 OK, Everyone, welcome back! I hope you've enjoyed your lunch, and you have taken the opportunity to meet and network and talk to each other. You're in the OER and others track and in Cinema 1 today, we are going to start in with Wikimedia residents from the University of Oxford and all round great guy cos he has certainly helped me going on in Wikimedia, editing in Wikimedia, and that is Martin Porte. So I will hand over to Martin. Hi, so I'll start my talk Ie ddim yn ymddangos hynny o amddangos diwethaf y OAR, oherwydd y rôl o'r rôl i'r rôl mae'r rôl ar gyfer y mae'r ddechrau OAR. Rydyn ni'n teimlo, i fyfyddon o'r rôl i'r rôl i'r rôl i'r rôl, i fyfyddonio i'r rôl i'r rôl i'r rôl i'r rôl i'r rôl i'rôl i'rôl i'r rôl i'rôl i'rôl faciwnol, ond we have permission to remix it and make open materials with it. There was funding creation of original material that was born open and trying to kick academics off in the practice of making open materials, the efforts to shape top-down institutional policy and make it more friendly to creation of open resources. There was the dissolution of the barrier between the platforms used by academics and the social media platforms used by the Hwy Pylwyd. People did more courses on blogs and flicker and used those kinds of platforms. Then there's the shift from the emphasis on resources to practices. If we have the values and practices of remixing of resources embodied in communities and in books involved in learning, then the resources will come out of that as a natural process. I want to talk about, I want to say, opening up another front, but maybe the military metaphor isn't apt. We're trying to do something to benefit everybody. But the last session talked about an army of peace. So maybe it is, but I'll say opportunity. There's a huge opportunity, I think, of additional things in the repurposing of data to make educational objects, data that was not intended to have an educational purpose initially. So examples, the data describing the collections in a museum or a culture institution. There's data from the outputs of research projects. So this is an archaeological project that surveyed archaeological sites in the British Isles. There's data from the public sector. Not that the fertility rate of a particular country in a particular month is a learning object, but more of that data, different types of it, given context, put in some sort of interactive platform, make something like GapMinder, something that people can come and interact with and can support learning. So the thing is, I'm not expecting the computers to do the teaching. I'm talking in this session about resources and ways to ease the production of resources that are interactive and interesting. And data bring with them their own problems, so that something is called data and it's in the computer and it's official. It can have a seeming authority to it, which of course data aren't always authoritative or aren't always neutral. We have more data about certain parts of the world than others. So creating objects from data doesn't solve social, cultural problems. It brings the traditional problems associated with claims to knowledge and other problems as well. But it's still, we can make things that support a process of learning and make it more interesting and we can make those things more easily than before. But why in particular now? We've had databases for a long time. We've had websites driven by data for a long time. We've had data that's freely accessible and data that you can get through an API for a long time in all these categories. Well, there's a problem, a deep problem, of communicating between databases and joining them up. On the screen are the different identifiers in some database for Jane Austen. So she's, for New York Times, she's person slash Jane Austen for the women writers database, she's 61CA, blah, blah, blah. So they don't represent the same object in the same way. And if we look at the, say, the relationship of authorship, the relationship between a work and a person authorship, that'll be represented in a completely different way in a library database, in a New York Times database and so on. So the existence of data about different types of data about the same thing doesn't mean we can join up and create something that explores knowledge about that thing. We were told that, yeah, I'll move on to the next slide. So if you're going to make an application like this since we're in a cinema, I've chosen one based on films, this is a fun application for exploring the relation between books and films. So you can go into, say, Les Miserables, Les Miserables is a film based on a book, a book by Victor Hugo. Victor Hugo also wrote this book, and there are lots of films based on this book of Notre Dame. And you can read the text of the books through the bibliotech national interface. So to do this traditionally would be a lot of work because you've got to model your domain. So how do you represent a person? How do you represent a film? How do you represent a book? How do you describe the relations between the director of a film and a film? And then you've got to enter the data and then you've got to think about how you'll present it. You've got to make this site which is an interface to what you've made. So that would be the old way to do it. And we were told this problem would be solved. In the initial design for the World Wide Web, there was this idea of the semantic web that there would be standards and formats through which databases could talk to each other and say, I have information about this thing. And that's 30 years ago, it's easy to think that that is just hype or vapourware because it was very hyped that it was going to happen and it didn't happen. But I think it is starting to happen, that standards are being adopted, new databases are being created built with an open format and built to share data with other databases. But a crucial step is the creation of a hub. So back in 1992 Tim Berners-Lee said about the World Wide Web that the number of documents people could get through the World Wide Web would eventually be absolutely astronomical. People would need to manage that explosion of information. And one recommendation he made was what he called the encyclopedia. So there'd be this site continually updated that you could go to to get for any topic in arts, sciences, history, culture, an overview of that topic, an introduction and some pointers to the key research, the key sources in that topic. And there were several attempts to build the encyclopedia that Berners-Lee described and one of them happened to be hugely successful and became Wikipedia which is kind of the first point of call for all sorts of categories of user. So the crucial step for structured data, for the knowledge that's not in a narrative but in the form of a structured database is having a hub. And that the newest sister project of Wikipedia is Wikidata which aims to serve that role, a summary of knowledge and culture in structured data but also a gateway to other sources of knowledge about that same thing. Yeah, some stats about it. So it's five and a bit years old with currently 46 million things described including more than four million people. These numbers are already a bit out of date because it's very rapidly growing but it's already the biggest digital authority file for people ever created. It's already very dense with say geographical items to have a coordinate location but what I said, inequality that's not equally all over the world. So this can be a kind of central reference point. So I'm going to go through the slides I've shown you backwards. So Wikidata exists. It has its own visualization tools, its own ways to get data in and out and it enables, it solves some of this problem of enabling us to create views of the domain of knowledge. So this application was actually built in a hackathon using Wikidata. OK, so the IMDB have a database of film posters. Bibliotech Nassanal have online access to texts. Wikidata knows which is which, knows what the links are to the internet movie database and to the Bibliotech Nassanal and has those based on relations or has a lot of them if you spot some that don't exist you can add them. So what the developer of this has to do is just present it, just how to work out how to present this to use and how the user interacts with it. It cuts out a load of the work. Wikidata has thousands of other databases reconciled to it. So one query gets all these and these aren't just identified, these are links. So say the information about Jane Austen's grave is at the finder grave link number 44. This is UNESCO sharing data. Wikidata isn't ideal for time series but there's lots of time series like the population of London or economic data month by month. Not all of that goes into Wikidata but it can go to somewhere that's addressed by Wikidata and we can make gap-minder like things. This is a research project in Oxford that I've persuaded to share, not the output of their research but the surface layer of their data. What they find out about where was it, what's it called and what type of thing is it and then we can generate maps, different visualisations of the data. And as well as urging developers to do this I've had to kind of eat my own dog food in sharing museum data which I'll show you briefly. So we shared a lot of data from a university collection. Those data are ostensibly about a bunch of items and those items are made of paper or they're made of wood or bronze and they're 20 centimetres high or 40 centimetres high and they're from a particular place. But implicitly the collection data museum is about other stuff. It's about Krishna, Buddha, Ganesha, it's about Mount Fuji, things that are depicted, things that people made these artworks for, for the purposes of or to depict. So we can give access to the collection in terms of those things. We can use the things that the collection is about for discovery of the collection and we can get context. So this is the plan of the different eras and dynasties and cultures represented in the collection and because it's all one database, bibliographic, biographical, geographical, we can draw in contextual things, we can draw in other names for the item, we can draw in the extract of the Wikipedia article so we get a few sentences saying what this is and why it's important, we can get a contextual image and then build a web. So this era is connected to people, there are works connected to it, it's connected to eras and time. So people go on the journey through a culture, to a person, to a location on the earth surface, to another person connected to the location, to the works of that location, to what was depicted in the works made in that location. So we can create these kind of web structured things that people can explore. So when I was doing funded open educational resource projects I was sharing a lot of Microsoft documents, words and powerpoints on the web and those of considered educational objects. If I'd done something interactive like that I would have got tens of thousands of pounds to do it. So I think we can think more expansively about applications that give an overview of a domain. I've shown you films and books and I've shown you Eastern art and it's basically the same code and the same principles but we could do that for any domain and let people find their own way through it. There's a few other things I won't mention. Hystripedia, if you haven't tried Hystripedia, have a go at that. It's another wicked data and wicked driven application and it makes amazing interactive stuff. But finally I just want to say that these things are very web-like. They have multiple entrance points and an astronomical number of pathways you can take through them. Who decides what path the learner should take? My earliest memories of being enwraptured in learning are staying up to watch James Burke on Connections and Carl Sagan on Cosmos. And they had these narratives, the programmes that would take you through the history of ideas or take you through a topic and it's one person's view of the connection between different concepts. And I thought the open education revolution would be about that but taking the paternalism out. So you'd have different narratives about a topic and you'd find your own version by assembling different ways. So we could do that. Too much data is still locked away in proprietary platforms or platforms that can't be repurposed. So open data advocacy should be a big part of what we're doing for open education. Thank you. Thank you very much. We're going to take questions now very briefly. So if anybody has questions, wonderful thing about Martin is you learn so much when you listen to him even for a few minutes. On the Open Education Seag webinar collection, Martin did a wonderful webinar for us which takes you through all things wiki. So if that's not something that you know a great deal about, they've produced some amazing things. They're very succinctly portrayed within that webinar, very cleverly, clearly communicated. Do we have any questions? It's wonderful when somebody takes something so complex. I just want to ask about the last comment you made about James Burke. Obviously it's been very interesting recently because Clark's civilisation thing has been remade as civilisations. It's been an opportunity to really think about this whole issue of paternalism, interpretation, curation, and whether the interpretation of an individual who knows their way around objects, history, the library, whether you can separate that individual from the content and whether the content can actually stand on its own and you can still sort of find your way through. I'm not sure about this. This is why I said early on that I don't expect the computer to do the teaching, that this thing needs some context, whether it comes from formal or informal learning, or whether it's individual curiosity, or whether it's something you do in a community with mentorship, and whether the mentor is present or there's somebody on the TV. There's got to be some context, but I hope we have an opportunity to get away from the broadcast model because we would tune in to Carl Sagan and James Burke in our millions and watch the one guy giving it, which was great and gave us an illuminating journey that we wouldn't have thought of ourselves. The same facts can sustain multiple narratives and find multiple interesting pathways, so it's creating the opportunity for that, but in a context of reliable information. I've emphasised authoritative sources of information all the way through. As the saying goes, people have a right to their own opinion, but not to their own facts. A kind of paternalism in quality, but ditching the paternalism of the pathway, what's the significance? But there is also something in the multiplicity of description of a Lord Clark or a James Burke, that actually they reveal something of themselves and their own understanding of stuff. I'd like to see other people revealing something of themselves, people from a different culture or different... My education was a quality education, but it was from particular points of view, and in adult life I'm learning about different points of view, so I think that's the point you're making as well. If we can open up as much of the cultural material and let people create their own stories, their own narratives. Hi Martin, what's the equivalent? On Wikipedia there's the whole kind of deletist version included version. What's the equivalent of that in wiki data? So there is a notability criterion for wiki data, as there is wikipedia. It's much more lax for wiki data. So wikipedia has got to be substantially covered in at least three reliable sources. Wiki data is for things that are in a reliable source. I described in a reliable source and it has to be some rich description. So I don't think I could put some museum catalogue record today like textile fragment from somewhere in India, purpose unknown. And you couldn't put that, but something which has properties and exists in some official register, if it's a person, an exhibit, a book, whatever that can be in. So that's why there's 46 million things in wiki data at the moment and there could easily be 100 million, it's rapidly expanding, whereas much larger numbers than you get in any individual wikipedia. Thanks guys, I'm going to rush most in a way, but do catch him, he's here today and tomorrow, I believe. Susan, Susan Cosu is going to talk to us now about research patterns and friends. Thank you. Okay, hi everyone, thank you for joining the session. Are you able to see me behind this podium? I'm so assured and they have this podium so high. Are these designed for men? I don't know tall women. So yeah, so if I stand like this, you'll still be able to hear me, yeah, okay. So the session is streamed live, so a warm welcome to those who are joining us virtually too. So my colleague Aras Boscert from another university Turkey and I, we explored open educational practices. And as far as we know, this is the first systematic literature review on open educational practices. So it was quite interesting for us to see what the literature was saying about OEPs. So the hashtag for the session is hashtag OEP. I believe Aras is on Twitter now ready to take your questions and comments. So please feel free to post anything to hashtag OEP. So, okay, so why OEPs? A number of scholars, including Leo and Harguass, here they argued that there is a need to improve engagement with OERs. So a focus on the process would be one way to do this. Ehlers work is quite interesting if you haven't read it, you know, you might be interested in reading that. So Ehlers says the open education resources movement needs to move away from its heavy focus on access to process. And this is to address issues with sustainability, with quality and many other barriers to open education. And in his paper he talks about open learning cultures, open learning architectures. He focuses