 Okay, well, we're super delighted to have this workshop with Elizabeth and Roland and I'll just basically hand it over to them to introduce themselves and tell us about this framework and dashboard. Super Roland why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself and then I'll follow and do the land acknowledgement. Sure. By the way, I put a land acknowledgement from Ontario Tech into the chat as well so we can read from that as well. Welcome to all of you. I hope that we're actually going to be having a very good interaction and exchange of ideas as we go through materials here. My name is Roland van Osveen. I'm from Ontario Tech University. For those of you who haven't come across that university we started in 2003, and the physical plant is in Oshawa, Ontario. So just east of Toronto, and I've been there at Ontario Tech since the beginning 2003. And I've primarily been working in the laboratory that you actually see on the bottom left of the screen the educational informatics lab so the EI lab, and I'm a director of that particular laboratory. Over to you Elizabeth. Hi Roland. Hi everybody thank you for making time in your day for this whether you're listening to the recording or joining us live. I'm Elizabeth Childs, and I have the privilege of working at Royal Rhodes University, which is on the very west coast of Canada. I'm Vancouver Island in Victoria, BC. And Roland and I have worked together for the past. I don't even want to count eight or nine years and working on what you're going to see today. Before we get started though formally Roland has put a land acknowledgement in the chat. So I would also just like to acknowledge that I come from you to you from Victoria on the Kosatsun and Lacongan family and ancestors lands. And I'm so very grateful to live and work on these lands and be able to use them as my grounding space to then be able to connect with people throughout the world. And I think for me, connecting to the land acknowledgement also is that invitation for all of us as we co created in these spaces to think about the protocols and the ways in which we craft the virtual space, and the ways that we invite others in and commune and share together, and then leave the space. So I invite you to as you're listening to the recording or joining us to think about the lands that you're joining us from. These spaces that we co create together and how we can leave them better than we find them for those who come behind so they can also lift their hands and thanks and I'm gratitude. So today we're going to give you a tour of a lot of acronyms. And so we'll start unpacking those and explaining what they are through a series of slides and then get you into some of the online readiness tools that the lab and its team has been developing over the past five or so years. So you'll be able to get in and actually play with them and investigate them. So before we jump to the next slide and Roland sort of contextualizes this for us just let me unpack some of these acronyms on the very first slide. So is the global educational learning observatory. And so you can think of this and Roland did a lovely job of explaining it earlier to Paul as little satellites within institutions globally that are working on maximizing the affordances of technology and education and that intersection between them. And the grex is a customizable suite of tools including a dashboard that allows you to take snapshots in time on different aspects of online readiness throughout your organization, both at an individual level, as well as a program or institutional level, and we'll spend some more time discussing them as we go. Roland I will be the driver here what to find my mouse. Okay. There we go. So one of the things that instigated the work that we've been working on for the last know this actually goes back to 2001 I think is that the first instance where we've actually been working on these particular ideas. Anyways, it's all been instigated by this whole idea of moving in a direction that takes a look at not only fully online learning, but also moving in a direction that changes the kind of paradigm of what we actually refer to as learning. And this becomes really, really contextualized when we actually start taking a look at the inclusion of other cultures into the kinds of learning spaces that we've been taking a look at. And specifically I'm there, then referring to indigenous learners but it's also going to be found outside of Canada in the sense that we need to reach out to other cultural groupings to to other sociological settings where the the kinds of traditions and the kinds of values that are actually being displayed are very different than ours. And how do those become accounted for and valued and recognized within the kinds of learning opportunities that we make available to individuals. So we're taking a look at changing away from traditional kinds of educational context to those that bring into account things like group collaboration, active participation, active learning, collaborative knowledge construction, particularly in the area of social participation, but also incorporating radical constructivist kinds of ideas, learner centered pedagogies, meaning maker discourse, and then higher levels of thinking analysis and synthesis. So the higher order thinking skills, if you want to harken back to ideas of blooms taxonomy, etc. And there's a nice little quote from John Sealy Brown on the bottom, which actually sort of summarize where we're going. It's this whole idea of not only digital literacy but also digital citizenship. And we can see the kinds of shifts that are actually occurring with the inclusion of more self directed and personalized learning modes. If I can paraphrase from Stephen Downs, who's one of the leaders of the this kind of movement in in in Canada. We need to be taking a look at personalized learning environments and personalized learning networks, more so than what we have in the past. This of course leads us to the possibility of participation in fourth industrial revolution kinds of societies where we're actually looking at not only the development of competencies and sets of skills, but also the effective use of digital for the purposes of addressing problems that we're finding facing humanity, facing the world, etc, and try to come up with solutions that are going to be viable as we move into the future, assuming of course that we don't get stuck in an existential problem where we seem to be currently. So, I think that gives a little bit of the context that we're actually moving from. And if you want to another reference, we didn't put it in here but kumi and Stevenson have a nice little diagram in their paradigmatic shift work that emphasizes the move from one quadrant to another