I’m perusing accessibility and OER. No surprise that while the definition of ‘diversity’ in learning includes cognitive issues, the overwhelming majority of the actual “things you can do to help” address vision and hearing issues and the stuff that’s legally required.
Not always! This slideshare show posted by Una Daly, current director of Communit College Consortium for Open Educational Resources, includes a set from Jutta Treviranus describing the “floe project.” Like me, they recognize that OER have a huge asset in their malleability: instead of trying to have a “universal” design and shooting for “once size fits all,” we can adapt and revise. Nothin’ against “UDL” as a campaign slogan, but it oversimplifies. They also, mirabile dictu, include adapting cognitive demand from the beginning.
Exploring FLOE got me to a “First discovery tool” and “Preference Exploration Tool” which let users set up sites to their individual preferences. The third link, “My Lifelong Learning Lab,” got me excited: it says it “helps learners keep track of their progress, and personalize their learning goals and learning experience through self-reflection.” Well… it got to a description of the idea at an even deeper space: https://wiki.fluidproject.org/ . This stuff is ‘way more techie than I can get into at my “down-time dabbler-in-it” level but it’s all open, so I can use anything that fits, and I can follow on twitter, eh?
FLOE has partnerships with oercommons.org and PhET and Pressbooks and Merlot and Connexions (which, since it doesn’t say OpenStax, means this might be a dated list).
And then, this:
Now, I’ve visited my share of “help” links that just compounded my frustration. It’s really hard to figure out what will inspire somebody to press that button.
Still, imagine a “doesn’t make sense” button on a math lesson 🙂
Imagine it having, as this does, a menu of choices (for my lessons they’d be catering to math… and doing the research to find what the choices should be, as opposed to thinking of something as fast as you can and marketing it enthusiastically. Erm, of course open would be the way to do it.
Imagine Khan Academy with actual, adaptive, mathematically and pedagogically sound instruction and solid accessibility… imagine instructors learning how to reach the people who can’t (yet) do the “easy” stuff… and while looking at Digital Promise is interesting… open really, really, really is the team I want to be on. There’s a huge, sometimes hidden market out there for “math for the people who don’t get math,” and the “growth mindset” movement challenges the “they just don’t belong in college” mindset.