on pedagogy, so it's packed with ideas. And also there has been growing awareness of open and network scholarship. And I don't know if you get a chance of reading Katrin Cronin's latest work. She talks about educators lived experience, how they experience open education in a higher education institution. So again, we also have this awareness of open and network scholarship. So our research questions, what are the trends and patterns in publications on digital open educational practices? And what patterns can be derived from a lexical and content analysis of paper abstracts? We use lots of methods for this research. It's the first time I'm presenting it here. I've used descriptive statistics, content analysis, or I've studied some social network analysis and also lexical analysis. So today I'm just going to be talking about just one of these methods, the content analysis, so the counting and the coding of paper abstracts. So sampling. So we began our study by sampling all articles indexed in the Scopus database. And we looked at, we looked at if the papers had open educational practices in their titles, abstracts or keywords. We read all the paper abstracts and also if needed we read the full text. The articles, most of the article, well at least abstract, we felt like well we looked at English articles written in English only. But also if they had an abstract in English we also looked at that. So there were some Spanish papers but they had an abstract both in English and Spanish so we include those in the research. OK, so as a result of this process we looked at 54 studies in total. Any questions about the methods if you're interested in? No? OK. Oh yeah, yeah, sorry. Sorry, that's a mistake. 52 studies altogether, that's the key point. OK, so time series. So the first graph I'd like to present is the time series graph which shows the publication trans between 27 and 2017. OEP has a long history in education literature. The term itself can be traced back to 1970s as a learner-centered pedagogical approach. For this study we only looked at digital OEPs. So the first publication was in 2017. So this is an interesting graph because the change in 2012 corresponds with a growing interest in OEPs in 2011, which is marked by Ehlers' work on open ecologies and also the OPA report on the shift from OER to OEPs. So just by looking at this graph will there be an increase in the number of publications in the upcoming years? There is a growing trend. It's quite slow. It seems to be increasing but also there is a drop in 2017. So just by looking at this we don't know if there will be an increase in the future. My personal view, judging by the sessions in this conference and also the discourse in education, there will be more interest in open educational practices. So subject areas, social sciences, lead the research followed by computer science and engineering. So two subject areas dominate the field but overall the study of OEPs is quite multidisciplinary. So the source types. So at first it was interesting to see that although the study of OEPs is quite new, relatively new, there were more journal articles than conference proceedings. But then on closer inspection especially when we started the content analysis, we realized that a lot of the articles, the papers, discusses OEPs in connection with OERs. So which is a much more established field of study. And sometimes the connection with OEPs was quite vague so we had to go into the full text to see what the connection was. And another observation is that the meaning of OEP was often times like we didn't know what the authors were trying to say. Like a focus on OEP, sometimes people would say would use OEP and OER as if they're two completely separate things but whereas we know that they're quite connected. Do I have three minutes? Three minutes? Really? How long is the presentation? OK. OK. OK. I have to be quick. Sorry. OK. So source titles. Just the first one is quite interesting because the first publication is published both in Spanish and English. And a lot of these journal articles are published open access. I'm just going to skip this one. Countrywide distribution. Quite interesting. UK seems to be leading the research on OEPs. But remember this research is looking at OEP as a descriptor. OK. So have people used open educational practices this term in their work? That doesn't mean that people from the US or South Africa they haven't been producing any work on open educational practices. So as a term we realized OEPs open educational practices is quite under recognized in the literature. I'll come back to these later if I have time which is something Nigel talks about in his editorial. He's the editor for distance education. So he's saying that it would be useful to see open educational practice as an umbrella term covering many different dimensions of openness. Open access, scholarship, open learning. This is in line with the Cape Town Open Educational Declaration. Open education is not only about open education resources. So this definition by Cronin is something I quite like. It's looking at OEP in a broader perspective including social networks, empowerment of learners, peer learning, learning participatory technologies. So in our study OEPs included the experience of learning and teaching with OERs, the experience of learning and teaching in open networks and platforms, and the experience of learning and teaching with open source technologies. So this is what was coming out of the papers we looked at. And we said OEP open educational practice is a multi-dimensional construct. It's an interdisciplinary thing and it's evolving constantly. Based on the findings, we define it as the broad range of practices that are important by open education initiatives and movements, and that embody the values and visions of openness, which is not necessarily one thing, it's a pluralistic concept. I would love to get some feedback on this model. So again this is based on the findings from our research. So what we're saying is open educational practices, it may mean many things, but it's basically a focus on the process of learning. So if you're making, say if you're designing, creating an open education resource, the emphasis is not so much about the end product what users or learners are seeing using. It's about the process of making it, creating it, designing it. And it's not only about OER, it could be many things, MOOCs, designing a MOOC, could be an open educational practice. So there are many dimensions to OEPs. Some areas that stood out in our study were open scholarship, open teaching, open assessments, and using open source software. Most emphasis on OERs, but again it's a very broad concept. So the evolving adaptive open approaches represent that. The rest is telling me to stop. I think I have one more. I have to talk about this though, so just give just one more minute. Okay so practical implications, we echoing Naidu, we call for a need to use OEPs as a common descriptor for diverse open practices, especially if you're doing research, academic research, having these descriptors are really important. So it's kind of combines different knowledge across different disciplines and also within specific disciplines. So areas for future study if you're into open education practice could be open educational cultures, open assessment of learning, I think this is something we desperately need in the UK, open online problem-based learning and ethical issues in designing and disseminating open education resources. Thank you. So we can open the floor for questions, you did a grand job of keeping us moving through that, but this is such a vast field and we're just scraping the surface and it's great to have this information. Sheila. Hi thanks, this is a great presentation. Just when you were talking there, I'm just wondering now, I think that's really interesting work to start doing that, but I feel there's so much informal sharing in practice around OEP, and have you had any thoughts about how we could start capturing that? Because I think talking about that certainly is evolving, but I think that's maybe something that the research isn't quite picking up on yet, some of it is, but I think that's an area, it's not really a question, it's a guessless moral statement, but I just wondered if you had any thoughts on that. We thought about that a lot, because from our personal experiences we know that there's a lot going on in the education community, on people's blogs, on Twitter, on social networks, but when you do a literature review you're kind of limited, especially if you're looking at peer-reviewed sources. I guess for me it's very challenging to capture what's going on across different blogs, so I don't know. My suggestion is that maybe we can be a little bit more proactive and start publishing, why not? There are some amazing things going on, we don't always have to publish in traditional journals, hybrid pedagogy comes to mind, that's a great venue to publish, if you're not into traditional publication process. That was a lovely presentation, thank you so much, and I'd love to talk further about it with yourself and Aris. What we call OEP intersects, as you pointed out with so many other things, open scholarship, open teaching, network participatory scholarship, and then even beyond that kind of connected learning and network learning, so we kind of are in our disciplinary silos in some ways. What do you see in the literature in terms of building bridges across, say, the body of open education work and other works, or the bodies of work like network learning, connected learning, and so on? The last slide is really, it's a call to achieve that. Oh, you can't see my slide. Even using some, okay, when we are writing a blog post or when we are publishing a journal article, maybe having some strategic thinking might help for us. Some articles, they weren't really using open educational practice as a term. We knew that that was what they were talking about because we looked at the abstracts and the full text. That, in the descriptor, is so helpful, especially if you're looking at research. Say, if I want to look at research from engineering, I have to start from somewhere. So I think maybe we can look at the language we're using and try to build a shared common language across different disciplines. So you just made me think about something when you mentioned hybrid pedagogy, as going back to the way you did your selection at the beginning, you used scopus. And I don't think something like hybrid pedagogy is indexed in scopus. And so that's, I mean, I'm struggling with this issue as well, is that I don't think, if I'm correct, scopus doesn't index a lot of the social science things as well as the science things. And it will probably not be indexing the most, the newest journal in our field that might not be as well known or as established or as traditional. On its website says the largest peer-reviewed database in the world. Larger doesn't mean... But I don't know what that means, you know. We started our research with Eric, Eric's education. But then there were some areas in the data so that then we had to go back and do a research on, you know, repeat the analysis using scopus. Just one last question. I should have had just like five slides that time. Thanks, Yzan. I think it's a really valuable piece of work. So first of all, I think it's wonderful. Thank you. The terminology is a real issue. And you know the term Robin DeRosa and Rajiv Jengiani. I've done a lot of stuff on open pedagogy. Do you think that's the same thing? Is it the same thing? I don't know. But I think process can mean so many things. For me, it's just having the focus on the process, maybe not necessarily on the teaching approach. It could be the design approach. Is that pedagogy or something else? I don't know. I have to think about that. But I think processes may be something broader, isn't it? Pedagogy is concerned with teaching and learning. I'm thinking loud. If