Case Studies - Collaboration

8/6/2019 Case Studies - Collaboration

1/16

Case Studies. Collaboration

This work, excluding institutional logos, is licensed under aCreative Commons Licence.

The following resource was created for academic teaching staff within UK higher educationalinstitutions as a part of the Intellectual Property Rights For Educational Environments (IPR4EE) project of the

University College Falmouth. The IPR4EE project is funded by HEFCE and part of the JISC/HE Academy UKOERPhase II programme.

Case study 1The Communication Trust DCSF

Cabinet Office for 3rd Sector (2008) Working in a Consortium HMSO online

http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-

Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdf

The Communication Trust, funded mainly by the DCSF, was established in April 2007 with

the specific aims of:

Raising awareness of speech, language and communication across the entire

childrens workforce

Enabling the childrens workforce to gain access to the skills and knowledge to

support the speech, language and communication development of all children

Encouraging collaborative working both within and across relevant sectors

The Trust was founded by Afasic, The BT Better World Campaign, the Council for Disabled

children and I CAN. This small group is supported by a consortium of 26 voluntary andcommunity groups which deliver services and support to children with speech, language and

communication needs. In addition the Trust is support by an Advisory Panel made up of 10

lead bodies in the field of workforce development.

The Trust is run by a small programme board made up of the founders. The Consortium and

the Panel have very clear roles and responsibilities, including quality assurance and

ensuring the relevant expertise is used in all the projects of the Trust. In addition, the panel
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdf


2/16

ensures that the Trust is not duplicating any existing work. A small project team are

responsible for delivering all the products. To ensure cost-effectiveness, any additional

support that is needed is bought in from the consortium and panel based on relevant

experience and expertise and paid a representative consultancy fee.


3/16

In the first 18 months the Trust has achieved the following:

The Trust developed a Speech, Language and Communication Framework (SLCF) -

a clear, comprehensive framework which sets out the skills and knowledge needed

by practitioners to support the speech, language and communication development of

all children, including those specific to supporting children with SLCN. It can be used

by individuals and managers across the childrens workforce to assess skills and plan

effective professional development in this area and it has been accessed by over

1500 practitioners to date.

We mailed 19,000 primary schools with information about speech, language and

communication and directed them to high quality, relevant resources. This generated

over 4,000 requests for a particular resource.

The consortium agreed a shared language and understanding of speech, language

and communication (SLC), enabling clearer communication between different sectors

who were using different terminology to describe similar issues.

We ran two very successful conferences, raising awareness of the issues and

highlighting current resources for over 300 delegates made up of managers andpractitioners from a wide range of sectors.

The Trust is working with Government and in particular presenting a cross-sector

position on the Bercow Review and its subsequent implementation

The Trust has been asked to represent SLCN organisations on government reviews

Key learning points

An independent evaluation of the Trust has recently been completed and the Trust has

received high praise from the DSCF and its partners. The report also identified key learning

points to strengthen the work of the consortium, i.e. to: Increase clarity of definition and purpose. As the Trust as been so successful and the

programme of work has extended, it is important to revisit initial aims with all

members.

As the Trust looks to its next programme of work we need to clarify the funding or

tendering process to ensure that it is transparent and fair.


4/16

As the Trust grows we need to enhance our membership and ensure the right

organisations are invited to support our work.


5/16

Case study 2

Opportunities for collaboration and the benefits of releasing OERs

https://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/w/page/24838012/Stakeholders-and-

benefits

Millions of pounds have been invested worldwide into the development of OERs and yet the

different benefits to the range of stakeholder groups have not always been well articulated or

evidenced. Whilst there is increasing evidence of benefits to educational institutions (e.g. as

a showcase) and to learners there is less evidence of the benefits to the people who are

expected to go to the effort of releasing their learning resources - the teachers themselves.

For a fuller list of potential barriers and enablers, see the Overcoming barriers and finding

enablerssection.

OER links to several other strategic goals, in the UK and worldwide.

OER release could also meet strategic needs, especially:

engagement with a wider community

engagement with employers

sustaining vulnerable subjects

enhancing marketing and engagement of prospective students worldwide

brokering collaborations and partnerships

The following is a visualization of what the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation sees as the

methods for equalizing access to educational resources worldwide:
https://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/w/page/24838012/Stakeholders-and-benefitshttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/w/page/24838012/Stakeholders-and-benefitshttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Overcoming-barriers-and-finding-enablershttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Overcoming-barriers-and-finding-enablershttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Overcoming-barriers-and-finding-enablershttp://www.hewlett.org/https://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/w/page/24838012/Stakeholders-and-benefitshttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/w/page/24838012/Stakeholders-and-benefitshttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Overcoming-barriers-and-finding-enablershttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Overcoming-barriers-and-finding-enablershttp://www.hewlett.org/


