 Welcome everyone to this next session in the conference. I'm very pleased to be able to welcome Gemma this morning, this afternoon now, to talk about her experience and work in open educational resources in Spanish universities. So I'm immediately gonna hand over to Gemma. Thank you. Hello, good afternoon. Welcome to our session about the domains of open educational resources in the Spanish universities. I'm presenting these together with my colleagues and the other authors who are also attending to this session. So I will initiate this. I think that you can sit in your screens. Okay, so the main objective from this study was the analysis of the current situation of OER in the Spanish university context. Why? Because the previous literature was more concentrated in studying research objects and OERs, they didn't pay attention to OERs. So it was this the reason. We have specific objectives that you can see in the screen. The three first of them are trying to provide some answers about the publication platforms where the OERs are available and also about the open policies, the OER policies and about the incentives for the authors. On the other hand, the other two objectives, fourth and fifth, are more concentrated on institutional repositories and specifically in teaching communities collections. And here we wanted to know the main features of these teaching collections and also if they were classified, if we could classify them in some stages of the development. Okay, we will see the proposal that we will do. And how did we do it? So we had a double methodology and there was a combination of two research techniques. So the first one was a survey, an online survey, distributed in 2019 among the review, which is the Spanish network of university libraries and is formed by 76 institutions. The most of them are universities, that is also a research center. And from this survey, we got 70% of response. Here in the screen you can see the survey and also the three objectives that we are trying to answer. And also if you have interest, I'll report with the results. The second methodology was a content analysis conducted from the Brevium Directory of Institutional Repositories. It was established that 45 of these repositories have teaching collections. So it was like around 60% of them, of the total of these 76 institutions. The analysis consists in the evaluation, the analysis of a series of indicators that you can see in this table. Let's go to see the main results of this study. We observed that there was a coexistence between different platforms. For instance, between open access and closed platforms, the virtual campus where the main learning content management systems use in Spanish universities, followed by institutional repositories and also open courseware. We should say that open courseware are disappearing because they are migrating into the institutional repositories. These three internal platforms alternate with other external ones that you can see here, as for instance, these channels, YouTube, Slicer, Prezi, and also some MOOCs platforms. In the case of Spain, the MOOCs are available mainly in media docs, and we have found some of them also in Coursera. The universities in Spain have open access policies or open knowledge policies, but most of them are research oriented and they don't usually include OER practice or OER recommendations. However, we can say that there are a few specific open educational policies to boost these kind of resources. For example, we have found some grants and specific programmes, some specific strategic plans that try to promote these OERs. As you can see here in this graph, there are around 30% of institutions that are working currently in some strategies to promote these OERs. As for the incentives, they are a little bit... they are rare, they are not very used. The ones that we have identified are with a nature of economic or academic characteristics, as you can see here in this table. Now we arrive to the analysis of the institutional repositories. So in this slide, we are explaining the volume and the timeline. There is a continuous increase in the total volume of OERs, which is new, but there is also a need of a greater institutional promotion and also some recognition for these OERs who create the OERs. As you can see, there is a boom of the increase of the teaching collation in repositories around 2008 and 2011. The typologies of OERs are very diverse. It's heterogeneous and there is a mix of different types. Here in the graph, you can see the prevalence of others. In this case, we have some... it was complex, it was complicated to identify different typologies because there was not a normalised vocabulary to refer these kinds of objects. That's why the OERs is so big here. We have also a trend that we ourselves that there is a prominence of audiovisual content and also a balance between practical and theoretical OERs. That is that you can find these institutional repositories, class notes together with exercises, exams or guide notes. And finally, it's also important to highlight the importance of final projects from students. Here, there are some institutions which consider these kinds of objects as educational resources and some other institutions that consider them as a research output. As you can see, there is a kind of dichotomy. The metadata to describe these OERs, unfortunately, is not the most appropriate schema such as the learning object metadata or the local variant. Most of these repositories, almost all of them, use Dublin Core, this metadata standard, to describe the OER with or without qualifiers. Why? Because the metadata schema is closely linked to the software use. And in this case, in Spain, the institutional repositories are all of them or the most of them are used in the space. And finally, it's also interesting to highlight that there is the OER in Spain has a double layer for the metadata. They are available as described with DC time that you can see in the first graph for the detail. And at the same time, they have also their complement for the semantic open-air standard, which is in the second graph for the detail that you will see after the conference as well because the slides will be available. Formats, there is a diversity of type formats. The most used is the PDF for the text documents and then you have all the different kinds on the screen. Here, maybe the most important conclusion was the shortcomings as for technical openness that is in the 55% of the cases of these institutional repositories. And we arrived to the licenses. The use of open creative commons licenses is widespread, which is good, it's a good meal. There are also a few collections, restricted collections that we have identified. And they are especially related with exams and some exercises. The