With members of the OTTER team having returned safely from their various conferences, we duly resumed our regular meeting schedule, the purpose of the most recent being to identify metadata requirements for, and quality criteria against which we could assess, the material which we intended to make into OERs.
The metadata requirements were decided upon relatively quickly following Simon’s advice to keep it clear and concise, and having looked at examples already in existence. Establishing the quality criteria was a slightly different story.
After much discussion and some revision of Sahm’s provisional six stage flowchart through which the material should progress, discarding some points, inputting others, determining that we needed a separate and detailed set of quality criteria, Gabi asked us all what lessons we had learnt from our planning meetings so far.
The two things I would highlight are that there is a distinct lack of OER quality assessment criteria which is accessible out there in existing OER literature, and that creating the criteria from scratch was a long old process. What you may perceive as a quality indicator in the first instance might well not stand up under closer scrutiny or attempts at setting benchmark standards. Further input and discussion is required before we can make a final decision.
The process continues…….
Tania
