Call for Proposals

What It Is

Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching materials published under an open intellectual property license that permits certain kinds of reuse, revision, and remixing. Not only are OER customizable, but students benefit directly from free, immediate, and permanent access to high-quality educational materials.

Since 2013, Maricopa Millions has funded the development and piloting of more than twenty complete courses using OER. During that time, we estimate that faculty across the district have saved their students more that $11 million by choosing to use low-cost/no-cost course materials (including OER) in place of costly traditional textbooks. Many of the highest-enrollment courses have already been funded by Maricopa Millions, so the need for complete course development has diminished and the project’s focus now shifts to empowering faculty to revise, remix, enhance, and expand upon the open content in the Maricopa Millions catalogue.

How It Works

In general, proposals will identify a specific OER-related need, design a project to meet that need, and describe the process, timeline, resources, and clock hours involved. Funding (in part or in full) will be based on the number of clock hours awarded by determination of the OER Steering Committee. The maximum award for a Maricopa Millions 2.Open grant is $3000 for an individual and $7500 for a team of three or more.

All residential, temporary (OYO/OSO), and adjunct faculty may apply. (For temporary and adjunct faculty, MM2.Open contracts must be completed during current employment and do not imply future employment with the college.)

Any scale of project may qualify, from developing an individual module or learning object to updating/improving existing OER according to one or more of the MM2.Open grant project’s Focus Areas:

Ensuring Accessibility
Incorporating Culturally-Responsive Content and Culturally-Sustaining Pedagogy
Maximizing “5R” Permissions
Developing Renewable Assignments (“Open Pedagogy”)
Developing Multimedia and Interactives

Maricopa Millions will also continue to consider funding the development and piloting of full courses according to the previous grant model. If you are interested in developing a complete course, see the information about Maricopa Millions OER Course Development Grants.

How to Apply

All potential applicants are encouraged to review the 2018 article “Toward a Sustainable OER Ecosystem: The Case for OER Stewardship” to see how proposals align with the “CARE Framework,” which outlines how those working with OER should ethically contribute, attribute, release, and empower to the global open education movement. Proposals should clearly reflect the values of the CARE Framework.

Here are the steps to apply:

Conceptualize an OER project
Discuss with those at your college to collect information about the need and support for the project (e.g. fellow faculty, department/division leadership, library, CTL, VPAA)
Determine the scope of the project
Review the MM2.Open evaluation rubric (below) and draft your application using the MM2.Open Application Worksheet.
Apply using the MM2.Open application form. To apply to develop a complete course under a traditional Maricopa Millions grant, see the information about Maricopa Millions OER Course Development Grants.

This call for proposals is open-ended. Proposals received by the end of day on the third Monday of each month will be considered for review by the OER Steering Committee at our monthly meeting.

Alignment with Governing Board Outcomes

The development of OER and renewable assignments at least impacts the following:

1.1 University Transfer Education and General Education

1.1.A: Providing students access to a free and retainable alternative to a costly textbook serves to lower the “cost of attendance as a percentage of Arizona mean family income” as well as demonstrating that the “college shows concern for students as individuals” (many of whom have real financial pressures) and that the “college does whatever it can to help me reach my educational goals” (by working toward providing free access to quality content).

1.1.C.ii: Involving students in the curation and development of content discovered online obliges them to interact responsibly with intellectual property and content licensing, which supports the development of “computer and information literacy.”

1.1.D: Incorporating openly-licensed and digitally-delivered materials into courses is an “enhanced educational delivery option.”

1.2 Workforce and Economic Development

1.2.B&C: Students enrolled in courses taught by instructors employing open pedagogy in Part 2 will develop/sharpen skills related to creating digital content, which continues to grow in importance across the spectrum of employment opportunities.

1.4 Community Development and Civic and Global Engagement

1.4.C: Students will be engaging in “civic, political, and global learning opportunities” because their use and/or development of OER at least connects them to a global learning environment and, in the case of open pedagogy, directly involves them in making contributions to global open learning.

Applicants are encouraged to review the full list of Governing Board outcomes/metrics in case a specific project further aligns, but this is optional and will have no impact on the evaluation of the proposal.

Examples of / Suggestions for Qualifying Projects

Projects may be of just about any scope and size, from revising existing content to developing individual modules and multimedia. Some ideas might include:

Making existing OER content fully accessible
Expanding upon / revising existing MM content
Developing individual modules that may be used in more than one course or as support/tutoring modules
Recording instructional videos / multimedia
Designing open pedagogy / renewable assignments
and more! Be creative!