quadrant. And that's the kind of thing that we're actually looking at over to you Elizabeth. Just while I dive us in here, Paul's put a great question in the chat around this notion of global citizen competencies, rather than regional or national ones and so I think that's really one that we're starting to probe more deeply, as we think about these tools that have been developed. Pardon me, let me. Let me just contextualize a little bit around the online readiness piece. There are three particular tools that the lab is part of the Jell-O project and the researchers involved have worked at creating and taken together. What we're suggesting is they might be useful for those using the tools to view as a way to self assess and then reflect on their online readiness and then move from there to some really specific strategies, depending on where they want to take that on a scale, depending upon the type of learning that they're going to be doing. And so the position that you see on the slide are these interconnected skill sets. And through these skill sets, we also have these tools that go with them. So the very first one is around digital devices and fluency and frequency of use and competency of use around these digital devices and apps. These are self assessment tools that you'll see and be able to get into is called a digital competency profiler. And the intent is that that sort of gives you a sense of where you're at with respect to digital devices and apps. The second one is this notion of the learning environments and the role of the individual and the role of the community within these learning environments and these spaces. And so that's taken up more fully as the fully online learning community survey. And then the third one, which is still yet to be developed. We have starts of it, but we're not as far along as the other two are these notions of cultural dimensions that influence the way that these apps and this working in these online community spaces are viewed and understood. And that piece is where we're really starting to focus our thinking in our, our attention to the question that Paul has raised in the chat. So Bonnie now Barthol would love to hear your thoughts and comments in the chat, either to some of these things you're seeing here to the question that Paul has raised or others please don't hesitate at any time. This is really meant to be interactive. We're going to go to the next slide and ask you to put something in the chat so I'm giving you a little precursor to that. This is really meant to get thoughts and feedbacks on these tools on the approach that's being taken in these tools. And so I'm really hopeful that you can dive in and join us and for those that are listening to the recording, you'll see our contact information and would again really encourage you to reach out because these are, well they're being used by many institutions globally right now. We also have an iterative development cycle. So there by no means fixed in stone, and we're constantly looking to evolve and improve them. So with that as a bit of a lead in and hopefully a pause. We have a question. Because my mouse is jumping all over sorry. So in your current situation. When you think of online preparedness for learning whether it's your faculty your staff your students or different stakeholders perhaps your board of governors or your Senate at your institution, or in another setting perhaps the senior decision makers. What is the situation. Who are these tools intended for. We've really seen them be taken up across three audiences. We've seen them use at the student level so individuals that are either embarking or currently in online programs that are working to develop their digital literacy fluency and their online readiness to be in these spaces. We've seen them used at the program level in higher ed programming around support for students so help to identify the support students need as they move in work in these ways, as well as support for faculty. So it's often assumed that they're you know it can guide that faculty as they come into working in these online environments, they would be able to do this, and we've had people use these tools at the front end of that. And then that gets pulled forward by their Center for teaching and learning to help guide the different offerings and supports for faculty. And then we've seen it used program or institutionally across programs to help make decisions around institutionally if there is student support offerings that are provided by the institution to both faculty or students. Where should those be directed and be guided. So that's some of the examples. Seeing anything yet in the chat. From Bonnie and Alberto which is totally fine. But, oh, lovely Bonnie, thank you. And I'm going to stop talking so you can jump in and Bonnie also you're more than welcome to come on the mic Alberto to Paul, it doesn't have to be just a talk, your welcome or type you're welcome to come and talk. Interesting point Bonnie so talking about advisors and other support staff who may or may not be directly interacting with students, etc. You're absolutely correct. We actually have a project that hopefully will be taken off in a couple of weeks that is underwritten by my tax so we've actually been able to secure some funds through the my tax funding program. And taking a look specifically at that I mean one of the things that we had thought about is taking a look at how does how does the current COVID situation actually change the environment within which people are actually looking at, at fully online learning has the situation actually improved the conditions that learning actually and hold. And then we were asked almost immediately so you're focusing primarily in this project on students and on faculty. What about the staff, and that became immediately apparent to us that it was something that we needed to look at as well. So we have expanded the participant pool in that project that hopefully is going to be starting in a couple of weeks to take start taking a look at what kinds of supports are needed for, and what kinds of skills and competencies are actually being reflected by four different populations within that particular project so we've got students who are already in the fully online space before COVID. The rest of the student population at my particular university faculty is the third population and the fourth population is the academic staff, so that we can start to make decisions about the kinds of programs that they actually represent and start addressing those as well. So you're absolutely correct. Can I jump in and can I jump in and say something. Yeah so, like, because I did 100% online degree and one one of my experiences was that all of the operational tasks from