Cluster Group Guidance and Instructions

OVERVIEW OF CLUSTER MEETINGS

Among the various sessions and formats for this year’s conference, we have set aside time for small cluster meetings of participants at specific breakpoints in the agenda. These pre-assigned clusters of about eight attendees will have three scheduled meetings during the conference, which will offer opportunities to come together and discuss key themes, share ideas and information, and channel inputs back into the larger group. Clusters have been constructed to maximize diversity of backgrounds and viewpoints.

Central Objectives

Informed by the conference and based on participants’ own experience, each cluster group will focus on generating a small number of actionable ideas for interventions in any of the various areas discussed at the conference, such as quality supply, standards, or policies that will increase the impact of open resources on education across various learning contexts (e.g. formal, informal), either domestically or internationally. At the close of the third cluster meeting, cluster participants will submit their selected interventions to the Berkman team; the compilation of these ideas will be an input into our Final Synthesizing sessions. We recommend that each cluster choose a small number (~2-4) of interventions, although including more is fine if time and mind space permit. For each intervention, clusters will be asked to consider key variables and attributes, outlined in more detail in the reporting template below. We anticipate that significant time within the cluster meetings will be spent both on the process of discussing and defining the recommended interventions, including their definition, scope, and mechanisms. In addition to generating actionable ideas, the exercise is intended as a means for sharing perspectives, knowledge, and experiences, and networking across different fields of practice.

Mode & Process

Over the course of the three days, participants will be encouraged to brainstorm, develop, and finalize their intervention ideas via the following process and inspired by the collected set of ideas and issues submitted by participants prior to the conference [1] and/or the Evidence Hub [2]: The first cluster meeting will be focused on initial connections, introductions, and discussion regarding the cluster objectives and process overall. Participants should come to the second cluster meeting prepared to suggest one or more actionable interventions for consideration. These may include an intervention that you are working on and know a lot about, or a nascent idea that you’re interested in exploring with your cluster. In determining recommended interventions, please consider interventions that draw upon the various skills, experience, and knowledge of your fellow cluster participants, and ideally include a range of interventions from those that can be implemented in the near future with few resources (or initial, exploratory steps in a larger initiative) to more ambitious or longer-term activities. You should select your proposed interventions in the second cluster meeting. During the second and third cluster meetings, you should develop the interventions, including discussing different mechanisms and modes for implementation. As you refine your ideas for submission and prepare for the final discussion, please: • Identify obstacles, requirements, and key parties for implementation. • Identify areas where innovation is required, whether in tools, organizations and institutions, outreach strategies, policies, etc. • Define specific targets for research to better inform the development and implementation of policies and interventions.

Meeting Details

April 10th 5:45 PM Cluster Meeting #1 Location: Wasserstein Hall, Milstein East Meet other cluster participants; discuss and process the assignments for your cluster; clarify any open questions regarding mode and outputs with the Berkman team; begin thinking about the interventions to identify, propose, and potentially develop with your cluster group. April 11th 12:15 PM Cluster Meeting #2 Location: Wasserstein Hall, Milstein East Discuss possible interventions for focus in your cluster; use the reporting template to inform your conversation; and select your cluster’s proposed interventions. April 12th

11:45 AM Cluster Meeting #3 Location: Austin Hall Collectively refine, analyze and elaborate your chosen interventions; and complete the intervention data form and submit to the heat mapping team.

Submission of Interventions

The template below is designed to facilitate reporting on your interventions and the characteristics and attributes of each intervention. This will allow us to aggregate, characterize and visualize the collective work of all the clusters, both for the final synthesizing sessions and as a roadmap for action. This is experimental, and between the volume, diversity and overlap of the information we are requesting, it is imperfect! Please simply do your best to convey the contours of your thinking within this format. We also invite you to offer general feedback on the process, so that we may improve any future iterations. Use this online form to submit your suggested intervention by [xx time] at [form address]. Please send questions and feedback to: oer12hf@cyber.law.harvard.edu

Reporting Template

A. Overview of Intervention

1) Intervention Title

2) Brief description of the intervention

3) Cluster Identifier (letter)

4) Level of intervention: Micro, meso, macro or research? a. Micro – intervention is focused on impacting creators and users.

