 Okay, and we are live again on OE Week Live. This is the show that I just made up myself. I'm Alan Levine from OE Global. And this is really meant to just bring a little bit of our radio show type field to Open Education Week. There's so many sessions going on. And I thought it'd be kind of interesting to have more of an informal time to talk about what's going on and bring in some people to talk about their work or things they're doing this week or just random questions that kind of come up as we do in conversation. So initially I had this idea I was gonna like announce and say like, look up in two hours there's this event and three hours this is event. But I trust that people know how to use the calendar but we do have them organized by day. And just one thing that I hope we did right is that people like they see the times and dates in their local time. And so working with kind of global projects anybody here listening knows you're always kind of wrestling with time zone conversions. And so we try to nick that one in the bud. But with that I'm gonna bring a couple people on stage and we'll get to meet them and talk about them and just see what they are doing in terms of their week or beyond and what they're interested in. And now I'm going to start adding some folks to the stream. And so really glad to have a group that like volunteered to be part of my crazy idea. So I'm just, you know obviously we wanna get to know each other. So I will just say, you know, tell us, you know where you are, what you do and maybe like one highlight that may have happened already for you during Open Education Week. So I'll ask Laura to come first because Laura was great, she came in early and we had some great chats and we talked about like South Dakota and motorcycles and he never know what comes up in conversation. So welcome, Laurie. Thank you, thank you. My name is Laurie Asup. I'm Open Education Operations Manager with BC Campus and I'm centered in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. And actually I didn't work yesterday so this is the highlight of Open Ed Week for me thus far but looking forward to lots more reading and attending sessions and talking with people. That's great. And we're gonna come back to you to talk about the 10 year anniversary for the open textbooks at BC Campus. And so next up I'm gonna bring up, I'm gonna, I hate the mango name, but Minas Vizgerda and it was great because I loved it because you like applied and I don't know you. And so I think it's really good when people discover this. But I certainly know a lot about University of Edinburgh so I always wanna hear about that. So let's know where you are and what you're up to. So hi folks. So I'm Vid, I usually go by his nickname but it's just the first letters of my name. I'm a PhD student at the University of Edinburgh and sending everyone best wishes from the city where today we had snow and sun at the same time. Fantastic. That can be a crazy place. Yeah. Well, if you want so I'm in Saskatchewan and it's about minus 20 out there with the wind. So, but definitely excited to hear about your work and interest there. Are you part of GOGN by chance or? I am and that's where I heard about this show from. Fantastic. We love them. And so thanks and we wanna come back to you and hear about the topic that you submitted. But now I'm gonna bring on my good friend, Nate and he works for a little organization you might not have heard of. You're muted, buddy. I hate to do that. Like... Yeah, I didn't even realize that I had muted myself there for a second. Okay, sorry about that. Yeah. Thanks, Alan. Yeah, so I'm Nate Anchol. I'm calling to you from the Nichowana traditional lands of also known as Portland, Oregon in the United States where the weather is a lot like Edinburgh actually often, but today we have sun. So it's rare. It could be raining also a little bit later. Who knows? I work for Creative Commons. I lead communications and community over there. And just really happy to be here and also happy to be with people from two of my favorite institutions, BC campus. Love them and University of Edinburgh, which I would love to visit someday. And of course, we global. Well, it gets to love for BC campus, right? Yeah. Okay. Let's just, I'll start with you, Nate, because you're already on the screen. Okay. I know Creative Commons obviously has a lot going on during Open Education Week. Can you give us the rundown or some highlights? Yeah, I mean, part of it is that since Creative Commons has kind of a global community of people all over the world, that's a global community, doing all kinds of things, especially in open education and with open educational resources and other kinds of open materials, there's a lot going on. And so maybe the best way to highlight it here is, can I share a link? Yes. If you put it in the private chat, I'll get it on screen. Okay. And so that's the blog post we just issued to kick off this week that kind of highlights all the things that we're trying to emphasize during Open Education Week this year. And I admit that my colleagues, Jenrin Wetzler and Cable Green are the ones who are mostly focused on that work. And so I'm just kind of, the message you're bringing you information about it. Anyway, it's like, you know, highlighting a lot of the work that's actually happened throughout the year and surfacing it again in Open Education Week so people can get a handle on it. I'll say for me personally, my highlight was, I don't know if you'll be able to see this, but I dug out of my closet an old shirt that I have. Is that some kind of wine or something? Yeah, it's like, it's the kind of wine, no. In all my work, previously in Open Technology, I used to work on the Sky Project. And at one point we got these fancy bowling shirts that said Sakai on the back. Sakai's, you know, not as widely used now as it was then, perhaps. But at any rate, I was very happy to find this shirt because it reminded me of my roots. And just for, I was thinking