Supporting Young People with Sickle Cell and Thalassaemia in School

open educational resources – social sciences

 Guide for Schools Cover

Images: Education and Health Guide by Professor Simon Dyson
CC BY-SA 4.0

Main Content Author:

Professor Simon Dyson

Level:

Undergraduate social sciences and healthcare; postgraduate education and healthcare professionals.

OER Features (2 components):

SCOOTEROER112b_Simon Dyson Guide for Schools_V2_June 2016 (PDF)

SCOOTEROER112a_Simon Dyson Guide for Schools_V2_June 2016 (Editable Word Document)

 

OER Description:

We are delighted to share an updated version of the very popular guide for schools. This guide to policy, background information and useful checklists, provides essential guidance for teachers and tutors on how to support children with sickle cell and thalassaemia in their studies. This version 2 is an update to a previous document shared in February 2011.

Subsequently, this version was translated into Portuguese and Nigerian dialects, and you can browse this collection of resources, and the research associated with it, on our search page.

All of these resources are available for you to use in your own school or college. They are licensed for re-use and sharing under a Creative Commons License. All we ask is that you fully attribute Professor Dyson and this website, and should you wish to share your work back, do contact the project director Dr Vivien Rolfe by Twitter. @vivienrolfe.

Here is how you attribute the work (like providing a citation or acknowledgement).

Creative Commons License
School Policy for Sickle Cell and Thalassaemia by Professor Simon Dyson is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

DO GIVE US FEEDBACK HERE!

Technorati Tags: , ,

Related posts:

OER quality checklists

open educational resources – training

OER Evaluation Matrix

OER Evaluation Matrix CC BY SA

 

Authors:                                Level:

Dr Vivien Rolfe                             OER community

OER Features:

Guides to checking the QUALITY of OER.

OER Description:

The UK OER Toolkit talks about quality considerations. Institutions will be concerned about the quality of OER released from a reputation perspective. Staff (and students) will feel unsure that their materials will be good enough to share to a community to reuse. In a series of interviews with senior university staff, the quality of OERs were referred to several times:

How could it be ensured that OER released by a university was high quality and met learner needs?”“The traditional academic quality processes govern the quality of awards, not content.” “How would OERs released remain current and reflect the quality of information required by professional bodies?” (2012-Rolfe-and-Fowler-How_institutional_culture_can_change).

From student perspectives, in interviews with learners in a health and life science faculty, quality was not identified so strongly, but what was highly valued were resources that were easy to access and clear to scan:

“I think it does because the longer I spend finding it, I tend to lose my concentration and think about what I will do next.” “…the thing is, you know, when trudging through books for example, you never really know what you’re going to get without reading the index or the content and you still don’t know what you’re going to get until you’ve re-read that thing. Whereas on the internet or online you can just scan and have a quick look through and pick out so many key words for what you’re actually looking for and get the right research that you need.” (2013 Libor Hurt_Student perceptions of OER).

How is ‘quality’ defined?

There are many features of an OER that may influence the perception of quality – as above, ease of availability and discoverability, accuracy of content, production values, reputation gain. Quality will vary on the stakeholder – those reusing OER might select OER based upon different criteria – accuracy of content, being a ‘stand-alone’ resource or ease of repurposing and remixing.

What are the main features?

As outlined in the UK OER Toolkit, as with any learning resource, authors should consider:

  • Accuracy
  • Reputation of author/institution
  • Standard of technical production
  • Accessibility
  • Fitness for purpose

So, how to check your OERs before release? Authors as gatekeepers of quality.

This simple checklist adapted from the Open University SCORE resources (original version CC-BY 2010) is a useful ‘pre-release’ guide. I’ve updated it to include a check on the inclusion of patient and medial data, to consider accessibility by diverse users by releasing in multiple file formats, and to encourage sustainability by releasing OER to at least two different locations.

OU SCORE OER Checklist_Adapted_CCBY_2015 (Download checklist document)

Students as gatekeepers of quality.

It is obvious that we all gather information from the internet to support our learning in a chaotic and unregulated manner. In one of our UKOER projects, a group of students arranged focus groups to understand how fellow students search for, and critically evaluate, web-based materials. They evolved an ‘OER Evaluation Matrix’ which a series of basic checks that a student can make to judge the quality of any multimedia resource – not just those openly licensed.

OEREM_Version1_26Sept2012 (Editable Word Document)

OEREM_Version1_26Sept2012 (PDF File)

OEREM Version 1 by Towlson and Hurt (2012) based on Leigh, Mathers and Towlson (2009)
CC BY-SA

 

Technorati Tags: ,

Related posts:

Patient consent and considerations for health and medical OER

open educational resources – training

SCOOTEROER76b_Jacob_Escott_Artwork2_Med

Authors:                                Level:

Dr Vivien Rolfe                             OER community

OER Features:

Guide to creating health and medical OER.

OER Description:

As part of the UKOER Programme (2009-2012) there was a wealth of important information produced, and in the context of creating health OER, the Medev Subject Centre team worked on some outstanding projects. I hope over the next few weeks that many of the OERs produced by this team can be hosted on this blog, as the original URLs to the subject centre pages are no longer valid. However, here are some resources to get you started in considering some of the additional checks that need to be made when creating OER involving health and medical information, and that might require cooperation from patients and families.

The team comprised Suzanne Hardy, Megan Quentin-Baxter and Gillian Brown who worked for the subject centre and were based at the University of Newcastle. You can hear them talking about the key projects on YouTube.

OER Projects

OOER Organising OERs – (Pilot Phase)
PORSHA Pathways to Open Resource Sharing (Phase 2)
PUBLISH OER (Phase 3)

During these projects when the team were working in the creation of health OERs, they observed challenges in working across NHS and academic settings, not simply in terms of dual-location of students, staff often with more than one job role, but the simple sharing of resources across separate IT networks was a problem. The team also started thinking about the issue of consent. The involvement of patients in clinical education was well established, as it is today, but the notion of recording and releasing patient materials openly gave rise to new questions. Any resource would have the issues of IPR and copyright to consider, but additional checks would have to ensure compliance with Schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act where consent is given by the ‘data subject’ to the processing of that data.

There are other scenarios that require consideration relating to ethical questions. Patients are protected by the Data Protection Act, but what when they are no longer patients? What if they die? What about cadaveric materials?

Here is some further reading on the subject.

HEA Medev S Hardy_Medical OER_2009 (PPT slides from a talk by Suzanne Hardy)

OER IPR Support Kit and Web2Rights LTD (Support kits for IPR – diagrams, charts and videos)

GMC guidance on audio and visual of patients (General Medical Council guidance)

Medev ‘Risk Kit’ – risks and consent. (Hopefully to be located here soon).

 

The reuse of OER in health and life sciences: a check-up

Using health OER (Download PDF guide on “the reuse of OER in health and life sciences”)

By Vivien Rolfe, Jacqui Williams and Richard Windle. This guide talks through some of the author experiences of creating and using health OER. In the UK alone, health is one of the largest subject sectors, with one fifth of students studying Medicine, Biological and Veterinary Sciences. A further one in ten study Nursing, Midwifery, Pharmacy and biomedical sciences. THE SCOPE FOR SHARING TEACHING MATERIALS IS VAST BUT YET TO BE REALISED.

The recommendations from this work were to:

  1. develop partnerships and communities around repositories of resources for health OER to be more widely adopted.
  2. to take the OER where the ‘real world’ users are likely to be interested in them. There is a barrier to the academic and technical language of universities. “We must work with approaches and routes of access that these communities are conversant with and that promote confidence”.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Related posts: