porsche nhs elearning repository copyright consent good practice
DESCRIPTION
nhs porsche medbiq toolkit medev 2011 consent commons e-learning repository oer healthcare education ocw learnining resources practice based training technical good practice ukoer nelr consent oerporscheTRANSCRIPT
Open educational resources - using and creating sharable teaching materials in health care -
findings of the PORSCHE OER project
Kate LomaxNeLR, London Deanery
Lindsay Wood, [Suzanne Hardy], [Megan Quentin-Baxter]
HEA MEDEV
Programme09.30 Coffee and registration
10.00 Welcome to and purpose of the workshop - introduction to open educational resources and the PORSCHE project
10.20 Open education resources and the NHS – current and future challenges
10.45 Breakout - personal experiences of current practice
11.10 Introduction to Copyright, and open licensing and questions
12.30 Lunch
13.00 Demonstration of finding openly licensed resources online
13.30 Using attribution tools and attributing creators
14.00 Recordings of people (especially patients and their families, healthcare workers, actors, students, etc.) in learning materials with discussion
14.30 Coffee breakHands on use of copyright, attribution and risk assessment tools (in groups)
14.45 Understanding risk, using risk assessment toolkits and 'digital professionalism'
15.30 Sharing resources between academia and the NHS
15.55 Wrap up and close
"digitised materials offered freely and openly for educators, students and self-learners to use and reuse for teaching, learning and research”
Hylén, Jan (2007). Giving Knowledge for Free: The Emergence of Open Educational Resources. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. p. 30
NHS context
"Times they are a'changing" AGAIN! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwr/4018985290/) / LEOL30 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwr/) / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/)
• Endless organisational change
• increased local ownership of education and training provision.
• Simulation, eLearning and emerging technologies – TEL framework
• shift towards skills networks, healthcare professionals empowered to deliver results
Is there room for OER in the NHS?
• Pressures for commercial partnerships and income generation opportunities
But also • doing at a national level only what is best
done at a national level – leavingmaximum opportunities for flexible, local implementation and innovation;
Do once and share- making the best use of
scarce resources
Making the case for OERs
• removing barriers and disciplinary silos of training and education resources.
• reduces duplication • supports cross-institutional sharing • promotes the concept of lifelong learning • supports discovery of most used/highest
quality resources
Good intentions: improving the evidence base in support of sharing learning materials Lou McGill, Sarah Currier, Charles Duncan, Peter Douglas http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/265/1/goodintentionspublic.pdf
OOERcontact: [email protected]
www.medev.ac.uk/oer/#ukoer #ooer #medev
• Guidance and toolkits for institutional policy, consent, copyright and IPR, quality and pedagogy. • 2000 resources uploaded to www.jorum.ac.uk • Recommendations included:
• Authors ‘hallmark’ all content (whether to be made open or not) with CC licences• Consent everything (even where ownership and patient/non-patient rights appear clear) and store
copies of consent with resource• Review institutional policies against good practice risk-assessment tools• UK HE enter into dialogue with publishers to increase potential for third party upstream rights
(especially images, music and video)• Establish staff reward system (for recognition of sharing & reusing resources, PDRs, promotion
criteria, etc.)
organising open educational resources
Institutional policy recommendations
• That authors should ‘hallmark’ all their content with e.g. CC licences (e.g. CC ‘by’ attribution only)
• Consent everything-even where ownership and patient/non-patient rights appear clear, and store consent in NHS record (patients) or with resource
• Review institutional policies against good practice• Include disclaimers in resources• UK HE enters a dialogue with publishers to increase the
potential for re-using upstream copyrights• Seek to replace, over time, any questionable material• Have sophisticated‘take-down’policies
Pathways for Open Resource Sharing through Convergence in Healthcare Education (PORSCHE)
Seamless access to academic and clinical elearning
resourcescontact: [email protected] www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/ #porscheoer #ukoer #medev
cc: by Tony the Misfithttp://www.flickr.com/photos/tonythemisfit/2580913560/
consent commons
Consent Commons ameliorates uncertainty about the status of educational resources depicting people, and protects institutions from legal risk by developing robust and sophisticated policies and promoting best practice in managing information.
