Visual history of the Drafts of the Foundations for OER Strategy Development document

Foundations for OER Strategy Development – version 1.0 2015

Drafting Committee: Nicole Allen, Delia Browne, Mary Lou Forward, Cable Green and Alek Tarkowski

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

This searchable background Research highlights all of the issues raised and visually tracks the comments, discussions and changes made in each of the Drafts through to the final Version

__July 13, 2015  Draft 1.2 Updated: full text with comments

__September 20, 2015  Draft 1.2 Updated: full text with comments

__November 18, 2015  Version 1.0  Final full text

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

Comments Edits Draft Language Changes

Nicole Allen  We’re now winding down the editing process on this doc, so if there are issues you feel are unaddressed please speak now.    Draft 1.2 Updated: July 13, 2015

 

Nicole Allen
8:59 AM Aug 17
p.s. Stephen, it’s not just you, I resolve all comments into oblivion equally. 🙂 Generally we leave threads open until other people comment or the drafting team has a chance to discuss a course of action (if any). We reply to explain our decision and if there are no additional comments, we resolve it to make space for other voices.
We’re now winding down the editing process on this doc, so if there are issues you feel are unaddressed please speak now.

 

 

SEE EDITS and CURRENT COMMENTS AUGUST 22

Updates below in copy ” Draft 1.2 Updated: 20 September, 2015

 

 

13:13 18 Jul

Cable Green

replaced with: “Ensuring educators have the legal rights to retain, reuse, revise, remix and redistribute educational resources as they determine – without having to ask permission.” // resolving this comment

Cable Green
1:20 PM Jul 18
Add: “Publicly funded educational resources should be openly licensed by default.”

 

  • Government Funding: Governments are the largest potential source for funding that can bring OER to scale. In many cases they are already spending money directly on course materials, or on programs that create course materials. We need strategies such as open license funding requirements (e.g.,ideally CC BY by default) that will redirect some or all of that money to OER. Publicly funded educational resources should be openly licensed by default.

 

Extent of OER Adoption Necessary to Consider the Movement a “Success”

David Wiley
11:20 AM Aug 18
Add: “Entire degree programs replace commercial textbooks with OER. New pedagogical approaches enabled by the 5R permissions of OER demonstrate superior learning outcomes and become popular among faculty

 

Movement Challenges
Nicole Allen
9:00 AM Aug 17

Delete: “Absence of Broad Standards: Other segments of the open movement have standardized models, such as the “green” and “gold” routes for Open Access or the 5 Star Open Data standard. The OER movement employs standardized open licenses, yet we still lack a single standard or unified message that is applicable around the globe. This is in part due to the diversity of the education sector, which spans education from infants to the elderly, and employs a variety of resources and tools. This is also due to a large variance between local and national autonomy of education, especially at primary and secondary levels, and variations in systems from country to country. Finally, use and reuse practices are crucial in education, as well as personalised approaches to learning – these don’t standardize easily. However, in order for OER to scale, some standards or standard pathways are needed.”

Nicole Allen
9:00 AM Aug 17
Add: “Lack of Consistent Models: Other movements in the “open” space have developed commonly understood models for implementation. For example there are the so-called “green” and “gold” routes to Open Access: self-archiving published articles in a repository and publishing directly in an Open Access journal. While the details differ between contexts, these two pathways are generally applicable across most countries, institutions and sectors. Given the variance between countries, educational systems, and sectors, it is unclear whether developing standard models is possible in the OER space, However, it has significantly increased the opportunities for international collaboration and resource development in parallel movements, and an absence of commonly understood pathways could be a barrier slowing us down.”

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Foundations for OER Strategy Development  DRAFT 1 – 2 July 13 05.JPG

Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 July 13 05

 

 

Nicole Allen
8:59 AM Aug 17
p.s. Stephen, it’s not just you, I resolve all comments into oblivion equally. 🙂 Generally we leave threads open until other people comment or the drafting team has a chance to discuss a course of action (if any). We reply to explain our decision and if there are no additional comments, we resolve it to make space for other voices.
We’re now winding down the editing process on this doc, so if there are issues you feel are unaddressed please speak now.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IYDeAmw3aMxuqpfEr_7BEwM5FJiqqX1S4dzPJZQqwTY/edit#

Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 02

 

Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 03a

 

Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 03b
AUGUST EDITS and COMMENTS
Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 05
Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 05aFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 05bFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 05bFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 05cFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 07Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 07aFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 07bFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 09Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 09cFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11aFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11b
Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11c
Cable Green

Works for me. I removed CC BY and replaced it with the generic (Creative Commons licenses).