about this because the conversation sparked up on Twitter recently about, you know, what Open really consists of. And I had to, you know, we always go back to that. What does Open really mean, right? But I was just thinking in terms of the kinds of things that I've been heavily involved with, it's at least always meant open tools and technologies. And so working to help educational institutions kind of build and use open tools and technologies. It's been around open content. So Open Educational Resources is an example of that or open access and open scholarly publishing to other areas that are highly, you know, at work and education. And then third, but not least, is just Open Educational Practices, I would say. And, you know, the idea of sort of bringing in other ways of doing things that are maybe outside the standard practices that we at least see here in the United States a lot in traditional education. And to that effect, if I was gonna talk more, but I'd like to shut up for a while and hear from some of our other guests, I would bring up this project that we did a while back called Open Educational Experience Bingo, which is about trying to explore maybe all of those three facets of openness. That's good. We're gonna bring up the bingo card. So definitely would do that. And there was a little bit of discussion this morning that came, I think via Twitter, just about like, what do we mean when we talk about an open education movement or a community because it has lots of bounds and or not. And so that's sort of in the similar vein. I don't think we can maybe never stop talking about what it means or it includes and it should be evolving. Yeah, we just, we also need to do things. We can't just keep talking about it. Let's get to haze everyone a while and reflect, right? Yeah, I think so. All right, so great, Nate. And we'll come back to the bingo and maybe talk about, I know we- If we have time. Yo, yeah, we have time. I'm in charge here, man. I can make it happen. With that, I'm gonna ask Laurie to come back on and tell us a little bit about the stuff that she's doing on the BC campus. Well, last year, but we're still wrapping up on this. It was the 10 year anniversary, not only of the original BC Open Textbook project but the collection itself. And I was mentioning to Alan before the show started, the problem with success is you gotta make sure you get everything done. And so right now, we are working, doing the production and trying to get all of the wonderful open textbooks and open course packs and all the ancillaries that go with those into the open collection. So I'll put a link here in the chat so you can see. This is the BC Open Collection 2.0. Originally it was called the BC Open Textbook Collection or library and now we just call it the BC Open Collection because we're expanding beyond the textbooks. So anyway, like I said, we're doing production, getting the open courses, getting the open textbooks into the collection. And what's unique about this collection, even though we have people from across Canada and in the US and around the globe using all of those OER, we do target the post-secondary instructors and courses in British Columbia. And so what I like about this new collection is we are doing just that. We will identify specific courses that an open course can be used in and the textbook that would go along with it. And we have a very good articulation system set up in British Columbia. So if within this collection now, if you plug in the course code for a book or a course that resource is built for, all the comparable courses at other institutions in the province, all the transferable courses appear on that same page. So that I find really exciting because I remember early on in this work that was one of the complaints was, well, how do I find OER for my course? How do I know it's gonna work? Will it fit the learning objectives, et cetera? So we're trying to make that a little more easy. So trying to address the practical end of open ed, especially for our province. And I wanna compliment you. When I saw the collection came out, it was like, it was a major leap from the, I mean, the open textbook collection was great, but in that vein, you had to find the textbook first, then find some of the answers or the materials and the way the collection site is designed, it's a little more fluid and it's more flexible to find things of use. Yeah, it was two years in development. So there was a lot of user testing done, a lot of discussion, lessons learned and it continues to be refined. So there are features that we will continue to add to it, for example, more easily tracking the adoption and usage of what's in the collection or outside the collection as well. So that's something that I'm in charge of is counting all those books and usage across the province. So we're very proud that we've, well, we count this cumulatively, but we just surpassed the $34 million savings mark for students in British Columbia. That's an impact and I'm curious about that. I forget where there was some discussion about like the ways an author or the publisher of an open textbook can find out where it's being used or adopted. Usually it's through some kind of contact form and you let them know that, hey, I've used your textbook, but you probably don't, that's an underestimate of the reuse. I always figure maybe we're counting half, but I implemented a program a few years ago and I call it the ongoing adoption program. And so I worked with my key contacts at the different BC institutions and asked if they would consider they would take over the tracking of everyone in their institution rather than BC campus relying on individual faculty members coming to us and filling out our form. And that's been, I think really eye-opening for the institutions and very, very helpful. So it requires that they stand back and review the landscape and see what their faculty are up to. It sparks conversations and it has led to other beneficial results