paying my tuition to getting a student number to accessing the library etc. were completely digital so you needed to have competencies just to do the, the fundamental tasks associated with no joining an institution and and functionally conducting those kind of operational tasks, because we often just think about the LMS, for example. And of course there are a set of digital companies competencies associated with effectively learning inside a learning management system. But, but my point is that the competencies go well beyond just the teaching and learning environment, and, and they extend to get the operational side, the learning environment but also the social interaction components which, perhaps people have acquired first through their own personal use of technologies but still often need a little bit of assessment as to how well develop those are. And, and lastly I just want to make one other comment here which is that when I think about the migration to online and even institutions who primarily are online. How have they tried to manifest their identity, like every institution has a kind of cultural identity or some way that it thinks about itself. But that's usually place based it's very much dependent upon the physical footprint. And when they think about creating their online services and offerings. Most of those services and offerings in in view or are infused with that place based identity and so I think there's this real missing piece around how the institution itself, let alone the students kind of creates its digital identity in such a way that it aligns with what it perceives as its physical identity. So, what you're talking about is things that we have actually lived. I think in 2012, I did a gap analysis between what was actually offered at Ontario Tech, which was referred to as UIT at the time, and what was actually being offered through the fully online programs and we had two of them at that point, and still have two fully online programs, only in the Faculty of Education. And you're absolutely correct, the differential in terms of what was offered for the place based kinds of learning opportunities was completely different from those that were fully online. And there was very little, I'll give you an instance as to where some of the gaps were. So we had student cards that could be sent out, but you had to actually come physically to the, to the campus to get your picture taken to be able to get a card, because we needed to make sure that you were the person who was actually on the card, right. So it was one of those pieces and for the rest, you never actually had to set foot on campus. So what was happening there, eventually we got it to the point where we can actually integrate the card online with your student registration, etc. But it took a number of years and lots and lots of talking to get to the point where we can actually integrate those those kinds of pieces. In the other section, Elizabeth, do you mind going forward to about slide 10, the GTCU, where we can start talking about these general kinds of competencies that Paul was talking about at the, the outset of his, his comment about generic kinds of pieces. So much of our work. So this is basically the framework upon which we built the digital comp c profiler that you'll see in a couple of minutes. But the GTCU is the work of Francois Desjardins, who has retired from our university but he certainly did a lot of work from 2001 on about the development of these particular ideas. So the kinds of competencies and skills that we're actually dealing with fall into these four orders of classification if you want. So the first one, the technical that is the interaction of the individual with computer technologies as a whole that could be at the personal level with a particular machine. It could be your tablet or your phone or even your laptop if you want, but it can also be the larger systems. So working through server based kinds of materials, such as the LMS, or other kinds of pieces. We spend a lot of time in the DCP on the technical as separate from the rest, because we acknowledge right off the bat that as soon as you get into these other orders such as social, the informational and epistemological, they require, as Paul was saying, the level of competence of in and how do you make use of zoom what you actually have to know not only how to make use of the hardware, the keyboard and the mouse and the monitors and the menu systems, etc. But you also then need to know something about how do you interact with other individuals through these kinds of pieces and so there's a technical component to all of those pieces. And then you can get to the social and the social for us, just going through the, the four orders here, social order, not only talks about interaction social interactions i communication, etc. But also talks about the ethical considerations that you have to have in mind when you are interacting with other individuals through the medium of a computer. So, how do you value other people's presence how do you value their contributions, how do you make sure that you're listening to and acting upon the kinds of information that they are sharing with you. So, beyond the communication the ethical. There's also considerations of privacy. So how do you ensure the security of other individuals in the social kind of environment, moving to the informational. I think here about the differences that have occurred from worldwide web one, i.e static pages, or primarily static pages to the dynamic kinds of pages that we have right now, where you can aggregate from a lot of different kinds of sources on to one particular source feed, etc. So if you take a look at Facebook or Twitter as examples of these, you're bringing information in from a number of different sources and then you're filtering that information primarily through, according to Facebook your friends. And then you're using a number of different ways of making sure that that information is the kind of information that you actually want to take a look at. Twitter is probably a good better example of that we can use hashtags as a mechanism for finding kind of information that we want. But it goes beyond that so that those are all consumption kinds of issues, informational also goes to the whole idea of creating information that is then going to be shared with other individuals as well. One of the things to note at this point is that I'm starting to mix this whole idea of, well, once you sharing information is no longer just primarily in the informational order now we're talking about the overlap between the social order and the informational order. And then we get into this whole idea of the epistemological. Thanks for the noting there. The epistemological order is one of