Talk:CAS Digital Learning in Emergencies (2022-23)/module4-Taam: Difference between revisions
BarbaraClass (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
(→Introduction redone -- ~~~~: new section) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
4) After you have read the UNESCO Open Science recommendations, you may want to broaden up your introduction, i.e. including communities, citizens', etc. | 4) After you have read the UNESCO Open Science recommendations, you may want to broaden up your introduction, i.e. including communities, citizens', etc. | ||
Best | Best | ||
== Introduction redone -- [[User:Taam|Taam]] ([[User talk:Taam|talk]]) 12:18, 4 January 2023 (CET) == | |||
The literature review has taken a while and taught me a lot. As a result, I the introduction could have been enlarged too much for the purpose of the page. Therefore, I've kept its size and content within the limits of time and that purpose. | |||
I'll have to move now to do the OAF that will miss deadline for your feedback. | |||
However, I'd appreciate your feedback about the introduction. | |||
Thanks! | |||
Revision as of 13:18, 4 January 2023
-- BarbaraClass (talk) 15:48, 19 December 2022 (CET)
Thank you Tawfiq for sharing your scenario. With regard to Openness, you focus only on the access part. What about openness at the epistemic level? What about collaborating to elaborate knowledge that is then freely accessible? The purpose of your learning in this module is clear but could you please design a complete scenario, with learning outcomes, activities and evaluation criteria, to achieve it? Are you for instance going to elaborate a rubric to evaluate the resources you find?
-- Taam (talk) 21:11, 22 December 2022 (CET)
The page is redone. Thanks!
BC 23.12.2022
Dear Tawfik, Thank you for updating your project. Here are some additional comments: 1) Developing the OAF is a great idea. To do this, you can either conduct a quick literature review or read at least the following texts: i) the UNESCO Open Science recommendations; ii) Deimann 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7740-2_5 ; iii) https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Open_Education . 2) In your table, when it is a little open, you may want to add some criteria (e.g. OER available). 3) It would be good also to search for one OER (no matter the granularity) in the domain of cognitive neuroscience and apply the OAF to this specific resource. This will force you to think Openness in an Open world and not only in a closed or semi-closed one. 4) After you have read the UNESCO Open Science recommendations, you may want to broaden up your introduction, i.e. including communities, citizens', etc. Best
Introduction redone -- Taam (talk) 12:18, 4 January 2023 (CET)
The literature review has taken a while and taught me a lot. As a result, I the introduction could have been enlarged too much for the purpose of the page. Therefore, I've kept its size and content within the limits of time and that purpose.
I'll have to move now to do the OAF that will miss deadline for your feedback.
However, I'd appreciate your feedback about the introduction. Thanks!