10:58 PM Aug 22

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

10:58 PM Aug 22

Don Gorges

Re-opened
__Hi Cable _ I hope you will reopen all Stephen Downes comments and responses _ This Government Funding policy strategy took a focused approach and form with The White House OER Letter _ “To achieve these goals, Administration policy on access to federally funded educational materials should direct the agencies to adhere to these core principles:
“3. Conditions that enable reuse. To maximize the value of these informational resources created with public funds, it is essential that recipients of Federal funds agree as a term and condition of such funding that they grant to the public broad copyright permission to reuse and adapt these materials for any purpose so long as the creator and the agency receive appropriate attribution.” _ https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sV3stjrzi3jB_knfGyfAft77qEUKR4Rj-soktIf5Vu8/edit?pli=1 _ The public will form an opinion and speak up on funding policy when they find see compare use review OER to Copyright resources that best meet their needs.

2:41 AM Yesterday (edited 11:08 AM Yesterday)
Edit
Delete

Don Gorges

__Where can we find data on federally funded educational materials i.e. breakdown lists of copyright titles affected by this policy proposal?

7:47 AM Yesterday
Edit
Delete

Cable Green

Hi Don: Thanks for your comments. (1) Stephen’s main concern – on this thread – was listing CC BY as the recommended default for open licensing policies. That has been resolved by removing “CC BY” and replacing it with this more generic text: “We need strategies such as open license funding requirements (e.g., Creative Commons licenses) that will redirect some or all of that money to OER.”

(2) re: where you can find open licensing policies – the current place is the OER Policy Registry: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/OER_Policy_Registry... if you know of an OER open policy not listed – please add it or let me know and I will do so. An example of content resulting from an OER open licensing policy is: https://www.skillscommons.org

(3) You are correct – the public will form an opinion and make acquisition choices re: OER vs. all-rights-reserved copyrighted resources. Price, effectiveness, legal rights to modify, etc… will all come into play. The public will also decide if they think they deserve to have free and legal access to the resources they paid for with tax dollars. If you’d like to discuss whether or not publicly funded resources should be openly licensed by default – I’m happy to do so – but let’s move it to an OER listserv. Gdocs isn’t the best format.

(4) Resolving this comment as Stephen’s concern has been addressed and text modified.

1:28 PM Yesterday

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

1:29 PM Yesterday

Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11dFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11eFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11fFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11g

 

 

 

 

 

 

Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11iFoundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11jDon Gorges

4:13 PM Yesterday
__Perhaps it would be helpful here to point to where can we find data on federally funded educational materials i.e. breakdown past/current lists of copyright titles affected/excluded by this policy proposal? Naturally, the public should be made aware of the specific resources that currently meet federal funding criteria, but would be excluded by a “CC by default” funding policy.

Don Gorges
4:13 PM Aug 23
Selected text:

In many cases they are already spending money directly on course materials, or on programs that create course materials.

Show all
__Perhaps it would be helpful here to point to where can we find data on federally funded educational materials i.e. breakdown past/current lists of copyright titles affected/excluded by this policy proposal? Naturally, the public should be made aware of the specific resources that currently meet federal funding criteria, but would be excluded by a “CC by default” funding policy.
Reply
Resolve

Cable Green

Good point, Don. Two points (1) remember this is a global doc / discussion about OER – so the answer will be different for each country. (2) In most / all countries – there is still important work to be done re: cataloging what national governments are funding (in grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, etc.) that produce educational resources.

3:31 PM Yesterday

Don Gorges

__I agree, Cable, we need necessary information to judge the pros and cons of this CC by default policy proposal.

6:25 PM Yesterday

Cable Green

Thanks Don. To be clear – this doc no longer says “CC BY.” Given there is broad consensus that publicly funded educational resources should be openly licensed – in the global OER community – I think this paragraph is in good shape.

6:46 PM Yesterday

Nicole Allen

I agree. This discussion is important, but belongs somewhere other than this doc. Perhaps one of the OER email lists?

9:51 PM Yesterday

Don Gorges

Thanks, Cable and Nicole, I understand your positions on the importance of Government Funding. __ In Ontario, I’m interested in the creative sector economy and data on Ontario funded educational materials i.e. breakdown past/current lists of copyright titles affected/excluded by this policy proposal? Naturally, we should all become aware of the specific resources that are excluded by the restrictions of a CC/Open License funding policy.

Should I Resolve and close this or keep it open? _ Thanks

2:08 AM Yesterday
Edit
Delete

Cable Green

Thanks Don – I’m going to resolve this thread… and I’m happy to discuss this more 1-on-1 and/or on a list. You make an excellent point – knowing what is excluded is as important as knowing what is included under an open licensing policy. Of course, those details are worked out nation by nation.

