text:
OERlabs Openbook/Lessons lOERned (OpenLab)

Is only curricular integration in the university system sustainable?
The response to the events can be regarded as low, at present there is no great demand or relevance on the part of students or staff for the topic of OER. The marketing efforts and resources to build trust with a possible target group were rather low, but it would have been questionable whether more students or employees had taken advantage of the offers. The abstract terms "OER" and "copyright" could be packed into a professional communication concept, especially for students. At the very least, this could be necessary if one is to focus on sustainable visits out of self-interest.

Voiced needs by university staff vs. actual participation
At the level of staff and teachers, the question arises as to how expressed needs can actually be translated into training practice in everyday university life and supposedly full calendars. There can be many reasons why none of the MSD participants appeared for the OpenLab in-depth appointment - however, there is a suspicion that not every wish expressed can be equated with participation, even if corresponding offers are created. On a positive note, the two events were actively used by the "school is open 4.0" project, also based at the University of Cologne, to train its own staff and develop new project ideas in the direction of OER.

High effort for planning open events
Room applications, catering orders, technology lending - especially for selective and perhaps even spontaneous events, flexible rooms at the university are needed, which can be reserved and used with a click in the best case scenario. The effort that would otherwise be required to organise such events, where perhaps only a few people appear, is otherwise hardly justifiable. Nevertheless, these events can be profitable for individuals who, in turn, can transfer the acquired knowledge into other contexts as possible multipliers. The establishment of open spaces at universities thus remains a highly complicated question, which must certainly be adapted separately according to the university culture, especially if students and university staff are to be reached together. However, there are numerous hurdles that can be cleared, at least for project staff, with regard to event management and administrative expenses in advance, so that there is still time for pedagogical finesse and open experiments.

Technical University Kaiserslautern
The OpenLabs take place in a room of the central library of the TUK. The dates follow a two-week rhythm and will be announced online and by notice in advance, as there will be breaks between events due to the lecture-free time and some public holidays. The claim to be 'open' for all conntected to the TUK should also be reflected in this type of event. However, in the case of OpenLabs, students are the main target group. The OpenLabs are loosely linked to the OERSeminars: OERSeminar students are invited to visit the OpenLabs voluntarily alongside the seminar and to exchange ideas and projects with other participants or tutors. In the winter semester 2017/2018 four dates of the OpenLabs were arranged by students of the OERSeminare.

Location, dates, frequency
The central location in the UB and the rooms available are ideal since they are quickly and conveniently accessible, as well as being adjustable depending on the needs for a desired work. Setting a date is a challenge. Irrespective of the day and time, the OpenLabs overlap either with courses or other offers at the TUK. This is exacerbated by the fact that the OpenLabs last three hours, which means that they always lie parallel to at least two lecture slots. On the one hand students who only have one lecture can participate, on the other hand students assume that they will miss something if they cannot spare the full three hours. However, a shorter duration does not do justice to the concept and the participants. Changing days or time slots can solve the problem, but we always wanted to advertise with the same place and time to avoid confusion and stay connected to programs such as TUK Zero (Trial study program of the TUK).

Weekend appointments are excluded, as the TUK is visited by many students from the region who either go home for the weekend or do not accept a trip because of a single event. For the same reason, dates before or after public holidays were not attended and were no longer offered. The same applies to dates in the semester break which were also not attended and thus cancelled. The opening of the room every two weeks enables the participants to work on their own ideas and to bring this work to the OpenLabs.

In addition, the research of questions posed by the tutors takes time, because in connection with the research some inquiries have to be passed on. For example, detailed questions on Creative Commons licensing were forwarded to the Jointly-Team. Together with the results of the enquiry, the participants are thus made aware of existing OER networks so that they can use them themselves in the future or contribute to them. The OERlab-Team Kaiserslautern receives very little feedback from people who would like to participate but cannot. This is why it is difficult to optimise the two-week rhythm during the lecture period. The already mentioned date problems were reported back to us by interested parties inside, a change of the date would have meant that current participants no longer could continue to visit the OpenLabs.

Appeal, announcement, communcation
The launch of the OpenLabs announcement will take place shortly after the ceremonial opening of the OER room. For this reason, the first contact between students and OpenLabs takes place during the semester breaks or examination periods. In addition, it is not possible for students to predict at this time which courses they will take in the coming semester. The announcement shortly before and during the lecture period is better accepted, which made itself felt through more visitors to the OpenLabs. The first steps in addressing students were on Facebook groups. With a short dialogue between two tutors, a question from the OER context is presented and supplemented by an OER explaining the OER, for example videos from the Federal Agency for Civic Education (BPB). The feedback received suggests that we were able to draw attention to the OERlabs and OpenLabs project and that the project is known among the students in the respective Facebook group, but these students could not be persuaded to participate.

In addition, posters and flyers were created and distributed on campus and in courses. The initial poster and flyer approach was in a design and colour that stood out and contained necessary information such as location, time and rhythm of the event. In order to inform about the project and the OpenLabs, a QR code printed on the posters and flyers is introduced on the corresponding project page. During the course of the semester, possible products such as sketch notes, podcasts or videos were listed to make them easier to understand. Together with a short explanation about the OpenLabs, the flyers were distributed at first semester events. The feedback received on posters and flyers is similar to the feedback received on Facebook: OERlabs and OpenLabs are noticed and arouse interest, but it is not enough to pass by. Parallel to the ways of addressing students described above, students from previous semesters were made aware of the OpenLabs offerings.

On the university level we were involved at several events (Die Nacht die Wissen schafft, Workshop Lehre plus ), where communication in direct conversation was possible. In addition to students and staff, teachers from the region were present. This enabled us not only to present the OERlabs and discuss material that had already been produced, but also to bring the idea of OpenLabs to the events as a networking space and a place to provide information, and to take the perspectives, questions, ideas and problems expressed at the events back to OpenLabs, mobile OERlabs or the OERlabs intensively. After the first months of running OpenLabs, both tutors presented the concept and their previous experiences in the online edition of the University Spectrum. This procedure was chosen in order to present all members of the TUK with an impression of the current operation and thus to inform them about OER and open practices without having to participate in the Lab in their daily work. In addition, participants in the multi-stakeholder dialogues get an introduction and overview of the OERlabs project in advance or can read up on details afterwards. The project's own communication facilities - podcast and blog - are used for documentation and reflection. In short: Whoever reads the blog articles or listens to the podcast also knows the project.

The participating students of the OpenLabs felt invited by different forms of our speech and announcement. The initial posts on Facebook, our presence at university events as well as the posters and flyers distributed were all mentioned as the reason for our first contact with the project and as the reason for coming.

On the flyers (see Fig.1,2,3) two important points were changed: 1) The dates were printed to avoid confusion by naming the two-week rhythm. 2) On the back, examples have been added to show immediately which materials can be created. In addition, the offer should be more interesting for people without previous knowledge of OER.

Structure, program, openness
The openness of the OpenLabs is a challenge for students and tutors. An open setting is fairly unusual for students. Preparations in the form of theoretical input and practical examples should be made by the tutor, but these should be understood as a didactical reserve for emergencies. Ideally, the students should bring their own ideas and the tutors are present as companions and supporters. However, the tutors have expectations of the framing and structuring of the OpenLabs. Framing makes sense insofar as curious people pass by without an understanding of OER and the basic functions of licenses, for example. Especially on dates when new participants arrive, it makes sense to have several tutors on site, as a few introductory words do not stop everyone else. A concrete preparation beyond introductory words is almost impossible, since the tutor cannot know in advance what the participants have planned or worked on. In an open format, we have refrained from previous submissions of the work status known from seminars. With one exception, the students came to the OpenLabs as individuals and pursued their own project at their own pace. In contrast to finding ideas and planning one's own project, the start into the working phase proved to be difficult. On the one hand, this is due to the openness of the event and thus the lack of pressure from a deadline, on the other hand it is due to external factors (such as unavailable interview partners). The difficulties in starting implementation and material production could also be observed at the OERSeminars, where students had to design a lab on a specific date. Two other students took part as a team. It should also be mentioned that the students were invited to a lab with the announcement that they wanted to work on a quiz game. The background to this is that the tutors wanted to go into material production themselves in order to show that material can be produced with little effort. Together with the attendees it became group work. Thus all materials published on the project homepage were created in group work. The idea of cooperation and networking of the OERlabs project is thereby strengthened.

The open structure of the OpenLabs is helpful when it is possible to respond directly to the wish to switch from individual to group work and when students can contribute their own strengths and time within the group. For the OERlabs team, this means that framing OpenLabs with a theme, such as inviting students to work on quizzes, challenges the idea of openness. Through the framing, the students and tutors successfully worked together on a goal and thus experienced the success of a finished material, which was important for the students due to the faltering individual projects. As a result, the tutors are faced with a dilemma: Either allowing complete openness and thus risking that there will be no discussion with OER and no success, or giving the OpenLabs more structure and framing and thus forcing the discussion with OER and success.

OERlabs are becoming mobile or how to bring OER into schools?
Teacher education not only takes place at the university, but also in the second phase and at school. Therefore it was important for us to address the school as well. It quickly became clear that the OpenLab in its implemented form would not be attended by teachers at the university: Since the OpenLabs took place during class time, it was to be expected that the teachers would be absent and that they would then have to come to the TU separately. However, in order to address the topic of OER throughout teacher training, including at school, we used a format called OERlabs mobil or mobile OERlabs to go to the network schools of the TU Kaiserslautern. We benefited from the fact that we openly interpret the term "laboratory", i.e. we also want to create intellectual spaces.

A lab is becoming mobile: OERlabs as internal professional development in the school
Before the first OERlab mobile took place, we had the opportunity to give an input on OER within the framework of a school-internal advanced training course (SchilF) at a vocational school on the subject of tablets and smartboards. The open educational resources were brought into the training in the context of material selection and production for these two devices. This short training allowed us to incorporate experience into the planning of the mobile OERlabs. For example, the possibilities of using technical devices are to be sorted out in advance with the school. In particular, access to the Internet and the accessibility of the websites used must be clarified. In addition, the different levels of knowledge of the teachers with regard to the technical equipment used and open educational materials must be taken into account. For example, many teachers were familiar with free online offers. However, there was a lack of awareness that these were not open in the sense of the open debate because, for example, they were not properly licensed.

Planing and preparation for OERlabs mobile
The approach of the network schools to the OERlabs mobile offer was combined with the approach to the Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue (MSD) with the focus on teacher education. Since in some schools different contact persons are responsible for the respective event, more attention could be drawn to both offers. In order to provide the network schools not only with an invitation but also with an insight into the working methods of the mobile OERlabs, the network schools received an information package in addition to the invitation (see Fig. 1). This included material that students had created in the OER seminars and the OpenLabs. Some of the self-created material was on a USB stick together with general information material, while other material was distributed in printed form. This was to ensure that the sample material was seen at first sight and without having to use the USB stick. Two to three weeks after the parcels were sent, the network schools were contacted by telephone about the parcel, which proved to be an important step, as some parcels either did not arrive or did not reach the relevant school. While some schools had already looked into the package, we were able to use the phone call at other schools to talk about OER for the first time. During these calls, basic information about open educational resources, the goals of the mobile OERlabs and the way the OERLabs project works were often part of the conversation.

Implementing mobile labs
The content structure of the mobile labs essentially follows the structure of the OpenLabs, because the goal of the OERlabs mobile is the implementation of the OpenLabs in schools. The teachers are to be given information about OER and thus to be shown starting points for their own work with open educational resources. Both enable teachers to openly design existing teaching materials or create new open materials. OERlabs mobil offers time and advice for both variants, as the tutor also accompanies the mobile OERlabs on site. In addition, the discussion with OER is stimulated by discussions on site. Both concrete references to the corresponding school and critical comments are welcome. At the same time, a mobile OERlab cannot be more than an impulse, which is why we always point out existing OER communities and networking possibilities.

A total of two mobile OERlabs, each lasting approximately one day, were held at an integrated comprehensive school. One date had teachers and the other date pupils as the target group. The teachers were planned as a target group from the start of the project. The idea to include pupils came from a network school and was similar to the mobile OERlab for teachers. The main difference was that we visited the pupils during a project week and the topic of the material was to be produced. In addition, our tutors were supported on site by a teacher. For this mobile lab, a podcast sequence was created from the perspective of the pupils.

Challenges for OERlabs mobil
In retrospect, it should be noted that the format needs to be reconsidered, especially for teachers. This is due to the different needs of the teachers. Some need to find their way first through the multitude of online sources of open educational material, while others have a greater need to talk about technical or license-related questions. Still others see no reason to adapt their existing teaching materials or have concerns about making their teaching materials available online. In addition, the handling of one's own mistakes and the quality control of one's own or other people's open educational materials were already a challenge in the discussions during the multi-stakeholder dialogues (MSD). For these reasons, a format with at least two levels would be advisable. On the first appointment, the first steps are taken with the teachers and needs are identified in order to be able to meet the teachers' needs on the second appointment. Depending on the number of participants, a suitable division into small groups should be considered, as the support of teachers by tutors in creating or remixing open educational resources is made more difficult by the different levels of knowledge of teachers. In the OpenLabs, the tutor allocation between the tutor and the participant was a maximum of 2/5. In the network schools, it was between 2/10 and 2/14. As a result, the tutor can respond less intensively to the teachers than was possible in the OpenLabs. For this reason, the OERlabs team offered the teachers the opportunity to work completely independently, and additionally offered various tasks that were intended as suggestions. This means that more preparation time has to be planned per appointment.

We received feedback from some network schools that they were considering the mobile OERLabs, but could only consider them in the planning after the summer holidays, so not all requests could be handled by us. It is not easy to plan from a project point of view, which is intended for semesters, and to plan from a school point of view, which is intended for semesters and holidays. A problem that also accompanied us intensively during the planning of the OERlabs and the MSD. Possible dates should be planned a quarter to half a year before the first announcement is made.

The tutors were only able to provide on-site support because they had already gained experience in the OpenLabs or OERSeminars and were able to complement each other in the division of tasks. In addition, some tutors had previous experience from other university activities, but the preparation for the mobile OERlabs appointments was time-consuming and their design went through several feedback loops. In this process it was helpful to focus on the strengths of events that had already taken place. The presentation of the project at events such as the Markt der Medien (MdM) (engl. market of media) at the TUK enabled us to identify functioning entry points for discussions and stumbling blocks on which to build during the planning of the mobile OERlabs. Even with these previous experiences, groups of teachers with at least ten people were a challenge, so small groups and a lot of preparation time are recommended at the beginning without corresponding previous experience.

OER for professionals: OER intensiv
The OER intensive had three objectives:
 * 1) To address issues or problems of previous OpenLabs or Multistakeholder Dialogues (MSD)
 * 2) Training of OERlabs employees and interested stakeholders
 * 3) Finding new entrants to the topic of open educational resources

The idea was to offer actors of the TU a possibility of further education, as this is not covered by the further education programme of the TUK so far. Both OER intensive were structured in such a way that the link to OER was only established at the end of the event in order not to deter anyone with the topic of OER.

We invited the Medienzentrum Südwestpfalz to the first date of the OER to hold a training on tablets in class. This training was designed in such a way that it is practice-oriented and friendly for beginners. On the one hand, the student teachers present benefited from this by receiving examples and suggestions. On the other hand, the tutors were able to pay attention to the importance of OER in this form of teaching. In addition, it was pointed out in the training that pupils can become material producers themselves through the use of tablets, which the OERlabs can build on both in the execution by the pupils and in the preparation by the teachers. In the discussions during the first school visit and the MSD, it became clear that the teachers wanted examples and links between OER and digitisation efforts. In the OpenLabs students approached us with the desire to use tablets and the students of the OER seminars wanted to try them out in general. The training enabled us to identify appropriate apps and sales opportunities.

Based on the experiences and feedback from the OpenLabs, the OER seminars and the mobile OERlabs, the second OER should concentrate intensively on another area. Part of the feedback from both the OpenLabs students and the OER seminars was that although they had ideas, there were difficulties in getting started. In order to overcome these initial difficulties, the second OER intensive organized a Design Thinking Workshop in cooperation with an external organization.

The participants present at this second meeting already knew each other from the MSD or the OER regulars' table and work at the TUK in OER projects or with Open Access. This comparatively homogeneous group made it possible to work with a focus on OER from the beginning. For example, by working out the target group for OER more precisely, the participants could not only take approaches for their future work with OER with them, but also approach speeches or events already held with a new perspective. By working together in locally formed groups, the participants were able to exchange ideas in a more personal setting than at previous meetings, such as the MSD. Working out the target group together allowed an insight into the work of the other participants and revealed new approaches to the target group. Events such as the MSD help to generate questions, define problem areas and outline solutions. In OERlabs intensive the work on these solution sketches stands in the foreground.

Challenges for OER intensiv
However, in the OERlab a challenge for the publication of new OER became very clear through the usage of tables: Above all the apps present themselves as a quite closed system. This makes the publication of material created in them harder or impossible. Connected cloud services make it easier and more convenient to share and make available material already in the system. This makes searching and remixing OER material outside the system more inconvenient or less perceived as an alternative.

