Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
OPENNESS (benefits (facilitates and inspire a culture of collaboration…
OPENNESS
benefits
promote lifelong learning where learners are exposed to different educational resources and can return to course content when the need arises (Kurelovic, 2016)
expanded access to learning, can be used independently of the education system and national curricula frameworks (Grodecka & Sliwowski, 2014)
- building reputation of individuals or institutions or communities
- improving efficiency, cost and quality of production
- opening access to knowledge
- enhancing pedagogy and the students’ learning experience
- building technological momentum
(McGill et al., 2013)
reduce barriers to education - costs, geography, time and entry requirements (JRC, 2016)
-
Sustainable models of operation (Weller, M. 2014, Chapter 4)
Evolution! Instead of reinventing the wheel we can move on and explore, try, test, learn new stuff
-
facilitates and inspire a culture of collaboration where learners can become more active participants in educational process through a collaboration in virtual communities of learning (McGreal et al., 2013; Hegarty, 2015)
The ability to collaborate and innovate is stronger with open web resources (Watson, K. (2014)
One of the key skills needed in the digital age is to be able to find, evaluate and apply content of different sorts (information literacy). Open education can support this if the students for example are trained to find and use content instead of teachers/instructors providing them with everything (Bates, 2019).
For an interesting discussion about new technologies and different aspects of resilience see Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013).
excuses
-
-
-
-
-
30 Resons to avoid openness
Lack of promotion opportunities (Beggan, 2010)
Sceptism over paid for vs. free material (Beggan, 2010)
Using other people’s material seen as ‘copping out’ (Beggan, 2010)
Content will be altered which will reduce its quality and yet the author will still be attributed (Stacey, 2007)
Materials are rudimentary and could devalue reputations (Beggan, 2010)
Students won’t come to lectures and lecturers will be replaced (Sky is falling) (Beggan, 2010; Sefton, 2010)
Free devalues materials (Beggan, 2010; Lee et al, 2008)
Loss of IPR – fear someone will take and repurpose ‘badly’ (Beggan, 2010)
Loss of commercial opportunities (Beggan, 2010)
IPR infringement from subject’s view and copyright holder (Lee et al, 2008; Beggan, 2010)
First-year materials too simplistic (Beggan, 2010)
Quality control – some materials bad reflection on the university (Beggan, 2010; Sefton, 2010)
OERs not appropriate for disciplines where practical skills required (Lee et al, 2008)
If you exclude copyright materials that added value to the course, the course will be less useful (Lee et al, 2008)
Sunlight effect (Winn, 2010)
Technology barriers to re-purposing (Beggan, 2010)
Issue of a single site versus resources still in departments (Beggan, 2010)
Concern that content delivered without formal learning is likely to be less ‘engaging and effective’ (Sclater,2010b)
Time (All)
Effort to adapt (Beggan, 2010)
Cost to materials (Beggan, 2010)
Workload and costs of maintaining OER (Smith & Casserly, 2006)
Concern about lack of context, e.g. lecture recordings (Beggan, 2010)
End user issues – how materials will be received (Beggan, 2010)
Students – e.g. first years who read lectures and think they know everything and will not need to listen (Beggan,2010)
Teachers’ use – cultural implications of reuse (Beggan, 2010)
Challenges of localisation – adapting and using content made for specific context (Beggan, 2010)
Lack of user feedback (Beggan, 2010) Scepticism about value to institution (Lee at al, 2008)
Potential violation of privacy if users attempt to contact contributors (Lee et al, 2008)Cox, G (2013) Researching Resistence to Open Education Resource Contribution: an activity theory approch. Learning adn Digital Media Vol 10, num 2, 148- 160. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.2304/elea.2013.10.2.148
-
-
Definitions
what is openness? The concept of openness in regard to education predates the openness movement that begins with free software and open source in the mid 1980s with roots going back to the Enlightenment that are bound up with the philosophical foundations of modern education with its commitments to freedom, citizenship, knowledge for all, social progress and individual transformation.
Open Education—An approach to teaching and learning focused on giving all students access to high-quality educational opportunities and resources that can be shared and reused. May also be used to describe an approach to teaching and learning emphasizing the student'?s right to make decisions and that views the teacher as facilitator of learning rather than as transmitter of knowledge
OER
Open Educational Resources—open provision of educational resources, enabled by information and communication technologies, for consultation, use and adaptation by a community of users for non commercial purposes
Open Educational Resources—Teaching or learning materials, usually online, that are in the public domain or available through an open intellectual property license that lets anyone legally use, copy, adapt, or share the materials free of charge. Do not confuse with the Descriptor "Open Source Technology."
Open Educational Resources—by ‘open’ it is generally meant that the resource is available at no cost to others for adaptation and reuse in different contexts. However, ‘open’ is not a simple dichotomy; rather, there is a continuum of openness.
Open educational practices (OEP)—a broad descriptor of practices that include the creation, use, and reuse of open educational resources (OER) as well as open pedagogies and open sharing of teaching practices.
-
-
barriers
-
functional diversity (hearing, vision, neuropsychiatric diversity, etc. )
A definition with social justice
Open Education is the development of free digital enabled learning materials and experiences primarily by and for the benifit and empowerment of non-privileged learners who may be under-represented in education systems or marginalised in their global context. Success of social justice aligned programs can be mesured not by particular technical features or formats, but instead by the extent to which they enact redistributive justice, recognitive justice and/or representational justce. (Lambert, S. R. (2018). Changing our (Dis)Course: A Distinctive Social Justice Aligned
Definition of Open Education. Journal of Learning for Development, 5(3), 225-244).
-