of practicing open ed on campus and they're very proud of what's happening. So it's made our, my job easier, but also it is enhanced awareness on campus. Right. Well, lovely. And I'd like to come back more and hear about some more of this work. I'm gonna give a bit of chance to talk a little bit about your PhD research or your interest. And I was curious about the item you submitted through the form in terms of what you're trying to collect. Sure thing. It's kind of funny how introductions here, I guess go, what's your name and what does open mean to you? Well, actually, I have to tell you, I was thinking about, because sometimes I like to be clever with my questions and I actually did the trendy thing and I asked chat GPT for some sample questions for an international audience and they were terrible. And so, but yes, we can talk about pets or favorite hobbies and actually I like to come back to that because we do like to get to know each other. So, pardon my parenthetical there. Oh, that is a beautiful use for chat GPT. It's got so many uses. Loads of interesting discussion starters at our university as well. But anyway, so I'm coming on as a PhD student, but actually my research is a little bit less related to this, but a project I'm currently working on on the side is all about open education. For a little bit of context, at our university, we use Blackboard Learn as the main learning management system and universities being forced to switch from Learn Original to Learn Ultra. Nate turns away, no more Blackboard Learning. I tried to get it in action, Nate. Yeah, so as part of the switch to Learn Ultra because Learn Original is being deprecated, all of the courses are moving gradually towards the new Learn Ultra as well. One of the things that is changing besides better mobile support and accessibility features is the removing guest access. And that means any courses that are on Blackboard Learn Ultra, you cannot access them without being locked in. And a bunch of staff at the university are concerned saying, hey, we've had this culture of sharing our courses, and now we can't do that anymore. So how do we do it? And I'm running a project experimenting with the kinds of approaches we could do, looking into how do other institutions, worldwide, publish resources openly, and what can we copy? I think Blackboard just got his camera. It looks like my camera is a bit temperamental. That's okay, that's okay. I was just worried we lost you. Yeah, now I'm still here. Okay, that's fine. If you could see the number of times I've messed up doing these broadcasts, I've played the wrong video, put the wrong people on, well, I hope it didn't go too wrong. That's fine, it's fine. So what kind of ways is it possible to create access to the resources if you can't get into Blackboard? So I guess the main conclusion that we've come to is we would set up the main courses with gated information within Blackboard Learn, keeping the old approach, not changing everything all at once. However, the courses that do want to share some resources openly would have a second parallel site that is open to the public. And how this parallel size should be structured that's still an open question. Right, I mean, it's, you know, I'm thinking of MIT OpenCourseWare, so it's not the course itself, but somehow it houses all the content. But I mean, ideally you don't want to have duplication of the course content, right? Right, since one of the goals, at least to me personally, of sharing open educational resources is to reduce the reinventing of the wheel that's going on everywhere at all times. So if we're duplicating our own content, we're not exactly helping ourselves there. But yeah, so loads of approaches from loads of different institutions, some are more effortful than others. Some sites are very, very polished where they will do high-end courses that are tailored specifically for public audiences or for example, produce textbooks. And these are not something that you can take from a course that we've been teaching at university and just put out there without a massive effort into recreating, restructuring, remaking what we have. But rather publishing materials in the way we already have is kind of a slightly different use case. So here we come into the space of differentiating between textbooks and MOOCs and open courses and just repositories, referritories and so on, we'll get into that later I think. Yeah, all right, just dump Blackboard, but obviously that's... There's, I'm sure there's the reasons like you mentioned, but that's, I have not followed the features of course LMSs or VLEs, but like, not providing public access, wow. Yeah, I suppose everything has its own uses and what it's meant for. As one learning technologist in our School of Informatics observed, it's as if institutions go through waves over time. They're saying, hey, let's let everyone do their own approach. You're decentralized, it's too complicated to be central. And then things become very, very different. They start to diverge in different ways. And now we want a unified experience for our students because we can't find anything when every course does its own thing. So let's have a unified platform and then they converge. And now it's not working for all the courses to have one same platform. So let's diverge, just keeps going back and forth every few years. Yeah, so it's the problem with platforms. I was in a conversation doing a podcast with Delmar Larson from Libre Text and he really talked about the problem of, when you start adopting and remixing open textbooks and then you get remix, you can't track all the revisions because then they all get slightly separated. And so how do you solve the problem of even unraveling version control? Yeah, that's the tough one we've talked about as well. And we were making plans or talking about how we might track that. And as far as, because we get asked for the BC collection, do you track all the adaptations? I said, we can't. You have to set