The target group perspectives generated in the OERlab intensive with the topic Design Thinking were very useful, but from an organisational point of view there is a dilemma here. In order for the events on offer to benefit from the sharpened perspective on the target group, a corresponding OERlab intensive must take place as early as possible in the course of the project. However, the experience gained so far in events was important in order to better understand the target group. Therefore, a procedure similar to that of the mobile OERlabs would be appropriate. Gather experience with one or the other event and take it with you into the reflection and improvement process so that later events can benefit.


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Field Notes (OER-Seminars)

OERlabs seminars - broadly based detailed work
University and teaching development represent a fundamental part of the project efforts in the OERlabs. To this end, there was a structural link within the project between the sub-areas and the stakeholders involved. One of these stakeholders is the group of students, more precisely the debate about students within the teacher education chain and freely available educational materials and open practices. The implementation of the round tables (see MSD Setup) represents an overarching macro-level of sustainable university and teaching development within the framework of the project. Our OERlabs seminars play a role on the meso and micro level in the course of the project. The seminars deal on the one hand with the OER topic and on the other hand build a bridge between science and profession/practice. After all, sustainability is not ensured by institutional changes alone, but also by the actors and stakeholders who pick up a topic, accept it and put it into practice.

How do OER get to the students?
In theory, this question would be easy to answer, but when formulating an answer, appropriate institutional framework conditions must be taken into account (see Number of Students: UoC Profile). More precisely, the focus of the OER topic is not on the definition of the field (e.g.: "What are OER?"; "What are licenses?"), since these points are clearly defined both by research and the practical community (see Creative Commons). Rather, the question of attitudes towards openness, cooperation and collaboration comes to the forefront. Accordingly, OER is not so much a problem for students to use as an information resource or educational material, but rather to exploit the actual potential based on the 5R permissions of Open Educational Resources:
 * 1) Retain
 * 2) Reuse
 * 3) Revise
 * 4) Remix
 * 5) Redistribute

Based on previous experience in teaching, the joint creation and transfer/processing of OER is more likely to emerge as a difficulty in the higher education landscape. This applies not only to students, but also to lecturers and teachers, because cooperation and collaboration are possible at all levels. Understandably, this is aggravated by the fact that participants have different levels of knowledge about media technology and media law issues. In some cases (digital) media are seen as part of a media didactic arrangement, but in others they are used purely as "add-ons" to motivate or activate learners. In order to initiate cooperation and knowledge sharing along the teacher education chain and to bring all relevant actors into cooperative action, practice-oriented solutions for OER as teaching material, as well as open and collaborative educational practice with regard to school and teaching should find their place at the UzK, namely among students, future teachers and their lecturers. In order to make all this possible, the OERlabs were involved in basic teaching in the practical phases of teacher training, as well as in suitable modules in other courses of study.

Practical training/phases during teacher training and media didactics
The OERlabs seminars were located at the interfaces to the traineeship and to teacher training. The connection to the practical phases of the teacher training course and the combination of modules within media didactics made it possible to deal with the topic more intensively than before. In order to give an overview of the basic structure of the OER seminars, it should be mentioned that the corresponding courses were held in tandem (cooperative and collaborative) by experienced teachers and university lecturers. This meant that topics were taken into the courses and dealt with in a practice-oriented manner. Furthermore, the practical phases were predestined for dealing with the practical implementation of the 5-R of the OER, since, as described in more detail below, student teachers should recognize, experience and understand important connections between theory and practice in this phase. For this reason, these courses were also coordinated by the Centre for Teacher Education (ZfL), i.e. the teaching planning was in the hands of a participating cooperation partner. In addition, an OER course was embedded in the curriculum of the junior professorship Media Didactics, since the project management as junior professor was involved in the teaching with half of the teaching load anyway.

Occupational/professional internship - digital education
The work placements are part of the teacher training program at the UzK and take place in the second practical phase of the Bachelor's program. Here the students have three different possibilities to complete the vocational field internship (BFP): By spending time at a school or in an extracurricular vocational field in connection with an accompanying seminar; recognition of an activity before studying, as well as an accompanying seminar; or as a project within the framework of a seminar. There were three topic-specific seminars to choose from:

 * Coding with Raspberry Pi
 * Design and production of digital learning materials
 * Mobile Learning at School

These three project seminars were organised within the framework of OERlabs and followed the following principles:

 * Product orientation
 * Practical relevance
 * Application reference
 * Collaboration/cooperation in learning groups
 * Diversity of digital offerings
 * Self-organisation
 * Close supervision by lecturers
 * Starting point: Curricular requirements (core curriculum)
 * Not (only) OER, but OEP

Design and production of digital teaching/learning content
In contrast to the BFP seminars mentioned above, which are only aimed at students of teaching professions, the OERlabs seminar was offered through the junior professorships in media pedagogy and media didactics to students from various fields of study, including educational science, pedagogy, music mediation and intermedia. This seminar dealt with current research and practical issues in media didactics, and students had the opportunity to design, develop and, if possible and desired, implement their own learning materials within the framework of a project. Finally, the respective projects and products were presented and evaluated by an external jury from the media, publishing, educational and university environment.

Practice-related product orientation in the project
The structure of the seminars and the integration of the OER theme led to a unique working process in the OERlabs seminars, which on the one hand influenced the attitude towards open practices and freely available material among the students, and on the other hand brought the necessity of cooperative and collaborative work to the forefront through the format. The practical relevance and the theoretical context of both seminar forms brought students in the teacher education chain close to their future working environment and sensitized them equally to the use of OER material in their own teaching.

With regard to the implementation of the student projects, the OERlabs seminars made substantial reference to many aspects of the Frey project method (2010) due to their subject matter, as well as the actors and objectives. The OER was strongly based on the 5-R, which brought action-oriented learning to the forefront. In many cases the instruction was given to fall back on already existing material and to adapt this material according to one's own ideas in order to be able to continue working with it. The practical examination of material was always on the agenda, but it was pointed out and produced by the teachers themselves (see Seminar Information/Tasks for Students and Analysis sheet for digital tools) that freely available materials should be found, used and adapted.

The project groups were also instructed accordingly to reflect together on project steps, especially in the first steps of the concept, the focus was on joint reflection. Although the objective had been set, the project groups first had to formulate appropriate topics in order to be able to carry out the project. The groups always had to keep in mind that the projects or the product should not loose its practical value for learning, teaching or school and teaching. Based on the semester logic - seminars integrated into the curriculum follow the regular course of the semester, whereas BFP seminars follow a block seminar procedure (e.g. some units take place as a block seminar on a weekend and are supplemented by blind learning self-learning phases) - the project work usually lasted an entire semester. Thus, the project groups were faced with the challenge of communicating as openly as possible about the individual work process and the status of their own work, as well as learning to deal independently with situations and dynamics within the group.

Finally, the students were able to look back on a project-based work process, which not only brought with it a corresponding OER product, but could also show them much more the open practices and their potentials. In the OERlabs seminars the students were to be given the opportunity and the perspective to take with them and apply both (self-made) materials and open practices in their future working environment.

Technical University Kaiserslautern
The OER seminars at the TU Kaiserslautern are integrated into the courses of the educational science part of the teacher training course. Since there are curricular standards of teacher training in Rheinland-Pfalz, a module is sought in which the contents can be well embedded. From the structure of teacher training, three seminars were shortlisted: First, the seminar "Introduction to Media Education", which is offered in Module 2 for Bachelor students of the 2nd/3rd semester (cf. Field Note TUK). Contents are according to the module manual "Reflective, self-determined and creative handling of media under technical, practical, aesthetic-forming and emancipatory aspects: education and media competence, media concept, media development and concepts of media pedagogy, communication and media also in connection with individual impairments [...]". Students "can reflect on their own use of media and select and design media according to teaching goals and individual learning requirements". In addition, there is a seminar "Approaches and current trends in school development" in module 6 in the Master's program, in which OER could also find a home, the topic of cooperative development of teaching-learning material and open education is a focal point, which raises close intersections on school development issues. A third seminar, which would be fitting, deals with the content "Didactics of E-Learning". Students "know the most important media-specific design possibilities and can assess their application" are the learning objectives of this seminar.

The conception of the seminars should take two conditions into account: firstly, the problem of cooperation in teacher education (A) and secondly, the problem of incentive structures for something new (B).