these more difficult concepts from perspective that it's about an extension of Seymour Papert and David Jonas's work in the sense of computer becomes a cognitive partner with us. And the epistemological order talks about the kinds of skills and competencies that you need to assign a task to the computer to take advantage of the things that it can do better than human beings. And humans are left to actually do the higher order thinking that is required when you actually take a look at the results of the processing that have been done by the computer at your behest, according to the tasks. So these are generic kinds of skills and competencies that we find are used regardless of where we are in the world. And so we look at this as being a much more generic and powerful because of its generic basis, as compared to some of the other tool sets that are available around the world. Elizabeth, did you want to jump in because now I've just said an awful lot of words in a very short period of time. Well, first of all, thank you for teaching me something new in my social and technical interaction here I didn't know that when I moved my mouse, everyone could see it so that's good to know. I think probably what's in some ways easier I'm going to pull us to this slide so as Roland had mentioned the framework that he just went through informs this tool which is the digital competency profile. And you're going to get a chance absolutely get in there we'll we'll put the link and we're going to go into it but we wanted to sort of do the big high level quick show and walk you through it and then get you into them. So this one, this is the report that you would get at the end. So, earlier to the question about who is this for. This is a report an individual would get a student would get a faculty would get a working group could do on behalf of the organization for planning purposes to get that moment in time and it shows you a variety of things on here so you can see with the colors of course it shows you the competencies. This individual it shows you as you move out on the circles, it shows you the relative and sorry, my screen is very small. So it shows you the frequency of use and this is the competence of use is the X, going straight up here. On the right hand side, you see these lovely little curves. And so this would be for an example if you were doing this in a class and I think this one was actually captured in the class, then you can see where you are the red line in relation to the rest of the group who went through and did this profile. There's also another ability so for some institutions that have used this they've used this with a career focus in mind and so they've done a profile that sort of the baseline profile around digital competency use. For that career pathway, and they've done a baseline of that. Then when you complete it another bar would be here so where that red line is. There would also be another one one of them would be the baseline bar and one of them would be you. And then the, the large color mass behind would be the rest of the people that had done the tool as part of a class for example. And so you can really get a sense of where you are with respect to your group and where you are with respect to, perhaps, in that instance the career path and expectations in that career pathway. So there have been several institutions that have found that to be an extremely valuable place to then have that starting point conversation both individually, and as a class of. Okay so where do we need to support where do we need to reach out and find different ways for these competencies across the four to be built out knowing that in this career pathway, we need this type of a representation. And so that one is also layered completely through the lens of the context of their career and the culture in which it's being taken up. And so those are the pieces that we're really trying to really turn our attention to now, really. Roland, did you want to add anything else in here before we move to the online community one. Probably not other than that there are some additional tools that are not shown on this particular slide that you will also see once you've completed the digital competency profiler. And that set of tools is actually a matrix that is set up based on the responses that you're giving in the DCP, and they actually give you interpretations of what the measures actually mean so your competence index if it's 7.9 on the social what does that mean. So there's an interpretation is given to you, and there's also a set of suggestions as to what you can do to improve your competence to meet those kinds of targets that Elizabeth was actually talking about. We also have sets of target profiles that we can actually develop with any group, etc, and incorporate them directly into the graph so that you can actually see what those targets are for individual career groupings for particular study topics, those kinds of pieces. So we can make it customizable for your particular purposes as you're going through as well. And that's probably as much as we need. Perfect and there's a great question from Paul. And so Bonnie and Alberto as well I'd love to hear your thoughts on this this notion of competencies are along these four orders as being ethically neutral. How that plays out as you take this up and use it in the settings. So I'm, we can speak if you want to jump in absolutely but I think this is when it's a pondering one so that use the tools. Keep that and top of mind and Paul thank you for raising it because I think it's a nice lens for people as they go in to explore the tools to think about when they're going through the questions themselves. So what I could add to that though is that I think there's an implicit assumption on the parts of lots of people that the tools themselves are ethically neutral, or even neutral in terms of the way that they are actually used in the kinds of consequences that they have as well. And of course we know that that's not necessarily the case at all either specific tools have specific functions, according to the way that they're actually created. So you're you're absolutely correct. And we need to do further, further thinking upon the way in which we actually design and use the tools, etc. And how do we actually get to the point where we are actually making those considerations of the actual implications, both ethically as well as morally and a whole bunch of other areas as well. One of the things that we did know to, you know, moving over to the cultural side, which is not where we're at right now is that digital tools are actually used in different ways by different cultures. We've got a very active participant in the lab who actually lives in Eastern Europe in Ukraine. He was noting