 Oh, I didn't actually ask permission. So we're now recording again. And who would like to share first what happened in their breakout room? And I can actually share the results from the Google form as well, so if that helps when we're recording there. Someone want to say from breakout room one? I'll share, because we were talking about a project that I am doing in my class. So I'm a teacher educator. I teach literacy education courses. And I've been kind of playing around with open educational practices outside of a renewable assignment that I did for one of my classes. So in this class, I want my students to walk away with a handful of tools that they can use to assess their students, their younger students, K-12 students, literacy skills. And so as part of the class, I set up a document, a Google sheet. And within the Google sheet, they would all add in different literacy assessments that they read about, that they learned about, and classify them in lots of different ways. Describe them, say who the assessments might be for. And so and then my idea is that each year, when this iteration of the class comes around, the students will add to it. So we're creating this content knowledge piece that is constantly shared around everyone. So we said that it would be kind of content centric, but kind of process centric. So yeah, we rated that in the middle of those. We said that it is teacher centric because I kind of designed and created the form and they're filling it in. So everyone's contributing, but it was contributing within the realm of what I had on there. And I did give them choice, but then COVID happened. And they just kind of started throwing information and the class got a bit derailed because all classes did last spring. We said that it was definitely more pedagogically focused than social justice focused. And of that, I was focusing on cognitive and knowledge dimensions and some skills and thinking about this assessment who will be applied to. So pushing it towards more social justice focus, we were thinking about how all literacy assessments can be biased against particular kinds of learners. And so letting the students go in and they can either add assessments or they can think about the assessments that are on there and add in some of the biases or whose perspectives might be left out or the students that they're working with are students in the Bronx, New York, which is one of the poorest congressional districts in the United States. So thinking about how some of the economic factors might not fully represent the students' skills and knowledge on these assessments and acknowledge that on the sheet as it continues to grow and change. So that's what we're thinking, like giving students a little more power and choice in that. I love that and giving them that critical lens because if we don't give it to them, they may not develop it on their own. Thank you Jonathan, that's great. All right, we had a room too, right? Renewable assignments, did someone like to share that? Sure, I can. I sort of hijacked the conversation with an example of a renewable assignment that I'm currently running in a college level gen ed that I teach. So the course is titled Truth and Reconciliation and it focuses on Canadian settler, colonial harm as well as the residential school history specifically. And then toward the end of the semester, we switch our focus to Canada's 94 calls to action which are intended to improve nation to nation relations and really deal with those equity issues that abound in text. So in the renewable assignment, this is a capstone project in the course. Students are invited to select one of the 94 calls to action of interest to them and research that call in a structured way. So I provide a framework in terms of their output but they have a lot of agency of choice in terms of format, selection of topic and whether or not they're going to contribute ultimately to a public facing website called Nabawajige in Algonquin, that means to examine closely which is what we're doing in the assignment. And they also have the option to apply or not various Creative Commons licenses. So that's the project in a nutshell and the reason why I suggested we examine it is this is what I'm researching for my doctoral dissertation through AU is student perceptions of this particular experience of a renewable assignment. So we said that the OEP is more content centric because it's really focused on that output. Our intended audience are high school students in the Canadian context because my students have repeated that they wished they'd learned about this stuff sooner. So I said, okay, let's create something that high school students can benefit from but there is process baked within the assignment. The group decided we were quite learner centric and that they have the agency. I tell them, you're paddling this canoe now. And actually I just sent that announcement out today that's where we're at in the semester. So they paddle the canoe and I stand off on the shore supporting them as they go. We said it was quite social justice focused. However, the nature of the assignment does allow for a lot of affect to come in and I encourage it. Students use their own personal voice. They're allowed to bring their emotion into the assignment and get angry at the Canadian government or the lack of progress or the state of our relations in Canada. So they're not silenced in that way and that's important learning throughout the course. So we skipped over the pedagogical focus because we did think it was more social justice. And the calls address all three of these fears. So depending on what the students decide to go with they might be quite culturally focused politically or economically. And then that final question was sort of when we got zipped like vacuum sucked back into the main space but I think we were leaning more toward that transformative. I can't say that a word so I'm not gonna try again but we sit somewhere on the left side of this chart when it comes to transformation or at least acknowledgement of the current state and requirements for change. Thank you, Jess. I mean, I was wondering actually where they get how they do their research and if they are not themselves indigenous whether there's interaction with indigenous