6/16

(based on an original byMichael Reschke)

Stakeholders

It is useful to tease out the range of benefits to different groups and to articulate these

clearly as external funding sources may become more scarce. Sustainability of OER release

is currently a significant issue for institutions around the globe and evidence of benefits must

be clarified if resources are to be made available for continued release. It is also useful to

identify which benefits are most relevant to each stakeholder group:

The global community (affected by cultural, language and political issues)

The national community (sometimes significant investment by Government)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/File:OER_Logic_Model.gifhttp://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/File:OER_Logic_Model.gif


7/16

Educational Institutions (not one homogenous community but several)

Subject communities (including employers and professional bodies)

Individuals supporting learning and teaching (teachers, librarians, learning technologists,

educational developers)

Learners (enrolled and global)

Good intentions: improving the evidence base in support of sharing learning materials (JISC

study 2008) includes a table in the Supplement: Business Case section identifying benefits

to different stakeholder groups with links to evidence.

Benefits

There are many instances of documented material benefits to institutions from releasing

course content as OER, including:

Brigham Young Paper on increased online enrolments where OER exists for courses

[PDF]

OpenLearn case study - bringing the OU into contact with new partners.

Apresentation from Patrick McAndrew at the Open University regarding the 'conversion'

benefits to the OU of OpenLearn as regards enrolment.

Excellent piece from the OpenCourseWare Consortium on 'making the case' for OER

Good, if somewhat dated,summary of benefits to MIT, centring on reputational benefit of

OER adoption.

Case studies are also emerging on other benefits to institutions from sharing

resources openly:

A number of Jorum stories highlight the reasons why individuals and institutions are

benefitting from sharing via JorumOpen, such as increased visibility of resources
http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/265/http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd3317.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/openlearn/about-us/case-studies.phphttp://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/988http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/988http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/988http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/988http://www.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=88&Itemid=183http://www.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=88&Itemid=183http://www.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=88&Itemid=183http://www.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=88&Itemid=183http://web.mit.edu/fnl/volume/183/miyagawa.htmlhttp://web.mit.edu/fnl/volume/183/miyagawa.htmlhttp://community.jorum.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=40http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/265/http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd3317.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/openlearn/about-us/case-studies.phphttp://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/988http://www.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=88&Itemid=183http://web.mit.edu/fnl/volume/183/miyagawa.htmlhttp://community.jorum.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=40


8/16

Pilot programme outcomes and discussion of issues around business cases and

benefits realisation are available on the OER Synthesis and Evaluation Team wiki in

thePilot Phase: synthesis and evaluation reportand in the accompanyingPilot

Phase: Synthesis of Strands pages

Pilot programme outputs: Business cases and benefits

Excerpt from OER Synthesis and Support Team Interim report (2009)

"Asked to identify potential benefits of participation in the pilot programme, and of OER

release in general, projects suggested the following:
https://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29747301/Pilot-Phase-Benefits-Realisationhttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29747301/Pilot-Phase-Benefits-Realisationhttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29747301/Pilot-Phase-Benefits-Realisationhttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29771254/Pilot-Phase-Synthesis-of-Strandshttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29771254/Pilot-Phase-Synthesis-of-Strandshttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29771254/Pilot-Phase-Synthesis-of-Strandshttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Pilot-programme-outputs%3A-Business-cases-and-benefitshttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29747301/Pilot-Phase-Benefits-Realisationhttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29771254/Pilot-Phase-Synthesis-of-Strandshttps://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29771254/Pilot-Phase-Synthesis-of-Strandshttps://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/Pilot-programme-outputs%3A-Business-cases-and-benefits


9/16

Learners can benefit from:

enhanced quality and flexibility of resources

seeing/applying knowledge in a wider context than their course would otherwise allow,

e.g. international dimension

freedom of access (e.g. at work/home/on placement) and enhanced opportunities for

learning (cf the Capetown Declaration)

support for learner-centred, self-directed, peer-to-peer and social/informal learning

approaches

skills development (e.g. numeracy) through release of generic OERs that can be re-used

and recontextualised in different subject areas

the opportunity to test out course materials before enrolling and compare with other

similar courses

The OER originator can benefit from:

student/user feedback and open peer review

reputational benefits, recognition

benefits (efficiency and cultural) of collaborative approaches to teaching/learning

Other staff users can benefit from:

availability of quality peer reviewed material to enhance their curriculum

collaborative approaches to teaching/learning (CoPs)

professional/peer-to-peer learning about the processes of OER release

Institutions can benefit from:

recognition and enhanced reputation

wider availability of their academic content and focus on the learning experience


10/16

capacity to support greater numbers of students

efficiencies in content production

new partnerships/linkages with other institutions

increased sharing of ideas and practice within the institution, including greater role for

support services

a buffer against the decline of specific subjects or topics (which may not be sustainable

at institutional level but can be sustained across several institutions through shared

resources)

Employers can benefit from:

access to repurposable content

new potential partnerships with content providers

upskilling

OER is an international movement, linking innovative people and organisations in a

common goal.

The OpenCourseWare Consortium (OCWC) has more than 200 members, including

several of the world's most prestigious universities.

OER Africa is a very clear and powerful use-case in terms of international sharing and

development.

The Cape Town declaration on OER is a worldwide initiative with thousands of

signatories calling for the removal of barriers to OER which will lead to 'a globalrevolution in teaching and learning'.

JISC infoNet has a range of online resources available on its website including activity that

has direct links to the issues surrounding and related to OER, for example:
http://www.ocwconsortium.org/members/consortium-members.htmlhttp://www.oerafrica.org/http://www.capetowndeclaration.org/read-the-declarationhttp://www.capetowndeclaration.org/read-the-declarationhttp://www.ocwconsortium.org/members/consortium-members.htmlhttp://www.oerafrica.org/http://www.capetowndeclaration.org/read-the-declaration


11/16

Strategy - strategic planning and activity http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/strategy

The Bologna Process http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/bologna-process

Business and Community Engagement http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/bce
http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/strategyhttp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/bologna-processhttp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/bcehttp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/strategyhttp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/bologna-processhttp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/bce


12/16

Case study 3

Model for Managing Intellectual Property in Consortia

http://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/ManageContent/ViewDetail/tabid/243/ID/1925/Model-for-

Managing-Intellectual-Property-in-Consortia.aspx

This document identifies issues related to the protection of intellectual property arising from

collaborative research and suggests clauses which should be included in any consortium

agreement.

The authors and the Department of Trade & Industry have agreed that the information can

be disseminated freely, with the qualification that the attributions, origins of, and the

information in this summary are not modified.

Authors

Dr Gordon Malan & Dr Mike BarnesBEP Programme Managers

For Department of Trade & Industry

5 January 2004

Model for Managing Intellectual Property in Consortia

Based on a successful model that has been developed as part of the Department of

Trade & Industry's Biotechnology Exploitation Programme (BEP) Challenge initiative.

Ownership of intellectual property (IP) normally rests with the employing institution. In mostcircumstances, ownership of an invention by an investigator in a single institution is thus

easily dealt with. However, handling joint inventions that might arise from a consortium, and

how this is to be exploited commercially, requires carefully prepared agreements.

These notes are intended for guidance only. It is very important that any consortium

agreement be drawn up by an experienced intellectual property lawyer: it is not a task to be

left to 'someone with legal experience'.
http://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/ManageContent/ViewDetail/tabid/243/ID/1925/Model-for-Managing-Intellectual-Property-in-Consortia.aspxhttp://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/ManageContent/ViewDetail/tabid/243/ID/1925/Model-for-Managing-Intellectual-Property-in-Consortia.aspxhttp://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/ManageContent/ViewDetail/tabid/243/ID/1925/Model-for-Managing-Intellectual-Property-in-Consortia.aspxhttp://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/ManageContent/ViewDetail/tabid/243/ID/1925/Model-for-Managing-Intellectual-Property-in-Consortia.aspx


13/16

Consortium agreement

Any consortium agreement should include clauses that address the following:

Detailed specification and descriptions of all background IP already developed and

therefore owned by each of the consortium partners.

It needs to be understood that background IP belonging to one party can only be used by

other members of the consortium under a separate agreement that should specify the IP

and conditions attached to its use.

Any foreground IP emerging from the collaboration should, as early as possible in the

project, be identified and the proportional contribution of each party to the invention, ie

ownership of the IP, be agreed.

Foreground IP should normally be freely available to each member of the consortium

during the project and for a predetermined period from the conclusion of the project.

For joint inventions, one of the partners should be designated the 'lead' for that invention,

and their organisation's Technology Transfer Office (TTO) should thereafter protect and

handle the invention on behalf of, and provide regular reports to, the parties involved.

Exploitation of all IP generated by the consortium, although it may be owned jointly or

separately by the collaborators' institutions, should be available to be commercially

exploited to the benefit of the consortium as a whole.