A) Cooperation issues in teacher training
It is the declared aim of the project measures to establish and develop a cooperative culture. Such a culture benefits from the mutual exchange of intellectual resources and knowledge between the participants and in turn makes this knowledge available, which in turn can lead to the emergence of collective knowledge. Cooperation is a central construct for school quality and school effectiveness (Fend 1998; Dalin & Rolff 1990; Dalin 1999; Ditton 2000, Rolff 1998), but it is mainly investigated in the context of organisational development (e.g. Bauer 2002; Dalin & Rolff 1990), rarely in the context of professionalisation issues. Questions of cooperative media action along the teachers' education chain therefore remain largely unanswered from a media pedagogical point of view. In this context, cooperative media action means joint development and exchange; the mere exchange of materials among one another is less relevant. Almost two thirds of teachers already regularly exchange teaching materials with each other (Richter & Pant, 2016). These materials, however, always remain in the same evaluation circle, where little of their development and individualization potential can unfold. The professional achievements of teachers are thus excluded from the possibilities of being known, shared and further developed in growing networks, whereby specialist knowledge is lost and cooperation in larger networks becomes virtually impossible (cf. Manila 2013 ). Richter & Pant (2016) state: "The results have shown that most teachers in Germany regularly exchange information and materials related to teaching within the teaching staff, but time-consuming and complex forms of cooperation are rare and can only be observed with a small group of teachers". (Richter & Pant, 2016, p. 34)). In addition, findings from other empirical studies show that even teaching and learning materials are hardly developed jointly (Ihme et al., 2009). The aim of the OERlabs is therefore to establish a culture of joint "creation" and sharing that creates occasions for collaboration in all stages of OER use, production and dissemination. We wanted to illustrate this in the seminars as well. So it was important to us that we sensitize students of teaching professions to OER in a cooperative way and that we integrate school practice from the beginning. To a large extent, teaching is still individual action, cooperation hardly takes place. At the same time, the OERlabs seminars are also an opportunity not only to make cooperation visible through the topic of the seminar, but also to live it in its design. Teamteaching is a possibility to make cooperative teaching visible (Krick & Reich, 2016 ). Therefore we were looking for teachers from practice who could support us in the organization of the seminars. The OERlabs will be accompanied by an external lecturer who will ensure the right balance between advising and supporting students and their peer-to-peer learning processes in line with the lab concept. As Director of Studies, Head of Department at the State Study Seminar of the Saarland and OER Coach, she brings along an alternative (open) practice and has already initiated the advisory circle, in which the students deal with specialist knowledge, exchange their own generated knowledge and thus approach open educational practices. A student assistant supported the development of these OERlabs seminars and founded the Tutor model by developing into an OER coach. It acts as an additional communicator between experts, consultants and students.

B) Organization of work processes and knowledge management
Even in schools that use digital media and employ motivated teachers, media are usually seen in a narrow context of the educational technology approach, which leads teachers to use technologies only for learning (cf. Schiefner-Rohs & Hofhues 2015) and thus to remain with their concepts, materials and experiences either within themselves or within their colleagues. Media to support everyday work processes - also in class preparation and follow-up - are usually rarely discussed. Thus, in addition to the cooperation problem, a narrower concept of media and the blind spot of the work process organisation become the topic of OERlabs. In addition, there are individual reservations about working with OER. These concern, for example, the potential "gifting" of intellectual property from which others could gain an unfair advantage (cf. Malina & Bonarius 2013 ). These reservations can prevent productive knowledge management among teachers. The OERlabs have taken these as their starting points in order to create new incentive structures for teachers to approach collaborative media work with the help of OER.

The OERlabs seminars also focus on the following aspects:
 * Overall societal developments in digitization, migration and inclusion that lead to increasingly heterogeneous learning (and teaching) groups and therefore make adaptable, individualisable teaching and corresponding materials and methods indispensable. This teaching guidance is made possible by OER practices.
 * OER become interesting for reasons of independence: the material can be constantly updated without having to wait for new books or materials. In addition, teachers benefit from the experience of others on a specific subject, and there may not yet be any publications.
 * In the seminar evaluations of the teacher training offers, it is usually criticised that only the use of media and media pedagogical competence training can be discussed and discussed in theory, but that there is no concrete practical relevance. This changes due to the concrete work assignments associated with the creation of OER and the exchange of information on it. At the TU KL, various cooperation partners will also offer concrete occasions and support in the labs for the production of media.
 * With regard to copyright protection, OER licensing is a very secure way to protect intellectual property. Today, digital content is so easily distributed and shared in so many ways that the license can at least ensure the attribution of the material to the original author, thus reducing the incentive for others not to cite the source.

The OER seminars are oriented towards action-oriented media education (Schorb, 2008 ), in which "it is not the media, but the appropriating individuals in their social context, in which media play an essential role, who are at the centre of media education efforts (...)" (ibid., p. 77), but also project learning according to Frey (2002 ) such as student orientation (students focus on their own questions), reality orientation (complex phenomena of current social discourse are addressed) and product orientation (e.g. by designing a continuing education course or producing teaching and learning material). Both aspects serve the professional development of students with regard to the acquisition of competences relevant to the work process, especially in the teaching profession.

In the summer semester 2017 there will be a total of five four-hour classroom sessions for bachelor students at TU KL's Media Pedagogy Seminar between May and July, which will provide a framework for the first OERlabs. The sessions deal with finding, creating and sharing OER and later also with their further development, quality assurance and possible uses for and by OER. The seminar also takes up media pedagogical theories and concepts and relates them to OER practices. As "highlight" and quasi "product" of the first OERlabs seminar the students prepare a Workshop on iMedia in Mainz on 30 May at the Open Educational Resources Forum for the participants to prepare, design, implement and reflect on their own responsibility (documented in the blog and wiki!). (see Projektwiki/OERlab). By making the OER practices accessible to others (teachers), the security in one's own dealings with OER is strengthened and new impulses and conceptual thoughts from the workshops are collected for the progress of the OERlabs. In the seminar "Didactics of E-Learning" (Master level), a seminar unit was used for the topic of copyright with OER insertion. Students of the bachelor's seminar in media pedagogy developed a lecture on this subject and had a copyright/license memory created in the group work phase. This not only made a networking with school practice visible, but also a vertical networking between students of the Bachelor and Master phases.

In the winter semester 2017/2018, this concept was implemented in a similar way, only at one point or another refined or adapted to the semester structure. Once again, the focus was on designing a continuing education event at iMedia as a product, but this time with a focus on school development. The teacher was integrated by Skype for support, the documentation took place in an OLAT course. Students designed OpenLabs events in this seminar. In the 2018 summer semester, the seminar was to be expanded to include school development issues, but did not take place as planned due to a lack of registrations.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Project (OER-Seminars)

OER seminars Kickoff, issues and topic priorities
Within the framework of our project, several seminars will also take place, which take up the topic "OER" and its numerous facets: A seminar under the direction of Jun.-Prof. Dr. Sandra Hofhues as a regular offer for students of the Faculty of Humanities of the UoC and further BFP seminars in cooperation with the Center for Teacher Education of the UoC. BFP seminars (vocational field internship) are the second practical phase in the Cologne teacher training program. The seminar under the direction of Jun.-Prof. Dr. Sandra Hofhues is integrated into the project, but is not part of the project funding. The BFP seminars take place within the framework of project funding and the lecturers have to be employed externally.

SE: Designing and creating digital learning materials
The project seminar takes up the most current research and practice questions and places them in the context of textbook research and media development. The participants will design their own learning materials that comply with the principles of the 5R and can be used in schools and universities. The seminar takes place each week and the project-related work takes place in groups formed during the face-to-face session. The choice of topics is left to the students. After an impulse "Produce digital learning material as an open educational resource" a workshop on the topic "From media production to the remix principle of OER" follows. The two sessions provide participants with a good introduction to the topic, since experience in media production is not considered a participation criterion. The virtual group work to substantiate the topic continues the work and leads to the group's own production of OER, initially as a rough concept. Then the intermediate presentation of the self-produced OER with the collegial consultation takes place. A further impulse "Pitfalls in media production (including media law)" enables the participants not only to avoid the typical and gross mistakes, but also to be familiar with the subtle peculiarities of producing their own OER. In the next virtual phase of group work, a detailed concept of the self-produced learning materials will be developed and presented. In the group consultation, the open questions are clarified, followed by the final presentation of the detailed concept to an external OER jury (from the media, publishing and pedagogical environment), which assesses the quality of the learning materials produced and gives the groups final feedback.

BFP-Seminars
The internship seminars are structured according to the principle of the blended learning concept. They consist of three phases, which take place in a repetitive rhythm building on each other. The three phases are: Self-learning phase, digital communication phase and face-to-face phase. All seminars provide the structured self-learning time in the form of portfolio work and cover 180 hours of effort. You can view the exact structure of the seminars here.

BFP: Mobile learning at school
In the first self-study phase, students acquire the basics of digital media (media didactics, OER, media design). In the subsequent attendance phase, experience with digital teaching, mobile learning, SWOT analysis and lesson planning will be exchanged. In the following obligatory digital consultation, the participants will be given advice on how to design a series of lessons and develop their own ideas for content for mobile learning in the next practical part. In the next digital communication phase, the group work, guided by learning groups, will take place. Afterwards, the students have the opportunity to get advice in the analogue or digital consultation hours, so that the next practical part of the series of lessons and content on mobile learning is ready. The following attendance phase serves to present and evaluate the results.

