text:
OERlabs Openbook/Getting in - Getting on (Fieldbook)

The OERlabs were founded as a joint project of two universities: the University of Cologne (UoC) and the Technical University of Kaiserslautern (TUK).

In order to gain an insight into the practical and sensitisation part part of the OERlabs project, it is first necessary to define the framework in which the work was carried out.

On the first level you will find the universities' locations and general information about the respective partners. The second level describes the structure of the universities more precisely (stakeholders), since the project was aligned along the entire teacher*internal education chain. Accordingly, for a better understanding, all the contributors of the project should be presented here. Finally, the core of the practical and sensitisation work, namely teacher training (Lehramtinfo), as well as the OER work (OER status) of the respective universities will be examined.

Contextualization - Getting to know the UoC
In order to be able to guarantee a successful project start, the framework within which the project is to be carried out must first be explored. As can be seen from the figures below, the University of Cologne can certainly be described as a mass university. This means that the top priority in any (university development) project must be a fundamental and university-wide internal pervasion of the project. In order for internal communication, networking and cooperation to be possible at all, appropriate structures must be in place or designed. In the specific case of the UoC, the organisation chart of the university on the relationship level strictly speaking does not provide for a regular exchange of content and events between university actors, which limits the possibility of exchange and networking in a certain way. Although events, committees and working groups are indeed organised, these follow certain procedures. In committees, for example, the heads of institutes meet, but in many cases these meetings are treated as processing the status reports of the respective institutes.

This is not only reflected at the level of thematic discussions between university employees, but is also visible in teaching and study practice. This is due to the fact that there is usually a lack of university exchange on thematic developments at the management levels, which seldom overlap in the strategies of the respective institutes. In the case of teacher*internal training, as well as the occupation with media-didactic questions, this results in a mostly decentralised distribution of tasks. As a result, it can happen that despite studies in educational science, no seminars or lectures with media relevance are attended by students of teaching professions.

However, the UoC has various media facilities which can offer both services and support in such subject areas. The sheer size of the university poses a challenge, but on the other hand it also means that there is already a structural basis with regard to the use of media technology and support possibilities in all directions.

Success in pervasion - Stakeholder
Open Educational Resources live through openness, collaboration and communication. However, these core topics cannot simply be implemented in a large organization on a project-based basis. These topics require the involvement of all relevant actors who, with their perspectives and experience as contributors, can add to the further development of the internal structures. In this respect, various stakeholders were included in the project at the University of Cologne, who through their role, work and experience were able to play a key role in the development of the machinery:

University project partners
 * Prorectorate for studies and teaching as patron of the university management
 * Management from the Centre for Teacher Training
 * "Future strategy for teacher education" initiative for university development

Bridges to school practice
 * Supervision of practical phase seminars by lecturers of the ZfL
 * Quality and Support Agency of the Landesinstitut für Schule (State Institute for Schools) (QUA-LiS NRW)

University practice
 * Students of educational science subjects (teacher training students)
 * Students of media and social science subjects (B.A./M.A. Intermedia)
 * Lecturers from all faculties and external lecturers
 * Central media-related facilities (CCE)
 * Dezentrale Einrichtungen mit Inhalts- oder Medienbezug (ZfL, Zentrum für Hochschuldidaktik, Netzwerk Medien)

Core topic - teacher training NRW
In order to be able to enter the teaching profession, a teacher training course (with a Master of Education degree) and an 18-month preparatory period are required in NRW. Teacher training is legally regulated by the Teacher Training Act and the Teacher Access Ordinance. Teachers and prospective teachers can be employed by schools and district governments.

Overview Teacher Training Studies

Core topic - Open Educational Resources at the UoC
The topic of Open Educational Resources has also found its way into the University of Cologne in recent years through national funding. The educational policy demands for OER and the penetration of teaching practice with open educational materials are gradually manifested at the University of Cologne in a wide variety of formats: on the one hand in media didactics seminars, on the other in art education, as well as at the level of media production and in the development of an Open Access platform.

OER-Situation at the UoC
''Within the framework of the same OER funding line, the OERinForm project also developed consulting and training concepts for the creation of OER in a network of six German universities. The focus here is on media centres that are to be enabled to support their teachers in the creation and use of OER material.''
 * OERinForm develops an information and consulting concept for media and e-learning centres at universities for the establishment of OER

Kölner Open Access Portal for Teacher Training § This portal is intended to give researchers, lecturers and student teachers the opportunity to openly make available and publish research reports, theses and teaching and learning material.
 * edu.pub

The OERcamp is the meeting of practitioners on digital and open teaching and learning materials in German-speaking countries.
 * #OERcamp 2017 West in Cologne

Contextualization - Getting to know the TUK
In Kaiserslautern, the OERlabs project is located at a campus university with a MINT focus. The Technical University of Kaiserslautern (TUK), founded in 1970 and the only natural science university in Rhineland-Palatinate, consists of twelve departments: Architecture, Civil Engineering, Biology, Chemistry, Electrical Engineering and Information Technology, Computer Science, Mechanical and Process Engineering, Mathematics, Physics, Spatial and Environmental Planning, Social Sciences and Economics. Distance students can also choose from various courses of study in the three areas of Human Resources, Management & Law and Science & Engineering at the Distance and Independent Studies Center (DISC). A total of approximately 100 courses are offered, many of which have an interdisciplinary profile. In the summer semester 2018, i.e. at the time when the OERlabs project was implemented at the TUK, a total of 13733 students are studying at the TUK, of which 10108 are enrolled students and 3625 are enrolled students in distance learning. Of the students in attendance, 761 students are studying to become teachers. Teacher training students are the main target group of the project, but care is taken to ensure that our courses are open to all students, as the Integrative Social Sciences programme includes media-related courses in addition to the educational sciences.

Focus teacher training
Since this project started with a focus on students in the teaching profession, the study of teaching professions in Rhineland-Palatinate in general and the TUK in particular should be dealt with in more detail. In principle, a teacher training course for grammar schools (GYM), secondary schools plus (RS+) and vocational schools (BBS) is possible at the TUK, whereby students generally study two subjects and the educational sciences. They can choose between biology, chemistry, geography, computer science, mathematics, physics, social studies, sports, civil engineering (only BBS), electrical engineering (only BBS), health (only BBS), wood technology (only BBS), metal technology (only BBS) and information technology/computer science (only BBS). In the curricular standards that apply in Rhineland-Palatinate, an examination of digital media is an obligatory part. Module 2 of university teacher education focuses on the following topics: "Reflective, self-determined and creative handling of media under technical, practical, aesthetic, educational 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 [...]" (BMRLP 2016). Students should "reflect on their own use of media and be able to select and design media according to teaching goals and taking into account individual learning requirements" (BMRLP 2016). From the perspective of integration into the teaching profession, topics such as OER can thus be integrated, especially in Module 2 of the educational science programme. By networking with the subsequent phases of teacher education (study seminars and schools), actors outside the university are integrated and made it possible for them to share their practical experience with us. At the same time, we bring a new perspective to the schools.

Close-quarters university
With a few exceptions, all TUK facilities and buildings are either located directly on campus or can be reached within a few minutes on foot or by public transport. This still manageable size of the TUK and its students means short distances for the project. This means, for example, that the choice of the location on campus for our events only has a small influence on the participants, students are not prevented from attending the events due to long travel times. In addition, some stakeholders are already known from previous cooperations, the daily workflow or teaching, for example the Virtual Campus Rhineland-Palatinate (VCRP) and the DISC already worked together in the project OKWest. This also makes it possible to address stakeholders, the administration and the service facilities directly and personally, people know each other.

