H5P Training

Dani, Courtney, and Chris attended the first of three workshops on creating interactive educational media in Moodle, WordPress and Pressbooks using H5P. Jamie and Brenna did a great job facilitating the workshop with examples, step-by-step guidance, and ample hands-on time to experiment with interactive media.

For an overview of the session and some jaw-dropping examples, see Create Share and Reuse Interactive Content – Part 1 (Moodle) on the Learning Technology blog.

Some questions and their answers from the session:

Editors Meeting Notes for Oct. 23, 2019

Attendees (in alphabetical order): Chris, Cory, Courtney, Dani, Justin, and Mona

Time: 11:00 am                 Location: OL344

Notetaker: Justin             Timekeeper: Collective effort


  • Pop survey on our website:
    • What’s working on the website? – working well as a reference tool for editors, layout, content
    • What would you like to see on the website? – more contribution from other editors, enlarge target audience to include other stakeholders and course developers, more subsections to reduce scrolling, increase access to site, OER support resources
    • Who is the intended audience of the website? Editors, IDs, Curriculum Services, Production, possibly OLFMs and other course developers

Topic 1: Editors Website

  • Discussion kicked-off on website elements
  • Original intent of website, as told by Chris:
    • History involves input from an array of sources
    • Basically, most recent approved policy sent via email was uploaded to wiki
    • This linear process became the 1st generation of what we now know as the website
    • Rapid-fire emails—sometimes several in a week—drove the need for continual updates
    • Despite upgrading from wiki to WordPress website, this process became overwhelming
  • Blog section on WordPress site was initially intended to capture approved policy emails
  • New editors have and should continue to have access to resources for onboarding purposes
  • Now meeting minutes are being added to blog – Note: needs new heading
  • Website is accessible to the public, though historically very low traffic
  • Publicly shared site can raise our professional profile at institution level and beyond
  • On one hand, privacy is a concern, but transparency is the payoff
  • Website as a platform allows us to advocate and educate
  • Can/should serve as an archive for in-house creations, PD events, and progressive resources
  • Diversity of purpose(s) speaks to the need for differing sources of input; needs full team effort
  • Note to discretion: policy updates reworded/names removed before publicly shared
  • Some website elements can/should remain private (e.g., meeting minutes)
  • Intent of this new endeavor is to have a dynamic site, not static
  • Leadership will need updates as we continue forward to account for our time spent on this
  • How will Leadership measure success?
  • Photo gallery to be included, since this adds a needed human element
  • Complex items like CG have both static and dynamic elements; could be divvied up into tabs
  • Media and/or Production could help out with layout, but content is on us
  • New hire/onboarding docs could easily be added
  • Blog sections could include Policy, PD, Meeting Minutes (private), Agenda Items (private)
  • Tabs could include Blog, Resources, About Us (similar to LinkedIn)

Next Discussion:

  • Update CG and Style Guide
  • Resources and References
  • Captions and Credit Lines
  • Revisit Process Mapping


Editors Meeting Notes for Oct. 9, 2019

Attendees: Chris, Cory, Courtney, Justin, Mona, Dani

Date  Time 10/9/2019 11:00 AM Location OL344

Notetaker: Cory Stumpf – Timekeeper: Chris Ward (unofficially) 😉

What is a reasonable expectation for internal review?

  • Course Guide components, assignment titles and marks, etc.
  • Assessments: marks (do they add up?) / grading criteria
  • Headings
  • Consistency (of capitalization, titles, etc.)
  • Check D4P to get an idea of what’s been done
  • Check CNET (note discrepancies but don’t change anything)
  • Perhaps look closely at one module, and if problems are found check for similar ones in others
  • Flag what stands out—comment rather than change, unless obvious (e.g. missing period), then change and inform editor—make clear what you’ve identified and/or adjusted
  • Search “OLFM” throughout?
  • Student Handbook – should we remove mentions of it in all cases? Maybe the handbook should be updated.


  • Sometimes should include additional appropriate credentials (not just the most recent) if they are relevant to the course/program (e.g. CGA certification for Accounting)

Capitals – Black Americans/White Southerners etc.

Positive Notes

  • Grateful for Wednesdays, particularly of the wellness variety, and especially when cheese is involved
  • Glad that we are discussing things together such as the importance of word choice, and that we continue to learn from one another and improve upon what we do
  • Newer courses provide most student satisfaction, so we’re doing something right!
  • We will be ordering desk copies for you of the 7th ed. APA Publication Manual!