BFP: A must-have for future school teachers: coding, handicraft and teaching with Rasperry Pi
The seminar has the same structure and procedure as the seminar "Mobile Learning at School". The difference lies only in the focus of the topic: creation of teaching scenarios and materials for working with the Raspberry Pi.

BFP: Designing and creating digital learning materials
The seminar also follows the principle of the blended learning concept. The aim of the seminar (apart from teaching the basics of OER, media design, media didactics, the associated legal situation, and the examination of examples) is to deepen the acquired knowledge through application. The students deal with the possibilities of OER in a division of labour, in this seminar with tools. These tools are then explained, evaluated and provided with possible application scenarios in order to enable competent handling of them. The evaluation of the selected application possibilities takes place with the help of the interviews, which the students carry out independently and then reflect on.

Participants
The OER seminar "Design and Production of Digital Learning Materials" by Jun.-Prof. Dr. Sandra Hofhues was offered to students of educational sciences, pedagogy, educational science, music mediation, intermedia and early intervention.

The three BFP seminars are aimed at students studying to become teachers at the UoC.

Results and documentation
The preparatory material for the BFP seminar "Mobile Learning", conducted by Henning Host and Simon Smend, is freely available as OER under CC-BY-SA license here.

All materials from the seminar "Coding with Raspberry Pi" can be found on Medienistik, Tobias Hübner's blog: Die OER-Werkstatt: Materials accompanying the Raspberry Pi Seminar at the ZfL Cologne.

The EBook of the BFP seminar "Design and Production of Digital Learning Materials" can be found in the Blog of the seminar.

Project organisation side-notes
The OER seminar "Design and Production of Digital Learning Materials" was evaluated at the end of the semester by students using feedback forms to the teacher. Most students emphasize project-related group work and the practical development of their own ideas as points they particularly like about the seminar. The technical implementation, however, is a big challenge (or even too much) for many students, as the technical knowledge/understanding of most students is low and is not taught at the university.

Technical University Kaiserslautern
A total of three OER seminars were planned, all of which are located in the educational sciences: Two seminars at Bachelor level and one at Master level. The seminar in the Master of Education did not take place because too few students registered for it. In another Master's seminar, students recorded OER in an input on copyright at school and had an OER/copyright memory created in the seminar. In the following, the two bachelor seminars are presented one after the other. The overriding idea was to use team teaching from university lecturers and school teachers. Furthermore, persons from the University Library and the eTeaching Service Center are available as contact persons. In both Bachelor's seminars, attendance dates alternate with independent work phases. They are therefore organised according to central blended learning principles.

SE 1: Media pedagogy - OERlab 2017
Target audience Teacher training students in the Bachelor's program

Learning objectives The seminar was based on four learning objectives. The students should: 1) get to know basic dimensions of lesson planning, 2) get to know learning theories and methodical aspects, 3) implement acquired skills in self-designed units and 4) select media according to teaching goals. The seminar promotes didactic knowledge and skills, which should enable the design of individual learning spaces and support the reflexive and creative handling of media. This semester's focus is on OER (Open Educational Resources), which students should get to know and create, share and remix themselves. The visit to iMedia and the active preparation and design of two programme items on site for the Open Educational Resources Forum are also planned.

Structure

 Didactic arrangement The first seminar was held via a Wiki, which is still visible and will remain visible. The Wiki documents not only the procedure in the seminar, but also results and the intermediate steps leading there. Besides the documentation of the seminar organization should reflect the open practices of the seminar. The seminar is based on three major tasks (see below). With a teacher, who works with open educational resources, a practical seminar leader could be won, in order to supplement the project coworker of the OERlabs. Both were there to help and advise the students. This was necessary because the seminar was scheduled with only four attendance dates and the students therefore worked more independently. The independent work phase does not only include working on texts, independently exploring open programs or tools, but also the change from the student role to that of a teacher.

Task design Task 1: In concrete terms, the task consisted of: a) Research on OER, b) Creating OER matching to the research topic, c) publish self-created material, d) plan a workshop on OER for the iMedia2017. Task 2: a) To recognize the unique selling point of a given text on media pedagogical topics, b) To create a matching OER c) To publish the results of the work. In the second working phase experiences from the role change are already incorporated.

Design of feedback During the attendance phases, one of the teachers was on site next to the seminar leader to answer questions directly and to discuss the interim results with the students. Since the teacher herself works with OER in her lessons, the students received feedback on the one hand with regard to school practice and on the other hand information on open educational materials. Both the seminar leader and the teacher were available to the students via e-mail during the independent work phases. In the planning and working phase for iMedia 2017, the students worked with open tools, to which all members of the seminar had access. In this way, the seminar leaders were able to provide students with information on the progress of their work.

SE 2: Media pedagogy - OERlab
Target group Teacher training students in the Bachelor's programme

Learning Objectives The seminar was based on four learning objectives. The students should: 1) get to know basic dimensions of lesson planning, 2) get to know learning theories and methodical aspects, 3) implement acquired skills in self-designed units and 4) select media according to teaching goals. The seminar promotes didactic knowledge and skills, which should enable the design of individual learning spaces and support the reflexive and creative handling of media. This semester's focus is on OER (Open Educational Resources), which students should get to know and create, share and remix themselves.

Structure

Didactic arrangement The second seminar took place in the winter semester 2017/2018 and started with the same staff but with a different time and organizational process. The changed schedule resulted from the fact that the same teacher could be won as in the first seminar, other obligations made it impossible for her to lead the attendance appointments. Therefore, the students were able to reach her via video telephony and ask for feedback. Secondly, the OpenLabs participants were able to benefit from the materials produced during the first OERSeminar. To ensure that the students of the second OERSeminar could also benefit from the OpenLabs, both events were linked to a few dates. It was the students' task to design and advertise an OpenLabs date themselves, i.e. to create material together with the OpenLabs participants on the respective date and to prepare a topic for it. The materials created in the OERSeminar are thus not only an end in themselves for the seminar's existence, but a joint material production that is freely accessible online for everyone. In addition, the students were again given longer work phases between the seminar dates. The seminar dates at the beginning of the semester were used to find topics and information about OER.

Task design Before working with and on OER, the seminar focused on concepts of media pedagogy, which were presented as posters by the students. The goal after the poster presentation was to plan and implement one of four OpenLabs appointments per student group. First the groups looked for a topic, structured the lab date roughly and thought about which material should be created in the lab and how the lab date can be made known in a meaningful way. This was followed by a presentation of the intermediate status in the seminar and a further work phase to plan the detailed course and to consider which support visitors* inside the lab need. Both were to be discussed with the teacher, adapted on the basis of the feedback and then implemented in the lab. In addition, the students ensured that the material produced was sent to the OERlabs team for publication.

Feedback Later seminar dates offered students feedback on their ideas and the planned procedure by the seminar leader and the tutors. After a further working phase, the current status was presented to the other students in the seminar in order to receive feedback from them and, for example, to exchange ideas on advertising design. The OpenLabs were open to the students at any time to get an impression of the process and to try out their own ideas on OpenLabs design on site. As a further feedback mechanism, a mandatory appointment was made with a teacher via video telephony. The students of the OERSeminars received feedback from four different perspectives (seminar leader, teacher, tutor and the students of the OERSeminar) before they presented their ideas to the audience. The different feedbacks offer the students advantages and disadvantages. If students, for example, want to work on volcanism, then the tutors support them from a perspective that should open up many possibilities. If it is absolutely necessary to develop a concept that enables the use of geocaching, the teacher works from the teaching perspective and looks at the introduction to the topic in detail, for example. However, the students are thus prepared for the discussions and questions arising in the lab unit, without their need to try something different[8] being slowed down.

title: OERlabs Openbook/Project (OER-Seminars)


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Lessons lOERned (OER-Seminars)

Sensitization and contextualization
The OERlabs seminars at the UzK are aimed at two target groups - student teachers and students with an interest in media didactics (see Field Notes). Through this composition one can assume an affinity to all topics relevant for the project: Teaching and learning with digital media, digital work processes in everyday school life, and much more. This does not mean, however, that when planning the OERlabs seminars at the UoC we could "automatically" assume that the students had mastered media handling or had already taken their first steps in the field of OER, on the contrary: the OER topic is not obvious for everyone when it comes to the context of school as well as teaching and learning. Accordingly, the OERlabs seminars faced a long process, which included both the introduction and sensitisation to open work and thinking processes as well as the contextualisation of the OER debate within the media-didactic discussion.