Clinical setting Academic setting
• Doctor collects consent
• Recordings taken• Consent for
recordings stored with patient record
• Clear guidance available
• Recordings incorporated into educational event
• Uploaded to VLE• No evidence of
consent• No access to patient
record • Location of risk
unclear
We all want to do the right thing!
Proposing a “Consent Commons”
• A human subject version of Creative Commons• Accepts a basic human right to refuse their image/voice
appearing and, where they have previously consented, their right to withdraw their consent
• Would work like Creative Commons in that you hallmark material with the consent status and when consent needs to be reviewed (if ever)
• Has levels of release (e.g. Closed; ‘medic restrict’; review [date]; fully open)
• Terms of the consent needs to be stored with/near the resource
www.medev.ac.uk
Accredited Clinical Teaching Open Resources (ACTOR)Partners: University of Bristol, University of Cambridge, Hull York Medical School, Newcastle University,Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry.
Contact: [email protected]
#ukoer #actor #medevwww.medev.ac.uk/oer/
cc: by-nc By Maxi Waltonhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/maxiwalton/898138774/
PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF CURRENT PRACTICE
Breakout: group work (20 minutes)
Pre-workshop areas of interest
• “appropriate and accurate”• “what you don't know”• “separating the facts”• “pros and cons of sharing e-learning”• “responsible for the authenticity of the content “• “use of images and other materials - copyright
issues”• “sharing and copyright issues”
www.medev.ac.uk
Good practice compliance table (managing risk)Explanation Risk of litigation from
infringement of IPR/copyright or patient consent rights
Action
3 Institutional policies are clearly in place to enable resources to be compared to the toolkits.
Low. Institution follows best practice and has effective take down strategies. Institution able to legally pursue those infringing the institution’s rights.
Periodically test resources against policies to keep policies under review. Keep abreast of media stories. Limited liability insurance required.
2 Compliance tested and policies are adequate in most but not all aspects to allow the compliance of a resource to be accurately estimated. A small number of areas where policies need to be further developed for complete clarity.
Medium. Ownership of resources is likely to be clear. Good practice is followed in relation to patients. Take down and other ‘complaint’ policies are in place and being followed.
Review those areas where developed is required, possibly in relation to e.g. staff not employed by the institution e.g. emeritus or visiting or NHS. It may be that a partner organisation requires improvement to their policies. Some liability insurance may be necessary.
1 Compliance tested but too few policies available or insufficiently specified to allow the compliance of any particular resource to good practice guidelines to be accurately estimated.
Medium. It is unlikely that the ownership and therefore licensing of resources is clear. Resources theoretically owned by the institution could be being ripped off.
Collate suite of examples of best practice and review against existing institutional policies. Follow due process to amend and implement those which are relevant to the institution. Take out liability insurance.
0 Compliance with the toolkits unknown/untested.
Compliance has been tested and materials failed to pass.
High/Unknown. Risk may be minimal if resource was developed based on best practice principles. Institutional policy status (ownership, consent) is unknown.
Establish a task force to test some resources against institutional policies; then follow 1-3 below. Take out liability insurance.
October 2010 cc: by-sa
MEDEV’s value statement from the OOER project shows some of the benefits of developing open educational resources.
These include:• enhancing the quality of learning and teaching resources• financial benefits• benefits for institutions, and collaboration between
institutions• potential advantages for student recruitment,
satisfaction, and retention
Sharing openly: benefits
www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/value/
Sharing openly is good
50%www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/value/
• Public money• Transparency and accountability• Equality of access• Increased utility• Increased applications & better retention
• Recent blog post: It turns out students do use OER and it does save time http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/learningtechnology/2011/02/08/it-turns-out-that-oer-does-save-time-and-students-do-use-them/
One of the benefits of being explicitly ‘open’ is that it removes the need for people to ask before re-using stuff. Without it, everything boils down to ‘am I allowed to do this?’ type question and many forms of re-use will stop at that hurdle because the costs of getting the answer are too great
Andy Powell comment on David Wiley’s blog
http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1735
Mitigating risk by adopting good practice to save time and money
OER is irrelevant(but a nice by-product )
Intellectual property rights (IPR)
• There are four main types of IP rights – Patents protect what makes things work (e.g. engine parts,
chemical formulas)– Trade marks are signs (like words and logos) that
distinguish goods and services in the marketplace– Designs protect the appearance of a product/logo,
from the shape of an aeroplane to a fashion item– Copyright is an automatic right which applies when
the work is expressed (fixed, written or recorded)• Copyright, Design and Patents Act, 1988 • Copyright arises automatically when an original idea (author uses some
judgment or skill) is expressed/created– www.ipo.gov.uk
Who owns copyright?