most frequently used license, as you can see in the graph, is the buy-in CND, which is the most restrictive. And the second one is the buy-in CSA that at least lets the creation of derivatives. Another interesting data that we have and evidence that we have from the data is that the 37th or 38th or most percent of these institutional repositories have OER under one of the fourth creative commons licenses that allow reuse. That allows the 5Rs of the Wiley. So this is a positive result. Finally, here you can see a proposal for a classification of these teaching collections in the repositories according to the proposed level of openness of the OERs contained. The first stage is formed by these repositories with teaching communities that they don't have exclusively these students' final projects. As you can see here the first stage. The second one makes up for institutional repositories, most of them with a mix of collections with OERs specifically for teaching and learning and also with different levels of openings. So this one is the most one of the repositories are in this one and there is a mix. A small proportion of repositories are in the third one, the third stage, which is characterized by the OER created exclusively for teaching and learning and also they have some kind of creative commons licenses. And finally the fourth one, the fourth stage has OER, most of them created exclusively for teaching and learning and with some license that led their reuse. Finally, some conclusions of this study as you will see in all these slides. Educational resources in the Spanish universities are heterogeneous with different types and with limited openness. They are published in different platforms and in the most of the cases they are not interconnected. There are some open policies. They don't influence that much in the creation of OERs neither in the incentives, but on the other hand there are some promotional strategies that seems to be more significant and more important to these incentives and this promotion of the OERs. As for the teaching collections in the institutional repositories they were created in a period of time, they were concentrated between 2008 and 2011. The total volume is increasing but there is a need still for an institutional promotion. The most of these institutional repositories are characterized for the transparency on a mix of resources types, licenses, metadata and also deposit patterns. Few of them are created exclusively for teaching and learning and have an appropriate license for reuse. And maybe the most important, there is not a common procedure followed by these institutions and these repositories about what creating OER means so it's necessary this kind of procedure. And in this sense, we share with you some recommendations that we propose to improve these situations such as to include OER in teaching evaluations which is important for incentivized offers also to create OERs with the maximum degree of openness and reuse. So in this case it's necessary to encourage collaborative working between the different stakeholders and also the creation of guides about how to create materials, how to use in open formats, how to integrate the metadata and how are the open licenses and etc. In this slide, you have more information, detailed information about this study so you can have a look to our article published recently at the end of the last year in the professional data information which is available in English and also there is this visual poster that you can find also in what we presented in our congress and you can find it through this link as well so you can have more details of this study. And finally we arrived to the discussion. Now it's your turn so we would like to invite you to participate with us through this booklet that we would like that you share with us some examples that you know some samples and real cases about different kinds of questions that we propose about OER, institutional repositories, metadata formats so I invite you to access this link and to share with us your knowledge. Thank you very much. Thank you Gemma and that was a wonderful tour through such a complex topic within OPEN and the use of resources so we do have a couple of questions so the first one is showing on screen now so it's telling us more about those promotional strategies in Spain. Okay, well right now we have an institution to assure the quality of this kind of well a national agency for the quality which has a section dedicated to teaching materials educational materials and now universities are trying to base on these standards to create some criteria related to publish these educational resources in OPEN access and incentivate the authors with some kind of economical or academic incentives but as I told you before there are not that much right now they are trying to increase but right now we don't have that much there are also some strategies some open knowledge strategies that are considering also OER not just open science and research and data and all these citizen science they are also incorporating the OER so this is also a positive these two I will highlight Yeah, because that was going back to your slide at the beginning with your pie chart so it was really positive to see that 30% of the respondents had a strategy because I do think the practical strategy says a lot about that promotional side so that takes us into the second question which is the kind of metadata considered as the priority within the Spanish IORs? Yeah, the kind of the kind of metadata is based on Dublin code mainly Dublin code is not specific for learning objects of course but we have some qualifiers in order to try to be more specific and as I told you also in the presentation we have the other metadata schema the open air one that tries to complement the Dublin code so I will say that the main one the priority right now is Dublin code because it's connected with the DSPACE software that we have in the institutional repositories so we can decide in this sense we have to use this one we are trying to complement with other kind of metadata and in this case for example I can say also that some institutions that are migrating or sharing their OERs with Merlot with an educational repository Merlot they are also transforming this Dublin code and open air metadata to LOM in order to providing these OERs in this platform so it's a mix of them well thank you so much so we've covered the questions that we have in the chat we are just about perfectly on time so I just want to take this opportunity to thank you very much for coming along and sharing your work and to thank everyone for being here so I'll give you a virtual round of applause on everyone's behalf so thank you and I hope to see you all at the next session thank you very much om nom nom