Role of central facilities and cooperation
There are no institutions at the TUK that create media content or teaching and learning material for others. Although faculties and teaching staff provide suitable material, this is done by the students themselves. The facilities of the TUK are limited to providing infrastructure for the campus or other organisational units. The Regional University Computer Centre Kaiserslautern (RHRK), for example, provides WLAN, printers, e-mail or IT systems. As a provider of postgraduate distance learning courses, the DISC cooperates with the TUK in the field of study and teaching. The DISC's organisational units offer events such as the Diemersteiner Selbstlerntage for all TUK students. The eTeaching Service Center (eTSC), as an organizational unit of the DISC, supports lecturers throughout the university in integrating teaching and learning offerings in the field of e-teaching. The service character of the organisational units or their offers serve as further multiplication possibilities within the TUK and its stakeholders. For the OERlabs project, cooperation and networking within and outside the TUK is of crucial importance. In the project application, the Centre for Teacher Education (ZfL), the University Library, the DISC, the study seminar for the teaching profession at vocational schools in Mainz and the network schools of the TUK. These are schools in the region around Kaiserslautern which cooperate with the TUK in the area of teaching, research and further education. In order to promote the cooperation and networking of the stakeholders between the planned events, the regular OER Stammtisch was established. The OERlabs, the VCRP, the DISC and the UB could be won as participants. From this perspective, the strong interest in OER is limited to those institutions that are themselves associated with an OER project. In addition, all regular participants of the OER regulars' table have a service component for the university. The VCRP administers the learning platform Online Learning and Training (OLAT), the DISC is home to the already mentioned eTSC, the UB provides publication possibilities for Open Access and the OERlabs would like to support all those interested in the field of OER. An important step for this project and the approach of interested groups and institutions was the recruitment of the new Vice President for Studies and Teaching, Dr. Stefan Löhrke, as patron of the Kaiserslautern Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues (MSD), which involve stakeholders of the TUK, teachers' education and the region with three focal points.

Experiences with OER at the TUK
Until the start of the joint project OERlabs, the subject area of Open Educational Resources hardly appears prominently at the TUK. Although individual institutions deal with their challenges and opportunities, such as Lermen et al. (2016) shows. A few months before this project, but within the same funding line of the BMBF, the joint project OER@RLP was launched, which cooperates with the VCRP and the DISC as joint partners as well with institutions of the TUK. At the University Library (UB), too, there are initial measures addressing Openess. Since 2016, the university library has been taking its first steps in the field of Open Access and has been funded by the DFG since May 2017 with third-party funds. As a result, there were already links to the OER topic and thus to the project at the TUK, which could also be used. Nevertheless, project-related offerings must enter the topic of open educational resources at a low threshold in order to create a common starting point and give those present the opportunity to discover points of contact. Our events such as the multi-stakeholder dialogues had participants* with different levels of knowledge in the field of OER, therefore and because we always wanted to address beginners as well, low-threshold and further information messages were always helpful. Due to the low awareness of the OER term at the TUK, basic explanations of the project object and project objective were often necessary in communication. With the Teaching plus workshop, the TUK is organising an event that is intended to promote the exchange of experience among teachers and is therefore always on the lookout for discussable teaching/learning methods. Such a platform offers itself to the presentation and discussion of our project contents, since with this meeting also broadly interested lecturers from other specialist areas participate. A participation on our part in a workshop was possible. Altogether it was very helpful to look for already existing platforms and similar projects at the TUK, although OER as a complex of topics was hardly represented in the run-up. University-wide events and contact with lecturers from other departments also support the project in reviewing its own perspective, as the vast majority of courses have a MINT background. Therefore, it is necessary to find out in the discussion which learning material is used there and whether there are other needs associated with it than in the social science courses. It has already been mentioned in the previous sections that we have several events in Kaiserslautern in our program, which, together with our participation in other events within and outside the university, can be roughly assigned to two concepts. Firstly, the multi-stakeholder dialogues with a focus on cooperation and networking, and secondly, the Open Labs, which enable and strengthen the practice-oriented production of free educational material. Detailed descriptions and discussions of both concepts can be found below.


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Field Notes (MSD)

Maneuvering a giant tanker towards Openness and collaborations?
It is probably the same with university teaching as it is with school and the teachers: Everybody who has ever been a student thinks she/he intuitively knows what good teaching from professors should look like - just as most schoolgoers probably have a clear opinion of how good teaching from teachers should be designed. And so the same question probably arises in the end for many: Why then are there still so many bad and boring lectures at German universities?

This is another question that some students probably also ask themselves: Why is so little use being made of the digital possibilities that have now been ubiquitously available for more than 10 years? Teachers are always working as researchers to keep up with all new (technological) developments, searching for the latest findings and daring new experiments or methods, always restless, always "on the bleeding edge"? Wouldn't teachers be the ideal drivers for new digital methods and concepts in universities?

Only those who look behind the scenes of higher-education teaching at German universities become aware of how complex the teaching situation is linked to the science system: reputation goals, time pressure, scientific habitus, funding and financing efforts for research as well as ever more and more heterogeneous student cohorts, which can be enrolled with their very own expectations at the highest educational institutions in the country.

What weighs much more heavily is the fact that good teaching makes a very small contribution to a scientific career. So far, good teaching has hardly been rewarded or taken into account, e.g. when hiring new professors. In the informal discussions at OERlabs events, different ideas about the nature of university teaching are put forward, for example the differing views of students and the public on university teachers (e.g. a timetable with lectures in an Audimax).

Potential of cooperation for digital transformation?
And yet - also at the University of Cologne - you always come across motivated lecturers and university staff who care about the university community of lecturers and students and who are committed to good teaching. By looking at the new or changed possibilities that digital technologies bring with them, the question arises as to whether and how they can contribute to the promotion of good teaching. The buzzword density that has developed around the word "digital" is now enormous: Whether digitisation, digital transformation, education 4.0 or Humboldt 4.0 - manoeuvring through interpretations, hopes, dystopias and through the jungle of possible consequences and options for action seems more complex than ever for the individual.

One aspect of the debates was explicitly identified for the OERlabs project: Cooperation. Thus, the subtitle of the project reads "Jointly training (teacher training) students for OER". Digital technologies in particular now permit a multitude of new possibilities such as content (texts, videos, large data sets, etc.) to be exchanged and communication between people to be organised, although the mere existence or use of the new possibilities in no way automatically improves the quality of teaching. Rather, very far-reaching questions arise, e.g. how the exchange of material, the use of media and communication in teaching can now be made profitable and of high quality. Open Educational Resources are a variant of cooperation between teachers.

Why use media in lecturing and schooling?
"Wait, wait!" - some people will now rightly object - "why do media have to be used for a good teaching at all? And what is good teaching anyway? The OERlabs project follows the discussion in teacher training that there are only few media-related courses in teacher training and that therefore current and future teachers only deal with media and media change in a guided or random way. For example, it is possible to study an educational science course at the UoC without attending a media-related seminar. If students take part in the introductory lecture on media didactics (Jun.-Prof. Dr. Sandra Hofhues), the students of the teaching profession say about the research-oriented blended learning event in the interim evaluation of the winter semester 2015/2016: "Ms. Hofhues, your lecture is simply too modern. This statement very aptly illustrates the "vicious circle of a lack of media education": The project follows the normative assumption that it requires the promotion and mediation of media education and media competence, so that pupils and students can participate independently in society and the mediatised world.

Looking at lecturing and schooling collectively
By looking at the vicious circle of a lack of media education, it was inevitable from a project perspective having to prioritize the topic of "good teaching" rather than just discussing "good practice" as it would eventually be incorporated at a school in the future. So how should one deal with these problems? Can cooperation be a sustainable way to make good teaching, i.e. good practice, possible and to overcome the challenges that arise? There are two popular sayings about this. The first is "Teachers are more likely to share a toothbrush than lecture notes". Cooperation during lecture preparation or implementation is therefore by no means the norm at German universities, which means that there are special problems and challenges to be addressed or explored in a project. Above all, the "attitude" towards cooperation among individuals, but also among organisations, is of decisive importance here. Our actions in the project followed the assumption that attitudes of employees are very difficult to change towards certain topics or practices.

Decision to incorporate dialogue-methodology "Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue": Distinguishing between committee work/university working groups
The second saying is a bit more general, but is nevertheless often considered to be a bittersweet truth at German universities as well: "If you don't know any further, form a working group". In the first discussions after the start of the project, the team at the University of Cologne always had the task to distance itself as far as possible from committee structures or working groups at the University of Cologne. There are already many committees and working groups on various topics at the UoC; the sustainable impact and outcomes of these other initiatives cannot be assessed here. As a project team, however, we were concerned with the decisive aspect that the perspective of the institute or the respective organisational unit is primarily represented by the persons present in committees or working groups, i.e. it is also a question of resources (and thus hard questions of financing and internal employee utilisation).

Even if all members of a committee are open to the topic of OER, it can fail at short notice due to the current distribution of resources and the setting of priorities. In order to avoid such cases, the "multi-stakeholder dialogue" approach was chosen as a format which, in addition to the institute's perspectives, focuses on bringing people into an open exchange about and with their individual attitudes and experiences on specific topics. Only then should possible results and perspectives be fed back into the university's committee structure.

The dialogue should also not be limited to creating, sharing and remixing OER material, but should present a broad picture of OER and ask questions about "Open Practices" and attitudes at the UoC. The formulated project objective was to promote and enable "a sustainable change in teaching and behavioral and action practices".