Associated keywords: Learning & Teaching, Guidance/Training/Mentoring, Customization/Reuse/Remix Business & Sustainability Models

b. Meso – Intervention focuses on the intermediaries, infrastructure and elements that help to link creators and end-users and contribute to building the systemic elements that facilitate the delivery, distribution and flow of OER materials.

Associated keywords: Accessibility, Tools & Technology, Search & Discoverability mechanisms, Quality Control, Accreditation, Feedback mechanisms

c. Macro – intervention addresses broader systemic issues such as policy and legal frameworks or behavioral and cultural aspects that shape the overall OER ecosystem.

Associated keywords: Supportive Policies, Copyright & Licensing, Community Building, Lobbying

d. Research – focus is on improving information and effort to understand the opportunities, challenges, impacts and efficacy of various OER strategies and mechanisms.

Associated keywords: Impact assessments, Evidence gathering and sharing, Case Studies

B. Key Intended Attributes of Intervention

5) Primary (or initial) context of intervention: a. Formal learning b. Informal learning c. National (focus on one country) d. Multinational

6) Primary Actors: who drives implementation? a. Content creators b. End users (teachers, learners, etc.) c. Facilitators/intermediaries • tool builders • distributors/content hosts • publishers • schools • other: (please specify) d. Researchers e. Policy makers

7) Requires new intermediary or supporting organization? a. Can be implemented by existing organizations. b. Would require a new consortium of existing organizations c. Would require expanded cooperation of an existing cooperative arrangement of institutions d. Would require the creation of new organizations to implement

8) Intended Timeframe: a. Hackable? i.e. able to explore, initiate or pilot with a short burst of hacking/development, including Friday’s Hackday?; b. Short-term – reaches maturity in less than a year c. Medium-term – reaches maturity in 2-4 years d. Long-term – reaches maturity in more than 4 years

9) Ongoing management needs - low, medium, or high? a. Low – little additional effort to maintain b. Medium – significant ongoing effort required to maintain c. High – intensive effort to maintain

10) Contributes to High Quality OER Supply: a. Aimed at facilitating sustainability? b. Aimed at facilitating re-usability of OER? c. Translation component?

11) Contributes to Supportive Policies: a. Requires or is focused on supporting legal and/or formal policy changes?

b. Focus of policy intervention: i. Institutional level ii. National iii. Global

12) Contributes to OER standards: a. Facilitates feedback and quality assessment? b. Promotes interoperability? c. Promotes accessibility? d. Promotes discoverability?

13) Adoption & Reach: a. Expands audiences and increases OER adoption? b. Engages non-traditional audiences? c. Focus on community building? d. Requires significant public outreach campaign? e. Likely to face opposition from vested interests? f. Behavioral changes or cultural shift required?

14) Research & Evaluation: a. Supports evidence-gathering, data collection, impact assessment? b. Requires more research and supporting information?

C. Implementation Requirements/Considerations

15) Financial requirements: low, medium, high? a. Low - can be implemented with little or no additional funding b. Medium - less than 100k per year c. High - more than 100k per year

16) Coordination needs - low, medium, or high? a. Low - able to launch without recruiting other participants b. Medium - requires coordination and buy-in of several organizations c. High - requires broad coordination/buy-in

17) Dependencies - low, medium, or high? a. Low - stand alone intervention that requires no complementary efforts; b. Medium - depends on another change/intervention; c. High - depends on several other complementary interventions/changes

18) Level of risk and uncertainty - low, medium, or high? a. Low – results are predictable b. Medium – reasonable degree of predictability c. High – results are unpredictable

19) Implementation complexity - low, medium, or high? a. Low – easy to implement b. Medium – reasonable to implement High – it is complicated c. 20) What types of innovations are required for development and implementation? (short answer)

21) Additional important considerations that have not been covered in the questions above? (short answer)