MEDEV

School of Medical Sciences Education Development

Case study one

Improving care (draft)

School or Department

NHS eLearning Repository

Institution(s) involved

London Deanery

Contact + Email

Kate Lomax (kate.lomax@londondeanery.ac.uk)

Lindsay Wood (lindsay.wood@ncl.ac.uk)

Date

13 Mar 2011

Tags

Medicine, PDSA cycle, copyright, images, consent, photos of people, toolkit v3

Questions

Explanation and further information

1. What is the curriculum/training context of the resource or resource collection?

Currently hosted on the NeLR since 2008: www.eLearningrepository.nhs.uk/LOR/search/default.aspx?q=Improving+care

Available to authenticated NHS Athens users.

Part of NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement training and used for staff training.

2. What were the aims and objectives of the resource or resource collection?

This learning resource introduces the concept of improvement within health and social care. It shows how improvement may be initiated and evaluated. It also explains how improvement is everyone’s concern, with small changes having the potential for large impact.

3. How was the resource or resource collection implemented? What technologies and/or e-tools were needed to deliver this?

The resource is a 11.45Mb Flash animation that takes around 30 minutes to complete.

It is SCORM 1.2 compliant.

MEDEV good practice and risk assessment toolkit (www.medev.ac.uk/oer/signup) was used to provide guidance on releasing open content.

NeLR (www.eLearningrepository.nhs.uk/) was the host repository from which learning resources were harvested from.

Jorum (www.jorum.ac.uk/) will be used as a repository to which learning resources are deposited.

4. What guidance and/or support did you use?

Add resource section – metadata was completed for resource. For Subject field, ‘Other’ was selected. Would have naturally added ‘Healthcare or ‘Nursing’ if available, ‘Medicine’ seems too specific (fields mapped to Dublin Core?). For Format field ‘HTML’ was chosen, but naturally would have selected ‘Flash’ and ‘Web/Online’ (i.e. multiple options).

Copyright section – toolkit pathway was as follows:

Are all the elements of this resource already licenced?

Is there a single point of IPR (a single copyright owner)?

For each element of your resource, who or what is the copyright holder?

There are contributions from people who are not employees of, or contracted to, my organisation

Others (e.g. students, volunteers, members of the public, self-employed, etc.)

Clearing rights by requesting permission.

Do not proceed - consult IP/copyright specialist or library staff.

Learning resource was authored by Dr. Jean Penny. Section Seven (screen 1 of 4) contains a 'Model for improvement' figure. This is attributed to Langley (1996) ‘The Improvement Cycle’ and cited from Jossey Bass Publishers. There is a copyright symbol associated with this attribution. It is not clear what licence that this diagram is under. There are multiple images that look to be created from photos (or clip art?). It is presumed that these are image library or internal stock photos. If they are commercial does the licence allow their use (and in particular for open educational resources)? The resource has a Creative Commons BY NC ND UK 2.0 licence in the repository metadata record. As copyright could not be resolved immediately, need ‘skip function’ (version 4 of toolkit) in pathway to use further guidance sections such as institutional policy (Is it permitted to publicly share all elements of the resource?). As the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement have released the content with a Creative Commons licence that allows sharing there should be no institutional policy issues releasing as an open educational resource under the same licence (by-nc-nd) (?).

Consent section – as commercial image library stock photos of people are used there are no issues with consent. Model would have signed contract (?).

Quality assurance – there is user guidance in learning resource stating that ‘Audio can be switch on/off’. User feedback can be typed in and logged in a portfolio section of application. This requires using keyboard and pointing using a mouse is required (has accessibility been tested?).

Sign-off – resource cannot be signed off yet until copyright issues clarified (?).

5. Content exchange/harvesting and hosting resources.

The resource was not successfully uploaded/harvested as an OER by xxx, as of 14/4/11.

(Not applicable yet - The repository upload system/content exchange was seen as xxx).

6. What are the key outcomes of following the good practice and risk assessment toolkit?

Licensing of copyrighted diagram and images needs to clarified before releasing as an OER.

Provenance of images containing recognisable persons need to clarified before releasing as an OER (are there consent issues?).

7. What follow-up activity will be/has been carried out as a result of the guidance?

Terms under which copyrighted figure is licenced need to be clarified.

Provenance of images needs to be clarified.

8. What are the lessons learned from following the good practice and risk assessment toolkit?

Comparison of learning resources against good practice and risk assessment guidance by persons not involved in learning resource creation is likely require additional time to check compliance of the source material with the original authors.

Third party copyrighted material attributed in learning resource should be used with explicit licence details.

Images in learning resource should be attributed somewhere within resource so that provenance is known.