Students generally attend seminars with different prerequisites with regard to their knowledge and actions. The seminars are therefore similar in that the development work of the students can usually extend over an entire semester, if not over several years of study. Due to the duration of the project, we have been occupied with these challenges from the very beginning. Through the entire MSD-Process including the OpenLabs it has been shown that all efforts to change attitudes require a lengthy and intensive process.

The comparison with 'normal' seminars, which usually also focus on communication and interaction, is obvious: Especially at the beginning of the first seminars, we as a project team often asked ourselves the question to what extent another seminar deals with the aforementioned situation. How are processes of personal competence development set in motion there? And how are one's own attitudes or attitudes, e.g. towards media use, addressed? Even if the "normal" seminar does not exist at a university. The question in our case should rather be directed at how the approach of the students changes with the solution of a more or less specific problem, if a kind of project is carried out in the seminar, but this is in a social context and deals with newer developments such as OER?

Project learning with and through OER
The first and probably most important anchor for the success of the OERlabs seminars was their placement in curricular courses. The BFP-Seminars are held at a very specific point in the teacher education chain, where students learn about the interface between digital work and practical school issues. The educational-sciences focused OERlabs-seminars found their place in an equally important place, namely at the focal point between research or science and teaching and learning practice. Didactically, these differences were overcome through project learning.

It turned out early in the working process of the seminars that some OER principles are inherent in project learning. Although a basic thematic introduction was given in all seminars, the students were confronted with the necessity of an open attitude. Since in most cases students did not know each other before, the search for topics for the projects was already permeated by an open process. In order to support the students, topic overviews or proposals were first determined on their own and then discussed in groups, guided by their interests, before the students decided on group work on the basis of their interests (Step 1). This means that they could not directly select their group members (as long as they actually pursued their interests and did not override social aspects such as sympathy or personal acquaintance). After the group formation, the students and their new project partners had to agree on a common project theme. The aim was for the group members to reorient themselves within a group and a topic in order to subsequently deepen a specific sub-theme, which is still of interest to everyone, in a self-organised way (Step 2).

Both steps of group and topic finding already represented the basis of an open practice: Topics were proposed freely by the students, the group compositions were based on the theme and the choice of the project focus was discussed collaboratively. The resulting dynamics represent interesting parallels to networked work on the Internet and to cooperation in schools. Students were forced to engage with people they had never met before, to build trust and to approach each other thematically.

In project learning, experiences such as these are inscribed, in a sense pre-programmed, if one understands the inclusion and penetration of one's own project as a personal and group-related learning process with ups and downs. The proximity to everyday professional life, be it as a teacher in school or in other professional contexts, is also given by the type of cooperation and collaboration. For example, a school's staff should not be afraid to network intensively with colleagues, even if the common interests or a topic only have superficial connections. In the OERlabs seminars, students thus had the opportunity from the outset to learn about practices that they can use not only in a digitally networked classroom environment, but also in their daily work with colleagues at schools. Because of the digital world such practices seem to be "natural", e.g. through communication via social media or cooperation on e-learning platforms (e.g. ILIAS). In teaching practice, however, it is a challenge to address media-related attitudes, to break them up or to transfer them to a later (professional) everyday life (cf. article teacher education (German language)). Project work after the basic topic identification presupposed that the students network among themselves (online and offline) and exchange openly about their individual progress. Constant reflection on the progress of the project was also a challenge, as the seminars did not follow a certain regularity (e.g. weekly), but were partly conducted as block and blended learning seminars (see Overview OER-seminars). This also showed parallels to the future work, because projects often run over one semester or school year, but do not exclusively represent the sole employment of a teacher. Students were also confronted with an open work process in which communication strategies are first negotiated.

The requirements of modern team teaching at school were reflected in the way the respective topic was dealt with and the project results were presented. In part, the distribution of tasks within the groups was organised on the basis of the main study areas (focus on media/media production, focus on educational science/general didactics/media didactics), in part, groups were composed on one side (e.g. the same combination of subjects). Whether and to what extent this could be used as a strength of the group constellation is up to the groups themselves. Here, too, the connection to the OER topic became apparent: on the one hand, forces were bundled, on the other hand, different competences were used to create new ideas and concepts. However, the creation of trust and communication about the individual work process was always of great importance.

Attitude towards OER principles
One of the advantages of such project work is that many desired actions and discussions can implicitly be taken up or forced. Through the project work the students have a concrete reference to their future workplace (especially BFP seminars) and also get a practical reference to teaching and learning from a research perspective (especially the educational-science OERlabs seminar). The form of project learning also emphasizes open communication, whether online or offline.

The systematics of the respective study processes can be a further advantage if students want to attend these seminars. This means that attending these seminars is in line with the objectives and thematic interests of the students. This does not say anything about the actual (work) commitment of the students within the respective projects, but the assumption exists that on the one hand school practice and on the other hand a research perspective on school practice is important for these students.

However, these facts require a critical reflection on our part, because they can be seen as disadvantages of such a seminar structure: Participation and cooperation in seminars alone does not indicate a profound discussion and (cognitive) processing as well as a deep understanding of the basic principles of OER. This relativization of the seminar experiences is important from our point of view, since a seminar alone will hardly change fixed and existing (media-related) attitudes of students. Instead, courses such as these sensitise students to the importance of specific topics for future, professional and not least social actions of each individual.

What do we take from it?
The basic question that concerns us after the OER seminars is easy to formulate: Should OER be identified and considered as material or are OER rather part of a didactic principle?

From this basic question, which opens the spectrum of the discussion between 0 and 1, further questions arise regarding OER practice, where OER can be installed and used:

In the OERlabs seminars, openly licensed material was always used, so that everyone was given the role model function by the teachers. In some cases, OER material was remixed or used by the teachers themselves, but in all cases at least the license for the material they actually created was marked and made available to the students online.
 * On the question of the use of OER by teachers

The principle of creating one's own learning materials was also tried out in the OERlabs seminars. This means that there was no explicit discussion with the students about the meaning of licenses. On the other hand, the focus was on providing the self-made materials with the right licenses. The differences between the Creative Commons licenses were discussed comprehensively and repeatedly, as well as which licenses do not qualify as OER. However, the discussion did not focus on the moral perspective (e.g. public domain vs. no-derivatives), but on the practical level of their concrete handling. In this way, the students have dealt with the question of the "right" license, which is usually raised in the foreground in many cases. In terms of learning theory, this approach can be assumed to lead to more in-depth processing.
 * For the creation of learning material by students and the principle of "correct" licensing

An interesting perspective was the discussion and specification of remixing for new student products. By fine-tuning the seminar concept, the focus of the students was on creating their seminar projects on the basis of existing materials and contents. This drew the other discussion with itself not only to find OER material, but to integrate this into its own planning and thought process. The strongest contradiction experienced by the students was that they had a new idea and had to implement it as far as possible, but at the same time had to fall back on existing material already created by others.
 * On the remix potential of learning materials

We have repeatedly addressed the fact that an open attitude - on the part of students as well as teachers - towards the subject, but also towards alternative didactic forms and formats, is also important in the courses. It reflects the main task of the entire OERlabs project, since an open attitude depends on personal factors, but is influenced to a not insignificant extent by others (fellow students, colleagues, etc.) and is determined by the specific framework conditions of the organisation. The OERlabs were able to show that this process can only be set in motion over a long period of time and that it requires the networking of different stakeholders (including their opinions, perspectives and ideas) as well as the role model role of the topic providers (the OERlabs) and the presentation and experience of the actual action processes (MSD or OpenLab work). The mere thematisation of the production of OER material does not reach these (higher) school cultural and structural limits. As mentioned earlier, student participation in seminars, for example, does not necessarily mean reflecting on one's own attitude. In addition, the limits of project work within the curricular framework become visible, among other things, through grading, evaluation and other (temporal) limitations. One solution could be to confront students from the outset with the fact that their products are made available to others (e.g. through appropriate university repositories, real school cooperations).
 * The need for an open attitude towards material sharing

What do we recommend?
If you want to implement a project like OERlabs yourself, you should ask yourself a fundamental question in advance: Do you discuss licenses and their pitfalls or do you discuss didactics and the correct use of material (regardless of format and medium)? A further tip is certainly not to forget the stakeholder group of the students in any project, because: Not only the work of the students in seminars is of great importance, but also the involvement of students in all development projects and events (e.g. MSD, OpenLab) is essential for the later acceptance of the measures in the student body. However, this also means that such development projects must be implemented at every level of a university. It is therefore about teachers and students as well as cultural and structural conditions in order to initiate movements and initiate them in the longer term.