Our hope was to bring people into dialogue instead of roles. Experiencing that interesting conversations take place during coffee breaks in the corridors of universities, in the open spaces of the clocked professional life, has often served as a model for us.

Conceptualizing Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues at the UoC
From mid-April 2018 on, the concept for multi-stakeholder dialogue was developed, including an analysis of the stakeholders, a communication concept, and discussion of the pedagogical and methodological concept for a dialogue process. The conceptual work was flanked by the practical training seminars at the Centre for Teacher Education (ZfL), which started in the summer semester 2017. The open involvement of the students was discussed again and again as an important, albeit difficult goal to achieve.

The topic of "Open Educational Resources" in teacher training served as an exemplary vehicle for the exchange of ideas through cooperation, openness and open practices. The teaching profession is particularly suited with regard to the idea of cooperation, since in the different phases of teacher training, university teaching has varying degrees of influence.

In autumn, the concept "OER meets good teaching - Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue (MSD) at the University of Cologne" was finalised with a duration from 14 December 2017 to 5 July 2018. Four core dates, two open lab dates and two virtual phases were set for the participants.

The setting at the TUK
In order to understand the concept of the multi-stakeholder dialogues at the TUK, it is necessary to briefly describe the situation at the TUK at the beginning of the project again (cf. Getting In TUK): As summarised in the description of the organisation, discussions around the topic of OER at the university up until the start of the project hardly took place at the level of the organisation and beyond the employees who were personally interested. As a result, the definition had to be explained in discussions with people who were not active in the field of e-learning or university didactics. To this end, the project also uses measures that were already planned at the TUK, such as the events of LehrePlus (cf. Getting In TUK). One lesson learned from this specific event is, for example, that we perceive different speeds at the TU: While some actors already have OER on their agenda, others even fear the loss of their reputation and their "unique selling point" by OER - a view that could also strongly lie in the scientific or engineering character of the TU as a university (cf. on discipline and university culture e.g. Huber et al., 1983; Huber, 1990; Becher & Trowler, 2001 ): Many courses, especially in the natural sciences and engineering, are characterised by the fact that basic knowledge does not change much and is offered similarly at different universities (just think of the many introductory courses in biology, mathematics or chemistry). Even individual focus, which is more common in social sciences or humanities, is hardly possible in these courses. While supporters of OER see exactly this as a genuine point for using OER, other lecturers are sceptical: they are afraid that they will come under pressure to justify themselves or that they will no longer be needed. In addition, from the perspective of teacher education, the topic of OER is seen within central institutions such as the Centre for Teacher Education, but has so far hardly really become visible in university practice.

The TUK is also characterised by the fact that the stakeholders involved in the project knew each other even before the start of the project - also due to the short distances at the TUK - as they have already worked together in various committees and projects or are linked to each other via the organisational structure of the university: There are close contacts between the Department of Education, the Department of Studies and Teaching, the Centre for Teacher Training, the eTeaching Service Centre and the University Library.

And finally, the concept of a multi-stakeholder dialogue must include the specificity of teacher training. The aim of the OERlabs project was to sensitise students of teaching professions in particular to OER and thus to have an effect on teacher education. However, measures in teacher education are structurally complex: teacher education as a vocational biographical development project (Terhart, 1992 takes place at universities in a cross-section between subjects, subject didactics and educational sciences and runs through three different and often not or only rudimentarily networked phases of professionalisation: studies, mandated practical training and professional practice with further and continuing education. This process not only involves universities, study seminars and continuing education institutions, but also ministries and state institutes.

In order to bring the actors into conversation with each other from the perspective of the OER, an OER regulars' table will be established within the project, which consciously refers to the informal nature of the meeting through the name. It aims to create a space in which experiences from other projects on the subject of OER (OER@RLP, but also sub-projects of the UEDU project of the quality offensive teacher training) as well as from the institutions (library, eTeaching Service Center) can regularly converge. The participants of this regulars' table are also responsible for the ideas of the multi-stakeholder dialogues, supplemented by the Vice President for Studies and Teaching. The idea was to work on concrete topics and projects and to consider how the different target groups could be brought together under one OER umbrella. The inner-university perspective of the regulars' table is broken up and expanded by the MSD, as the MSD are open to further stakeholders at the TUK, address stakeholders outside the TUK and take up and integrate their specific perspectives.

A multi-stakeholder dialogue (MSD) was chosen as a format, which were called Round Tables at the TUK. Each round table had a framework theme under which both the same people (a core group that continues to advance the OER theme at the TU) and new people came together. One of the aims of the events was to establish a "core group" within the university that would deal with demand-oriented OER questions beyond the scope of the project, and to connect this group with other actors relevant to the course of the project and the focus on teacher training. The hope was that working on a framework topic will make it easier to work on concrete examples, including concrete materials and target group approaches. A special focus was on teacher education, so that this was also the connecting link between the MSD. The focus was on the question of what OER could look like in teacher education. While the first round table focused on OER at the university, the second round table was explicitly planned around the topic of OER in teacher education and the third round table on the topic of OER in the region. As a result of the extension of the scope, different actors were able to talk to each other at the respective roundtables (at the university's round table, for example, other university managers, at the round table on teacher training, for example, representatives of the further phases of teacher training).

The individual working tables at the events follow a similar structure: After a welcome speech by the Vice President for Studies and Teaching, Dr. Löhrke, there is thematic input, followed by an exchange and work phase for the participants. Notes taken on writable table cloth should enhance the visibility and thus create footprints of the participants. These are then digitalised and serve to identify the participants in the documentation. The results of the workshop were collected (cf. concept contribution) and subsequently summarised and made available to all participants by e-mail.

In conjunction with the OERlabs, the multi-stakeholder dialogues at the TUK are an ensemble of different perspectives: On the one hand, there are (university) political events, but on the other hand they also aim to stimulate further debate and thus to be a rather alternative format of further education. The multi-stakeholder dialogues in Kaiserslautern are framed by the voluntary OERlab dates for students and other interested parties that are organised by the tutors, as well as the regular OER meetings for cooperation partners, in which perspectives and questions from the roundtables were deepened. Ideally, this should be used to establish a link between the other elements of the OERlabs; at the same time, students should also be "given a voice" at the Round Tables or included in the discussion about OER.

In Kaiserslautern, in addition to getting to know each other, participatory sense-making processes (Calton & Payne, 2016 ) were particularly relevant within the respective thematic focal points on OER and the associated open educational practice among the participants: As the experiences with OER were different, it was important to understand the phenomenon of OER on its own, but also to ask what perspective OER can offer for the current field of work. What all the Round Tables have in common is that they look at university development strategies as well as at questions of the design of teacher education from the OER perspective. By repeatedly addressing OER from slightly different perspectives (university, teacher training and region), it is possible for the participants to focus on only one topic, depending on their interests, or to exchange experiences with actors for a semester in a processual manner. Through the different participants, Openness is not only addressed, but is also taken up as an element of design. It is important that the topic of OER is opened up in a multi-stakeholder dialogue and that the "more" becomes visible compared to licence discussions. The Round Table on Teacher Training, in particular, therefore brought in the problem areas of the stakeholders, while the first Round Table addresses topics such as Open Access and research, but also library issues. In this way, the MSD address the respective interests and problems of the actors. In the ideal case, dialogue and further training are mixed and an alternative space is created in the Communities of Practice (Lave & Wenger, 1998 ).

Multi-stakeholder dialogues at the TUK serve to bring the relevant people involved in OER and teacher education into continuous contact with each other. To this end, the multi-stakeholder dialogues are thematically framed on one hand, and further connected with more events on the other. (siehe OpenLabs) This will make it possible both to penetrate the OER issue from several perspectives and to exchange institutional knowledge and find solutions and relevant best practices. In the multi-stakeholder dialogues, the OER topic thus opens doors for various discussions: it can be used in its thematic breadth as an occasion for discussion on the design of teaching and university strategies (Jäckel, 2015 ), on the question of appropriate media education in teacher education, as an occasion for school development but also as an opportunity for civic engagement (Pilch et al., 2010 ).

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

title: OERlabs Openbook/Field Notes (MSD)


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Lessons lOERned (MSD)

Field of tension between open discussion opportunities and presentable outcomes
At the end of an exhausting and labour-intensive dialogue process, the usual questions naturally arise as with any project work: How is the result to be assessed? What did participants learn, what initiates others to implement the project themselves? What could have been done differently? What was made possible by which structures, what, if anything, was prevented? Last but not least, the big question is whether the format "Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue" (MSD) was, in retrospect, the appropriate format to address a topic such as OER in teacher training at university level? In order to approach the answer to this question, in the following article the text by Felix Dodds and Emily Benson (2003) will be discussed, with which the conceptual work began.

Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues as a flexible tool
It quickly became clear during the planning phase and through the text by Dodds and Benson that there is no standardized MSD process, but that the process can and should be designed according to the context. This flexibility in design was heavily utilized in the OERlabs project and the approach outlined by Dodds and Benson was partially modified.

A dialogue appointment in Cologne thus turned into several appointments in an entire process flow.

The MSD in the OERlabs should, however, be somewhat more active, open and experimental in contrast to the university committee work, for which, among other things, cooperative visualization or drawing tasks were also assigned to groups of participants. In the OERlabs, "dialogue" therefore means more than articulation in text.

The "equity"-aspect: student participation
According to Dodds and Benson, however, an important aspect of an MSD is that of equality and fairness: participants should be able to enter into dialogue with one another on the same level. We have always taken this claim into account in our planning, especially when it comes to the stakeholder group of students, which unfortunately often receives little attention. For the time being, however, we have to come to the conclusion that our strategies for inviting students to participate have hardly been fruitful: In the BFP seminars, open invitations were issued by the lecturers, but these were not received well. However, it is to be noted positively: A student teacher with previous OER experience was present out of self-interest, a student teacher from the seminars mentioned above gave a keynote speech about his seminar product. This was highly appreciated by the dialogue participants. Student employees from Sandra Hofhues' team also took part in several appointments, which was made possible by the equal dialogue format. For the closing event, an intermedia student, dialogue participants and student employees participated. In our opinion, their student perspective was followed with great interest by the participants.

As far as student participation (cf. Headnotes (Student Participation)) is concerned, we believe there is a need for better strategies of communication, invitation and involvement of students in such a process. If necessary, early involvement may be appropriate, e.g. in a seminar context in which the position of the students on the MSD topic is worked out and the relevance of the dialogue is introduced. Last but not least, this is also about building trust.

The "equity"-aspect: temporary dissolving of hierarchies?
It was not only with regard to the students that the general goal in conducting the dialogues was to open up discourse spaces that were as equal as possible. In order to achieve this goal, the moderator provided the participants with corresponding guidelines and wishes: on the one hand, a "you" rule (i.e. this would be an informal way of addressing people during discussions, as the German language distinguishes between formal and informal speech) was to be negotiated within the groups in the later working phase, and on the other hand, each round was to be discussed with a new person in the first working phase ("questions of inspiration"). The first hurdles should fall through this entertaining and yet interesting discussion task.

How well this worked was looked at by Birgit Schlotter in her bacherlor thesis „Dialogformate an Hochschulen am Beispiel OERlabs“ (2018) (engl. Forms of Dialogue in Universities on the Example of OERlabs). She draws the folowing conclusion.

Communication and preparation: missing concrete, urgent decision-making?
Looking back, the MSD process "OER meets good teaching" was very ambitious all things considered, but during the individual meetings it was formulated thematically and in terms of content and kept specific. The aim was to facilitate not only the debate on "OER as material" but also the discussion on good teaching and open practices. While the understanding of education or a "big picture" as an aspect of the dialogue should not be missing (cf. the MSD1 event), in our experience the goal of the process should be communicated more clearly and easily. Here we could think more in the direction of a "decision-making process" or a "policy discussion" in the sense of Dodds and Benson, even if this only takes place fictitiously.

The term "multi-stakeholder dialogue" has often caused a lack of understanding among the persons addressed; it is advisable to use an alternative term for communication in advance. Furthermore, we recommend to put energy into a communication concept, which may also show incentives and outcomes for participation. Furthermore, it should be communicated that the participants can contribute their own problems. However, not only individual employees must be convinced in advance, but also managers in the institutes/organisational units. These two target groups should be considered and differentiated. To illustrate this: One stakeholder clearly signalled to us that the dialogue had very little relevance for the respective institute, since the results were not linked to a decision-making authority and thus the staff, as well as internal resources were needed for other, (from the point of view of the respective institution) more effective projects. Similarly, letters of intent offered little guarantee of long-term and sustainable commitment.

The communication and activation for participation can always be taken into consideration at the beginning of the project and started early, telephone or personal enquiries with the participants as well as mail/internal mail communication (confidence building) can be planned as an elaborate work package. This can be worthwhile, since one of the results of the MSD was that many actors at the University of Cologne have to make common practices possible and that OER issues do not only concern individual persons.

Missing personal connection with target audience and scheduling issues
As a promotional project, which was part of a junior professorship in the field of media didactics, the lack of access to the target group from the employees' point of view proved to be a great challenge, for example to inform participants personally about upcoming appointments or to obtain expectations and feedback. This raises the question for decision-makers as to where MSD coordination can best be anchored.

The chronically prevailing lack of time (or the low relevance for the dialogue, depending on the interpretation) also makes it difficult to find an appointment date. At each of the four dates a different composition of participants were present, so a continuous process is of course not possible from a didactic point of view.

First considerations here would be the recommendation to focus on all-day, intensive events and to open and close the process there. Events from the field of "design thinking" could serve as inspiration. This recommendation is also relevant in view of the fact that very few participation activities took place in the virtual phases; the dialogue was conducted mainly face-to-face. The open and additional offer OpenLabs was also not accepted by the participants.

Open atmosphere is valued: Making it the core element of the MSD?
We always received positive feedback for the fact that there was enough time and space on the dates to get into open discussions with people and to exchange opinions and ideas. However, if there is a need for more intensive discussions, it can also be advantageous to offer full-day events (e.g. for university staff, the conference format is mostly familiar). This time seems to be hardly available in the everyday university life of the University of Cologne or in committees rather the focus is put on the individual perspective of the institute and resources, which was at least our assumption. The multi-stakeholder dialogue can therefore serve as a "space opener" to help people network and also to generate unexpected outcomes such as project cooperation, partnerships, financing opportunities, etc. The dialogue between the various stakeholders can also be used as a means of creating a network of contacts. The open and friendly atmosphere as well as the supply of drinks, coffee and snacks should therefore always be taken into account. As a project implementer, you are at the same time the host and thus primarily responsible for creating an open, friendly and appreciative atmosphere. Even if this sounds banal, it is precisely these banalities, such as a personal greetings, a cup of coffee or a piece of cake, that set you apart from typical committee meetings at universities. The MSD should not be confused with a loose coffee break without outcome, but offers a structural framework for the exchange of perspectives, experiences and opinions.

Furthermore, problem orientation can be a big advantage: By enabling participants to bring along concrete questions and problems from their everyday university life, the MSD can also be distinguished and highlighted from other formats. In our case, the introduction of their own problems in the second phase of the process was certainly present, but it offers potential if several people already work practically with OER or pursue open practices as a goal.

Becoming contextualizers: avoiding "trainer"-role
One challenge that we met more often as a project team was the wish of the participants to have proper explainations about the correct handling of copyright issues and OER. We have always tried to refer to self-learning offers or offers such as OERinForm for teachers. The examples of the student teacher Sebastian Arz (>> LINK presentation at MSD3) as well as the conception of the seminars by ZfL employees of the University of Cologne show that one can become acquainted with the topic OER quite independently. A lack of information does not exist thus under any circumstances in relation to OER and OEP, rather there is a surplus of information for this.

We have concluded from this that there is a legitimate desire for contextualization, i.e. the identification of several discussion threads and debates that go beyond pure information or specific application knowledge. In this respect, from the second MSD date we also saw ourselves as "contextualisers", as Sandra Hofhues described several scientific references in her brief impulse.

We have also always been guided by the principle that we do not want to provide any solutions or answers, but that these should be developed jointly by the participants (in the sense of Dodds and Benson "build consensus around complex, multifaceted and in some cases, divisive issues."). For this reason, an external moderation was used for 3 out of 4 dates in order to carry out the dates as freely as possible from the project's (i.e. project staff) own logic. In our opinion, this "withdrawal" worked well, but if necessary, partners should be found directly who offer further training or introductory seminars on OER during the period of the MSD.

Podcasting as accompanying documentation tool
During the dialogue process, the academic staff recorded podcast episodes, which were primarily intended to reflect on the dates and not to summarise the content of the discussions. This decision was made, among other things, because the protected space was to be maintained during the dialogue events. For the following projects, it could be considered whether the discussions could be partially opened and the podcast could take on a "rapporteur" role, so that participants who are not present could inform themselves about the contents of the discussion. In addition, the podcast should provide an opportunity for external feedback on questions to be obtained. Christian Friedrich, for example, advised us on the topic of "design thinking" after a Podcast-mention via Skype.