you have any comments, please. I think we have to chime in. I think we're going to have to continue this discussion. Elsewhere, because we've got one more to go through. Thank you. We'll carry on that discussion because I think it's early days in open pedagogy and open practice. But it's great to have that information out there and lots and lots of things to follow up. Javier, Javier Atenas, and you have a man to talk to us. So, thanks everyone. It's great to follow those two presentations because we're very much talking about both data and about open practices. And so, lovely to be in this session. And really we feel that recent events have brought into sharper relief how our data is being collected and processed and potentially is used against us. But we also wanted to highlight that it's not all doom and gloom. There are changes happening in the data world such as GDPR and also such as the Open Government Partnership, which are offering us new ways of protecting our data and also of interacting and engaging with the data that's out there. And for our presentations, as we learned that we were going to be live streamed, we felt that it was, and therefore, competing with Netflix, we thought we need a bit of an entertaining theme. So, I hope you'll indulge us in this. OK, one of our aims is to talk about how we shape participation and what we mean by participation. So, we're looking at the point of our study, Open Government Partnership. The Open Government Partnership is a coalition of plus over 70 countries that advocate for and foster transparency accountability and participation. What those three means things? What do they mean by participation? How we foster participation? And ODP has three core components, national commitments, open data and public documentation. And it's layered at five levels. One is to inform the citizenship, to inform the people about the things they're doing, to consult the people so that little participation instances where people is asked what the governments could do to improve their services, to involve the people into the processes, to collaborate with the civil society, with the students, with the teachers, with the universities, into developing national plans, action plans and commitments, but also to empower communities. So, we're looking at those five layers. Most of the themes coming around ODP, of the national commitment levels, is governance, open data, education, transparency, capacity building. But what do they mean by that? So, we think it's really important to recognise that we're now living in a data-fied society, drawing on Shaefer and Van Es, where almost everything is transformed into data. It's been quantified and analysed from birth to death, studying, voting, buying, establishing relationships, getting a job or travelling. Everything that we're doing is leaving digital footprints, digital traces. And this data is also potentially used as a political tool. And Hood and Margats have proposed that government agencies act as both detectors, which gather information and data from individuals in society, and also as effectors, which seek to influence people. And we think, as we've illustrated with our daily profit, that also we need to think about how the media operates in these ways as well, in both discovering and creating information and also in influencing the way that we understand and the way that we think about it. So, in order to understand how governments and the media can both effect and manipulate our habits, our conduct, our political views and the way we establish relationships within society, we need to develop skills that will help us understand how this information is to being depicted, helping us make informed decisions towards acting as citizens and as individuals. When we think about those issues, participation and democracy and education, and being manipulated by the media, by the government and actually by all the agencies, including corporations, we need to look at what educational society has to do with a data-fied society. If our countries and most of countries are part of the OGP, are members of the OGP, they need to foster training and educational programs towards committing into citizenship education. And citizenship education around these areas have three key components. Statistical literacy, political literacy and media literacy. They need to work together. We need to be aware of the situations because if, as we can see, data every day is portrayed in the media. X percent, 3 percent, half of the people, half of the population, half of the Londoners want to do X. People don't like immigrants, for example. We see this data every day. How people know or can relate on the data that is portrayed on the newspapers, and we need to start developing a politically literate citizenry. And how do we do that? Because democracy requires a commitment to participate and take action, and also to monitor the government activities. We need to be more active, not only as individuals, but also as communities. And every community we participate needs to make action towards challenging and evaluating, assessing the government's activities. So in order to bridge education and participation and really take advantage of the opening of government information, we need to form a bridge between civil society, industry, research and politics, promoting development of a critical and informed citizenship, fostering effective and efficient use of information, allowing citizens to critically participate in democratic and social dynamics. And so in this sense we propose what we're calling an open pedagogy of citizenship. The idea of which is to empower learners and open educators and advocates to become cognizant of the rhetorical and influential techniques used by governments, the media and corporations, so they can become information gatherers, detectors, as we mentioned earlier, and influential agents or effectors in society. So it's not only about now the government and the media being effectors