 And welcome everyone. We're here today at the OER Domains Conference exploring the possibilities for institutional OEP with a self-assessment tool to shift OEP from grassroots to institutional wide. We're here with Elizabeth Childs and Tannis Morgan, but we also have Christina Hendricks, Michelle Harrison and Irwin DeVries who are part of the presentation are in the chat with us. So take it away. Great. Good morning. Good afternoon. Good evening everybody. It's really wonderful to be here and to be with my research team members who are here as well. And as we just heard, this is the title of our presentation. It's really about how we created an open education self assessment tool, how we applied it and what we learned from it with a bigger focus today on the research results. So I want to begin by just mentioning that in British Columbia, it's customary for us to do a territorial acknowledgement. And I would like to acknowledge that today I'm coming to you from the traditional unceded territories of the Musqueam Squamish and Slewa Tooth First Nations, where I work, but also where I'm an uninvited settler. And each of our institutions for the most part in BC reside on a different traditional territory. And if you are in North America, we encourage you to acknowledge the traditional territory where you are located. And nativeland.ca, which is this link up at the top here, is a really wonderful resource for becoming more familiar with indigenous territories in North America and in Canada in particular where they were stolen as a result of colonization. So the study that we are sharing today includes participation of five BC post-secondary institutions with support from BC campus. And we would also like to acknowledge that Rajiv Janjiani, who is one of the keynotes at this conference, was also part of the study representing Rajiv Janjiani, but he's not with this presentation today. And what you need to know for the context of the study is that higher education in Canada is a provincial responsibility. And that means that in British Columbia, where we are located on the far west side of the country, we are part of a system of 25 public post-secondary institutions representing universities, colleges, and institutes. Oh, and I forgot to mention that you're going to be seeing some slides today that are photos from our beautiful province. So please enjoy. And as I mentioned earlier, this study was supported by BC campus, and it was response to an interest in wanting to know more about the impact of various OER initiatives that they had been supporting. And the gap that we identified was really around understanding how institutions as a whole, as opposed to maybe keen individuals or enthusiastic programs, were achieving results more broadly in advancing OEP at their institutions. So specifically, we framed this study around a scenario like this one. You know, you're an administrator at an institution, or maybe you're an open education champion or an advocate at an institution, and you've seen some momentum in open education practices happening at your institution. And you know that there are probably some factors that make the institution successful. And in order to understand where support or investment is needed, you want to have a better idea as to what factors are being addressed and where the gaps are. So that's really the scenario that framed the study. And it led to the next question, which is, does a tool exist, or can one be adapted? So what resulted was the creation of a tool for conducting an institutional self assessment. You can see the link on the slide at the top. It's a tool that we adapted. And it is CCBY licensed. And we now have an interactive version as well, where you can enter your institute, you can respond as an institution, and it gives you a report with some feedback built in. And it's very much a work in progress. And one of the things about the tool as well is it's very much designed around the possibilities for adapting to a variety of different contexts. But basically, we don't have a lot of time in this presentation to talk about how we developed this tool. But what we can say is that it builds on research on success factors for institutional transformation and success factors for blended learning. And why blended learning and institutional transformation, blended learning for the most part has in the research and there's a fair amount of research on blended learning initiatives at institutions, and they've largely been positioned as institutional projects as opposed to grassroots or program level projects. So that had some applicability to what we were looking at. And institutional transformation, as it turns out, there is a body of research around institutional transformation success factors. What we reference here is mainly Kazar and Echo, who studied, did case studies of US institutions over a longer period of time in the US. And the rationale, which I think is really important to mention is, can really be summed up in a publication that Weller and his colleagues did in 2018, around noting that open education research has largely developed, this is their words, as islands of subtopics disconnected from each other, which has a consequence of research ignoring previously discovered knowledge. So that really sort of led us to open our, I guess, open our eyes or look to what was happening outside of open education specifically to see if there were some advances that could be made in terms of thinking about what a tool would look like. I'll stop there. Thanks, tennis. Hi everybody, thanks so much for joining