What is the product?
Which product has an open process? This question is certainly a classic to which there is no concrete answer. And yet decision-makers are particularly interested in what outcomes can be expected if considerable resources are to be invested in an MSD. For Dodds and Benson, there are various options such as "facilitator's summary, an agreement text or a set of recommendations". For example, all stakeholders should accept the final document resulting from the dialogue and communicate it internally. Since the virtual phase between the third and the final date was only used by a few people for participation, the visible end product was the Impact/Effort Matrix, which was primarily developed during the attendance time of the third date within one hour of working time. The matrix represented the core result for us that many solution ideas are located in the area of what is feasible in the short term by the participants. These measures could also have a potentially high impact. Even if the matrix has worked well for structuring, much more time should be given to create a more comprehensive document. We therefore supplemented this matrix with a 10-point plan for OER at the University of Cologne, which Sandra Hofhues designed based on our observations during the process. In MSD coordination, one always moves between keeping the process open and leading it to a certain outcome that can be communicated to the outside world.

What remains from the MSD? Who is committed at the UoC?
Finally, the great openness and appreciation that we have come across is a good signal for follow-up projects to promote OER and open practices. Higher education projects do not necessarily have to offer traditional formats such as meetings or conferences where people primarily listen. In our opinion, open formats that focus on the activity of the participants and provide rather short inputs and impulses were almost always positively accepted.

Nevertheless, it remains to be noted that the topic of OER and further debates currently have a rather low priority at the University of Cologne and concrete measures are not planned in the near future. This can be seen, for example, in the - from our point of view - lack of support and further education for copyright issues concerning teaching or student products. If OER is really to penetrate the breadth of the UzK, the stakeholders here would have to jointly develop viable solutions. The multi-stakeholder dialogue showed that experience and diverse expertise are already available in the individual organisational units and could possibly be better networked. An event format such as multi-stakeholder dialogue is certainly not a panacea here, but in our experience it can potentially make an important contribution to the exchange of perspectives and to personal and institutional networking as well as serious reflection on education.

Multiple stakeholders - especially in teacher training

Each of the three MSD at the Technical University of Kaiserslautern (TUK) has its own focus. The first MSD focuses on the stakeholders at the TUK and the chances for OER in the university context. The second focuses on OER in teacher training and the last MSD focuses on OER in the region. Each focus addresses new stakeholders, expands the project perspective on OER and facilitates exchange and networking among the participants. Since the MSD are open to all interested parties and also appeal to previous participants, suggestions and discussions from the MSD are not limited to the TUK and our project. This decision not to confine the stakeholders to the TU alone, but to look at the entire teacher education chain in the course of the MSD, seemed to be understandable from the logic of teacher education. However, it provided for one or two difficulties in the implementation - from the acquisition of the respective stakeholders (via e-mail and telephone) to the question of what knowledge can be assumed and the question(s) of how people can get involved in an open process. Thus, the MSD were always structured in the same way within the process: Input - discussion phase - collection of ideas - subsequent documentation. This was followed by podcast sequences for the time in between. This made it possible to deal with the topic of OER in teacher education over the course of a semester. However, it turned out that there were only a few people who participated in all three MSDs: For example, the university library, the VCRP or the eTeaching Service Centre were represented at all meetings, the Centre for Teacher Education could only be reached once. Teachers inside and/or schools felt more addressed by the second round table. For internal project reasons, the last round table had to take place during the summer holidays, which is bad for the participation of schools. The planning and objectives of the individual MSD had already been set for the podcast "The multi-stakeholder dialogue from the point of view of the TU Kaiserslautern" (Fig. 1 ). They are explained in this Podcast, as already mentioned, and then also converted. Neither at the planning nor at the goals something changed, except in detail questions, in the course of the project. The mutual influence of the MSD and the three lab formats on each other has been planned and expected right from the start. Both event types complement each other in that the MSD captures the perspectives of the stakeholders, their needs and problems, the lab formats react to them, go into the practice of material production and bring their experiences and materials back into the multi-stakeholder dialogues.

Incorporate dialogues-in-between with the help of podcasting and blogging
Since the MSDs are linked to other events of the project, the dialogues that have been created there should not stop after the events. In order to maintain the dialogues in between the MSD events, they will be initiated on Twitter during the event and provided with new impulses by podcasts or blog entries after the events. MSD participants, supported by podcasts or blog entries, can bring dialogues into their organisation or institute and thus return impulses at the next MSD or other OERlabs events. For newcomers, the opportunity for intermediate dialogues represents an introduction to the topic and the status of the discussion. Furthermore, blog entries and podcasts are used to make project processes transparent, to provide an outlook on future developments and to document current developments.

With the exception of the podcast on the first MSD, all other blog posts and podcast episodes were created after the respective multi-stakeholder dialogues. At least one communication measure is planned for each MSD. Published are: one podcast episode for the first MSD, two podcast episodes and one blog post for the second MSD and one blog post for the third and last MSD. For the podcast recordings, it was very helpful to take immediate advantage of any opportunities that arose. Thus the podcast episode developed out of a discussion over the planning and conception of the MSD in Cologne and Kaiserslautern, which is also addressed in the Podcast. Directly after the second MSD the recording of the following episode was organized. With some temporal distance the blogentries are written. Both formats are published, as soon as they are finished.

In the podcastepisode belonging to the reflection of the first MSD the overview of the course of the project and possible further events take up a lot of space. They arouse attention and curiosity, but also make the goals of the project more vivid. For example, goals are formulated there such as broadening and opening one's own perspective. The publications of all podcast episodes are also designed as advertising for subsequent events. The MSD episodes are intended to address specific stakeholders.

Two further podcast episodes, which are thematically linked to the MSDs, are located chronologically before the second MSD. In episode 15 students are interviewed in the voluntary Open Labs of the TUK about their self-made game board and their experiences with its creation. Within the framework of the MSD, the project is dependent on the perspectives on OER of as many stakeholders as possible, including students. One part of the student perspective is their self-produced materials and experiences from "lived" practice. The participation of our tutors in the MSD made it possible to bring in the experiences of previous OpenLabs. In order to give the participating students the opportunity to speak, their experiences are included in the MSDs and other events such as the mobile labs as a freely available podcast sequence, while the self-created materials are available on site.

The documentation of the second MSD with the focus on teacher*internal education approaches the content and status of the discussion anecdotally in Podcastepisode. It classifies these into teacher*internal education and school practice. The corresponding blog entry is reminiscent, among other things, of the paper tablecloths described, the thoughts recorded on them discuss the path to a culture of error that also understands failure as an opportunity and possibility of learning. The ideas, thoughts and suggestions recorded in the documentation cannot all be taken up, but they are now available as a learning opportunity and for improvement. Regardless of whether participants* want to continue their thoughts from the MSD with the help of the documentation or the OER community takes up suggestions from the documentation.

Managing expectation for OERlabs project
From the feedback received during and after the events, one wish of the participants regularly stands out: to receive a concept for the implementation of the addressed and demonstrated chances of open educational resources. To put it simply, the demand put on OER is to contribute directly to the solution of existing problems. For example, the question is asked how OER - as quickly and urgently as possible - simplifies inclusion or how OER ensures that pupils do not perceive smartphones and tablets only as communication and play devices. Although it is important for us to work out such wishes or needs, in retrospect it would be clearer to communicate in the documentation what we can take up. Because an OERmobil cannot deliver a finished recipe for media education in a school in one day. As OERlabs at the TU Kaiserslautern, we can give suggestions, dismantle hurdles and take away the teachers' fears of contact. Individual schools themselves are responsible for a school-wide concept or the solution of supposedly worn out problem situations.

Activation of Schools

In the same time frame that the invitations to the second MSD were sent out, our network schools also received invitations for the planned mobile labs. The network schools were addressed in the form of a package designed by us (see OERlabs mobile) (Fig. 2 ) with cover letter, information material about the project and self-made material from the Open Labs at the TUK. The double address is intended to reach more interested people in the network schools. In some network schools this is achieved in a certain way by the fact that different contact persons are responsible for the MSD and the mobile labs. In addition, as suggested by Dodds and Benson (2015), we wanted to give all interested parties the opportunity to inform themselves in advance of the MSD and to incorporate any questions and suggestions into the discussions of the multi-stakeholder dialogue. Episode 17 therefore deals with the development process and the content of the package created and packed for schools. Furthermore, first experiences with the use in schools with which we go into the focus MSD teacher*internal education will be reflected in the following. An experience from the second round table is that the discussions were not only about OER, but about digital media in schools. The OER topic was a door opener to the current question of the importance of media education in schools.

