and to delve into the material. They also thought that it was enjoyable to learn how to communicate succinctly and in a different way than they normally do. As far as usefulness, some of them saw how this could be a way that they could apply this in their profession, either for a business that they planned to do in their courses or if they planned to be teachers. In terms of downsides, nobody mentioned any concern about publicly sharing their memes on social media or that the instructor would be publicly sharing their memes in social media. There were some mentions of being nervous or scared that their memes weren't funny enough or it wasn't good enough that resonate with other comments in the literature, such as from Zhang et al. 2020. Generally speaking, students' main concern was the amount of time, because not only did they need to find an article or read an article, depending on the assignment, the upper-level students were told to find their own article, the lower-level students were told that there were a list of articles they could choose from, but they had to read it, they had to learn how to make a meme, and there were a lot of steps involved. As far as take-home points, it wasn't specifically the research question or research purpose, but students found that making memes to express their knowledge of the course content was enjoyable and valuable. They thought it was fun, that it was an opportunity to be creative, and they saw it as being meaningful and something they can apply to their future work. Thankfully, they also did not see a high level of emotional costs with the different measures that we had as far as negative emotions or just seeing emotional costs. We did see more pride reported when students were not told they would be public sharing. This is something that we'll have to dig more into to see why that is, that's the opposite of what we expected. However, we did see that there may have been benefits for communication skills and scientific knowledge development to publicly share.