取得进展:3个健康科学机构的OER

Jessica Kirschner, Jenn Monnin, Christine Andresen
{"title":"取得进展:3个健康科学机构的OER","authors":"Jessica Kirschner, Jenn Monnin, Christine Andresen","doi":"10.18060/27410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Open Educational Resources (OER) are rising in popularity at higher education institutions to help combat high textbook costs. To date, little research has been published discussing the impact of OER in the health sciences context. This comparative case study seeks to fill this gap. Experience: The article shares OER programs and advocacy efforts at three institutions, including a brief history of OER work, barriers and failures, current successes, and future directions at each institution. Discussion: All three institutions are making efforts in OER outreach and advocacy, informed and impacted by their institutional community. Two institutions have an OER grant with increasing submissions from health sciences faculty. OER work is completed by one librarian at two of the institutions, while the third completes the work through a committee of stakeholders from across the institution. All cases include OER advocacy and outreach through library workshops and working to establish faculty partnerships. Barriers at all three institutions include a lack of time and funds to dedicate to finding or developing OER. Unique barriers include a desire to work with for-profit companies, concerns over disadvantaging students on their qualifying exams, and the sustainability of institutional efforts in OER. Takeaways: Libraries are uniquely situated to support faculty and staff as they incorporate OER into their practices. While health sciences faculty are typically slower to adopt OER, once they do take this step, they become strong advocates for open practices, the librarian, and the library.","PeriodicalId":90517,"journal":{"name":"Hypothesis : the newsletter of the Research Section of MLA","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gaining Ground: OER at 3 Health Sciences Institutions\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Kirschner, Jenn Monnin, Christine Andresen\",\"doi\":\"10.18060/27410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Open Educational Resources (OER) are rising in popularity at higher education institutions to help combat high textbook costs. To date, little research has been published discussing the impact of OER in the health sciences context. This comparative case study seeks to fill this gap. Experience: The article shares OER programs and advocacy efforts at three institutions, including a brief history of OER work, barriers and failures, current successes, and future directions at each institution. Discussion: All three institutions are making efforts in OER outreach and advocacy, informed and impacted by their institutional community. Two institutions have an OER grant with increasing submissions from health sciences faculty. OER work is completed by one librarian at two of the institutions, while the third completes the work through a committee of stakeholders from across the institution. All cases include OER advocacy and outreach through library workshops and working to establish faculty partnerships. Barriers at all three institutions include a lack of time and funds to dedicate to finding or developing OER. Unique barriers include a desire to work with for-profit companies, concerns over disadvantaging students on their qualifying exams, and the sustainability of institutional efforts in OER. Takeaways: Libraries are uniquely situated to support faculty and staff as they incorporate OER into their practices. While health sciences faculty are typically slower to adopt OER, once they do take this step, they become strong advocates for open practices, the librarian, and the library.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hypothesis : the newsletter of the Research Section of MLA\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hypothesis : the newsletter of the Research Section of MLA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18060/27410\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hypothesis : the newsletter of the Research Section of MLA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18060/27410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:开放教育资源(OER)在高等教育机构中越来越受欢迎,以帮助应对高昂的教科书成本。迄今为止,讨论OER在卫生科学背景下的影响的研究发表得很少。本比较案例研究试图填补这一空白。经验:本文分享了三个机构的OER项目和宣传工作,包括OER工作的简史、障碍和失败、当前的成功以及每个机构的未来方向。讨论:这三家机构都在努力推广和宣传开放式教育资源,并受到其机构社区的通知和影响。有两个机构获得了OER拨款,来自健康科学学院的申请越来越多。OER的工作由其中两个机构的一名图书管理员完成,而第三名图书管理员则通过由整个机构的利益相关者组成的委员会完成工作。所有案例都包括通过图书馆研讨会和建立教师伙伴关系来倡导和推广OER。这三家机构面临的障碍包括缺乏时间和资金来寻找或发展OER。独特的障碍包括希望与营利性公司合作,担心学生在资格考试中处于不利地位,以及OER机构努力的可持续性。要点:图书馆在支持教职员工将OER纳入其实践时具有独特的地位。虽然健康科学教师在采用OER方面通常比较慢,但一旦他们迈出了这一步,他们就会成为开放实践、图书管理员和图书馆的有力倡导者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gaining Ground: OER at 3 Health Sciences Institutions
Background: Open Educational Resources (OER) are rising in popularity at higher education institutions to help combat high textbook costs. To date, little research has been published discussing the impact of OER in the health sciences context. This comparative case study seeks to fill this gap. Experience: The article shares OER programs and advocacy efforts at three institutions, including a brief history of OER work, barriers and failures, current successes, and future directions at each institution. Discussion: All three institutions are making efforts in OER outreach and advocacy, informed and impacted by their institutional community. Two institutions have an OER grant with increasing submissions from health sciences faculty. OER work is completed by one librarian at two of the institutions, while the third completes the work through a committee of stakeholders from across the institution. All cases include OER advocacy and outreach through library workshops and working to establish faculty partnerships. Barriers at all three institutions include a lack of time and funds to dedicate to finding or developing OER. Unique barriers include a desire to work with for-profit companies, concerns over disadvantaging students on their qualifying exams, and the sustainability of institutional efforts in OER. Takeaways: Libraries are uniquely situated to support faculty and staff as they incorporate OER into their practices. While health sciences faculty are typically slower to adopt OER, once they do take this step, they become strong advocates for open practices, the librarian, and the library.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信