people. Sorry, I'm making this longer, just a quick question. Sure, yeah, it totally depends on the scope of their project. Calls to action involve everyone, indigenous, non-indigenous, new has a role to play. So they select a specific example of an individual, a group, an organization working to support the call in a good way. So that may involve engagement with indigenous persons or communities or it may not because there are other agencies that are also working to support specific calls. So it is so dependent on the direction the student decides to go in but there are often really beautiful connections made and a lot of students have told me that they sustained that engagement after the course ends through volunteer opportunities or the like. So it's a really special project for me. Thanks for asking. Thanks, Jess. Okay, Lena, this is the open syllabus. Thanks, Jess. It was just so nice to hear you talk about that project in more detail. I'm really looking forward to your research. So Melissa and I were not talking about something quite so specific or practical. We were talking kind of broadly about the syllabus. I had a little bit of a rant because I'm a current student, current online student and I just, I find a 40 page PDF syllabus to be one of the most kind of unnecessary and unnecessarily intense and contractual beginnings of a course. And so I am very interested in the work of Michelle Pacansky-Brock that she does around the liquid syllabus and rethinking this whole idea of the syllabus. So we were talking about co-creating syllabus we were talking about the syllabus evolving throughout the course. We were talking about opportunities for students to have access to the syllabus, maybe a couple of weeks in advance of the course beginning and being able to suggest new readings, different authors, maybe even a change in the order of the reading. And so for the answers to the questions we talked about it being kind of in the middle of content and process we were kind of waffling back and forth. We thought it was more teacher-centric even though the students may have an opportunity to contribute, it's still a tool for the teacher in the end, the syllabus. So we kind of put it a little bit leaning towards that direction. And although there are opportunities to make it social justice focused I was really reflecting on the definition of kind of what true social justice focused work means that you shared at the beginning of your presentation and the explicit focus on people who are marginalized or otherwise disadvantaged. And so I just couldn't see, I couldn't see, I'm sure there is a way that it could happen but in the current kind of way we were conceiving of it thinking of it more as a pedagogical tool rather than a social justice tool but it could become a social justice tool if you asked the marginalized students in your course to design your syllabus for you from scratch with no prior, but then I was thinking about how the concept of a syllabus even is kind of predetermined. So anyways, it's hard. Effective is definitely a key aspect of this for me and the political being giving some of the power over to the students about what they're reading and when. We didn't even really finish this last question. We had, it was because I took up a lot of the time ranting about Sylvester's, it was completely my fault but yeah, I want to thank Melissa for having that conversation with me as well. Thank you, Alina. And I think you've also like come across all the different types of ways a syllabus could be open. You know, you were saying, well, how much time would students have? Would they just change it at the beginning? Could they change it? Could it evolve throughout? So there are all these different ways even though you didn't answer the last question, you sort of touched on it a lot. Okay, I think the next room is room. Sorry, I don't want to take any more time but I just want to say to Lena that I added a link to the socially just academia page and equity unbound and there's a bit there also about increased citation which you might find interesting. Happy to chat afterwards as well. Okay, thanks. All right, eight, nine and 13. Hopefully we have enough time. I would hopefully useful but I actually said I hope we have enough time. I can share from room eight. So we were talking about collaborative annotation and interestingly we were each able to bring kind of a different perspective on collaborative annotation. So one of us shared using an experience using hypothesis to sort of facilitate a community of practice around open educational practices and open pedagogy. So there was that idea about collaborative annotation almost being used as a faculty or professional development tool to comment on readings and share. There was a perspective shared from an author who actually had one of their papers that's open on the web annotated unknowingly until they came across those annotations. And then there was a perspective of being in a position to actually support instructors who are using hypothesis as, or yeah, using hypothesis and collaborative annotation as a practice or as an assignment with their students. So it was with those different perspectives in mind that we actually answered these questions. So to the first one, we said that collaborative annotation really lies in the middle of being content centric and process centric. Collaborative annotation can't really be removed from the content that it's commenting on but at the same time, it really is and can be about that process of making your reading visible, making your thoughts about a work visible as you're doing the reading. We said that it is more learner centric in that it's often used for learner, so that more learners can share their thoughts about a reading and engage with each other, although teachers can and do have the ability to really build assignments around it. So in that way, teachers could still be involved but often I think it's used or in our experiences, it's used with that idea of giving learners more of a voice. We said it's certainly more of a pedagogical tool in that it's used to help address cognitive, the cognitive knowledge side of things. So not really used with a social justice focus in mind but I think we said that it does have the potential to be