• The owner of the copyright is the person (or persons, if jointly owned) who created/expressed it, i.e. the author (writer, composer, artist, producer, publisher, etc.)– Original literary works such as novels or poems– Original dramatic works such as dance– Original musical works, i.e. the musical notes – Original artistic works such as graphic works (paintings, drawings etc.),
photographs and sculptures, including sound recordings, films and broadcasts
– Typographical arrangements of published editions• An exception is an employee who creates a work in the course of
their employment (employer owns) • www.cla.co.uk
What rights does a copyright owner have?
• A copyright owner has economic and moral rights• Economic rights cover copyright owner acts, including rights to
copy the work, distribute (e.g. making it available on-line), rent, lend, perform, show, or adapt it
• Owners can waive, assign, licence or sell the ownership of their economic rights
• Moral rights can be waived (but not licensed or assigned) and include the right to – Be identified as the author – Deny a work (that an author did not create) – Object to derogatory treatment of the work
• www.cla.co.uk
Copyright infringement
• It is an infringement of copyright (in relation to a substantial part of a work) without the permission or authorisation of the copyright owner, to– Copy it and/or issue copies of it to the public– Rent or lend it to the public– Perform or show it in public– Communicate it to the public
• Secondary infringement may occur if someone, without permission, imports, possesses or deals with an infringing copy, or provides the means for making it
• Material found on the internet is subject to copyright• www.cla.co.uk
Exceptions
• You may copy copyright works if– Copyright has expired (e.g. for literary, dramatic, musical or
artistic works = 70 years from when the last author dies) – Your use of the work (which must be acknowledged) is fair
dealing as defined under the 1988 Copyright Designs and Patents Act (UK)
– Your use of the work is covered under a licensing scheme that you and the copyright holder have subscribed to
– The copyright owner has given you permission• www.copyrightservice.co.uk
Obtaining clearance to use copyright material
• For permission to copy, contact the copyright owner in writing and specify– The material you wish use (title, author name etc.)– The exact content to be duplicated (i.e. page numbers)– The number of copies you wish to make– How the copies will be used (i.e. for an event, course work)– Who the copies will be distributed to (i.e. students)
• For most published works this will be the publisher • Permission is needed for each and every purpose • Fees may be charged to copy the item, or for administering the
request to copy the item• www.cla.co.uk
Fair dealing
• Your use of the work (which must be acknowledged) is fair dealing as defined under the 1988 Copyright Designs and Patents Act (UK) – Research and private study– Instruction or examination– Criticism or review– News reporting– Incidental inclusion– Accessibility for someone with, e.g. a visual impairment
• There is no simple formula or % that can be applied –instead use licenced materials, or ask for permission
• www.copyrightservice.co.uk
Using licenced works
• A licence (a set of rules) describes how copyright items may be used by others
• Licensing schemes (such as Creative Commons) that both authors (owners) and users can access for free – If both sides observe the rules then both parties are instantly
protected – Owners licence others to use their content– Users obey the terms of the licence– Creative Commons provides different licences that can be
combined together– Policies can be developed to guide owners what licences to use
INTRODUCTION TO OPEN LICENSING AND CREATIVE COMMONS
Open Educational Resources
http://creativecommons.org/
Creative Commons: creativecommons.org/about/licenses/
Other open licensing models?
