What About Reuse? A Study on the Use of Open Educational Resources in Dutch Higher Education

Extensive research has taken place over the years to examine the barriers of OER adoption, but little empirical studies has been undertaken to map the amount of OER reuse. The discussion around the actual use of OER, outside the context in which they were developed, remains ongoing. Previous studies have already shown that searching and evaluating resources are barriers for actual reuse. Hence, in this quantitative survey study we explored teachers’ practices with resources in Higher Education Institutes in the Netherlands. The survey had three runs, each in a different context, with a total of 439 respondents. The results show that resources that are hard or time-consuming to develop are most often reused from third parties without adaptations. Resources that need to be more context specific are often created by teachers themselves. To improve our understanding of reuse, follow-up studies must explore reuse with a more qualitative research design in order to explore how these hidden practices of dark reuse look like and how teachers and students benefit of it

What About Reuse? A Study on the Use of Open Educational Resources in Dutch Higher Education

Extensive research has taken place over the years to examine the barriers of OER adoption, but little empirical studies has been undertaken to map the amount of OER reuse. The discussion around the actual use of OER, outside the context in which they were developed, remains ongoing. Previous studies have already shown that searching and evaluating resources are barriers for actual reuse. Hence, in this quantitative survey study we explored teachers’ practices with resources in Higher Education Institutes in the Netherlands. The survey had three runs, each in a different context, with a total of 439 respondents. The results show that resources that are hard or time-consuming to develop are most often reused from third parties without adaptations. Resources that need to be more context specific are often created by teachers themselves. To improve our understanding of reuse, follow-up studies must explore reuse with a more qualitative research design in order to explore how these hidden practices of dark reuse look like and how teachers and students benefit of it.</p

GO-GN Research Review 2022

This report summarises some state-of-the-art research relevant to open educational resources (OER) and open educational practices (OEP) that was published recently. The reviews of these articles were written by doctoral and post-doctoral researchers who work in relevant fields and are members of the Global OER Graduate Network (GO-GN)

The Go-GN Open Research Handbook

This Handbook draws together work done between 2020 and 2023 by members of the Global OER Graduate Network (GO-GN). GO-GN is a network of PhD candidates around the world whose research projects include a focus on open education. GO-GN is currently funded through the OER programme of The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and administered by the Open Education Research Hub from the Institute of Educational Technology at The Open University, UK. In our current phase of activity, we began these collaborative writing efforts with a Research Methods Handbook which was created during the depths of the Covid-19 pandemic. Working together at distance provided an important way to strengthen community links when meeting in person was not possible. The Research Methods Handbook was well received by a much larger audience than we anticipated, and went on to win an Open Research Award. We followed this up with a sister publication, our Conceptual Frameworks Guide. This explores a less well traversed (but nonetheless important) area of scholarly focus. Together, these two explore open approaches to the theory and practice of research in open education. One distinctive feature of our presentation is to foreground the authentic experiences of doctoral researchers who have used specific approaches in researching open education. While it is not possible to cover all approaches in this detail, we hope that important insights are presented in this form of open practice. Throughout 2020-2022 we also regularly engaged our membership through collective reviews of recently published papers and articles. The Research Reviews serve as an overview of recent research but also as a snapshot of the critical responses recorded by doctoral and post-doctoral researchers working in relevant areas. No one volume can claim to comprehensively contain the diversity and variety of open approaches, and this is no exception. But one virtue of openness is that we can draw on the openly licensed works of others to increase our coverage of relevant areas. The Additional Resources at the end of this volume bring together a range of openly licensed texts on open education research and suggests places for further reading and research. Consequently, the information contained here represents a wide range of contributors and collaborators. The original and intended audience for this volume is the doctoral student working on an open education research project - in short, the typical student member of GO-GN and the profile the network exists to support. However, we’ve learned through feedback and analytics that the potential audience for works like this is much larger. Many people who wouldn’t describe themselves as researchers still do research and evaluation. Presenting accessible insights into research foundations and practices helps with this and can be understood as a form of open practice

Futures Literacy: “To have or to have not, is alI have got, I see no hope in those eyes as they close" (Gavin Friday, Apologia)

One of our most distinctive powers is imagination, our capability to imagine or fantasize about possible futures. Systematic use of imagination can be a powerful method to analyze possible next steps in the present. In 2012, UNESCO coined the term Futures Literacy (plural: the future does not exist, FL), the ability that enables people to understand the role the “futures” play in our behaviour, and expectations. Imagination is a developable skill that allows us to separate expected futures from desired futures using fantasy. FL can be used as a method to achieve the 5 Inner Development Goals: 1. Being (relationship to self), 2. Thinking (cognitive skills), 3. Relating (caring for others and the world), 4. Working together (social skills ) and 5. Tackling (steering the transition). It is argued that using FL can lead to paradogical insights

The involvement of human ribonucleases H1 and H2 in the variation of response of cells to antisense phosphorothioate oligonucleotides

We have analyzed the response of a number of human cell lines to treatment with antisense oligodeoxynucleotides (ODNs) directed against RNA polymerase II, replication protein A, and Ha-ras. ODN-delivery to the cells was liposome-mediated or via electroporation, which resulted in different intracellular locations of the ODNs. The ODN-mediated target mRNA reduction varied considerably between the cell lines. In view of the essential role of RNase H activity in this response, RNase H was analyzed. The mRNA levels of RNase H1 and RNase H2 varied considerably in the cell lines examined in this study. The intracellular localization of the enzymes, assayed by green-fluorescent protein fusions, showed that RNase H1 was present throughout the whole cell for all cell types analyzed, whereas RNase H2 was restricted to the nucleus in all cells except the prostate cancer line 15PC3 that expressed the protein throughout the cell. Whole cell extracts of the cell lines yielded similar RNase H cleavage activity in an in vitro liquid assay, in contrast to the efficacy of the ODNs in vivo. Overexpression of RNase H2 did not affect the response to ODNs in vivo. Our data imply that in vivo RNase H activity is not only due to the activity assayed in vitro, but also to an intrinsic property of the cells. RNase HI is not likely to be a major player in the antisense ODN-mediated degradation of target mRNAs. RNase H2 is involved in the activity assayed in vitro. The presence of cell-type specific factors affecting the activity and localization of RNase H2 is strongly suggeste

Degrowth

Despite continuous improvement, lifelong learning, and plan-do-check-act cycles, every new day the planet is a little worse off than the day before! In the first 10 months of this year alone, an area the size of the Netherlands has been deforested and twice that area has been added to desert! Technology development, continuous improvement and quality approaches are (at most) aimed at doing the best possible. That's not the same as doing the right things. Implementing wrong (disastrous) practices as efficiently as possible is actually accelerating the ever-growing problems we face. In this article it is argued through 8 suggestions how to evolve from prosperity to well-being, to economic degrowth in favour of ecological growth and increasing connectedness

Ribonuclease H1 maps to chromosome 2 and has at least three pseudogene loci in the human genome

We have analyzed the genomic structure of ribonuclease H1 (RNase H1) loci in the human genome. Human PAC library screening combined with database searches indicated that several loci are present. The transcribed gene is localized on chromosome 2p25. This was confirmed by RNA analysis of a monochromosomal hybrid cell line that expressed human chromosome 2. These data contradict a previous report, as well as the current Human Genome Project (HGP) annotation, which had placed the gene on chromosome 17p11.2. This location represents a pseudogene. Another highly similar pseudogene is present at a separate locus located more distal on chromosome 17p, while a third pseudogene is localized on chromosome 1