all the time in his interactions with individuals from a variety of institutions from Latvia all the way through down to Georgia and Uzbekistan and various other places that the way that they see digital technology has more to do with the way that they're seeing other people and the way that they interact them with the digital technology has to do with the way that they, they interact with people, for instance, in the former Russian Soviet sorry, states, there is a distrust of individuals who have a function in terms of the government, as long as they've got the uniform on or they are on duty, whereas if you are talking with somebody who doesn't have the uniform on who happens to be your neighbor. It's a very, very different kind of view that you or perspective that you have of them, and therefore you interact with them very, very differently using your digital technologies. And so those are the kinds of things that we'd start to investigate as well when we are taking a look at these, the use of these kinds of tools. I'm just conscious of the time a little bit and I'd like to move it to show just the framework that underpins the fully online community tool. So that then you can get into exploring with them. And so this, you'll see many aspects of the community of inquiry model here and in fact it did inform some of the initial thinking around this. But you'll also see a bit of a leveling. So one of the things that is not present here is a circle from community inquiry that talks about teacher presence. And that was very intentional. That collaborative learning environment circle that you see really is this notion of co creation and an attempt at leveling some power and creating potentially and hopefully a more democratic space for learning. So we're navigating the social presence cognitive presence and of course recognizing that it all occurs in this digital space in this type of an environment of fully online environment. There is a little link to a very short, honestly, two minutes, three minutes, research short animation that that speaks a little bit more about this model that's there for your reference and rolling maybe can pop that in the chat. If you'd like to take a look at it. But the survey that's been designed based on this model has a very similar so you can see the collaborative learning. But it has more of the indicator is more of that sliding scale recognizing that this is all a work in progress as you're moving forward and so you will see as you're working through the questions sorry let me get my nose back over here. That you will find these types of and you can see of course here on the slide you have the Latin on the right hand side that's because it's under development that you have these types of descriptors. You'll get something like this and this is when the tools are combined using the fully online readiness index with this one down here around the digital competency profiler index. You then get this amalgamation that speaks to a variety of aspects both those four competencies, as well as these four areas of the fully online learning community. In the DCP survey the digital competency when there are suggestions for areas and ways to grow and extend along those four competencies in the fully online community survey those are still under development they're there. In very thin. Be fair to say descriptors. And so we know that that's an area that is the additional work and we're undergoing that work currently. Enough of us looking let's get you in these tools. When you log in. You're able to keep track of everything you're able to go back and use them again this is just a really big reminder to everybody these are not meant to be diagnostic they're a moment in time. And it's really the intention is for individual reflect reflection and growth, and then programmatic or institutional reflection growth and support structures that could be created. The ones around the career profiles and Roland maybe we can speak to those in a bit have been used in slightly different ways but still with that intention that they're not meant to box you in, but rather give you a sense of where you are right now. So, this is the link and Roland's put it in there. You're going to jump in and use the tu Dublin link. When you get there you will be asked for an email address, and that email address whatever when you'd like to choose, then get you into the survey. And you'll see the ability to consent to participate in the surveys. All of the data is maybe actually Roland you want to speak to I don't think we've covered that. It's a research piece of this and the data and what happens to the data so that people know. Right so when you first get into the space the first thing you're going to see is that out of the 1234 surveys that are available in the tu Dublin link. They're all grayed out except for the first one. So the basic demographic survey will need to be completed first. That will bring you to the end of the cracks and you'll have to. If you'll see the blue arrow for the tu Dublin now changes into nine dots, and it's just a link back into that space that you've already created. You can move into into the actual space itself, and there you will actually find access to all of these surveys so the first one that I would suggest that you actually try out would be the DCP. That if you want to continue on in this particular piece, then you can go on to the FOLCS. And if you want to see a really, really old one that's built on ISTE standards, the attitudes towards it survey that we used for a different project, quite a while back. Anyways, the data is displayed on an individual basis that Elizabeth was just talking about, but it's also available in a compiled kind of format for the entire group, which actually undertook all of the surveys simultaneously. We can do statistical analysis based on groupings that we can set up using the basic demographic survey because that becomes linked to all of the other data within the structures that we've got here, so that you can do comparisons to see if there are any differences between individuals or between subsets of the population based on age, gender, the level of education, the kinds of careers that they're actually pursuing, all of those kinds of pieces that you so you can do fairly comprehensive statistical analysis to break down what is actually being shown in the data itself. We've got access to all of those data sets and we would love to collaboratively work with you to actually analyze the pieces that are set together. All of these tools are now licensed under Creative Commons licensing attribution, but the idea here would be that you'd come to us so that we can actually help you through collaboratively analyzing your data once it has been collected. So the tools are free to use and we actually want to work with you to actually understand them and so that we can actually make comparisons to other groupings from other places that we start to understand the cultural differences that are actually occurring between various groupings that have completed the surveys, etc. So there's a long standing kind of research goal that's lying underneath all of this work. Elizabeth has posted into the chat here that we'd like to take about 20 minutes or so we'll stay on the line. And if you've got questions about what it is that you're seeing and would like to have a little bit further information and discussion about that, that certainly is a possibility as well. 15 after the hour, go ahead. 