up your boundaries so that what you deliver is of high quality. And yeah, Vid, listening to you talk about different people doing their own thing. And what I've noticed when we put a call out to create a textbook or a course, often the faculty member who, even though we say we want broad use, everyone's got their ideas about, I want a book from my course, the way I teach. And those books kind of make me think and those books can still be changed. But if they're too broad, they're of no use either. So anyway, yeah, individuality, many versions, keeping high quality, all, I think just things that, well, open ed, I was thinking about publishing. So I was a writer in my previous career and worked with big publishers. And I realized, and then so I was on the other side of the fence, I wasn't the writer anymore. Now I'm the managing editor and project manager. And to see what that's like to be helping the author do their work without saying you have to copy edit your own work. You know, that doesn't work. But seeing what the other challenges are, except with open education or open educational resources, you have additional challenges that you don't have in regular publishing because you're dealing with the open copyright licenses. And so if you are going to stamp a CC by license on that book, you better be darn sure that whatever you've borrowed fulfills that license. And so that was one of the points that we stressed with and when we do stress with authors that we have you can't pull something in as one-time permission only. It's not open, man. Yeah, and I wonder, I mean, a different topic but maybe a bit, no, some of this like, I mean, BC campus has really been so good at supporting and sharing materials for addressing accessibility. Like what are some current challenges in sort of keeping up or keeping that consistent across the collection? Well, we, I'll just digress for a moment. So we didn't start out that way. We recognized it, but it's a lot of, it's work. So part of it was defining what accessibility was in the beginning. And now we have the accessibility toolkit. And Amanda Kooge was one of the authors of that. And then Josie Gray has become our resident expert. So part of it is when you put a call out and ask faculty authors to create a textbook, we always say in the contracts, you must make this accessible. So it's like any aspect of publishing ensuring that that has been addressed and it has been addressed consistently throughout all the resources. And our definition of accessibility is changing. So diversity and inclusion and equity is entering into that. And I remember asking the question years ago, what do we mean by accessibility? That's a pretty broad term. Well, we were primarily talking about visual, if somebody is blind or low vision, but that has been expanded. So one, making sure it's in place and then trying to keep up with how that area is evolving. And then the technology behind it as well. So screen readers that people are using, are you capturing everything in a book so that a person of low vision can get all the information? Yeah, and the one that like we forget about a lot is like print accessibility or PDF because we tend to think of this stuff as online and in reality, a lot of learners, especially in remote areas have to rely on print materials. That's right. That's one of the biggest barriers right there is, you're trying to create accessible features for reading online, but what if you can't afford a computer or don't have internet? Yeah, we've addressed that somewhat looking at Northern communities, remote communities. And that's where you go to print copies. Or the other one too is we have, we just finished or we're at the tail end of the production for adult basic education because in British Columbia to get your grade 12 equivalent is the tuition is free if you're a resident of BC. And so we wanted to create the materials that went with that schooling to be free as well. So if you get someone who is semi-literate or not literate yet and they're learning to read, I remember working on the BC read series with that author that was 12 different books. And they said, well, people who are learning to read aren't always computer literate either. So the two literacies can go hand in hand. And it was then realized we had to make sure that these books could be cleanly and easily printed. Right, is this anything that you're involved with at Enver Vid or understand how the university is dealing with accessibility? I think here would bring us on another tangent, but we've got an accessibility working group that's just recently formed itself. I'm always talking from perspective of the School of Informatics because that's where I'm based. There might have been other initiatives around the university and other schools. But in our case, yeah, we're considering, for example, during lecture recordings the use of mic for anybody either deaf or hard of hearing, captioning on any videos, fonts that are adjustable for anybody with dyslexia or using more images and less text on slides when presenting something. For anybody with photosensitivity, different color schemes so that they could have, for example, black text on white or white text on black or a print friendly version black and white. It's a variety of considerations that can go into it. I don't know if I found the right link here for, I found the main equality, diversity and accessibility is kind of under there somewhere, but I'm not surprised to hear that your university is definitely on this. So yeah, great conversation here. And I think, Nate, is it time for some bingo? Well, it's funny because I've been losing with great interest and have had my forays into all these topics everywhere from that whole question that it was bringing up of the difference between a repository and an archive and an LMS and all the work that you all do at BC campus to house materials and platforms like press books and also make it available in LMSs and all that work. There's