• Open Government license• e.g. from the Department of Health website:• http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Copyright/
DH_4067693
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/uk-gov-licensing-framework.htm
DEMONSTRATION OF FINDING OPENLY LICENSED RESOURCES ONLINE
Open Educational Resources
MedEdPORTAL
• Live demo• http://www.mededportal.org/
www.nottingham.ac.uk/xpert/
http://creativecommons.org/
Remember to check the terms and conditions
http://www.photolibrary.nhs.uk/TermsAndConditions.php
RECORDINGS OF PEOPLE (ESPECIALLY PATIENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES, HEALTHCARE WORKERS, ACTORS, STUDENTS, ETC.) IN LEARNING MATERIALS
Open Educational Resources
Consent as distinct from IPR
• Defined by the 8 principles in the Data Protection Act 1998 (and Human Rights Act 1998)
• Recognises the need for more sophisticated management of consent for recordings of people (stills, videos, audios, etc.)– Teachers (academics, clinicians, practice/work based learning tutors,
etc.)– Students and ‘product placement’ (branded items) – Role players/actors/performers/hired help (including recording crew)– Patients/patient families/care workers/support staff/members of
public in healthcare settings (sensitive personal data) – GMC guidelines for consent/patient recordings
Considerations
• People• Patients (children and vulnerable adults)• Dead people/patients (children and vulnerable
adults)• Existing recordings (already exist)• New recordings (that you are planning to
make)
Consent for use in teaching
• Patient or non-patient participation in the development of teaching materials is not ‘in their best interests’
• If it can be copied digitally then you have to assume that it is ‘open’
• There is no such thing as ‘anonymising’ patient or other information
The Data Protection Act (1998)
• Schedule 1 states:• "1 Personal data shall be processed fairly and
lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless -
• (a) at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met, and
• (b) in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met."
The Data Protection Act (1998)
• Schedule 2 states (paraphrased in [], emphasis added)• "Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of any
personal data• 1 The data subject has given his consent to the processing.• 2 The processing is necessary - [for any of the above (schedule 2) plus the
purpose of performing any right or obligation which is conferred or imposed by law on the data controller in connection with employment; in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject including where consent has been unreasonably with held, or another person in a case where consent cannot be be given or the data controller cannot reasonably be expected to obtain the consent; processing is carried out by a body or association which is not established or conducted for profit and exists for political, philosophical, religious or trade-union purposes, safeguards the rights and freedoms of data subjects and is not disclosed to third parties without consent.]”
The Data Protection Act (1998)
• Schedule 3 states (paraphrased in [], emphasis added)• "Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of any
sensitive personal data• 1 The data subject has given his explicit consent to the processing.• 2 The processing is necessary - [for the purpose of entering a into contract;
compliance with some legal obligation; to protect the vital interests of the data subject; for the administration of justice; for the exercise of any function of: houses of parliament, conferred on any person or under any enactment, Crown, a Minister of the Crown or government department, exercised in the public interest of any person; for the purposes of legitimate interests by the data controller except where prejudice the legitimate interests of the data subject; the Secretary of State has specified particular circumstances.]”
GMC guidance
• Making and using visual and audio recordings of patients 2001– Referred to clinical care and research, did not refer
to teaching• Making and using visual and audio recordings
of patients 2011 – Does refer to teaching
GMC principlesWhen making or using recordings you must respect patients’ privacy and dignity, and their right to make or participate in decisions that affect them. This means that you must:• give patients the information they want, or need, about the purpose of the recording• make recordings only where you have appropriate consent or other valid authority for
doing so • ensure that patients are under no pressure to give their consent for the recording to be
made • where practicable, stop the recording if the patient asks you to, or if it is having an
adverse effect on the consultation or treatment• anonymise or code recordings before using or disclosing them for a secondary purpose,
if this is practicable and will serve the purpose• disclose or use recordings from which patients may be identifiable only with consent or
other valid authority for doing so• make appropriate secure arrangements for storing recordings• be familiar with, and follow, the law and local guidance and procedures that apply
where you work.
GMC principles
• And you must not:– make, or participate in making, recordings against
a patient’s wishes, or where a recording may cause the patient harm
– disclose or use recordings for purposes outside the scope of the original consent without obtaining further consent (except in the circumstances set out in paragraphs 10 and 15-17).
