 Hello everyone. I'm Angela de Barger. I'm a program officer at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and I've been at the foundation now a year and a half and as I've been learning about the work in open education, I'm always curious about how the field is evolving globally and particularly research around teaching and learning. So as I was reflecting on this, I thought it could be useful not only for the purpose of the foundation but also for the field to conduct a landscape analysis to look at what we're learning across the world and in different regions and to share that back to help to spark the conversation and be part of the conversation about the future of the open education field. My colleague Kathy Casserly has led this work in collaboration with colleagues at Redstone Strategy Group and she's been a wonderful partner and colleague in this work and across my other work at the foundation and I'm going to turn it over to Kathy who's going to begin by sharing some highlights from the research and then I'll share some reflections about the implications for the field. So thank you and good to see you after lunch. Hopefully we're all still awake. Just actually before I dig in a little bit on the research, we'll share a link at the end which will actually connect you to the full deck so we're going to be seeing kind of a sampling of the research so you have a sense of what kind of data was collected and what might be useful to you. Just to give you a little bit of background, this research was conducted in six months from the fall and was completed in February so it was a relatively quick scan. It was not known, it wasn't attempted to be a comprehensive research landscape but looking more at recent trends about what is the field producing in the research area, what are the themes, what are the methodologies, what are we beginning to see and the pieces that we looked at were not only research pieces, they were also thought pieces and they were also policy pieces. What is influential in the field? What are people pointing to? And we used a number of ways to gather data. We identified experts who are known in the field. We interviewed them in depth. We asked them to reference research that they thought was important. We also looked at some of the databases like the OER Research Hub, ROFID and other areas as well. I also want to point out that the research was limited to the researchers myself and an analyst being English language dependent and so we didn't have the capacity to analyze research in other languages. So I want to call this out right now because it's clearly a bias that gets introduced to the pieces that are collected. At the same time we were very intentional of looking for research across regions and highlighting research across regions. The work itself is outside the U.S. base. So the idea here was to look really at non-specific U.S. based research and what was being analyzed and the analysis happening overall. So with that I'll share some of the findings overall. So pretty much obviously at a high level the research believe it's much more robust in North American Europe. Certainly if you've been in the field you're aware of this. If you're new to the research you can point this out. And the caveat that the English language is skewed. So not only ourselves as researchers but other experts we spoke to indicated this kind of hesitancy about identifying key articles at times because they themselves may not have had English language. I should also say that some of the experts we spoke to were multilingual and were able to point us to articles as well. But as we look at the research we can also see that the focus of the research tends to differ. Now these are relative generalizations that we see but it does differ across the world, the globe and what the focus is and what the areas of key interest. So in North America a lot of focus on costs and perceptions. A lot coming out of Europe around the open pedagogy and what it means in the open access. In Asia reusable learning objects and the cost benefit for universities. And so again Africa teacher education so you can begin to see some of the trends that are happening. There were some pieces of research that were multiregional and I really want to call out two pieces that everyone really pointed to as key pieces that are becoming exemplar for the field to point to at this point in time. One is the work on the global south conducted by University of Cape Town and the Roar Fadi and all the researchers who participated in that. That was really called out as an exemplary piece that we can all learn from. And also the more recent work from Cronin, from Catherine, who was here I think she's somewhere else right now. And McLaren on conceptualizing OEP another piece that people are pointing to is really moving the field ahead. One thing we did is we also made sure to call out a selection of articles from each region. This slide isn't meant for you to be able to read but just to point out that we've identified some research that you can come and go back to when you look at the full deck to be sure that you're finding pieces that are representative of all parts of the globe. In addition we also highlighted about 10 to 15 articles that really were kind of standing out as representative that were people were calling out that were important for the field overall and providing a bit of an analysis for people who were relatively new to the research area to begin to dig in and see what the trends are and what some of the more important pieces that are coming out overall. So we analyzed a collection of about 150 articles and is 126. The majority of the articles were about higher education and yet at the same time if you look at some of the bullets on the right hand side there are some caveats