15 after the hour because we often don't give ourselves bracketed time to zone in on things so we thought this will be a way for you to dive in. And then when we come back we'll just start the conversation around one thing that resonated with you one thing that you're curious about. And Paul absolutely when we come back we'll talk about some of the use cases for all of this. And here of course the comments from the group. So we will take 20. You're welcome to dive in and we'll see you at quarter past the hour of an element. Got. So this is an example of an element that is taken from the epistemological order. So this is the assigning of tasks to the actual computer so that we can take a look at the, the products and do interpretation of those products etc. And so I couldn't find a social yet so I thought that the epistemological might actually work. So creation and use of concept maps flow charts site maps and algorithms. You need to know something about the domain that you're working in but you also need to know how to actually assign that particular tasks to the computer to create this cognitive partnership that David Jonathan and Seymour Papert actually talk about. And then we ask, what's the frequency with when with which you actually do this particular piece and maybe you actually do this on a regular basis. Most people don't. So you might actually say a few times a month maybe, and the confidence that you do within. Well that has everything to do with self efficacy so this has been during concept of self efficacy. If you have a five point Lekert scale do not know how to use not confident confident fairly confident and very confident as you're moving through. So you may actually be very fairly confident at it, but you only do it a few times a month. And in terms of the way that the DCP is working and this is still out for. I think we use those as indicators Paul so you're you're right but but here's the the other question coming back. How do you define, and how is it measurable, what competency is. And we've come up with those two indicators as being at least indicative. So the idea of frequency would be that the more often that you actually do it. The more at it, you're going to become in terms of effectiveness perhaps in terms of efficiency. I don't like to use the efficiency kind of terminology though in terms of language because I'm not sure what it actually means. So the confidence of use of course that it's comfort level right so the more comfortable you are at it the better off you are, but we use them together. So the CI the competence index is the both indicators at the same time. On a fairly frequent basis you're very, very competent, confident at it, and therefore by by sort of implication, you're going to be coming better and better at it more effective at it, i.e. competent. The last piece that we have in each of these items is the device that using most often, and we're getting to the point where I think we're going to be losing this particular question, because it becomes more a consideration of preference, more so than anything else. From my perspective, the reason for that is that there's from my perspective not much difference between these and the desktop computer that I'm interacting with you in the sense that they can all do basically the same things. The major difference is screen size. Is that really a difference. Anyhow. So that that last question the device I use most often, we're probably going to be dropping very, very shortly. We used to have six different areas, and we're down to three. So it shows that we're consolidating that that kind of an idea. Here's another epistemological one. And I have to respond to these as I'm going through other questions. Elizabeth, did you want to say more. Yeah, I'm just. Yeah, so, you know, Paul was curious about the frequency competency of these piece right so, and I think that's really where we're at is really probing this with that critical lens of crystal. What else what, what are different ones and so successful completion of a task. And that's, I think that one. The way we talk with people, you know, in the lab research team is challenging because the definition of success is different for it takes it down to the task of granularity level and I think they were trying we're trying to stay up above that. And it may be that that doesn't work anymore, maybe that that has to change. Getting more ideas and we've been we presented this at network learning earlier this year. Again, just to get from a global audience, more ideas about how to really hone this in, in a way that it reflects, and ultimately is useful, right it doesn't become a theoretical exercise, but also ultimately can really inform practice at the individual and beyond. Roland, you look like you were about to say something. I was actually so successful completion of a task or an activity. Here's the thing. So if you actually take a look at other tools like digit comp, coming from the UK. They actually take a look at that kind of an idea or Venderson. So from University of Tventa in the Netherlands. Again, it's this kind of an idea in fact, what Alex Venderson does is measure the time that it takes to actually complete the task. But that assumes that there is only one way to complete the task and what we're actually after is this whole idea that complex tasks are going to require a fair amount of complexity in terms of the competence that are required to address the tasks themselves. And we've had a number of studies master's projects who have started to take a look at this. So we actually define a number of different kinds of tasks using some basic ways of characterizing, or taxonomically, taxonomically leveling tasks out using Maggie seven baddens or Oh, what's his name. Given Golan in own broad anyways, there are a couple of different schemes that are available for doing these kinds of things. And then taking a look at what kinds of skills are actually being used by individuals. And their, their skill level change over the course of doing the particular