Experiences with open processes
The MSD were openly designed in terms of the process structure. In other words, there was no predetermined goal that was being worked towards. In particular, the focus was on generating experience, getting to know each other and jointly "thinking through" the challenge of integrating cooperative practices into teacher training. The summary of the MSD in documentations was helpful, which was reported back in conversations. These were requested by individual participants. While we produced the documentations in the form of PDFs, the cooperation with the project "OER@RLP" led to the fact that the documentation could be produced in the form of a video: So there was a nice overview of the discussion about OER at the TUK at the first MSD and beyond:

EINBETTUNG VIDEO LINK

In summary, the experiences made in the dialogue formats with TU staff and schools contrast with the offers for students. In the dialogue formats, difficulties tend to arise in acceptance/acceptance - perhaps also because the idea of content and its role in the event was missing.

title: OERlabs Openbook/Lessons lOERned (MSD)


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Headnotes (MSD)

Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues as participative organizational development
It is no coincidence that the OERlabs project focused on exchange and participation formats. When we applied for funding from the BMBF, our funding line included OERinfo. We assumed that universities tend not to lack knowledge about media, but that they lack ideas and application-oriented perspectives on how media (education) can be integrated into teacher training. Thus the OERlabs are not 'only' a sensitisation project for OER, but also a didactic project - but different from what is commonly called, for example, (university) didactics as an improvement of teaching and learning:

In very loose reference to Flechsig (1975), who named five (or three in compressed form) design levels of higher education teaching about 50 years ago, the importance of the interplay of concrete teaching offers with aspects of curriculum planning, study programmes and orientations of entire universities can be emphasised. What is more, the various design levels are only addressed jointly through the transformation of the higher education institution(s) by seeing concrete courses, study programmes and conditions for studying in context. Even before the application was submitted, it was clear that subjects, disciplines, study programmes or even areas of education could only benefit from each other in terms of media, OER and digitisation if they discussed media-related challenges and problems together and mastered them according to their own ideas and views. This is particularly challenging in the area of teacher education. That is why we at OERlabs also talk about educating teacher students together for OER in our slogan. Especially for the university committee, where actors are typically only loosely coupled (Weick, 1976), the cooperation of its members would thus already be a (project) success, among other things in favour of the design of courses of study in the teaching profession.

This is one of the reasons why the OERlabs characterised different aspects of networking right from the start, be it within courses or study programmes, within universities or through the involvement of actors outside the university such as network schools or state institutes for schools: in all cases, it is essential that the OERlabs together become what they have become through participation in school and university development processes. Because concrete contents are hardly predetermined, they become mirror images of such demands and requirements for qualification and sensitisation to OER, as formulated by the various actors as participants in the so-called multi-stakeholder dialogue. If actors are involved, this means assuming responsibility for design issues themselves.

Multi-stakeholder dialogue is a concrete measure from participatory organisational development (Seufert, 2013). The multi-stakeholder dialogue represents the initiation of a systematic reflection process within the organisation. The contents of the dialogue formats reflect, for example, public expectations of the use of media in studies and teaching, teaching and schools, various reservations about media and, last but not least, euphoric hopes that (experimental) involvement with media in the laboratory format could solve most problems in teaching at once. Such expectations are deconstructed and revealed in the multi-stakeholder dialogues - through a dialogical form - so that they can be turned around productively, ideally in a solution-oriented way. For example, multi-stakeholder dialogues can be regarded as a form of participatory university development.

Aspects of cooperation in a very large university such as the University of Cologne certainly play a strong, if not overriding role in a comparatively small practical and development project such as OERlabs, which is funded for a short period of 1.5 years. For example, students and colleagues do not simply meet on campus; even a coffee for informal arrangements requires dedicated planning if one does not want to leave it entirely to chance and informal space - quite different from the TU Kaiserslautern.

Accordingly, the measures that have initiated cooperation and knowledge sharing between different actors at the University of Cologne must also be evaluated: The measures, be they multi-stakeholder dialogues or open labs, all contribute to determining opportunities for participation based on a (media) phenomenon such as OER and to approaching these in terms of content or beyond one's own positions and functions. It is therefore no coincidence that, especially in Cologne, cooperation and knowledge sharing were more important than the topic of OER.

In Kaiserslautern, the multi-stakeholder dialogue addressed the entire process of teacher education (Schiefner-Rohs, 2015), i.e. also the second and third phases. Accordingly, the focus was not only on the exchange with the university, but also with other institutions such as schools and/or state institutes, but also with central state media institutions, ministries and local representatives. Participation in teacher education and thus the joint discussion helped to better understand the respective perspectives on OER in teacher education.

It is important that both the Cologne and Kaiserslautern procedures can be understood as participatory university development: Participation within the limits of an educational organisation aims to involve various actors in a project and as representatives*in a discourse on current phenomena. In such a perspective on higher education development, actors become stakeholders. This means that they become persons who, because of their institutional roots in the participating universities (and beyond), pursue their own or common interests, i.e. have a "stake".

This is also the reason for the selection of the actors involved in the OERlabs: With their different positions, the participants bring their own interests with them, some of which can be abstracted from personal opinions or attitudes towards OER (institutionally). But the OERlabs are not free of personal ties either: For example, it has long been known in the social and economic development of organisations that individuals can also systematically pursue their interests (cf. Gairing, 2017). Not least for this reason, we have made our respective prorectors for teaching and studies patrons of the project. In a way, they shine as personalities and are interested (not only) in teaching and teaching development at their own university.

Accordingly, participatory university development - despite all participation - is characterised by an imbalance in educational organisations: There are always people who are involved in the project like everyone else, but who have so much "internal" power in their day-to-day work that they are perceived as more important than others, or that their participation in turn determines the (non-)participation of others. It would be too high to want to solve this inherent contradiction with the OERlabs. However, the internal structure of the individual dates, especially the multi-stakeholder dialogues, has succeeded in accepting this power-political challenge, in fact in fading it out for a few hours and in favour of the content and objective employment: Greetings from important university representatives* were, for example, more subordinate than superior to the project. During all dialogue appointments, care was also taken to ensure that the people could get to know each other and that time was reserved for this - regardless of their functions and extensive time bottlenecks and involvement. This methodical approach proved to be effective and not least effective in the course of the OERlabs:

While in the OERlabs it was initially obvious to learn from the respective experiences with OER, in the course of the project it was above all the ability to reflect on "the other's" points of view that was promoted and highlighted as positive. Especially the way of exchanging experiences lives on in the University of Cologne and the TU Kaiserslautern in different (project) contexts: from jointly responsible (teaching) events beyond the project to the discussion of common concepts for the design of teacher training courses and the writing of this Open Book.

Can learning from the experiences of others therefore be seen as the success of a project? Probably yes, because experiential learning in connection with the OERlabs was not left to chance coffee on campus, but followed a certain systematic approach (with regard to the targeted processes). In addition, we were able to show that the exchange of experience can be implemented with few resources. Such a point must not be underestimated, since experiential learning in connection with media will gain even more value, as marked in the speech of the project management in Cologne:

According to Moldaschl (2017) it can even be assumed that constant reflection will become the "normal case". Schön (1984) knows early on how exactly this reflection can be shaped. Accordingly, three modalities trigger reflection on practice: First, it could be repeatedly thought about the meaning of individual media offers (or not). Secondly, reflection on situations and personal experiences in study and teaching can be shaped, for example in the format of multi-stakeholder dialogue. Reflection at the meta-level as "reflection on reflection" is implemented in the OERlabs through this OpenBook. Thirdly, other methods and formats could also be found to directly address the meta-reflection of higher education development processes.

Participatory university development is relevant not least because standard media solutions reveal an idea about media from the past and can no longer be generated. With a view to Stalder (2017) Explanations on the culture of digitality, it is important, among other things, to sound out how and under what conditions central or decentralized media offerings can (still) be made and how a science and science-based organization like the university shapes the process of constant reflection (cf. Hofhues, 2018). In the context of OER, it seems essential not to be deterred by (missing) legal framework conditions or (supposedly) lacking knowledge of media production: If participatory university development is understood above all as 'doing reflection' and a joint process, then the ideas of the members of the (higher) schools in particular encourage them to take action with regard to the media and to reflect on trials together with various actors from science and institutions/Third Space.