GMC states
• Consent to make the recordings listed below will be implicit in the consent given to the investigation or treatment, and does not need to be obtained separately.– Images of internal organs or structures– Images of pathology slides– Laparoscopic and endoscopic images– Recordings of organ functions– Ultrasound images– X-rays
NHS states• Patients are any person or people currently in receipt of healthcare
treatment, or who has/have been in receipt of healthcare treatment.• Children and vulnerable adults may or may not be in healthcare treatment
but should always be considered under the 'sensitive' part of the Data Protection Act 1998.
• The NHS guidelines recommend at least three or possibly four (Scotland) levels of consent, ranging from none to 'publication' NHS level III consent.
• "Many NHS Trusts have patient consent forms which specifically designate 'level III consent' (public access including the internet). If this applies, then Open Access in the sense of sharing materials publicly clearly would fall within this permission.– Level I consent is for use within the patient record only.– Level II consent is for teaching and learning but with restricted access only.– Level III consent is usually for open access and in the public domain."
Issues
• Where to store copies of consent?• Withdrawing consent?• How to find properly consented materials?• What is the advice in relation to lecture
capture?
Policies, disclaimers and risk• In order to safeguard yourself against litigation for
copyright or data protection (consent) violation– Have a policy/disclaimer– Clearly publish your policy and keep it up to date– Train your staff in the use of the policy– Follow your policy (do what you say you will do)
• You may also want a disclaimer ‘this resource has been provided… use it at your own risk. If you have any concerns about any material appearing in this resource please contact…’
• Actively manage your risks• Take out liability insurance
www.medev.ac.uk
Good practice compliance table (managing risk)Explanation Risk of litigation from
infringement of IPR/copyright or patient consent rights
Action
3 Institutional policies are clearly in place to enable resources to be compared to the toolkits.
Low. Institution follows best practice and has effective take down strategies. Institution able to legally pursue those infringing the institution’s rights.
Periodically test resources against policies to keep policies under review. Keep abreast of media stories. Limited liability insurance required.
2 Compliance tested and policies are adequate in most but not all aspects to allow the compliance of a resource to be accurately estimated. A small number of areas where policies need to be further developed for complete clarity.
Medium. Ownership of resources is likely to be clear. Good practice is followed in relation to patients. Take down and other ‘complaint’ policies are in place and being followed.
Review those areas where developed is required, possibly in relation to e.g. staff not employed by the institution e.g. emeritus or visiting or NHS. It may be that a partner organisation requires improvement to their policies. Some liability insurance may be necessary.
1 Compliance tested but too few policies available or insufficiently specified to allow the compliance of any particular resource to good practice guidelines to be accurately estimated.
Medium. It is unlikely that the ownership and therefore licensing of resources is clear. Resources theoretically owned by the institution could be being ripped off.
Collate suite of examples of best practice and review against existing institutional policies. Follow due process to amend and implement those which are relevant to the institution. Take out liability insurance.
0 Compliance with the toolkits unknown/untested.
Compliance has been tested and materials failed to pass.
High/Unknown. Risk may be minimal if resource was developed based on best practice principles. Institutional policy status (ownership, consent) is unknown.
Establish a task force to test some resources against institutional policies; then follow 1-3 below. Take out liability insurance.
October 2010 cc: by-sa
Institutional policy recommendations
• That authors should ‘hallmark’ all their content with e.g. CC licences (e.g. CC ‘by’ attribution only)
• Consent everything-even where ownership and patient/non-patient rights appear clear, and store consent in NHS record (patients) or with resource
• Review institutional policies against good practice• Include disclaimers in resources• UK HE enters a dialogue with publishers to increase the
potential for re-using upstream copyrights• Seek to replace, over time, any questionable material• Have sophisticated‘take-down’policies
e-Learning resource ‘’elements’’ and source• Wipe board activity
Permission to film from Trust, etc.?
Role-player, patient?
Staff, students, public, relatives, etc.?
Clinician? NHS/HE contract? In-house filming/
external contractor?Contract?
Original content?
www.medev.ac.uk
MEDEV good practice toolkit
• learning resource metadata collection• content comparison against good practice
guidance on copyright/IPR, consent and quality assurance
• sign-off/auditing• learning resource ‘put in many places’
syndication through APIs
MEDEV good practice risk assessment toolkit
• www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/toolkits/
www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer
USING ATTRIBUTION TOOLS TO ACKNOWLEDGE CREATORS
Open Educational Resources
‘’Good’’ attribution?