MM2.Open Evaluation Rubric

		/ 100 points
Description - Abstract (300 words or fewer)	Abstract clearly and concisely summarizes the proposed project.	5
Description - Deliverables (bullet points are acceptable)	The materials to be developed and shared are clearly and concisely described.	5
Qualifications	Grant participants possess OER knowledge and experience as well as content and/or technical expertise. Maricopa Millions OER certifications are especially valuable here, though not required.	10
Materials and Licensing	Content developed (authored or remixed) will be openly-licensed, sustainable, and maximally portable.	20
Need	The need for the project's deliverable(s) is clearly described and justified.	15
Impact	The projected impact on students and/or the institution (department, college, district) is clearly described and supported with evidence.	15
MM2.Open Focus Alignment	The project clearly aligns with one or more MM2.Open focus areas.	10
CARE Framework Alignment	The project clearly demonstrates alignment with the values articulated in the CARE Framework.	10
Budget	The requested budget is appropriate to the tasks associated with the project.	10
TOTAL		/ 100

What You Should Know about the CARE Framework

Embedded in the Maricopa Millions 2.Open project are the four characteristics of responsible OER stewardship articulated by Petrides, Levin, and Watson in their 2018 publication focused on “building a sustainable open education ecosystem”:

“Contribute: OER stewards actively contribute to efforts, whether financially or via in-kind contributions, to advance the awareness, improvement, and distribution of OER; and
Attribute: OER stewards practice conspicuous attribution, ensuring that all who create or remix OER are properly and clearly credited for their contributions; and
Release: OER stewards ensure OER can be released and used beyond the course and platform in which it was created or delivered; and
Empower: OER stewards are inclusive and strive to meet the diverse needs of all learners, including by supporting the participation of new and non-traditional voices in OER creation and adoption.”

This framework is valuable as a means of holding our work to the highest standards of open education. MM2.Open projects will reflect these values.

The "Prix-Fixe" and "Buffet" Models of OER Adoption/Development: An Analogy at Dinner

Why not full courses?

Persons familiar with the restaurant industry (whether as an employee or as a patron) will recognize the very different “Prix-Fixe” and “Buffet” models of dining options.

A “Prix-Fixe” (PREE-fix) dinner is a complete meal made available, as the French term translates, at a fixed price. (In Spain, restaurants commonly offer a “Menú del Día,” which is basically the same concept.) While the menu options are typically limited to the plan of the designer (in this case, the chef) and there is very little choice involved, the consumer of the dinner may simply enjoy the curated meal without the burden of too many choices. There is little customizability, but, ideally, the promise of a fulfilling meal. Some diners like this model.

On the other hand, the “Buffet” dinner offers a variety of options for each part of a dining experience. Diners are obliged to choose based on their individual tastes and needs, but this customizability is preferential to some. In the end, those eating get what they want and/or what they need.

Hear me out—I know this analogy is far from perfect, but I hope that you are already seeing some of the vital comparisons to how we might refashion our catalogue of open resources.

First of all, to be clear, the “Buffet” model in this analogy does not imply that we’re suggesting that faculty “skip” courses. Imagine that there is a nutritionist on hand to let you know that you don’t have enough leafy greens on your plate (i.e. that you’re missing a competency). Or, better yet, let’s assume that you are yourself committed to consuming a meal that includes all the nutritional benefits of a healthy diet. You know what your course’s competencies are, and you’re not going to skip any of them. But we all know that’s not going to be a problem, right? Who goes to a buffet and only eats macaroni and cheese with a side of strawberry shortcake? (Are we getting hungry yet?) This is, admittedly, one place where the analogy begins to rupture, but we know that many faculty receptive to switching to open materials are not seeking a full meal; maybe, if you’ll allow the extension, they’ve already had their shortcake and macaroni and cheese before arriving to the buffet and all they’re looking for are a couple of sides, say grilled asparagus (multimedia content) and sautéed squash (a set of formative assessments). We want to make these options readily accessible to them if that’s all they need to help them make the transition to open (or just finish eating a healthy, rounded meal).

The overall design of this grant project is to encourage faculty to identify what’s either missing from or needs improving on the buffet menu and work on filling in those gaps so that everyone has an even more mouth-watering selection of resources from which to gather whatever kind of meal they’re looking to eat. And, if there are faculty who have a great idea for a new Prix-Fixe menu for which there is sufficient demand and projected impact, they are fully able to propose the course’s development according to the traditional Maricopa Millions model.

To take the whole analogy even further (since I’m sure you’re not sick of it already), there may exist gaps in the fare offerings that funded projects may seek to fill. For example, the “Buffet” for a given course, or discipline, may not include any options at all when it comes to a particular competency. If and when that is the case, a funded project might carve out a space on the buffet line for a new set of choices.