Inspiring students for unknown topics
We started well prepared between school and university and had to put up with an immediate setback: Too few Master's students had decided on a course with a media focus, which was to establish the first OERlabs. Was it the amount of work? Or was it the seminar time on a Friday when TUK students tend to go home? Or maybe it was because the topic of OER was too unknown or because OER itself had to be created, shared and remixed? Has the unusual requirement to produce something yourself discouraged students? It is an already uncovered fallacy that motivation problems of students could be solved by the mere use and thematisation of digital media (cf. Schiefner-Rohs & Hofhues 2015). On the contrary, it is more important than ever to offer students occasions, support and advice in dealing with and producing digital media if (media) practices are to be sustainably changed. For it is often courage and the desire to experiment that students lack and which can thus be promoted. But first you have to get involved with them.

The OERlabs seminars of the TUK then took a second try and integrated the course into the bachelor courses. Registration was better here. One may take a critical view of the fact that the Lab idea is thus pressed into a seminar structure with an elective character. However, this has many advantages at the start: Not only the firmest of the student body, who already have a high affinity to the topic, are concerned with the change of school under digitalization. In addition, with the relocation of the OERlab seminars to the introductory phase, there is a justified hope that interested parties will be able to work on the project and create OER far beyond the seminar phase. And last but not least, students benefit as long as possible from the resulting collaboration structures with and within the participating institutions.

OER seminar content as process and product
The OERlabs were integrated into the seminars, which had an affinity for digital media in schools. This is where they could best be implemented in accordance with the module manual. However, such an approach also had disadvantages: There was a quasi automatic focus on the topic of digital media, even if in the first seminar the students were to develop an OER material on the topic of media pedagogy (https://www.unispectrum.de/lehr-und-lernmaterialien-im-digitalen-wandel).

A particular challenge for the students was on the one hand the open work orders, but on the other hand also the potential public action. In order to address OER not only as a product (as material), but also to clarify the development process and the associated cooperative action practice, the seminar documents were made public on the one hand, but on the other hand the student results were made publicly visible. This led to repeated discussions (not only in the seminar) about whether student results should be published. Because the 'big shock' happened when - thanks to the review case of our cooperation partner from the university library - it turned out that a film did not comply with copyright law - but was already published on the net by the students. This example made the whole problem of OER in teaching clear: If you don't want to reduce OER only to product creation, you have to map the entire process, with all its highs and lows. And here at least the option of failure (cf. Schiefner-Rohs, in print) is inherent in the seminar concept and provides students with inspiration to reflect on their own practice.

Connecting/networking between schools and university
Students had the task of preparing their own lab unit on a topic of their choice and creating their own material together with those present. They were supported by university staff as well as by media-related teachers. This cooperation was implemented in different ways: once as a classic team teaching with two teachers in other semesters(Gast, Schildkamp& van der Veen, 2017 ), the media-affine teacher was responsible for commenting and advising on the OER materials created. Throughout the semester, the students were thus always given a view of science and school with this type of event, so that the seminar also contributed to putting action and science knowledge in relation to each other (Wildt, 2000 ). In both cases, the view of school practice was appreciated by the students, even though it was not always free of conflict at one point or another.

The Open Labs were also linked to the seminars and offered to students as an additional contact point. In the summer semester of 2018, the students then had to design a session in the OpenLabs as part of the OERSeminar. It became interesting when two teachers from local schools came to the seminar and the audience mixed between OERlabs Seminar and Open Lab.

Product- and problemorientation during the seminar
However, it is not only the production of materials that pays off for us in terms of action and problem orientation, but also the design of further training courses on the subject of OER. Thus, the students not only had the task of creating materials in the OERlab seminars, but they also had to assume responsibility for slipping into the role of the teachers. Thus, the task was to design input within the framework of iMedia or to take over the content design of an OpenLab. According to the motto 'Learning by Teaching' (Renkl, 1997 ) we hoped here that the students would not only perceive the topic of OER from the perspective of media production, but that they would quickly reach self-efficacy by explaining each other and taking on an expert role (Shin, Jonassen & McGee, 2003; Jerusalem & Hopf, 2002 ).

Teacher participation
Two of the OpenLab dates designed by the students of the OER-seminars were attended by one teacher each. The teachers were involved in the material preparation and the discussions. As a result, all participants were able to benefit from contributions from teaching practice and the two teachers were able to take suggestions with them for their lessons. This constellation of event format, students and teachers resulted in a success story. One group of students remixed the wOERking memory which was created by the participants. The participants were to retain the underlying game principle, but create meaningful questions on concrete topics of school teaching. This resulted in playing fields and questionnaires for the subjects Biology, Physik and Latin. The present Latin teacher uses the Latin version of the game since then in repetition lessons outside regular lessons. More information can be found in the corresponding podcast sequence are recorded for listening. In this podcast it is addressed that pupils ask further questions, which are also available.


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Headnotes (OER-Seminars)

OERlabs as an example of action-oriented and design-oriented media pedagogy in higher education
The project is characterised in particular by the attitude of the participants to take a look behind current phenomena and to connect them to older (media) pedagogical debates. As far as the implementation of the project is concerned, it was therefore logical to use OERlabs as a form of design and development-oriented educational research by Reinmann and Sesink (2011, p. 10 ) and thus also connect with forms of action-oriented media education. This attitude led us to pay particular attention to the problematisation and design of possible scenarios. For young phenomena such as OER in particular are proving to be challenges in coping with them, since there are neither routines for dealing with them nor structures in educational institutions, as well as a great deal of scepticism overall (cf. Stalder, 2016 ), with regard to teacher*internal education there are hardly any theoretical debates. Nevertheless, the thematisation of OER, but in particular of the associated practices, appears to be virulent for teachers' internal education, so that it seemed necessary to sharpen precisely this awareness of open educational practices in teacher education, which is often neglected in the educational policy and material-oriented debate about OER (Beetham & Sharpe, 2013 ). Accordingly, the project not only recognises the breadth of content and openness as a design feature, as well as its own involvement with the phenomenon, but also explicitly addresses it in various formats, as is customary in action-oriented forms (e.g. as related learning goals in the courses) and makes it possible to experience them.

Elements that take up both action and design orientation as action guiding principles are above all open scenarios and labs. Based on the assumption that for the occupation with OER first of all occasions and incentives must be arranged in order to bring students into self-responsibility, above all the seminars are aimed at working on OER in a project/product-oriented way and anticipating possible requirements of the later professional practice of the (teaching) students. Reference was made here above all to action-oriented media pedagogical practice outside formal educational organisations and to collage as a suitable form of discussion, in particular with the remix principle of OER (cf. Schiefner-Rohs & Hofhues, 2017 ). However, not only the seminar design followed an action and design orientation, but the entire process in the project - one could even say our attitude. This is also how the Multi-stakeholder Dialogues Element of shaping media pedagogical practice in order to deal with OER at one's own educational institution. The dialogues are a construct that ascribes importance above all to open dialogue and interaction within a pluralistic network. Of particular relevance to our goal of sensitization is the fact that participatory and pluralistic sensemaking procedures (cf. Calton & Payne, 2003 ), which help to question the issue of OER and to associate it with previous practices. Innovations and their implications at the university can be experienced in this way: openness, uncertainties and paradoxes are inherent in the phenomenon of OER, contradictorily connected requirements (openness and unity, participation and expertise, ...) can be seen and discussed.

How does our idea of standing up for action and design orientation at the university in the doing of the last 18 months? Overall, the following experiences can be recorded from the perspective of action and design orientation, which can form the basis for the re-conception of the OERlabs as well as for (initial) theory building.

Thus the 'OERlab Seminars were judged to be profitable by the students ref>Schwarzer, R. & Jerusalem, M. (2002). Das Konzept der Selbstwirksamkeit. In Selbstwirksamkeit und Motivationsprozesse in Bildungsinstitutionen, hrsg. v. Matthias Jerusalem und Diether Hopf. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 44. Beiheft. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz. Altogether the studying on different levels (begun from the use of technology up to the openness to look over the own plate edge) see a personal profit in the meetings, in particular for their occupation preparation. Above all, the action-oriented approach ensures a high level of acceptance on the part of the students.

"I especially liked the fact that the students all had the chance to realize their own ideas, which are also important to them personally and which may have something to do with their own subjects (in the case of student teachers). It was also very helpful to try out learning materials for yourself, because you could learn the most in the process." (Quote from a respondent (m/f))

But it was also challenging for students in the OERlabs, as they had to set their own priorities. If 'studying' is subjectively interpreted as the task of the lecturer to 'work off', this inevitably leads to irritation (see Lessons Learned Kaiserslautern).