just such a complex field just in the technology delivery aspects of it even before you get to print. So then when you just get to print, it expands. But one of the instigations behind the bingo which I can share a link for here was to try, it started out actually the way educators will with a hope of maybe creating a rubric so that we could perhaps, oh, got it. You got it up there. Yeah, I was about to share a link because you have it. So the beginning instigation of this collaboration between multiple people was to somehow have a rubric that one could use to sort of take a look at the openness of some kind of educational activity and just understand the ways in which it might be open. And we already discussed how openness can have so many different definitions. But as we got further into it, we decided that the idea of a rubric itself was not open enough for us. And so we kind of transformed the idea of the rubric into more of a game and that's where the bingo idea came in. And so the idea here is that there could be a bingo card that you could use to kind of hold up against some kind of educational activity or even resource and then just explore some ways that it might be open perhaps by coloring in or putting markers on certain squares where you felt like the openness of that activity or work was at least present in some way. And so on the, I guess that's from my point of view at the left hand simpler version of the bingo card there which just has 16 boxes. Those boxes represent sort of different kind of ingredients of openness that you might have. And those include things like, are the materials in some way open? Are the activities somehow open? Are the skills somehow open? Are the tools somehow open? Are the, is it open for different kinds of people? Have different roles at different places, different times. So it's sort of like all the nuts, the one that's on the left on the screen that probably on the right have been in where you're looking at it. And so that's sort of the simple version of just like all the things that you could ask is this thing open in this activity or resource? But then we went a little bit deeper. Oh, I'm sorry. And I've explained them backwards. That's actually the one that's on the right, the simpler one. And the one on the left actually adds dimensions to every box of ingredients because we realized that there were different ways in which certain things could be opened. So it's probably almost impossible to read on the screen here the way it is shown. But if you visit it yourself, and I don't know that you, if you already showed the link, but this is one of the primary pages where you can get to this resource. You'll see those kind of faint, diagonal lines, which is probably not very accessible, frankly. And those are the different kinds of dimensions that one might be able to see openness happening on. And so when it comes to people, for example, as an ingredient is the people aspect of this educational activity open. You can ask yourself, like, is it open for people to connect in different ways? Is it open to include different kinds of people? Does it help develop? Was it developed with different people in mind? Was it created openly? Were people present in the openness of its creation? Is, are the people in the activity surfaced? Does one have insight and understanding into who created this activity or who's participating in this activity, et cetera, et cetera? And so these same dimensions exist for every square. It kind of got kind of fractally populated, right? But the idea is mainly that you could just use this as a way to kind of prompt your thinking about the degree to which something is open or not. And nearby in the blog where you've surfaced that one, there's a couple of examples where I've actually played bingo with a specific educational activity and ended up coloring in the squares. It's not actually on that page, it's a different post. That page explains everything about the bingo, so I don't have to reiterate it here. But the interesting thing that happens is when you hold up these bingo cards to an actual activity and start to color things in that you notice that are open, it ends up creating a kind of heat map of openness. And then you can kind of see like, oh, this activity seemed to have a lot of openness across the board, but mainly in the sense to the degree that it surfaced the underlying aspects of its creation or something like that. Whereas this other one was super open in terms of time and place, but almost nothing else, right? So like an asynchronous educational activity might be super open in terms of who can take part in it and when, but it could be that it uses proprietary textbooks and a closed learning management system. So the tools and materials aspect of it would not be so open. And it just ended up being a kind of way that you can sort of like not measure, but point and think about the openness of an activity and also maybe see areas where you could open it more. Oh, wow. So what were some of the use cases that you were applying this to? Like what was the situations? Well, it got created in the context of a conference actually where a group of people were supposed to sort of evaluate and judge some open educational activities. And so the idea behind it was a tool that could help them do that, but that's when we started to want to move away from the idea of it being some sort of like assessment of how open something is, because that wasn't even in keeping with the underlying idea of openness, like the idea of having some sort of summative grade about how open something was didn't seem like the right thing to take. So that was the instigation, but the kind of use cases are, you can imagine like as a program or even as an individual instructor, you could hold this card up to say all the classes in a portfolio, whether that was across a department or across everything you're teaching. And you could just ask yourself, how open am I in this ingredient box and this