Case study two

Acids, Alkalis and Bases: Further Application

School or Department

NHS eLearning Repository

Institution(s) involved

London Deanery

Contact + Email

Kate Lomax (kate.lomax@londondeanery.ac.uk)

Lindsay Wood (lindsay.wood@ncl.ac.uk)

Date

13 Mar 2011

Tags

Medicine, acid, bases, copyright, images, tracking, terms of use, re-use metadata, toolkit v3

Questions

Explanation and further information

1. What is the curriculum/training context of the resource or resource collection?

Currently hosted on the NeLR: www.eLearningrepository.nhs.uk/LOR/search/default.aspx?q=Improving+care

Available to authenticated NHS Athens users.

Part of staff training (?).

2. What were the aims and objectives of the resource or resource collection?

Introduction to acid and base chemistry. Examining the operation and application of acids, bases and alkalis, including neutralisation, acid/base reactions, and salts.

3. How was the resource or resource collection implemented? What technologies and/or e-tools were needed to deliver this?

The resource is a Flash animation that takes around 30 minutes to complete. It is SCORM 1.2 compliant.

MEDEV good practice and risk assessment toolkit (www.medev.ac.uk/oer/signup) was used to provide guidance on releasing open content.

Re-used from CETL (School of Nursing and Academic Division of Midwifery, Nottingham) within permission and under Creative Commons licence (BY NC).

Embedded licience (www.nottingham.ac.uk/nmp/sonet/rlos/rlocopyright.html)

NeLR (www.eLearningrepository.nhs.uk/) was the host repository from which learning resources were harvested from.

Jorum (www.jorum.ac.uk/) will be used as a repository to which learning resources are deposited.

4. What guidance and/or support did you use?

MEDEV good practice toolkit was followed.

Copyright section. It is presumed that this existing open resource was re-used under a specific agreement with the NeLR. The licence on the host institutions collection is available from:

www.nottingham.ac.uk/nmp/sonet/rlos/rlocopyright.html

In addition to the Creative Common licence there are terms of use:

“Private individuals, and publicly-funded educational and other institutions, may link to and use the Reusable Learning Objects (RLOs) on this site without restriction for non-commercial educational purposes. Use of any RLO for any commercial purpose, or by any profit-making commercial entity, is not permitted without our express permission. If you wish to use a RLO for any commercial, revenue-generating or non-educational purpose, you must contact us to negotiate terms of use and payment.”

There is specific advice and terms on attribution and modification (although resource is licenced with a derivatives permissive CC licence):

“Modification to adapt RLOs to local circumstances is permitted, with the following restrictions:

The modified version must clearly display the University of Nottingham logo, and the School copyright notice. The modified version must not be distributed outside the modifying institution without the express permission of the School. Is this compatible with Creative Commons licence?

Quality assurance. The resource originally had some feedback elements linked to resource page (i.e.www.zoomerang.com/Shared/SharedResultsSurveyResultsPage.aspx?ID=L22M4SPZ8M2Q) these were not replicated in sharing/re-use in the NeLR.

Guidance on tracking was provided on original site “We much prefer that you use this and other RLOs by linking to them on this website as this ensures you're always using the most up-to-date version We gain data on usage of the RLOs, from access statistics and user feedback forms

Local circumstances, such as network security policies, may constrain your ability to link to external sites, or may impair the usability of our objects. If you're unable to run our RLOs 'from source' for these or other reasons, please contact us with a brief explanation of your circumstances and we may provide you with specified RLOs as an IMS Content Package”

5. Content exchange/harvesting and hosting resources.

The resource was not successfully harvested and re-used as an OER as of 19/4/11.

6. What are the key outcomes of following the good practice and risk assessment toolkit?

Specific terms and condition in addition to CC licence.

Compatibility of this with CC licence.

Loss of tracking/feedback when shared and re-used outside orginal repository.

Less re-use metadata was transferred with resource on sharing.

7. What follow-up activity will be/has been carried out as a result of the guidance?

Need to clarify specific agreement under which resource was licenced to NeLR.

Clarification of compatibility of specific terms and conditions this CC licence applied.

8. What are the lessons learned from following the good practice and risk assessment toolkit?

Follow up on discussions of compatibility of CC licence with specific terms and conditions.

Discussion on extent of re-use metadata transferred with resource.

Case study three

Pandemic influenza – module 2

School or Department

NHS eLearning Repository

Institution(s) involved

London Deanery

Contact + Email

Kate Lomax (kate.lomax@londondeanery.ac.uk)

Lindsay Wood (lindsay.wood@ncl.ac.uk)

Date

13 Mar 2011

Tags

Medicine, pandemic, copyright, logos, commercial brands, institutional branding, toolkit v3

Questions

Explanation and further information

1. What is the curriculum/training context of the resource or resource collection?

Currently hosted on the NeLR since 2009 (created in 2008): intralibrary.eLearningrepository.nhs.uk/IntraLibrary?command=open-preview&learning_object_key=i01n17462t

Available to authenticated NHS Athens users.