tasks, etc. And we've done quite a number of those kinds of studies, and they're primarily reported through a variety of different kinds of articles that you'll find in in various places. But what you can take a look at much of that at Research Gate. So my profile at Research Gate and I can show that to you in just a second. Other use cases, just to bring them back into that particular kind of context. We've used at the beginning of a course and then at the end of the course and seeing what kinds of changes actually occur in terms of the kinds of changes that individuals actually are able to exhibit demonstrate. As they go through the intervention of the course learning itself, you could do the same thing as Elizabeth was suggesting through programs, doing a variety of snapshots through the program to see the level of skill as it's developing. But also at the institutional level, we can do the same kinds of things with faculty members to see how they are starting to change the way that they actually look at learning opportunities, the activities that they provide for individuals within the course structures to meet the needs that are represented by the competencies that are measured through the DCP and the FOLCS, etc. I don't know if we're meeting the questions adequately or if there are additional questions. I think at this point, I mean, I'm just looking at our time and we have some time for conversation. So, I'm wondering if we want to flip it so that we're not sharing screen and we can invite folks who are comfortable and able to to come on the camera because I think one of the things that that isn't here. And we may want to we may because you weren't able to get in the tool we may need to see the questions again I'm not sure but let's set piece around open educational practices or open ed resources and digital competency and fluency and frequency of use of those and of the ability to mix and remix and so this is where I don't know I mean is, is there a tool out there. I don't know that I mean there's lots of starts of tools that people are using that would allow for an individual or an organization to mapped with this suite of online readiness tools really have much more of a comprehensive, perhaps approach for guidance and reflection, and then implementation going forward. So, I'd be interested if that's even a useful area to pursue. I talked in an earlier session about how in many organizations right now, there's an open agenda, there's an online agenda, there's a blended agenda. And so there's all these parallel tracks where many of the commonalities are not being seen yet. And so perhaps tools like this can help with that can help see areas where there are gaps and areas for development. I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts on that. And you're welcome to come on the mic. If you'd like, if you're able to. I'm wondering, Roland, were you able to show some of the FOLCS questions as well, were people able to get into that one. No. So, as soon as they finished off the basic demographic survey they couldn't actually go any further because everything is still great. So, I was actually showing at the end, the items in the FOLCS things like I can put some of these into the chat as well so that they can take a look at them. So here's one for the digital space. I'm just going to grab a couple of examples. Here's one for collaborative learning. So the digital space when there is an interesting one because it also in underneath that question speaks to level of comfort or sense of responsibility in creating learning environments and whether that rests at the individual student level at the faculty level. I'm also able to tease that out as people are completing that survey. As you're looking at the aggregate data, it's kind of an interesting place to then have further conversation. I know, Roland, in your work with when you use it in your courses that comes out quite a bit around, wait a minute, I didn't know this was my responsibility to actually be part of co-creating this. Exactly. And negotiation, what do you mean negotiation? Aren't we supposed to listen to what the prof says and just about it back? You know, so it's this whole idea of negotiating meaning in a constructivist kind of way, which for a lot of people is a very, very different way of looking at education. So there are some examples from all four different areas across the FOLCS. I put them into the chat. DS stands for digital space, CEL stands for collaborative learning, SP stands for just as it does in the community of inquiry framework, social presence, and CP again is borrowed from COI. It stands for cognitive presence. Maday, I'm not sure if you're able to type or come on the mic, so I'll just ask it and if you're aren't, it's totally fine. But I'm wondering in your current role as a PhD student, what of what you've seen so far been able to be part of the conversation. What has resonated with you and what is still something that is still very either conceptual or abstract or unclear. I'd love to hear that if you have an opportunity to drop that in. The others are the same. So just while people's fingers are taping or thinking, which is also something that we have to leave space for and time for in these spaces. Roland, I'm wondering, I think we were at the point where we shared our contact information. So people could find us. But I think one of the things that perhaps wasn't covered as quite as thoroughly as possible is the notion of how to participate and the invitation for you to participate the fact that these tools are there. It's completely accessible to you to your institution. You can go back and have different profiles over time as you do it at that moment in time. So maybe do we want to pull up the slides again just to share that contact or drop our contact information in. Because I think it'd be useful for people in thinking back to Paul's comment about use cases. I'm not sure I'm sorry when I stepped out to have a little body break. Did you speak at all about the way it's being taken up in the German context in the grant that they were going to how they were going to approach this. Actually, that I didn't talk about that at all. But what we have been noted noting with our German partners. We have about four different sets that are within the Grecks at this point in time. So if you go back to the Grecks main board, you will actually see all of those instances there. And so I'm just doing it right now. So what I'm doing right now is a German project that is done in cooperation with health workers in the area to the south of Berlin. And what they're doing is looking at the level of a digital skill that is found within healthcare workers themselves. They're looking at decisions about the kinds of tools that will