and I think in the chat we can see the chat and people are trying to put the link in there it doesn't seem it's clickable but the link does work and we really part of the focus of this presentation was just sharing that link to the tool so that you can go out and try it and use it in your institutions. Because we'd love to hear how you're using it how you adapt it and how you change it. One of the things that as we were going through this process we realized was that we were learning a lot a lot about our institutions a lot about areas for opportunity and potential gaps. And so we decided to also take a research lens to this and we did a appreciative critical case self study approach. So I'm just going to talk very little bit about that there we did write it up and hopefully you'll be able to read it soon. But we really looked at so of course we were the convenience sample those who are on the research team, and the reason the groups were chosen because the institutions have significant open practices. So some of them are listed on the slide there so you can sort of get a sense of the scope of the different open practices being undertaken at the five institutions in BC. So the research part of it was both the creation of the tool, and then the team members completing the survey tool themselves and you'll see on that link what we're talking about when you go into the survey tool. And then we took it individually and checked our completion of the survey with members in our own institution so did a little bit of member checking there. Then we realized when we looked at that data and came together as a team to discuss it that we actually had a lot more to say about it. And so we ended up having hosting for ourselves a series of five one hour conversations and recorded those and looked back at the transcripts of those conversations to really see the themes that were emerging. The survey data, we did a collaborative analysis of it and it came up with the four themes. And then we used Bayes Lee's categories of describe, compare, relate, extend and explain to help us sort of manage as a frame what the surveys data was telling us. And then when we went through the transcripts, we assigned one to each of us to analyze the transcript in conjunction with the survey data. We did some secondary coding and member checking with each transcript and then each research team member reviewed and others to just make sure that those four themes held up. So what questions were we particularly exploring tennis. Can you flip us to the next slide please. Thank you. So we really wanted to look at how institutions who are doing some of this good work along a continuum can advance and sustain their efforts. We thought, you know, perhaps because of investigating this, we might be able to have some lessons learned to share out. I mean, our lens really was a very practical application based on the experience of creating this tool of using the tool of analyzing and reflecting on its use across the five institutions. What could be helpful in informing other institutions around their OEP? What might be missing? What can you leverage? Oh, Kathy, the categories were Bayes Lee, B, A, Z, E, L, E, Y and the references at the end of the slide deck. So tennis, you can pop us to the next slide. We'll look at the some of the main themes. So these themes were ones that were consistent in the survey completion analysis and in the transcript analysis. We talked a lot about advocacy. It was defined in this study as efforts to effect and support change in the organization towards adoption and implementation of OEP. There was an increase in breadth and meaning of the term across the institutions. So lots of different examples ranging from active forms of advocacy, promoting OEP to faculty, lobbying, department chairs, to less active forms like verbally endorsing early OEP initiatives or developing enabling policy and funding. What was consistent across advocacy was being led from the middle and a need for resourcefulness. This was not a one recipe fits all. Each institution took up advocacy in its own way. Another main theme coming out, not surprisingly, was policy and the differing policy environments. So there was a tension that emerged between growing open educational practices at an institution and the needing to level that up with the policy in place at that institution. So generally across what we found was there's a lack of formal policy or even guidelines around OEP at the different institutions. The development was of policy was seen as sort of an indicator of maturity of the OEP initiative because it allowed for the allocation of resource and the recognition of the importance of the practices within that institution. Not surprisingly, again, leadership was a common theme across the risk of not having leadership was discussed. Third space leadership came out front and center so through the form of working groups through student leadership, and of course the notion of distributed leadership. One thing that did emerge was over time the need for an increased formalization of leadership to really gain more formal senior level visibility, more support and resources to be included in that strategic planning cycle. The role of leadership and the coordination between that informal grassroots piece was identified as a way to grow senior institutional support. And the last piece that really was one of the deep pieces was around institutional culture and this notion of identity at the institutional level and the tensions that are faced as you navigate that culture. Institutional