What it means to be constantly talking about the changing university and to name ideas for its further development is shown by the 23 ideas concerning OER that emerged in Cologne: Seven of them could even be implemented with little effort at the University of Cologne, for example. Whether or not this will be successful will be up to the actors themselves once this project has been completed. This is where the understanding of participatory university development differs from that of an entrepreneurial university: it would probably accompany the existing ideas during their implementation and measure their success in quantitative terms (cf. Hofhues, Pensel & Möller, 2018).

Media education in teacher training
Teacher education is a vocational biographical development project with three different phases (Terhart, 1992). Participating in the entire process of teacher*internal education are not only universities but also study seminars and advanced training institutions, as well as ministries and state institutes. Thus, teacher*internal education often becomes a "major construction site" (Kunter, 2011, p. 107) and place of numerous reforms (cf. Pasternak et al., 2017), of which currently the integration of digital media is only one of many (cf. BMBF 2018). With the OERlabs project, we have dedicated ourselves precisely to this "major construction site" and attempted to address both the topic of OER and the underlying perspectives of cooperative media action in teacher training and schools, as well as to point out opportunities to do justice to this diversity of actors and to perspectives within teacher training. One of OERlabs' aims is to identify opportunities for media education in teacher training and to stimulate dialogue between all stakeholders. The "OERlabs are thus moving between external requirements and normative objectives of media education at the university and along the chain of training and further education of teachers". (Schiefner-Rohs & Hofhues, 2017, p. 73).

Incorporate structural peculiarities: addressing networking through various phases
A central feature of teacher*internal education is its special design: on the one hand, it takes place in different phases: Study, legal clerkship and professional practice with further education and training follow one another. On the other hand, the design within the course of study is also special: within the university, there is often the challenge of interlinking the subject sciences, didactics and educational sciences, as is implemented in many current measures (including the quality offensive for teacher*internal training): For example, many projects in the latter funding initiative are devoted to the lack of interlinking of subject sciences, subject didactics and educational sciences (Pasternak et al, 2017, p. 97). These are particularly frequent with each other through "the establishment of interdisciplinary networks or cooperations" (ibid., p. 135) associated. We have followed a similar path with the multi-stakeholder dialogues, which were intended to bring the actors into dialogue with one another via open educational resources and cooperative (media) practice. For example, explicit invitations were extended to stakeholders from the specialist sciences, didactics and educational sciences, as well as to representatives of the Center for Teacher Education and (teacher) students. Cross-phase networking beyond the university then took place at the roundtable by inviting representatives of the study seminars, the state pedagogical institutes, schools and the responsible ministries. The aim was to reflect the career biographical development perspective within the Round Table and to jointly discuss the design of open educational practices. An interlocking, understood as "organisational, curricular and personnel cooperation of the institutions involved in teacher training with the aim of using the respective strengths for training in the other phases" (Hericks 2004, p. 301) also took place in the OERlabs seminars, in which lecturers from the university worked in team teaching with a teacher*on the subject of OER (see OERlabs Seminars).

Addressing new content and formats: enable media education processes for (student) teachers
In addition to networking, there is also the question of how media educational spaces, understood as "media-influenced, institutionalized and informal spaces [...] in which educational processes are initiated by the media" (Spanhel 2010, p. 29f.), can be created or shaped at all levels of the educational institution. In terms of dealing with the demands of digital media, students of teaching professions are a special target group in all areas of their future careers: they know that their own media-related school experience influences their media-related attitudes (van Braak, 2001; Blömeke, 2007 ). In addition, however, teacher training students can be described as 'little digital-affine' (Schmid et al., 2017, p. 43 ) and score worse in terms of competences and attitudes - at least in Germany - with regard to digital media in comparison with other students (Blömeke, 2003; Herzig & Grafe, 2006; Schmid et al., 2017 ). Nor can it be assumed that digital media are anchored within teacher training at all universities (cf. Monitor Lehrerbildung, 2017). This makes it necessary to look at alternative forms of addressing media education within higher education institutions.

The real challenge in dealing with OER lies not (only) in the use of educational materials from the Internet and thus in the production of media, but (also) in the development of a reflexive habitus with regard to openess and the associated practices of cooperation and sharing. It is known from previous (school) pedagogical and psychological studies that cooperation among teachers is rather difficult to achieve and implement (Trumpa et al., 2016, Kullmann, 2016 ) and teaching and learning materials (Ihme et al., 2009 ). In addition, cooperation is primarily investigated in the context of organisational development (e.g. Bauer 2002; Dalin & Rolff 1990) and is rarely (more rarely) related to professionalisation issues. As a result, questions of cooperative media action along the teacher training chain remain largely unanswered from a media pedagogical point of view. The OERlabs' participative-cooperative approach (both within the multi-stakeholder dialogues and the jointly responsible courses, but also the facilities of rooms in cooperation with administrative staff) leads to the fact that teacher training is understood as a joint responsibility of many within the university - and through the inclusion of stakeholders from the second and third phases, the view is also extended beyond the university.

The focus in the OERlabs was to make a change from the lecturer to the student side under the concept of subject orientation. Thus, students in different formats (OERlabs seminars, open labs, multi-stakeholder dialogues) with their experiences, ideas and together with teachers should ask about the causes of certain practices, question previous assumptions about the role of digital media (not only) in teaching. In particular, this stimulates a discussion of the theory behind the OER debate. With the problem of (lack of) cooperation as a theoretical eye-catcher, the focus of the discussion is on social phenomena, not on technologies. At the same time, however, openness is explicitly allowed in the debate: within the multi-stakeholder dialogues, the focus was particularly on joint discussion with all those involved in teacher*education and beyond, while within the seminars, based on the production of material, thought was stimulated for reflection, but in the openness of the design, own focal points also became necessary. Accordingly, the basis for professional action in teacher*internal education is precisely the endurance of uncertainty and openness of interpretation (Floden & Clark, 1991; Paseka, & Hinzke, 2014; Paseka, Schneider-Keller & Combe, 2018 ), which is why in particular the development of a reflexive habitus is defined as the goal of teacher*internal education (especially the first phase) (cf. Neuweg, 2018 ). In order to develop such a habitus, open, not predefined (media education) spaces are needed. The aim of all measures was therefore to ensure that students also "deal with indeterminacy as such" (Jörissen & Marotzki, 2009, p. 19 ). These are used to stimulate educational processes, because "education lives from playing with indeterminacy. It opens up access to heterodoxies, ambiguities and polymorphisms" (ibid. p. 21). Through this tentativity (ibid.), i.e. the development of new approaches to a phenomenon through different project perspectives (e.g. labs and dialogues), it becomes possible to think together about subjective practices of action, whether related to digital media or professional action in the teaching profession in general. In particular, it was a question of working together with students and actors in teacher education to "search for new rules and schemes for new, unknown phenomena" (Jörissen & Marotzki, 2009, p. 21 ).

Thus, different formats within the OERlabs project make socialisation and habitualisation processes more central: it is not primarily a matter of integrating digital media into teacher training through a special anchoring, but rather of changing perspectives: Instead of seeing media education in teacher education merely as the creation of offers, the perspective of appropriation is addressed with the question of how students deal with digital media, which perspective of meaning is created. From this perspective of appropriation, processes of reflection regarding media and one's own biography are stimulated or set in relation to one's own biography and (future) professionalism. Students are thus sensitized to see familiar challenges again and again, even within supposedly new phenomena.

title: OERlabs Openbook/Headnotes (MSD)


text:
OERlabs Openbook/Field Notes (OpenLab)

An event follows the next: opportunities to establish open formats in short-term projects
"What exactly makes a lab so special?" - Prof. Dr. Stefan Herzig (Patron of OERlabs at the UoC 2017, now President of the Technical University of Cologne) asked this question once again openly at the closing event of the OERlabs dialogue process at the University of Cologne. This question has accompanied us as a project team since the start, sometimes we asked ourselves the question internally, sometimes it came to us from the outside. Sandra Hofhues and Mandy Schiefner-Rohs attempted a scientific interpretation of the lab concept in the publication "Vom Labor zum medialen Bildungsraum: Hochschul- und Mediendidaktik nach Bologna".

At the OERlabs closing event, the panel discussion "Labs and Learning Rooms - How can they be designed together?" had different views on the question raised. Sometimes the lab is a casual place that you simply visit for a cup of coffee, sometimes a room in which you explicitly work on fulfilling a certain task, or sometimes the whole city is suddenly a laboratory in which you can experiment. During his keynote speech, HS.-Prof. Dr. Klaus Himpsl-Gutermann used the Future Learning Labs (FLL) as an example to show how the PH Wien Labs is developing.