be made available. And also the educational instances or the educational programs that they'll make available to upgrade skills as we're moving from an area of doing things on paper charts, to the digitization of all of those kinds of materials, and how do you then access all of that information through the digital tools themselves. So that's the DiMedica project. KI conference is again at a German one that took a look at conference attendees, the kinds of skills that they actually had available, and the kinds of changes that they could make to their skill level. That would be make them more appropriate for the kinds of activities that were being represented in the conference. And I did not attend the conference. I don't know exactly who was there. But they certainly used it. Next week, Monday, the IKK group is again a German group. And again, it's looking at a number of individuals who have exceptionalities, usually referred to as disabilities. So we've actually had to modify each one of the elements in the digital competency profiler, so that they the level of language was much lower and much more understandable. But the same kind of idea how do you make use of your digital technologies in your particular context as an individual who is studying whatever the topic is that they're dealing with. And digital digital provence is going to be a doctorate students project, whenever she gets clearance to actually start to collecting data from individuals in a physical setting, then she'll actually start taking that one on. So we've got four German projects that are going on right now, and we would like to involve them in some of our ongoing studies. So we've got a shirk application, an insight grant funding opportunity that starts to take a look at what kinds of changes can occur within cultures. So at a national level, and then at a, sorry, an international level at the national level so we can actually start making use of the partner organizations that we have across the nation are used for example Concordia in Montreal is another example, and we have a variety of other schools that are associated as well. University of Quebec, at Quebec City, no sorry, Laval, sorry, at Quebec City. So starting to take a look at differences between areas in Canada, and then also recognizing that there are differences between the cultural settings within programs within the same university so we can do a number of different levels of study, depending on how we actually position the survey tools themselves. Does that sort of get out what you were looking for, Elizabeth. Yes, I think so. I'm conscious of the time and that people have had a very rich and full week in the conference. So I don't want to cut a short, if there are more questions or observations or feedback I would, we'd love to hear it, but I also don't want to keep us longer than needed. So, with that said, our email addresses are there, please feel free to reach out if you have questions if you go away and you think, you know, I don't know that I agree with these two people. And their researchers and where they're trying to take this I think I'd look at something else, please. That's, that's why we wanted to talk and and share and get feedback from this audience and so those of you who listen to the recording, I would extend the same offer please connect with us. It's through your feedback and through the comments that come from these kind of conversations that tools like this can get more refined and hopefully be more useful at the end of the day. From my perspective, thank you so much for taking the time to be part of this for those who listen to the recording thank you so much for listening to the recording. And just really encourage you to reach out if you would like to be involved and continue or even just to test drive it yourself they are creative commons licensed you are able to go in there at any time so the link that was in the chat you can use. And thank you the conversation continue on only global connect, which is fabulous. Roland I'll let you say your thanks as well. Again, just as Elizabeth has already shared. I also extend my thanks to you for participating in this particular session, and also for your participation. For those of you who are listening to the recording. I would again like to extend my invitation to you to get in contact with us about either participating in the data collection and analysis of data using the existing tools or even better, helping us to refine and modify and modify the tools that we already have much much better. I'm looking forward to a new set of graduate students who are becoming online very very shortly in the next term or so, who will start doing that refining using the kinds of cultural tools that we haven't talked about that will be integrated into the actual Gregg's platform very very shortly, so we can start making use of the differences between different settings, different organizations different institutions, etc, regardless of whether they're in our own institutions or if they're across the nation or around the world. So thank you so very much. Well, for for a really fascinating session I think this area of digital competencies is hugely important, and I know from our global network that some of our members are also pursuing this kind of strategy sometimes in partnership with high tech companies to of course have an invested interest in and seeing people acquire skills associated with the use of their tools but but also just in the context of like wanting citizens to become more competent in general with that kind of digital literacy if you will. And so, I think, and, and I guess the last thing I'll say is that there have been a number of sessions at this conference that have looked at professional development related to open education, whether it's content creation or pedagogy and practices. And so, as we begin to see this field mature, the importance of building out what what are the necessary competencies for someone to be good at doing open education as it pertains to different roles, whether it's faculty or librarians or instructional designers or whatever, I think will become increasingly important. So thanks so much for sharing the work that you're doing. And I really look forward to following the research is in how it emerges. Thanks for that, Paul. I also just placed a reference to my profile and research gate into the chat so that you can take a look at much of the publications that we've actually been generating about this topic, as well as the fully online community model as as that develops in time as well. So there's another opportunity to interact and Roland keeps his way more up to date than I do so definitely go to his good stuff there. We should probably stop the recording. Thank you.