ingredient box or how open is the activity? And it would just give you a way to then see across the board where there was openness and maybe where there was a lack of openness in say a portfolio of different educational activities. Another thing that's kind of interesting is of course everybody has different evaluations of what counts for open. And so if you have a group of people look at the same educational activity and everybody fills out their own bingo card, then you can get some really interesting results about the differences that people saw and it could be like the beginning of a discussion prompt, like, okay, we saw very different things about the openness in this activity. Let's talk about that. Oh, it's fascinating. I'm thinking like, and also like, what if you're able to save your cards over time and so you would have like an evolution, right? And so- Like my goal is to color in as many squares as possible. Fill him in. But yeah, definitely, I love it. It's such a refreshing kind of take besides the plain old square rubric and that kind of approach. The cool thing too is because it's itself, the bingo itself is openly licensed. It's already been transformed, at least in one way. I don't know if you know Abby Elder. She said, is it Ohio State? No, I think she said Iowa. Iowa's Iowa, right, yeah. She made a sort of like paper, what do you call that game where it's the little box that you like? Yeah, yeah. It's kind of a fortune teller thing. Yeah, yeah, like, yeah. So she made one of those based on this game and it turned into like a thing where you could like, it would pop up a new question for you. Like, oh, you want to know how open something is? It's like, what question should we ask? Oh, we should ask this question. It was a way to kind of randomize it. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I vaguely remember seeing that, but yeah, it was a clever idea because it was that old thing you remember doing as a kid. Yeah, I think they're called fortune tellers. Yeah, I think so. Yeah, yeah. I can never get the folding right to make those work. A little bit beyond my dexterity as a kid. Yeah, me too. I love the idea. Yeah, well, I don't know. In a way, we talked in the beginning about how we're always talking about what openness means and thinking about this as a way because obviously different people are going to have different things they're going to wait and color in depending how you set it up. Or we just give up on trying to define all this stuff and just keep trying to do it, right? Well, I think one of our goals here, sorry to interrupt one more time, but one of our goals here was like there are open boxes on the bingo precisely because you don't want to close it down and never decide that you're done, saying what open is. Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. That's okay. Oh, good. I wanted to ask Laurie a question though because I'm interested in how has the experience at BC campus? Like, what kind of things have you learned about general applicability of producing textbooks aiming to make things that work for so many different people? Are there any rules of thumb about what works and what doesn't? Well, I assume you mean my perspective, I mean, as an organization, we're always trying to evaluate what we've done. Well, like I said, I was on the other side of the fence for many years and now I'm on the publishing side. So I have gained a great appreciation for anyone in the publishing game. It's complex. I don't think you can make anything for everyone. It just, as humans, we all want something different but what has helped is for us to figure out what has worked and to try to be consistent in how we work with authors, for example. So it starts from, okay, we've got some funding. Let's figure out how long, you know, what do we want to accomplish with that? So we look at the system, where is there a gap? So we had this happen a few years ago. Well, we need some more open textbooks in ABE adult basic education and the trades was woefully lacking and health and business and STEM. Those were the areas we targeted. Okay, that's great. Now we're gonna try to at least fill some of that too. Okay, we're gonna put a call for proposals out to see who is open to doing this work and would like to apply for these grants. Well, you also have to have some sort of structure as to how you write the call because that's set in the groundwork. You have to lay out your expectations. What's the scope of the projects that will come out of this, including, well, here's a big one. How long does it take to write a textbook? Takes longer than people think. I mean, I have written a couple of books myself and just the writing process for me was a year. So not to expect you can do more than you can do. And then once we, and then also during that process is to figure out from BC campuses side. So we're gonna give this money to a faculty member. What is the support they get at their end, but also what sort of work is it gonna generate at ours? So we need to be there to give them support to check in. And then once it's done, I was mentioning Alan before the show, right now we're in a phase of production. So we have so many OER waiting to be added to the collection but there's a whole production phase that has to go through where you make sure the accessibility is there. Make sure you've got attributions for all the openly licensed work, either original or borrowed. You gotta cover for the book. You got an image, all these little bits and pieces and then finally getting it out there. And then making sure that people know it's there. That's something I do in operations is make sure that we've got it recorded. People know it's there. I mean, it goes into the collection but reminding them that it's there. And as far as fulfilling everybody's need, again, I don't think that's possible but whoever will find that book is a good fit, making sure that that group of people know it's there and then reminding them. And this