One of the key questions that arose for us at the University of Cologne: Who has the necessary time to take advantage of an open lab offer - no matter how the labs are designed? What incentives can be provided, how much thematic interest is already available for OER and open practices?

Over-saturation for students and university staff
The first question about the time factor in particular is elementary: Cologne, as a large university city, offers not only a wealth of leisure activities but also numerous university-related events for students and employees of the university. The Intermedia studies alone offers weekly events, the meetup.com platform also features numerous open meetings on various topics in Cologne and the surrounding area. In addition, there are meetings, conferences, lectures and bar camps as well as internal university events. In the area of further education, employees are offered further training and coaching. All of these are potential competitors for project events.

A big challenge: relevance and marketing of/for "OER"
The competition with other events in Cologne is challenging enough in itself, but in the context of OER another big challenge arises: The debate and the term Open Educational Resources are by no means widely known. In order to understand OER at the level of educational material, discussion can begin from the perspective of basic knowledge of German copyright laws and their interpretation. Representative of this can be the open and honest sentence in the mind of a 3rd semester teacher training student, after a brief impulse in the professional internship seminar on copyright and OER: "I would not have thought before the seminar that copyright law could later play a role for me as a teacher". The topic is therefore potentially of little relevance to the students - and possibly also to the university staff. OER is often misunderstood or underestimated as a free material, too. In spite of this lack, different practices and strategies in dealing with the topic develop even without appropriate offers:

Another important aspect, which is also often critical in teacher education based on our assessment: The lack of experience and knowledge in the production of media content, especially among student teachers. Without these two aspects, it would be difficult to implement a sustainable discussion of OER as a material, especially when it comes to individual selective events. Accordingly, they can only start with the basics, so that in the end there is no time for further discussions, e.g. on open practices or the meaningfulness of sharing and cooperation.

Ideas for OpenLabs at the UoC
At the University of Cologne we came to the decision not to try to open a fixed room regularly (in contrast to the lab room at the TU Kaiserslautern). Instead, selective events within the framework of the MSD as well as the internship seminars should be offered openly to all persons with interest. The decision was made on the basis of the project resources already mentioned. Furthermore, it is due to the fact that similar lab/laboratory offers already exist at the UoC.

The "Open" in the title of the event primarily referred to the open invitation to all interested students and persons from Cologne and the surrounding area. In the beginning, it was particularly important that both students and employees* of the university were invited. The labs thus served as basic workshops or lectures, which could have served as an introduction to lab activities.

Proposal- and trainingstructures at the TUK
The offer and further training structures at the university are usually found as an offer of corresponding institutions mostly in event formats, which are borrowed from classical further training events: For example, personnel development at the university offers seminars on management and employee topics, university didactics offers seminars on university didactics and the Centre for Teaching and Learning on Media-Didactic Topics.

At the TUK, the existing range of offer and further training structures looks dispersed: At the TUK there is an extensive range of further training measures for personnel development. The university didactics - at the TU the department for study and teaching - does not offer own courses, but participates in the university didactic program of the University Evaluation Network Southwest. The only self-responsible offer is the Teaching Plus workshop. "With this series of events, the TU pursues the goal of initiating and maintaining the exchange of experience on teaching between the faculties and individual status groups of the university. New developments and innovative teaching/learning methods are discussed and made known within the university". The eTeaching Service Center offers various courses on media didactic topics. The self-study centre, located at the Distance & Independent Studies Center (DISC), offers a wide range of courses for students to strengthen their self-learning and self-management skills. The SLZ currently offers the Diemersteiner Self-Learning Days as group training on the one hand and coaching as individual support on the other. In addition, both classroom and distance students can use our online services (eDSL) to expand and improve their self-learning skills. The Regional University Computer Centre Kaiserslautern offers technically oriented further education.

The formats of the VCRP can also be used. "The aim of the VCRP E-Cademy is to support teachers and other interested parties, primarily from RLP universities, in the integration of online components into teaching and to expand individual media competence. The focus here is particularly on a didactically meaningful implementation that is suitable for the respective course offering." Innovative formats such as the e-Learning Ralley can also be found here.

All in all, it can be stated after a tour through the institutions that, apart from a few exceptions, classical (course) formats of continuing education structures, which are used to varying degrees, predominate at the TUK. However, the question is to what extent course structures represent an adequate form for new and mostly rapidly emerging trends and topics, to which one can also count OER, so to speak. The OERlabs have a target group that differs from participants in normal continuing education programmes: they are aimed both at students and employees at universities, lecturers and professors. As knowledge workers (Wilke, 2006), they are accustomed to obtaining and processing information independently. At the same time, professors and lecturers have a tight time budget, which hardly allows any scope for further training in the form of courses. In addition, sensitization as a goal is hardly achievable in course-like formats, but requires continuous forms of discussion that can also irritate. Radtke points to an important moment, especially for educational processes at the university (where a part of teacher training takes place), because: "Practicing scientific education is not practicing this thinking cultivated in professional culture, which can easily end in a 'harmony of deceptions', but its irritation, which is a prerequisite for innovation. This is not based on practical experience or the needs of practice, but on scientific discipline and methodological reflection."(Radtke, quoted in Hedtke, 2000, P. 8). In the same way, experience-based exchange can also trigger such irritations: "It proves particularly fruitful for the change of teaching-related cognitions if teachers experience discrepancies between their own convictions and their own actions and if they are confronted with argumentation patterns, subjective theories and convictions of other teachers".(Lipkowsky, 2004, S. 474). These irritations and the resulting self-reflections should be triggered by the OERlabs.

Breaking up the structures through OpenLabs
The OERLabs represent a new form of debate: First of all, the OERlab is a metaphor for a form of debate that is generally open. Three different forms of this metaphor have emerged at the TUK:

An OERlabs-room that is open and lives through the interaction of the participants, in which the topics themselves can be chosen - this did not and does not exist at the TUK until now. For us, the lab is more than just a metaphor for experimental teaching and learning formats. With the support of experts from the central facilities of the TU Kaiserslautern, (teacher) students can document, produce, change (remix) and share open educational resources. Since July 2017, the University Library has thankfully made a room available for this purpose (see Pressemeldung TUK), in which students approach the topic of OER practically and autodidactically every second Friday, guided by student tutors. The aim of the labs is to get students to work together and with university actors in a cooperative way and to learn together in the process. The OERlabs can be shaped by the actors in doing: students should make the OERlabs their labs. They should demand and support university teaching on exactly those topics that interest them. But teachers and university staff also find a place in the labs, because incentives and input are provided in the labs by experts from the subject didactics, the library, the partner institutions or the network schools. It will be open every two weeks on Fridays from 10 a.m. to 12 noon for students and other interested parties. Students should learn how they can jointly produce educational materials on topics that they, as prospective teachers, may miss out on during the rest of their studies. They also acquire knowledge on how to use media sensibly in class, from explanatory films to infographics to complete teaching concepts. In addition, the OERlabs also have a wide range of learning materials available, which interested parties can use to familiarise themselves with a specific topic, for example.

However, it is not enough to offer only labs in order to anchor the topic of open education at the university. A debate at university level is at least as relevant. Thus the MSD/Round Tables are also a new form of setting topics and discussion.

The mobile OpenLabs at the school are the attempt not only to locate the debate with OER at the university, but also to carry it into the school.

Various mobile labs have thus taken place, sometimes with a focus on teachers (80), sometimes with a focus on pupils. Before the lab, a concept was developed in consultation with the school to clarify technical as well as content-related possibilities. The concept consisted of a lecture on basic education and a self-production phase. The task of the tutors was to create the basics for the understanding of OER and to support the teachers in creating OER. The experiences with this can be found in the Lessons Learned.

Voluntary proposals
In order to train student teachers for OER, however, it is not sufficient to adapt OER as curriculum content to the module templates and to design seminars based on them. In order for the project to become a student project, there should be a core group (tutors) from our perspective who supervise and administer the labs in terms of content and organisation. The foundation stone for this is laid by the student employees, but there have to be others who bring the topic into their own student body. Commitment outside the seminar plan is therefore required so that those aspects that are of interest to the OERlabs project can really be promoted and established. The OERlab was promoted by the students with the following ideas: Culture of sharing, of creating together, making appropriation processes possible: What do I need, what interests me, what do I want to do, what do I want to learn, what do I want to drive forward university development with all actors and actively shape digital change, as well as the sustainability of media education through a tutoring system (peer-to-peer learning). Students as mentors should dissolve the hierarchies between the participants in the labs and thus lower any inhibition thresholds for participation in a voluntary seminar.

title: OERlabs Openbook/Field Notes (OpenLab)