• Author?• Original source?• URL?
– + licence
‘’Good’’ attribution?
Attribution facilitation tools
http://openattribute.com/
Drop down gives HTML or plain text options to copy into your resource
Discussion
• Technical and cultural barriers• Repositories• Getting content in and out• PORSCHE ‘open collection’• How it could be used?• Cross-search feature? • What do end users like?• Authentication issues• Deposit process? • Automated content ‘pushing’ into LMS (using ‘API’/’feeds’)
Post-session evaluation
• Please complete this online evaluation (5 mins, 10 questions)
• http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PORSCHE
www.medev.ac.uk/oer/[email protected]@medev.ac.uk
twitter.com/hea_medev
www.elearningrepository.nhs.uk/[email protected]@londondeanery.ac.uktwitter.com/nhselearning
Links in response to questions
Creative Commons licence embedding during content creationhttps://creativecommons.org/about/downloads
Creative Commons licence embedding in Adobe mediahttp://bit.ly/paJR33
JISC OER starter pack and model templateshttp://www.web2rights.com/OERIPRSupport/starter.html
JSIC OER IPR Support Licence Compatability Wizardshttp://www.web2rights.com/OERIPRSupport/creativecommons/
• http://www.jorum.ac.uk• http://www.elearning.nhs.uk/• http://www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/toolkit/• http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/xpert/attribution/• http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm• http://oerwiki.iiep-unesco.org/index.php?title=UNESCO_OER_Toolkit• http://www.creativecommons.org• http://wylio.com/ • http://openattribute.com
References
• The Higher Education Academy OER pages: www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/teachingandlearning/oer/
• The JISC OER pages: www.jisc.ac.uk/oer• The OER InfoKit from JISC InfoNet:
openeducationalresources.pbworks.com• The OER Synthesis and Evaluation Report:
www.caledonianacademy.net/spaces/oer/• The JISC Legal IPR Toolkit:
www.web2rights.com/OERIPRSupport/index.html
References
URLs• www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer• www.nottingham.ac.uk/xpert/• http://creativecommons.org/• www.jorum.ac.uk/• www.flickr.com/search/advanced/• www.google.com/advanced_image_search/• www.nottingham.ac.uk/xerte/• www.glomaker.org/• http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/ • http://openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/• http://thenounproject.com/
UK HEFCE JISC/Academy OER programme
• Organising Open Educational Resources (OOER)
• [PHORUS – HSaP]• Phase 1 OER project
• 250K - Apr 2009-Mar 2010
• Investigated institutional practice, developed toolkits, disseminated widely
• 15 UK partners
• www.medev.ac.uk/oer/
• PORSCHE & ACTOR• [SWAPBox – SWAP]• Phase 2 OER projects• £125K & £20K respectively• Linking NHS and academic
networks• Disseminating through
‘clinical education’ programmes (training the trainers)
UNDERSTANDING RISK, USING RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLKITS AND 'DIGITAL PROFESSIONALISM'
Open Educational Resources
Policies, disclaimers and risk• In order to safeguard yourself against litigation for
copyright or data protection (consent) violation– Have a policy/disclaimer– Clearly publish your policy and keep it up to date– Train your staff in the use of the policy– Follow your policy (do what you say you will do)
• You may also want a disclaimer ‘this resource has been provided… use it at your own risk. If you have any concerns about any material appearing in this resource…’
• Actively manage your risks• Take out liability insurance
Institutional policy recommendations
• That authors should ‘hallmark’ all their content with CC licences e.g. CC ‘by’ (attribution only)
• Consent everything-even where ownership and patient/non-patient rights appear clear, and store consent with resource
• Review institutional policies against good practice• Include disclaimers in resources• UK HE enters a dialogue with publishers to increase the
potential for re-using upstream copyrights• Have sophisticated‘take-down’policies
www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer
www.web2rights.com/OERIPRSupport/risk-management-calculator/
www.web2rights.com/OERIPRSupport/diagnostics.html/
http://medicalimages.pbworks.com/
Principles
1. Acknowledge that patients’ interests and rights are paramount.2. Respect the rights to privacy and dignity of other people who are included in recordings, such as family members and health care workers.3. Respect the rights of those who own the recordings and the intellectual property of those recordings, and check and comply with the licences for use.4. Take professional responsibility for your making and use of recordings and alert colleagues to their legal and ethical responsibilities where appropriate.