is usually a continuous thing is you can't assume everybody heard you the first time but say, you can change this. And I remember the beginning of my open ed work is people didn't believe it, especially if you're an academic. What? I can borrow somebody else's work. No, that's wrong. You don't do that. Well, there's a special kind of license. I mean, and also the work's copyrighted. That's why you need a license. And this is what it means. And you still give credit to the author, but it's okay. The person has given you permission to do this. So that it's no simple answer. It's complex. And I find I'm always circling back and reminding people of the basics. Over and over again, I try to cater it to whomever I'm talking to. And then the last thing I'll say is as we provide support to people, we've noticed the audience in BC has become more sophisticated as they've gotten used to use OER, but you always have the beginners. And so the spectrum of the type of support we need to provide has broadened. It's getting a little more difficult because we have more answers we have to provide. But yeah, you have to pay attention and you got to listen to when people are unhappy and why and then capture all of that and try to answer it. Thank you very much. This has been good. I want to throw in my question at the moment. And just because I don't know if you're tired of hearing about it or excited, but like what is going on where you are people reaction to chat GPT or artificial intelligence because like it's been a long time since I seen and we have seen like disruptive technologies come in but the size of this wave has been impressive. Well, it's funny you should say that. Clint, we just had a, I'm just gonna put a link up a blog about this Clint Lalonde wrote it. It came out yesterday about. I think I have it. Did you have that Alan? Yeah. Chat GPT and open education. Yeah. Yeah, we've talked about this. I think there's fear and concern rightfully so. We should always be skeptics but it's a tool and it depends how you use a tool. I remember in university when the side role came in giving away my age and it's like, no, you can't take that into your physics course final or your math course final. That's cheating and pretty soon calculators were allowed and a lot more. So when a new tool like this comes up, we should be critical but if it does more good than harm and we continue to talk, it probably will become part of the toolbox of what we work. Although it was like, we didn't have to figure out whether the slide rule or calculator was giving you a correct answer. There are some things that are like, wait a minute, this is really problematic and I know, and Nate will probably talk about Creative Commons is doing a huge amount of, and we've had Nate and I have conversations like, okay, these image generators, how the heck do you attribute them? And it's not even clear what the license you can put on these things are. And so I think some of the interesting things is like it's battling some of our concepts and our experiences because it is in some ways different from these previous kind of interruptions. And the other thing that I like to think is we don't know how they work or what they do. Like we just put something in and we get something out. Like what is going on behind the machine? So I think Nate might have a few things to say. Yeah, although I was thinking that Vid mentioned that there was a talk of it at Edinburgh too. Yeah, yeah. If you want to say something, Vid. Yeah, sure. We recently had a circle of all the natural language processing researchers in the school discussing about GDPT and other large language models like Bloom that have been recently released. And yeah, the main thing is they are good at generating text based on what it has previously seen. But they can't think. They can't tell what's right and wrong. They will happily, if you ask it to prove why the earth is flat, they will happily oblige and even generate fake references for you to back it up. So some skills become a little bit more relevant. People need to do the fact-checking when they get AI generated content. And so, for example, we're changing some of the questions we're setting in assessments for students instead of asking bookware questions like state the definition of this or explain how that works. We're asking more like, here's an explanation. Can you spot what's wrong and why? Or here's a statement, is this correct? Prove it. That's questions that you can ask at GDPT where you can't trust its answer. So until models evolve far, far more to the point where they can actually think and for our knowledge, we're safe. Yeah. Well, and I should, I'm saying the School of Informatics, they probably understand how this stuff works, but obviously that's really good to hear the way you're rethinking the kind of ways that questions are phrased. And they? Yeah, I mean, that seems like just to chime in on the educational aspect, right? That might, with my open education hat on, that seems like a logical direction to go is, I think a lot of the affordances of open educational practices actually would have an easy time bringing something like chat GPT into the mix because it's not, that kind of educational mindset isn't based on a kind of, there's a set of right answers to a set of canned problems, which would be the thing that something like chat GPT might do very well at answering, right? So to some of the examples that that's giving, I think seem like the right strategy. Sorry, no, I'm choking to death by the motion. I'd create of comments, I'll say that our focus mostly has been thinking about the complexity of copyright in relation to these, as you mentioned. And it's both on the input and the output side, right? Because a lot of different works are being used to train the AI models as it was talking about in order to give them the raw material that they then transform into mathematical probabilities or whatever they do in the black box and then use that as sort