mandate, reputation, the centralization or decentralization of decision making and resource allocations, and the need to attend to other organizational structures that would affect OEP adoption really surfaced under this theme. Tennessee, thank you. So we also were asked to talk about impact and the impact these points on the slide that you see are the impact that we felt as part of the research team of going through this process. And so building on some of these points. There's value in having frameworks and tools that can help to surface areas of strengths and opportunities for growth that perhaps were invisible previously. They helped identify gaps both internally in each institution around an overall OEP initiative. And that was then able to sort of redirect resources or put a different lens on a way forward for a plan. Additionally, I think for all of us experiencing the creation of the tool, the use of the tool and researching our use of the tool. Really further reinforced for us the value and the need for OEP in general to continually look outside and across fields and across disciplines as the work in this space deepens. By paying attention to measuring the impacts of these efforts, we can further the potential of institutional OEP to affect that transformational change that we're looking for. Tennis, if you wouldn't mind, thank you for flipping the slides. So these are our contacts. Please don't hesitate to reach out. And from what we can see, hopefully there's links in the chat links are going to go in discord, which is great thanks Christina. We'd really love to see and hear your questions in the chat. There's references and we can flip those slides to. But I think for the takeaway, the real important piece for the team is to get that link out there so people can try this tool. And I mean, we have spent lots of time with it. We'd love to spend more time with it. And I think we are hearing that some people are taking it up in different ways. Working groups are using it individually to then come to the table with the working group people having completed the tool, getting their sort of output and then being able to have a place to talk from. So there's lots of different ways it can be taken up and we'd love to hear how you take it up. Thank you so much. I know that there were a lot of comments in the chat, looking for the link and looking for the research, the authors that you were framing the categories from. So thank you for sharing all of that. Any comments or questions? Yes, Leo had a question. Oh, open education factory tool in the development. No, there was, we did look at some OEP work that was around policy, because I think as Leo you and I've had a conversation about policy has a bit of a different meaning here as opposed to in the UK so we came late to the policy stuff. But mainly that what we ended what we landed on was really institutional transformation and blended learning. Although in our research article we did actually reference some of the OEP work around, I think there was something that came out of UNESCO even or there was some, there's some reference to OEP as well. Yeah, I think the comment from Irwin is important, the distinction between institutional structures and focus and framework versus individual. Yeah, that and that really was the scope to was to really focus on what's how do you, how do you look at the institutional level, as opposed to evaluating your own program or, you know, your resource or even a certain type of resource. Yeah, and finding those enabling policies, right so that that it the policies always just a bit behind the behavior you actually want, you know, people to strive for. And I think that's where we had some good conversation. And we will share the slides and of course, what the link to the tool is actually the research website as well. So when we do these presentations, the last time we did this was a global and we had more of a participatory session where people contributed to giving feedback actually on the tool. And that was really nice because we did it in more of a global setting where context or obviously, you know, there's much more variation. So those notes are actually on the website as well, and we will also post these slides, so you can reference them as well. And Leo, I did see a comment that you are wondering about the findings there actually I mean I'm happy to share a draft article that's in peer review as long as as long as you're not one of the peer reviewers I guess, but it's forthcoming hopefully. Okay, so there's we can share resources and discord okay that's great to know I'm just catching up on the checks when I'm presenting I actually can't see the chat so I'm missing, I'm missing seeing all these wonderful names and people that I would so love to see in person right now but you know that's for future times. So thank you everybody for for your interaction and for your interest and you know where to find us. And we know the conversation will continue, not only in discord for the next couple of days as part of the conference, but definitely beyond that because I know other institutions will be taking definitely taking a look at this resource. So thank you so much. Super. Thank you everybody so lovely to see you in the chat and thanks for the good questions. The tool is definitely still iterating so the questions are what's going to make it even stronger. Yes, and take it and adapt it we'd love to see adaptations. Also thank you to Erwin for answering a lot of the questions and clarifying things in the chat as well. I appreciate that as well. Om nom nom.