Tabled for next meeting:

  • Editing website: Who/what is it for, and what do we want it to look like?

Additional information:

Mona, Justin and I went to the Ask an Analyst session, Understanding Open Learning Students: Data-informed Insights and Outlooks

This session validated much about what we know already about our students, but there were some key takeaways for me, mainly: 1/3 of all OL enrolments represent only 25% of our courses; students want more media and videos in the courses, students are struggling with exams, which is preventing them from re-enrolling in another OL course, enrolments are continuing to grow (mostly international and dually enrolled students); 93% of students said that their course met expectations and that they would recommend their course in 60 of our courses  (mostly the newer courses). ENGL and STAT courses represent the most enrolments.

IPE – Factbook 2018/2019

Other institutional reports from IPE that you may find interesting.

Matt D. from Program Delivery set up a small meeting with Sarah from Accessibility Services – She gave us some interesting stats. For example 40% of their students (that they are accommodating) are OL students, many who are suffering from mental illness or neurological disorders. Sarah said that she would be sharing her presentation with Matt – so I will let you know. This is interesting information to have from a UDL perspective as well: Are OL courses meeting the needs of these students in terms of how they are developed? Could we do better? A few weeks ago, Naomi shared a resource from the CNIB, which is good to take a look at in terms of what we may suggest for universal design.

How can we use these resources to improve our editing of distance courses?


Editing Team Meeting 9/25/2019

Editing Team Meeting

Date | time 9/25/2019 11:00 AM| Location OL344

Meeting Notes:

Attendees: Dani, Mona, Justin, Cory

Regrets: Chris; Courtney

Note taker: Mona

  1. Editor’s website:
  • Log-in;
  • Review current content;
  • Collaborate;
  • Determine common objectives.
  1. Free online micro-course to master the basics of OER and Creative Commons:

Open Education, Copyright and Open Licensing in a Digital World (LiDA103)

  • Editors are welcome to attend;
  • Starts on October 7, 2019;
  • 2-week course, commit to 1–2 hours/day;
  • Negotiate with Naomi to use some work time;
  • Certificate earned upon completion;
  • Registration link: https://oer.nz/wcol2019
  1. Maintenance Courses:
  • Change to file version for Rachelle’s IP review: Moving forward, she will *always* review the edited version.
  • Editors to flag new/deleted 3-rd party materials for her attention;
  • Dani will share the edited files with Rachelle upon completion of peer review process.
  1. “One-offs” (those maintenance projects that *should* involve only one component of a course):
  • Be sure to check all materials that could be affected by the corrections/changes made;
  • Discussion was around accountability and transparency of the very narrowed scope.
  1. Internal Review
  • Discussion postponed to next meeting;
  • Consider what common issues occur in the process;
  • Consider scope: skim vs. total re-edit.
  1. Style considerations for each course/discipline:
  • Justin suggested adding that information in D4P2 in the notes section;
  • Advantage to next editor: reduction of time spent determining which style was deemed appropriate.


Editing Team Meeting 9/11/2019

Call to order: 10:30am

In attendance: Courtney Charlton, Naomi Cloutier, Dani Collins (Chair), Justin Frudd, Mona Hall, Paul Martin, Cory Stumpf, Chris Ward (scribe & time keeper)

Dani: Welcome and new meeting format

  • Call for note taker and time keeper: Chris
  • Call for review of process changes this summer
    • Chris: brief review of process changes
    • Discussion:
       lack of CMP (what info needed? can it be shared in D4P?)
       determining, negotiating, and communicating editing scope
       identifying and confirming course materials
       exam processes
       ProctorU

Courtney: “Using a Tempest in a Teapot to Separate the Wheat from the Chaff” presentation on plain language with examples from HIST course

  • Learners’ needs not served by misused and obscure terms: e.g., obduracy, abrogation, temporal turmoil, venal, jeremiad, etc.
  • Long, complex sentence structure obscures meaning.
  • Random or inconsistent capitalization, and dated racial/cultural terminology requires more time for editors to query or resolve.
  • Discussion:
     How to minimize problematic language without changing voice of writer?
      How to balance student needs, writer wants, time constraints?

Paul: Introductions; enrollment growth up 15%; potential of non-linear development processes with editors contributing or collaborating earlier

Group: Appreciative enquiry

Dani: Open call for agenda items for future meetings

Tabled for future:

  • Editing websites
  • Credentials: when to include designations and certs

Adjourned: 11:45am