and detectors, but also our students as citizens. And in order to do this we believe it's vital to embed political media and statistical literacies to develop transfer of skills for both lifelong and life-wide learning. So in other words, not only for training for the workforce, but for your engagement as a citizenship in society. To enable people to understand and critically analyse information and data from media and government sources, empower people to become critically engaged, data intermediaries who are empowered to act as social detectors and effectors in the service of social justice and democratic values. We need to think about foster participation. And actually the use of open data, open educational resources can foster citizenship in education to establish connections between the learning, teaching and learning activities and social political problems. How many of our students know what's going on around our own universities? How many people is homeless around Bristol University? Is there any relationship? Is people in the university working with the society to improve people's lives? Are we doing that? We need to learn to take and evaluate information presented in the media. We need to be politically responsible of our decisions. Everything we do as we're going to be data-fied will be used at some point for or against us, quite lightly against us. But we need to understand that if we bring to the lecture, to the theatre, we learn to bring to the classroom data and open data and actually wiki data, to teach the students to work with the same raw materials that not only politicians or the industry work, but also the civil society, the scientists and the press use in the effort to develop policies and also research. We need to have data-literated people. We cannot keep having an entire generation of people that cannot understand the difference between a media and an avarator. We aim, with all these contemplations, to foster social justice. Open data as object as a standalone element does not promote social justice. We need to make very clear on that. Actually, now we have two groups of people, those that can understand and relate with data and our data-literate. And those who are excluded completely from the political participation or the media interactions because they don't understand anything about data, they don't have statistical literacies and actually they become a mere object of study. This is something that we need to think about. Who are the privileged ones, the ones that can easily understand data? We say, oh, this is actually not clear, not valid. Oh, I don't believe what my government is saying. Because they relate, they understand data. But what happens with the people that are a mere object of study? They don't have the capacities. So open data by itself can be actually a very dangerous thing if it's not used pro-social justice. We thought a key example to think about this is the example of data about education. Because it's not only using data in education, but also thinking about how the data about education reflects actually a non-neutral set of priorities and kind of knowledge claims that are being made when this kind of data is released. So when you have the school data that's trying to tell you about school quality and is saying, oh, this school is inadequate, then actually, in a sense, what we're being presented with is open data as an alternative to social justice. So rather than actually having adequately funded schools which can all be excellent, we merely are provided the data in order to make choices about which schools to attend or to send our children to attend. Actually, if we look at this map, we'll see that when these children graduate from the schools and they are adults, this data will be looked for future employers. It's like, oh, you are from an inadequate school, therefore you are inadequate. Who is to blame is the school, the teachers of the students for portraying a school as inadequate. We are talking about people, we are talking about children. I don't think it's fair to portray children, their schools, their environments, actually their social environment. Inadequate, because that's actually mean poor, mean deprived. Are they cutting meals at school? Are they cutting teachers? What are they doing? So I think every time that we see data portraying that manner would reflect humans, we need to think twice. Who is inadequate here? Is the government or the council that you have learned that is not pushing enough money or the children? So one of the ways to think about this is that one of the ways to monitor the government activities, for example budgeting and schools, is to work with civic monitoring approaches. This is quite well-practised in Italy, and actually butyone and regia are presenting a protocol called civic monitoring on money on Italy that allows people, students, teachers, groups of people, as a community of educators to look into access to information, anti-corruption, capacity building education, civic education, public participation of open governmental data and transparency accountability. We can look into where are the deficits, where are the issues in our government, in our regions, in our councils and bring those social problems to the classroom. Because if you want to work with research-based learning or problem-based learning activities, we have loads of real issues in the society that we can foster and we can help resolve from inside the classroom because we need to think that most of our students are privileged enough to be in the university. So if we can start working not only for the capacities that the industry needs, that the market needs, but also that the society needs, we actually may help a little bit into change the society and not have two groups of people that will be like those capable to analyse data and those being studied and turned into data. So if you want to look into how to co-create and how to solve real problems, how to work with the