about that. Certainly the multi-regional and the global studies are both about primary secondary and higher education. Europe also skewed more heavily and if you look into the research pieces itself we divide this analysis by regions. When you look at Central America 50% of those articles include more primary secondary studies. So again the work is focused in different ways across the globe and that in some samples that the regions were just small and so we have to be careful about how we think about the representation. Most research explores multiple topics and so what we did is we coded the research database dependent on where the areas of focus were. So if you're wondering, you won't be surprised perhaps to see in knowing where the field has been a lot of focus on adoption and discoverability which also now come in close second or tied with it is the open teaching and the practices and the pedagogy. This work on the perceptions of OERs more of that came out of North America. I think we'll see less of that as the field begins to develop. And then certainly the pieces I think that many of us are most interested in around student learning outcomes which is difficult to measure and capture and student uses of OER which I certainly called that was called out in the past few days here at the conference. It was mixed youth methodologies overall. Again sometimes employing multiple methodologies but again this begins to call out just the general themes and directions we're seeing with the types of research that are being conducted. So most pieces did have desk research or literature review included as well as the qualitative case studies of the qualitative interviews. There was some opinion and perception surveys conducted as well. But the work on the quantitative side, the observational data with statistical controls or without statistical controls as you can see is very, very limited. And this is a piece that we may want to see more robust in the future if we feel it can kind of give us the evidence base we need to really understand what's happening in the field. We did not find any randomized experiments which we wouldn't be perhaps surprised given the norms of the field overall. Let me just point out a few opportunities to capitalize on for stronger methodologies and kind of the rising areas with the trends of what we saw. So one kind of caveat or caution is that there's really limited generalizability to institutional scale. And I think this actually points back to the opening keynote because the issues around sustainability and institutional scale. We have a lot of studies that are more classroom based. It does share a lot of information. It is critically important and yet at the same time to understand how to really scale this up to get institutions to buy in to see the value. We're not quite there. There's been a positive shift that we would say in design and calling it research rigor loosely in the last few years where the methodologies is stronger. And again I think this is what we see in the emergence of a field as more researchers convene learn with each other and share overall. The field is really obviously intersect intersecting with other open fields. So it's real. It's not a peer study. These research articles were open edgy. We are open pedagogy. Some of them were MOOCs or digital pedagogy as we were looking at different regions. A lot of conversations particularly with the experts and with other researchers about the lens and that we can learn from some of the metrics perhaps they've used in some of these adjacent fields. And lastly the research in the global south has been historically as we all know less developed and it merits effort to certainly raise the profile in the global north. But we have to be careful to preserve obviously the local questions overall. So with that let me turn it over to Angela. One thing that's interesting as the team was synthesizing what we're hearing from the different people that we spoke to. The different users actually value and need different kinds of research. Thought leaders and field conveners really valued and appreciated research that helped give them a sense of where the field is headed next and what's reasonable and to expect in terms of where they can push and support the field in going forward. Policy advocates wanted the headlines about what's working how were programs funded how and in what ways you know briefly how and in what ways these programs were supported. And then for program implementers it was really more about figuring out the grounded guidelines to help them inform how to implement programs. So this process is not so surprising but just a reminder that in doing our research thinking from the very beginning. What's the purpose. Who are the audiences that we hope to connect with. Particularly if we're one of the goals is to expand and connect with new communities of practice. Another finding or synthesis from a takeaway is that there are few areas that surfaced as high priority needs in terms of next steps for research. These have to be with teaching and learning. Policy and practice connections and then taking on more intentional implementation research. Just taking on the questions around teaching and learning. Some of the field experts voice a question around the need for additional rigorous research to help validate the relationships between the impact of OER on student learning and engagement. I want to just unpack that a little bit and acknowledge I believe there's rigor both in case studies as well as these larger kind of studies. So it's not just about the size of the studies and in fact we're just at a really beautiful session prior to this where we talked about the discipline in creating small stories. I think part of what the push here is around is making the