We reviewed the data from our self-survey and dove into some of the questions and how we interpreted them. For example:
- open scholarship can include both faculty and students, and the tri-agency requirement for open publication is driving this somewhat
- open faculty development: is it open enrolment or does it produce open products? Also interpreted as T & L centre extending opportunities, sharing, promotion open practices in teaching or scholarship, open resources
- open pedagogy: open pedagogy and digital humanities, open pedagogy and design of new programs, ope pedagogy and engaging the public/community
We discussed some assumptions about why collecting, measuring, narrating impact is important and some desired tangible outcomes. We are reminded that while practice drives impact, impact also drives practice. In our discussion about this we struggled with the limits of what this advisory can do – we don’t represent all BC post secondaries, and we aren’t the only knowledgable informants for this group of institutions in this advisory. So being clear on a manageable and realistic set of goals for this advisory is important, and that goal may be to design and implement a survey for BCPSE that uncovers how our sector is measuring and reporting impact.
The powerpoint slides for Meeting #2
Zoom recording available – please let me know if you want to view it