Part of Tower Hamlets PCT training and used for clinical and non-clinical staff.

2. What were the aims and objectives of the resource or resource collection?

An introduction to pandemic influenza.

3. How was the resource or resource collection implemented? What technologies and/or e-tools were needed to deliver this?

The resource is a 1.6 Mb Flash animation that takes around 10 minutes to complete and includes an assessment.

It is SCORM 1.2 compliant.

MEDEV good practice and risk assessment toolkit (www.medev.ac.uk/oer/signup) was used to provide guidance on releasing open content.

NeLR (www.eLearningrepository.nhs.uk/) was the host repository from which learning resources were harvested from.

Jorum (www.jorum.ac.uk/) will be used as a repository to which learning resources are deposited.

4. What guidance and/or support did you use?

Add resource section – metadata was completed for resource. ‘Creator’ field in NeLR has been mapped to ‘Author’ in MEDEV toolkit ‘add resource’ section. Resource details were completed by third party, how does this appear in eventual sign-off?

Copyright section – toolkit pathway was as follows:

Are all the elements of this resource already licenced?

Is there a single point of IPR (a single copyright owner)?

For each element of your resource, who or what is the copyright holder?

Don't know who the copyright owner is

Do not proceed - consult IP/copyright specialist or library staff

Are all the elements of this resource already licenced?

Is there a single point of IPR (a single copyright owner)?

For each element of your resource, who or what is the copyright holder?

There are contributions from people who are not employees of, or contracted to, my organisation

Others (e.g. students, volunteers, members of the public, self-employed, etc.)

Clearing rights by requesting permission

Do not proceed - consult IP/copyright specialist or library staff

Learning resource was created by Richard Price for Tower Hamlet PCT (NHS).

What is the provenance of animations (in house authoring presumed?).

Image of man sneezing (Crown copyright or NHS?)

Image of man in bed (image library stock photo or internal NHS stock image?).

Image of Tamiflu tablet box (image stock?). What are the issues with including images of a commercial brand/trademark? Images

Custom diagrams – are they redrawn from an original (are they sufficiently different for copyright purposes?)? Or are they novel?

Old (1948) posters from Central Office – are they out of copyright or used with permission.

Poster from 2008. Used with permission? What is licence?

Images of cockerel and pig used with permission? What is provenance?

Background image of virus electron microscopy used with permission? US public domain?

Page 16, ‘Predicting a pandemic’ – arrivals image/logo similar to BAA website commercial style. Has/or does permission need to be obtained.

Page 16, background image of plane landing. Image stock/used under licence?

Pandemic wave graph – what is source of data/how is it licensed?

Pandemic timeline – what is provenance of images?

Stock image of map of Spain used under licence.

Page 21 – 4 images. Image stock?

Diagram of dish/people – in house artwork or stock used under licence?

Resource is licensed with a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial licence in metadata record, thus derivative works can be made? Embedded images from multiple sources have not been licensed separately so derivative works can been made of these?

Consent section – are images on pages 9 and 21 commercial/NHS image library stock photos of people (if so there are no issues with consent as model would have signed contract)?

Quality assurance – does this section of toolkit need a question on the currency of medical guidance? Institutional branding in form of NHS logo and licence to make derivative works.

Sign-off – resource cannot be signed off yet until copyright issues clarified (?).

5. Content exchange/harvesting and hosting resources.

The resource was not successfully uploaded/harvested as an OER by the project team, as of 14/4/11.

6. What are the key outcomes of following the good practice and risk assessment toolkit?

Licensing of copyrighted diagram and images needs to clarified before releasing as an OER.

Provenance of images containing recognisable persons need to clarified before releasing as an OER (are there consent issues?).

Use of licence allowing derivative works on resource containing possible 3rd party material.

7. What follow-up activity will be/has been carried out as a result of the guidance?

Provenance of images needs to be clarified.

Terms under which 3rd party content is licensed needs to be clarified.

Check derivative licence is as intended.

8. What are the lessons learned from following the good practice and risk assessment toolkit?

Comparison of learning resources against good practice and risk assessment guidance by persons not involved in learning resource creation is likely require additional time to check compliance of the source material with the original authors.

Explicit attribution of images used in learning resource during authoring is good practice.

Creative Commons licence variations (i.e derivatives/no-derivatives) and implications (??)

Use of institutional branding and derivative works (??)

Could different Creative Commons licences be used for different elements of the learning resource if needed (??)