society, look at the co-creation standards from the open government partnership that can be translated into group work activities within a classroom because it foster empowerment, co-creation, participation and public deliberation, work with your students into solving little problems, so problems from inside the university and start making them and widening these problems also. What is going on around the areas around the university? What's going on in your council? What's going on in your city, your country, your region? And basically how to start fixing poverty and deprivation and exclusion. I think that's what we're going to leave behind. Mostly I'm going to give you more questions and answers and we're happy to talk to you later. So here's the list of spells if you want to read some good research later and this is how you can contact us. Thank you. I think I'm going to start blending with the background. It's invisibility clock, you can see. Is it data or money? Haven't we turned everything into money? I think we can start recommending a good reading. Weapons of Moth Destruction, because it's monetisation, algorithms and you don't need to forget that data is produced by humans and the algorithm that analyses them too. So it's actually money and corruption behind it many, many times. So I would say follow the money rather than the data. The data may be a red herring or it may only be a sign that there's something else going on. Yeah, follow the money absolutely and follow the corruption. Sam. Yeah, following on with that. There's another really interesting book from the States from Virginia Eubank about Automating Inequality and about algorithmic systems that did some vaguely terrifying things around using data. Is it digital redlining that kind of? Oh, it's horrific. If you haven't read it, please read it. With kind of open government and government data it kind of becomes quite scary and some of the things that we've done in the UK are nothing compared to some of the crazy crap that went down in the US. So it's built on something that Lorna was talking about this morning and what's just been said about money as well. So there's been alternatives to GDP, like the human development index and that kind of stuff. But essentially, if you work within the capitalist system then everything's reducible to money. It seems like people who don't want to work in that system haven't got a way of measuring things because things aren't reducible to a common currency. Now I was just wondering if you were aware of any work that might have been done in that area that we could reference. That's a great question, but I don't think that we are. Send us a tweet, we'll follow your question and that's maybe something that we can ask for other stakeholders both at the Open Data Community and the ODP community that can help us to find it. Because we also keep learning about new things every day. I think Sheila was raising it. I suppose that, again, it just raises not so much by data money, but I think there's the ethical aspect that in education we have a really critical role in highlighting that and reminding government of their ethical responsibilities and empowering citizens to ask those questions about what are the ethics of the data collection that you are doing. And I think if we had more of that kind of level of discourse at an everyday level then people would question school-league tables more. I think absolutely. Echoing what Lorna was saying really this morning if we're not going to do it then who is? And I think that in a sense, I mean we do want to celebrate the Open Government Partnership as an excellent set of commitments to open up information but we also have to be highly critical of that information and really train people to investigate what does it really mean, what's not being collected as well. And also we need to start looking into our communities of open educators to start fostering commitments in open education because apart from Chile, Romania, Slovakia and Greece and the United States not many countries have a commitment and those commitments can lead to policy that can help enhancing these literacies or improving on actually developing the literacies that people need in the country for democratic participation because if not it's going to just become another game of exclusion. I think you can see by your questions that you were wonderfully provocative and getting people to make connections between what you're saying and the questions you're asking and many other areas and that's I think a sign of success for what you just did. One other thing that was called to mind when I listened to you was this body of work more recently around critical data literacies and are you connecting with that because it seems like very productive collisions between what they're doing and what you're talking about? I mean definitely we are. We're sort of developing a much more detailed version of this so we couldn't talk about everything but that does relate to some of the previous work that we've done on working with open data and I think that it's absolutely vital but in all these open spaces the criticality has always got to be there. Yeah so a little bit of like for you is to question when the people say oh we want to enhance participation, we want to promote participation, we want people to participate, you need to ask them how do you want them? How are you going to do it for people to participate? What spaces are you opening up for people to participate and how are you training them? And how are we training our students? Because if you download the database for participation on OGP commitments it's huge but there are very scarce elements of training and education in within fostering participation so we need to be aware there's actually now a little bit of a bubble of promoting participation but not including everyone. So this is something that we as a community of educators need to stop thinking about and yeah can we disappear? Thank you guys, thank you.