Email: [email protected]
Digital professionalism• To be a digital
professional every member of staff who contributes to curriculum delivery, in both NHS and academic settings should be able to identify, model and understand professional behaviour in the digital environment.
CC-BY Official US Navy Imagerywww.flickr.com/photos/usnavy/5509486066/
“learners' information literacies are relatively weak but learners have little awareness of the problem”
Beetham et al 2009
• Information/resources increasingly easy to find• Blurring of personal and professional identities online• Increasing need to manage issues of disclosure• Changing public expectations• Misunderstandings of digital spaces• Consequence
• Permanence• Lack of understanding of ownership
and licencing in online environments
Digital professionalism in the curriculum?
• Digital professionalism: how we present and manage presence in the digital environment and how that presence relates to professionalism in the curriculum
• Professionalism in Tomorrow’s Doctors:www.gmc-uk.org/education/undergraduate/professional_behaviour.asp
• No reference to professionalism online: implicit? explicit in your curriculum? Hidden?
• Are there any differences?
Digital literacy
“digital literacy defines those capabilities which fit an individual for living, learning and working in a digital society”
Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), 2011
“most learners are still strongly led by tutors and course practices: tutor skills and confidence with technology are therefore critical to learners' development”
Beetham et al, 2009
Digital professionalism: embodiment?
Academic practice: enactment?
Information literacy: competence?
Digital literacy: awareness?
References• Beetham, H., L. McGill, et al. (2009). Thriving in the 21st century: Learning Literacies for the Digital Age.
Glasgow, Glasgow Caledonian University/JISC. Online at http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/projects/llidareportjune2009.pdf
• Chretien, K. C., S. R. Greysen, et al. (2009). "Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students." JAMA 302(12): pp1309-1315.
• Ellaway, R. (2010). "eMedical Teacher # 38: Digital Professionalism." Medical Teacher 32(8): pp705–707.
• Farnan, J. M., J. A. M. Paro, et al. (2009). "The Relationship Status of Digital Media and Professionalism: It’s Complicated " Academic Medicine 84(11): pp1479-1481.
• Ferdig, R. E., K. Dawson, et al. (2008). "Medical students’ and residents’ use of online social networking tools: Implications for teaching professionalism in medical education." First Monday 13(9). Online at http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2161/2026
• Thompson, L. A., K. Dawson, et al. (2008). "The Intersection of Online Social Networking with Medical Professionalism." J Gen Intern Med 23(7): p954-957.
• Mostaghimi,A., Crotty, B.H., “Professionalism in the digital age” Annals of Internal Medicine 19 Apr 2011;154(8):560-562.
UK HEFCE JISC/Academy OER programme
• Organising Open Educational Resources (OOER)
• [PHORUS – HSaP]• Phase 1 OER project
• 250K - Apr 2009-Mar 2010
• Investigated institutional practice, developed toolkits, disseminated widely
• 15 UK partners
• www.medev.ac.uk/oer/
• PORSCHE & ACTOR• [SWAPBox – SWAP]• Phase 2 OER projects• £125K & £20K respectively• Linking NHS and academic
networks• Disseminating through
‘clinical education’ programmes (training the trainers)
Attribution and disclaimer• This file is made available under a
Creative Commons attribution share alike licence• To attribute author/s please include the phrase “cc: by-sa Suzanne
Hardy, Megan Quentin-Baxter, Kate Lomax and Lindsay Wood August 2011 http://www.medev.ac.uk/ourwork/oer/ “
• Users are free to link to, reuse and remix this material under the terms of the licence which stipulates that any derivatives must bear the same terms. Anyone with any concerns about the way in which any material appearing here has been linked to, used or remixed from elsewhere, please contact the author who will make reasonable endeavour to take down the original files within 10 working days.
www.medev.ac.uk