used as a social justice kind of tool, particularly the political side of things, giving power to people whose voices are usually suppressed or who don't usually have the ability to share their thoughts about a reading. So empowering more learners to see their voices and their thoughts as valuable. Although unfortunately, we didn't get to have much of a discussion around that last question because we spent a lot of time sharing our experiences. I mean, that sounds like you did quite a lot in 20 minutes. Thanks, Emily. Yeah, I mean, regardless of the less field on the forum, I mean, if you ended up talking about power and politics, it sounds like it was a really valuable discussion. So thank you so much. The process is more important than the documents. So I think the next group is group nine if I'm not mistaken, is that Marilyn? Yes, I am a group of one. Thank you so much, Marilyn. No problem. I had chosen the topic of virtually connecting and the way in which I had interpreted that was to bring students together from different places, to use the power of web conferencing, to bring students to start talking amongst themselves, basically, and this was a result of an experience I had in a global citizenship class where we brought students from Eastern Europe together with our students here in Maine to have an exchange, excuse me. And so in looking at whether it's content or process, excuse me, I thought, you know, one could balance this that it could go either way and it depended on, you know, how much the students became involved, how much the instructor put it in print. So I use that as a kind of neutral response to that as far as teacher-centric or learner-centric. I think this has a potential to be more learner-centric, although if the instructor has a curriculum that they oftentimes can kind of have an input on whether, you know, have some kind of input that it wouldn't be totally learner-centric. Let's see, could we scroll down a little bit? Thank you. For pedagogy, I'm looking at that as more of a pedagogical tool as far as bringing students together in terms of the original conception and the cognitive and affective dimensions, but also in terms of social justice, that culture would be brought into the exchange on, you know, what kind of target group here, neutral in terms of cultural, because it would depend on, you know, do you have minority students who are being represented in the conversation? And as far as how to improve this, be sure that students who are minority constituents are represented within the group so that they can represent that perspective. So do we want to go to group 13? Yes, thank you so much. Sorry, I wasn't sure if I was on mic there. Yeah, I mean, we only have a couple of minutes left, but I think we have enough for a two-minute share from our last group. And then Maha and I will just wrap up really quickly. So thanks. And thanks for that, Marilyn. Who's sharing from 13? Interesting, Michelle's will hear. I nominate Michelle. Michelle, do you accept? I accept, thanks. We didn't, can you hear me? Yes. Okay. So we looked more about, I think just the process of our spaces generally, rather than one kind of focus. And so I think we really talked about this idea that we're even put forward about architectures that help promote OVP. And we, things like all of our spaces, both physical and virtual, are governed by kind of someone else's decisions. There's roles, for example. How do you create a welcoming space in either? So we talked a lot about how that configuration really can allow people to feel like their voices can be heard. How can you create a participation, an architecture participation where multiple voices actually can be shared? So we really, when we talked through the form, didn't really fit us that well. It could be content focus, but it also could be process centric. So it really just depended. It could be teacher centric, or it could be learner centric OVP. So I think it just depends on what you wanna do. And then again, we thought it could be socially just. So depending on how we define our spaces, can you have, can you create a space where marginalized voices can really contribute in a meaningful way in that virtual or physical space? So we thought it could address all the different aspects. And I think just generally, we talked about the fact that we don't talk about space that much in relation to practice. And it really dictates everything we can do and how we welcome the kinds of participation that we want, hopefully that, hopefully just captured everything we talked about. That's very powerful. Thank you so much. And yeah, it links to what Jess you shared before, but that's much bigger. So thank you, thank you for sharing that. I knew we would learn a great deal from you while sharing today. Will I just keep finishing my, are you have noise in the background there? Are you okay? You still have kind of noise. Yeah, I'll just post the link to the sheet. Okay. So folks can have. Oh yeah, can you share your screen or do you want me to share? Is that helpful if I shared my screen? I can, I don't know if I can share. Sorry. Let me share for you. Okay. Okay. I'm sorry that we ran into this sudden wall at five o'clock. I know there are other things happening in people's lives. So we just wanted to say a sincere thank you. And I hope that with many of you that we can continue the conversations and share what we're doing. This is just hearkening back to the paper that I shared right at the very beginning, a wake up call. And quite often we talk about hope in terms of open education, but this particularly complex conceptualization of hope is one that we really thought spoke to what we're doing all together in this work around critical openness. And Laura Cherniewicz and her co-authors talk about a fragile hope and an angry hope in systems where there are glaring inequalities and in systems themselves, which may be oppressive. So this final quote, we just wanted to leave with you about that hope is critical because we keep calling out systemic injustices, but hope is also insistent because it is impossible to give up as long as possibilities exist for equity-oriented change. So thank you all for bringing it today and we look forward to connecting with you all in the future. Thank you.