connections between that work and and how we demonstrate student learning not just learning around academic disciplines that also social and emotional growth. I'm really pleased to see the growth in the field around the connections between OER and teaching practices and continuing this work that helps us understand how and in what ways it matters when materials are openly licensed and how that benefits teaching and learning. And then finally this last question I think starts to get at a need to continue research and work that helps us understand how to apply inclusive design and really from the very beginning so that we're not retrofitting courses to meet the needs of every learner but but more inclusive from the start. In terms of policy and practice here's where it we can't continue or can't be satisfied with just tracking the number of open policies but really understanding what happens when policy is taken up and used. So in places where there are open policies looking to and tracking adoption rates of OER exploring the potential for increasing adoption of OER within and beyond these contexts. Think there's an interesting opportunity to explore the connection between Paul open policy and open practice where are there cases where open educational practices are explicitly addressed in policy. I think vice versa where we seen grassroots take up of open educational practice and that's beginning to shift policies in institutions. And finally like getting at the mechanism for how this work can be done. So for example when governments and institutions adopt agreed adopt OER how are they changing procurement and financing. How can we understand how this is happening in different countries and different institutions. Share that out so that we can all continue to to learn and grow and perhaps adopt these kinds of practices more regularly. I'm going to go a bit quickly through the next set so that we can leave a little bit of time for questions. I think what I'd highlight here are a couple of things. One it'd be really important to look at where we have seen success and long term success of OER projects. Understanding what are the policies and people in those places that are enabling this work to continue on even after funding has concluded. And developing research agendas that aren't just about building theory but really have practical utility for educators and students engaging like continuous improvement cycles so that there's a lot of interaction and exchange about what's working how it's working and iteratively refining the approach along the way. I guess the last point I would make about technology is that as the field between open education and educational technology continue to evolve and perhaps intermingle making sure that we are able to develop strong evidence based arguments to advance the ethical use of data and technology with open education. I think I'm going to share that this is something that I'm working on as part of and taking in this data to inform our strategy at the Hewlett Foundation around open education and love to talk with any of you after this or on Twitter about it. I'll continue to update the field about how the strategy is evolving and want to just highlight a couple of resources that are available. We invite you to share and to learn from the research that we've collected and used as part of our work and this is available online and the full study and findings are available on the Hewlett website so please take a look at those and send us your feedback. Thank you. We do have time for a couple of questions or comments if anybody would like to say anything or ask anything. No? Then I'll pass back. Is there one? Okay. There's one in the middle. The first tiny URL is the database of the research we collected with all the fields and it's just you know it's not a complete comprehensive set what we learned is everyone has their own collection on their desktop and we wanted to create a place where we can actually all contribute so if you would like to share your research articles and points very easy I'll take you five minutes to upload your data as well and other people can go and discover it in a much I think easier fashion. I just had a question related to Sue's talk this morning so when she talked she talked of a paradigm that's very kind of dangerous where we put things into spreadsheets and we count things and we we have a very positive mindset positive as mindset and when I hear we need more rigor we need more control I start to hear we need more numbers and we and getting kind of away from qualitative so how are you how are you seeking ways to kind of balance the need for as you say the scalable with the need for the human elements. That's a really great question didn't mean it was not an intention to imply that this these kinds of quantitative studies are more valuable than qualitative they don't give us the information they need I think part of what I'd like to figure out through the strategy refresh is to find that complementary set of think about the complementary set of studies and methodologies that are mutually beneficial to helping us learn about our strategic direction that we set and and the field so I think it's going to be a both and kind of approach that's that's how I think about it. I'm afraid the last word has to come from then we'll have to move on so if you have other questions can you hold them for the tea break. No and I was just going to conclude I think as the work moves more into practice I think it's naturally going to be more qualitative in nature but as we still want to think about system implementation and sustainability there's a interest in understanding how that can work as well so I think I don't think it's one or the other to amplify Angela's comments as well. Thank you very much. Thank you.