"We are just small stupid students who want to insure themselves by asking questions and do not want to unsettle." (Quote from a respondent (m/f))

In particular, the question of what is framed by students as a course of study and what role open, per se indefinite spaces play in it can be connected with the experiences made. From our point of view, the OERlabs seminars were rather well planned, but in the eyes of the students, the open work assignments in particular provided material for discussion. The aspect of dealing with uncertainty and openness inherent in the labs is assessed ambiguously: There are students who cope well with the design of the seminars, while others would like more guidance and structure. Also the cooperative discussion is not a 'self-runner' and the seminars do not necessarily contribute to collaborative practices. In the team there are many models of division of labour and labour economics, which can be found both through the organisation of the studies (see Reinmann & Jenert, 2011 ) and through elements of project learning (cf. Frey, 2010 ). Especially the open answers of the students, but also the information on the closed questions point to long existing insights into project learning (cf. Frey, 2010 ), that as learning experiences above all process steps are remembered and products inspire (or not inspire).

Action and design orientation were also central design features in the MSDs. In open, moderated discussion offerings (world cafés, tandem and group work, scenario work, etc.), activating methods were integrated above all, which made clear in particular the demarcation from university committee work: each participant can participate in the chosen points without hierarchy. Both at the University of Cologne and at the TU Kaiserslautern, student participants are initially overwhelmed by these open roundtables. Openness as a principle in event planning has no tradition at the university and therefore it is not possible to fall back on the habitual principle. In addition, similar to the OERlab seminars, input and professional guidance from the organisers are expected at both locations. It takes a while until trust in such a leadership is again achieved through the targeted use of methods in each dialogue, before participants show themselves willing to engage in the self-determined development of content. Hierarchical differences can be found here: Executives in particular tend to be more impatient when it comes to developing their own content and assuming responsibility in group work. A further interpretation is that the OERlabs project is essentially aimed at the members of teacher education with their relatively strict procedures and their clear job description. An open framework, which - from a didactic point of view - is also a structure, is not initially in line with expectations for finished and prospective teachers, but also for other participants.

Experimental laboratories as the third form of action-oriented offerings are not defined in the project concept by spatial or temporal structures, but by processes of collaboration, which can also be initiated and shaped by means of digital media and virtual exchange and OER platforms. In addition, therefore, voluntary offers, so-called open OERlabs, are created, which tie in with questions from the seminars or from the dialogue formats (cf. chapter in OpenBook). In our experience, however, all participants find it difficult to try out open educational spaces beyond seminars or lectures. This is inevitably followed by the question of whether voluntary offers must be used as a matter of urgency or whether their very existence was/is essential for the progress of the project.

In summary, action and design orientation played a role in the OERlabs in different phases: in the development of a concept to address Open Educational Resources and their practices in teacher education, in the implementation of these ideas and drafts at both universities, in the concrete implementation of the seminars and formats up to the evaluation of our results, which flow into the further development of the OERlabs. If we summarize by assuming that action-oriented media education is above all "the development of the subjects' ability to use media productively to articulate their own collective interests is at the centre of their efforts" (Schorb, 2008, p. 77 ), then this presents itself in the OERlabs as an Achilles heel. Both the multi-stakeholder dialogues and the OERlabs seminars reveal general challenges in dealing with open formats: In the multi-stakeholder dialogues, it is indeed possible to offer the opportunity to provide the OER topic with meaning for oneself in a participatory way and in discussions with others (cf. Calton & Payne, 2003 ), at the same time all participants wish for more support and clear communication out of habit The OERlabs thus offer an opportunity to address the paradox between security orientation and open educational practice and to experience an exemplary way of dealing with uncertainties (cf. Floden & Clark, 1991 ). If we combine the perspectives of society as a whole with the experiences of OERlabs, these can be interpreted against the background of action-oriented and designoriented educational research (cf. Tulodziecki, Herzig & Grafe, 2014), since subject, media and society have a special relationship, especially in action-oriented media pedagogy (Schorb, 2008, p. 78 ). However, this does not only apply to the design, but also to the perspective of gaining knowledge: The design perspective adopted also makes it possible to better understand the continuous connection between the design and research of higher education institutions and teacher education and the reflections associated with it. It is therefore particularly relevant to focus on communication and negotiation processes. For it is another story how communicative (negotiation) processes such as those initiated by the OERlabs become more professional in an organisation that is characterised by communicative, social practice but finds it difficult to be open to it. Academic self-administration and teacher training seem far removed from what we have experienced in the OERlabs.


text:
User:KuberRaj

I am AtharavRaj Yadav

title: User:KuberRaj


text:
User talk:Oerlabs

Hello, two questions: your account name suggests that the account is being operated by more than one person and is associated with the subject that you are editing about - i.e., there is a employer / employee relationship and you are being paid to edit. Can you clarify the situation please? Secondly you appear to be copying from another source - can you identify where the material is coming from so we can verify the copyright status. Thanks - QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 11:49, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * @QuiteUnusual
 * The account is only operated by one person (me), but I could ask for an account rename to clarify things, if that would help.
 * I am getting paid by the University of Cologne (Germany) to transfer this work, I will add conflict of interest markers on the talk pages to clarify things. I was not aware that this would be neccessary, so thank you for reminding me.
 * The book is the result of a joint project of the University of Cologne and the Technical University Kaiserslautern to further the use of OER (open educational resources) and implement openness in schools and universites.
 * The original content is hosted here: https://openbook-int.oerlabs.de/index.php?title=Openbook_(en) and the original text is CC0 licensed - on Wikibooks of course the CC-BY-SA 3.0 applies. I do hope that the project can find a place here on Wikibooks since it would fit nicely with other works on open educational resources.

Oerlabs (discuss • contribs) 13:09, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the answer. I think you are fine with what you are doing. No need to rename, we're not that fussy here (compared to Wikipedia) QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 13:49, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

OERlabs Openbook
Hi. I'm looking at this book, and, based on what I actually see on the page, I literally don't know what I'm looking at. If you're moving this book from elsewhere to here, you do need to make sure someone who encounters it here knows what it is; otherwise, how can they use it? Some explanation of what OERlabs is would seem appropriate. As a related point, each wikibook should place itself on at least one shelf; but, what shelf this belongs on depends on what it's about. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Oerlabs


text:
User:Oerlabs

About me
I am a student worker at the University of Cologne and currently enrolled in the teacher education program.

Disclosure of (paid) conflict of interest
I am getting paid by the University of Cologne to transfer the OERlabs Openbook from https://openbook-int.oerlabs.de/index.php?title=Openbook_(en) to Wikibooks.

Also if someone knows how to use the appropriate template for that sort of thing  (this one is from Wikipedia, is there anything similar here?) please leave a message on my talk page. (Compare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure#How_to_disclose).

title: User:Oerlabs


text:
User:CezauroBlanca

CezauroBlanca (discuss • contribs) 15:08, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

title: User:CezauroBlanca


text:
World War I/Imperialism

Imperialism
The natural corollary of economic nationalism was imperialism. The exploration of the nineteenth century had exhausted the unknown regions and now nations turned on each other. Germany aspired to win back the colonies lost in World War 1. Italy cast her eyes on Abyssinia (now Ethiopia) and Japan on China. The imperialism of the nineteenth century was a product of the Industrial Revolution. Increased production created the need for raw materials and increased markets, which led to the Scramble for Africa and colonial rivalries in Asia. These in turn, gave rise to a series of international crises. France and Germany. Kaiser William 2 raised imperial slogans like Berlin to Bagdad and the Germans claimed a "place in the sun". The Kaiser's project of the Berlin Baghdad Railway threatened Russian interests in the East. The Kiel Canal and German's efforts to rival England in naval power, the attened the latter's supremacy on the seas government as the murderer was a Slav. She sent an Ultimatum to Serbia did not agree to two points. Austria treated this as a refusal of the ultimatum and attacked Belgrade.

title: World War I/Imperialism


text:
World War I/Militarism

Militarism
Natural suspicion and rivalries led to a race of armaments. Europe became on armed camp with each nation possessing a military machine ready for use. Naval rivalry strained the relations between England and Germany while the competition of land armies and armanents increased fear and hostility among all countries of Europe. It is rightly observed, that the national industry of Prussia was war.

title: World War I/Militarism


text:
World War I/Nationalism

Nationalism
Behind most of the events which led to the war lay political rivalries and nationalistic aspirations. It was French nationalism which long to recover Alsace-Lorraine. For the same reason, Russians desired to extend their control south-ward. It was Nationalism against which led to bitter rivalries between Britain and Germany and encouraged them to military and naval competition. For nationalist causes, Bosnia and agitated for union with Serbia. Bulgaria's national pride was hurt at the end of the second Balkan war by the treatment given to her by Roumania, Serbia and Greece. She contemplated vengence. Hence the First World War is rightly called the Third Balkan War.

title: World War I/Nationalism