Commercialisation agreement

For commercial exploitation of IP arising from the project, the collaborators'

institutions, ie the IP owners, need to enter into an agreement (either separately or as

part of the collaboration agreement):

As early as possible in a project, the relative contribution of the partners involved in

reducing an invention to practice or showing proof-of-conceptshould be agreed, (eg, one

institution might own the IP, but a second might expend considerable resources in

reducing it to practice). This contribution should be recognised and, in due course,

appropriately rewarded. If this work is done by the second institution under a paid


14/16

contract from the first, then they might be eligible for no share, or a reduced share, of the

revenue from the invention.

For a specific portfolio of IP, the components of which might be owned by different

partner institutions in the collaboration, agreement should be reached between the

institutions or their TTOs as to which institution is the most appropriate to take the lead in

commercialising that IP portfolio.

This agreement should include details of the costs, how they will be shared or allocated,

the preferred route(s) for commercialisation, proportions of revenue or equity share to be

attributed to the various parties involved, and other related matters such as royalty or

assignment conditions.

Shared information for the parties involved is required, along with regular reports during

all stages of the commercialisation process.

Regular follow-up checks, and in some cases, further management of the IP might be

required.

Timing and distribution of funds generated by the commercialised IP need to be specified

and monitored regularly.

Dr Gordon Malan & Dr Mike Barnes

BEP Programme Managers

For Department of Trade & Industry

For further information:

Mike Barnes: [email protected]

Gordon Malan: [email protected]

Martin Harris, DTI: [email protected]

5 January 2004 (Posted on 14/03/2011)
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


15/16

Resources

Guidelines on developing and working in a consortium from the Cabinet Office for the

3rd Sector. These guidelines are aimed at charities and voluntary organizations involved in

public service delivery by contain clear approaches to setting up and maintaining a

consortium to achieve the outcomes of a collaborative project.

Cabinet Office for 3rd

Sector (2008) Working in a ConsortiumHMSO onlinehttp://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-

Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdf

JISC project management guidelines on developing consortium agreements for open

educational projects in higher level education.

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/fundingopportunities/projectmanagement/planning/partners.aspx

Collaborative Working & Mergers - Choosing to Collaborate: Helping You Succeed,

from the Charity Commission. While focused specifically on charities, this resources contains

invaluable information and guidance on ways to collaborate, planning and templates to help

you identify the reasons for establishing your consortia and the goals your consortia want

to achieved. It highlights common pitfalls and gives practical advice including the legal

aspects of partnership working. http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/colltoolkit.pdf

Consortium Toolkit for User Led Organisations. A toolkit which is intended to provide a

reference for developing or considering establishing a consortium, with a particular focus on

the legal and constitutional aspects of consortium development. While this toolkit is focused

on the charity sector, it contains excellent scenarios, covers a wide range of issues and

provides easy to use templates to assist you in identifying the resources required for your

project. http://www.livingoptions.org/updocs/ULO%20Consortium%20Toolkit

%20(Fusion).pdf

Charlesworth, A., Creating a Consortium Agreement, JISC/University of Bristol

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/project_management/consortiumagreements

.pdf
http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/fundingopportunities/projectmanagement/planning/partners.aspxhttp://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/colltoolkit.pdfhttp://www.livingoptions.org/updocs/ULO%20Consortium%20Toolkit%20(Fusion).pdfhttp://www.livingoptions.org/updocs/ULO%20Consortium%20Toolkit%20(Fusion).pdfhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/project_management/consortiumagreements.pdfhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/project_management/consortiumagreements.pdfhttp://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/files/groupdocument-Simon_Cope/Working_in_a_consortium_fnl.pdfhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/fundingopportunities/projectmanagement/planning/partners.aspxhttp://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/colltoolkit.pdfhttp://www.livingoptions.org/updocs/ULO%20Consortium%20Toolkit%20(Fusion).pdfhttp://www.livingoptions.org/updocs/ULO%20Consortium%20Toolkit%20(Fusion).pdfhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/project_management/consortiumagreements.pdfhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/project_management/consortiumagreements.pdf


16/16

Example Consortium templates and Memorandum of Understanding:

http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ipr-educational-environments/unit-two-working-

within-your-institution/session-5-context-and-
http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ipr-educational-environments/unit-two-working-within-your-institution/session-5-context-and-http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ipr-educational-environments/unit-two-working-within-your-institution/session-5-context-and-http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ipr-educational-environments/unit-two-working-within-your-institution/session-5-context-and-http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ipr-educational-environments/unit-two-working-within-your-institution/session-5-context-and-http://openspace.falmouth.ac.uk/courses/ipr-educational-environments/unit-two-working-within-your-institution/session-5-context-and-

Documents

Case Studies - Collaboration