of like a raw material to think about how to answer. It's not just a cut and paste operation, right? It's more complicated than that. Oh, thanks. That link should lead to the recent blog articles we've done. But then there's also the output side, like you mentioned, like what is the intellectual property status of a work that's created by generative AI, right? And the funny thing is the answer to both of those questions on inputs and outputs in a jurisdiction like the United States, which has dominated a lot of the copyright law world, is that there's actually a free use exception for machines to ingest material for this kind of purpose. And so it's in the United States, at least according to lawyers understanding where things are now, this could be tested in court, using even copyrighted works as AI training materials is a fair use exception and so allowed. On the other end, if the work is created by a machine and doesn't have significant human, creative input into it, and then under US law at least, that's not considered a copyrightable artifact. And so presumably they would, the outputs would just be in the public domain. Of course, we don't know, like is writing a text prompt considered enough of a human creative input in order to rise to that level? A lot of people are saying no, the US Copyright Office recently issued a ruling. You'll see a blog post on that on our list that said that that wasn't enough from their point of view, but that's not law. It'll be worked out in court cases in the years to come. And what I think it's doing is it's having us just think really carefully about the, where is the line between original authorship and using the wealth of the comments in order to inform your work? And in scholarly practice, like Laurie mentioned, we have a whole system of citation that we use in order to like connect our own thinking to the work that has influenced us, but the artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence doesn't really provide that direct line into its sources. It doesn't cite its sources really. And so there isn't that transparency into the work like we try to maintain in scholarly work. And anything like that you can, I mean, what does it mean for open education in particular? I mean, some of the thing with licensing and reuse, but like, what if Laurie, I'm like working on a draft of a new textbook and I just do a first draft with this. Actually, Cable Green has been saying that that could be one of the great uses, right? Like in areas where we have holes of where we are that we're trying to fill, like you've done so much work, Laurie, to try to fill them. Maybe it could be a tool that could be used for production, but as Vid brought up, like much of what it says would need to be very carefully researched in fact check. And so it's like, we can't just point to it as like a thing that will automatically solve a whole bunch of problems for us. It could be a tool that we could use in certain ways, but it doesn't seem like some sort of like, you know, it will magically, completely transform the production of OER because of all that work that Laurie talked about, has to go into quality OER that chat GPT just wouldn't fully handle. Well, and the whole issue with either incorrect or non-existent citation for information generated are gathered and cobbled together. Open textbooks and courses, they too need citation and referencing. You might borrow a block of information or an image from another openly licensed source, but you still need to cite your work. You can't take credit for the expression of an idea. You know, and so that allows you to do your research and not everything that you base your textbook say on must be an openly licensed work. So that's what, you know, as we see the limitations of generative AI and the unreliability of the information we're gathering, sure it could maybe, it'd be like part of the brainstorming phase of writing. Okay, give me some ideas, but then I have to go back and substantiate what is produced here. I wonder too with these criticisms coming up, the, if this tool, you know, if it'll be part of the development work, okay, we have to do better when chat GPT goes and gathers information that has to cite so that people gain confidence. That would be nice, but I think then again, it's like, because we don't really fully understand it's not drawing from sources. So it's predicting the text that matches that would make sense for the whatever prompt you put in. And then it's using that to predict and draw upon, you know, citations of work, which it might appear in, but it's just assembling mixes and authors together. And so like we should have no expectations that chat GPT can cite sources because it's not even going to sources. It's just drawing upon this giant statistical relationship of this humongous corpus of text and it doesn't even know what a citation is to me. So yeah, thank you for engaging in this. I think I've been throwing this question into all the sessions because, I mean, it's interesting. And so I think a lot of it is how education, you know, it's like some of these things are gonna be driven from outside factors and this is one. But, you know, and, you know, and I think Vid kind of suggests there's also potential and large too, like there are things that it could do for us. But I just wanna thank everybody for joining me for this and us for this session of OE Week Live, doing one twice every day now for the rest of the week. And so we have one, tomorrow is gonna be in Spanish on Espanol. So we've got some student interns from OE Global and two of our board members and that one will be in Spanish. And we have another Spanish one on Thursday, I believe. And I have one Thursday too that's gonna be half English and half French. So we'll see how that one works out. But I just wanna thank you again and I'm gonna cue the band for the outro music and we'll end the broadcast and thanks for the audience out there on YouTube who decided to show up for this.