Developing an Open Access, Competency-Based Global Oral Health Curriculum: A Global Health Starter Kit | Journal of Dental Education

Abstract:  Dental education has seen increases in global health and international educational experiences in many dental schools’ curricula. In response, the Consortium of Universities for Global Health’s Global Oral Health Interest Group aims to develop readily available, open access resources for competency-based global oral health teaching and learning. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a Global Health Starter Kit (GHSK), an interdisciplinary, competency-based, open access curriculum for dental faculty members who wish to teach global oral health in their courses. Phase I (2012-17) evaluated longitudinal outcomes from two Harvard School of Dental Medicine pilot global health courses with 32 advanced and 34 predoctoral dental students. In Phase II (2018), the Phase I outcomes informed development, implementation, and evaluation of the open access GHSK (45 enrollees) written by an interdisciplinary, international team of 13 content experts and consisting of five modules: Global Trends, Global Goals, Back to Basics: Primary Care, Social Determinants and Risks, and Ethics and Sustainability. In Phase III (summer and fall 2018), five additional pilot institutions (two U.S. dental schools, one U.S. dental hygiene program, and two dental schools in low- and middle-income countries) participated in an early adoption of the GHSK curriculum. The increase in perceived knowledge scores of students enrolled in the pilot global health courses was similar to those enrolled in the GHSK, suggesting the kit educated students as well or better in nearly all categories than prior course materials. This study found the GHSK led to improvements in learning in the short term and may also contribute to long-term career planning and decision making by providing competency-based global health education.

Official announcement from the Open Science MOOC Steering Committee – Open Science MOOC

“The Steering Committee (SC) of the Open Science MOOC (OS MOOC) convened in the week of 11-15th November 2019 to address the removal of Jon Tennant by the OpenCon Code of Conduct Committee from their community, as well as his own subsequent statement in response. At the time of these announcements, Jon Tennant was a member of the SC and the main contributor to the OS MOOC.

As a community, we respect the decision made by OpenCon, and the actions implemented based on their Code of Conduct (CoC). We are dedicated to offering a safe and welcoming space for everyone in our community and we are therefore committed to upholding high standards of conduct, especially with regard to our leadership responsibilities as the SC. Leadership positions bring inherent power dynamics with them that impact the community. The OS MOOC SC realizes this and therefore is taking steps to affirm the community’s spaces for unimpeded collaboration….”

RDMLA | Research Data Management Librarian Academy: Exploring the need for research data management training for librarians

“The Research Data Management Librarian Academy (RDMLA) is a free online professional development program for librarians, information professionals, or other professionals who work in a research-intensive environment throughout the world.

RDMLA features a unique partnership between a LIS academic program, academic health sciences and research libraries, and Elsevier. Partner institutions include:
       Harvard Medical School
       Harvard Library
       Simmons University
       Boston University
       Brown University
       Massachusettes College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences
       Northeastern University
       Tufts University
       Elsevier….”

Disruption Disrupted: The Great MOOC Die-Off –

“[W]e have an overpopulation of MOOCs that are in the midst of a die-off. I’m not saying that MOOC companies are dying off. As far as I can tell, Coursera seems to be healthy. (I have less visibility into EdX’s financial status.) What I mean is that previous generation of the Stanford/MIT/Harvard-style xMOOCs, having failed to achieve either their mission or their sustainability goals, are now being repurposed into other things. Because we don’t have better names for those things, we still call them “MOOCs.” But they don’t meet the definition of Massively Open Online Courses. Even the Stanford/Harvard/MIT definition….”

Disruption Disrupted: The Great MOOC Die-Off –

“[W]e have an overpopulation of MOOCs that are in the midst of a die-off. I’m not saying that MOOC companies are dying off. As far as I can tell, Coursera seems to be healthy. (I have less visibility into EdX’s financial status.) What I mean is that previous generation of the Stanford/MIT/Harvard-style xMOOCs, having failed to achieve either their mission or their sustainability goals, are now being repurposed into other things. Because we don’t have better names for those things, we still call them “MOOCs.” But they don’t meet the definition of Massively Open Online Courses. Even the Stanford/Harvard/MIT definition….”

Open access to teaching material – how far have we come? | Impact of Social Sciences

“One of the foundational aims of the open access movement, set out in the Budapest Open Access Initiative, was to provide access to research not only to scholars, but to “teachers, students and other curious minds” and in so doing “enrich education”. However almost two decades on from the declaration access to the research literature for educational purposes remains limited. In this post Elizabeth Gadd, Jane Secker and Chris Morrison present their research into the volume of open access material available for educational purposes, finding that although much research is now available to read, a significant proportion is not licensed in a way that allows its use for teaching….”

Open access to teaching material – how far have we come? | Impact of Social Sciences

“One of the foundational aims of the open access movement, set out in the Budapest Open Access Initiative, was to provide access to research not only to scholars, but to “teachers, students and other curious minds” and in so doing “enrich education”. However almost two decades on from the declaration access to the research literature for educational purposes remains limited. In this post Elizabeth Gadd, Jane Secker and Chris Morrison present their research into the volume of open access material available for educational purposes, finding that although much research is now available to read, a significant proportion is not licensed in a way that allows its use for teaching….”

Re-educating Rita – Education and policy

“The fact that Udacity, Coursera and edX all emerged from AI labs highlights the conviction within the AI community that education systems need an overhaul. Mr Thrun says he founded Udacity as an “antidote to the ongoing AI revolution”, which will require workers to acquire new skills throughout their careers. Similarly, Mr Ng thinks that given the potential impact of their work on the labour market, AI researchers “have an ethical responsibility to step up and address the problems we cause”; Coursera, he says, is his contribution. Moreover, AI technology has great potential in education. “Adaptive learning”—software that tailors courses for each student individually, presenting concepts in the order he will find easiest to understand and enabling him to work at his own pace—has seemed to be just around the corner for years. But new machine-learning techniques might at last help it deliver on its promise….”