12:22 PM Yesterday

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

12:22 PM Yesterday
Don Gorges
9:01 AM Today
Replace: “.” with “and it is essential that recipients of Government Funds agree, as a term and condition of such fundi…”
 ——
  • Government Funding: Governments are the largest potential source for funding that can bring OER to scale. In many cases they are already spending money directly on course materials, or on programs that create course materials. We need strategies such as open license funding requirements (e.g., Creative Commons licenses) that will redirect some or all of that money to OER. Publicly funded educational resources should be openly licensed by default and it is essential that recipients of Government Funds agree, as a term and condition of such funding, that they grant to the public, broad copyright permission to reuse and adapt these materials for any purpose, so long as the creator and the agency receive appropriate attribution..
Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11L
 Foundations for OER Strategy Development  DRAFT 1 – 2 – Page 11L
 Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 - Page 11m
 Foundations for OER Strategy Development  DRAFT 1 – 2 – Page 11m
 Foundations for OER Strategy Development DRAFT 1 - 2 July 13 11m1Foundations for OER Strategy Development  DRAFT 1 – 2 July 13 11m1

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

AUGUST EDITS and COMMENTS
Nicole Allen
8:59 AM Aug 17
p.s. Stephen, it’s not just you, I resolve all comments into oblivion equally. 🙂 Generally we leave threads open until other people comment or the drafting team has a chance to discuss a course of action (if any). We reply to explain our decision and if there are no additional comments, we resolve it to make space for other voices. We’re now winding down the editing process on this doc, so if there are issues you feel are unaddressed please speak now.
 

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

Draft 1.2_Foundations for OER Strategy Development_July 15.doc

 

Draft 1.2 Updated: July 13, 2015

Foundations for OER Strategy Development

Drafting committee members: Nicole Allen, Delia Browne, Mary Lou Forward, Cable Green and Alek Tarkowski

Purpose of Document

 

For more than a decade the movement for Open Educational Resources (OER) has evolved from a collection of small, localized efforts to a broad international network of institutions, organizations, practitioners, advocates and funders. While significant progress has been made on both expanding the availability of OER content and expanding its use, OER has not reached its full potential of entering mainstream education on a global scale.

 

The goals and broader vision for OER are outlined in foundational documents including the Cape Town Declaration and Paris Declaration. These documents are critical for communicating the case for OER to the outside world and providing a unifying voice for the movement. But while the goals for OER are clear and broadly agreed upon by the movement, the means and strategies for achieving them are not. To actualize the full vision of OER, a need has emerged for a document that looks inward and addresses strategic questions about how we, as the global OER movement, can reach our goals.

 

The purpose of this document is to provide a concise analysis of where the global OER movement currently stands: what the common threads are, where the greatest opportunities and challenges lie, and how we can more effectively work together as a community. The first draft was born from a meeting of 26 OER leaders in February 2015. We then shared this document and had multiple discussions with members of the international OER community at the 2015 Hewlett OER grantees meeting, OER15, and Open Ed Global 2015. Comments from all three meetings were integrated into this draft document.

 

Our hope is that this document will serve as a starting point for conversations about strategies for mainstreaming OER and extending its reach and impact globally. We also hope that this document, and the strategies within, will evolve as the conversation evolves to provide useful insight for both global coordination and local action.

 

State of the Movement

 

The OER movement consists of diverse individuals and organizations spanning educational institutions, IGOs, NGOs, and activities at all levels, from teaching infants to seniors; and ranges across a diversity of countries around the globe, with varied educational systems and social, economic and cultural contexts. The diversity of our perspectives, resources, and capacities is one of our movement’s great strengths, but it can also make strategy conversations challenging, as these discussions must start with a shared sense of what the strategy hopes to achieve. While the movement generally can agree upon the goals and vision outlined in the Cape Town and Paris Declarations, the specific missions and priorities of community members vary widely.

 

The common thread that seems to unite the movement is a belief in expanding the adoption of OER. While there are different visions for the specific practices, impacts, and audiences to be served and supported by expanding OER, we can all generally agree on what OER is, and that widespread use of OER is a positive and meaningful change in education. Given this common understanding, strategies can grow out of identifying the common challenges and opportunities around OER, and developing a shared sense of priority about what kind of actions will help advance the proliferation of OER development and use.

 

We Have Similar Perspectives On…

 

 

  • Definition of OER: The movement broadly agrees on the definition of OER as put forth by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation or UNESCO, noting that there may be some differences around which specific licenses qualify as OER (such as those restricting commercial use).  However, the general understanding that OER must be both free for students and teachers to access and to legally modify (according to the 5R activities: retain, reuse, revise, remix, redistribute) is widely accepted.
  • Overall Vision: The Cape Town and Paris Declarations each outline aspirational visions and goals for actualizing the potential of OER. While community members may prioritize some elements over others, in general the movement agrees that these documents form the basis for what we hope to accomplish.
  • Necessity of OER Adoption: While members of the community hold different goals for OER use, and different perspectives on the aspects of OER that are most important, we are united in asserting that OER adoption is necessary to actualize its potential. We understand adoption as a two-step process: people adopting OER instead of non-open resources, and people taking advantage of the rights and permissions granted by OER, to use and reuse content.
  • OER Ecosystem: We also agree that as preconditions of OER adoption, three elements are necessary:

 

    • Demand: Awareness of OER and the motivation to use it.
    • Supply: Infrastructure in terms of OER content and the tools to find, use, and adapt it.
    • Capacity: Community and systemic support that will sustain OER.
  • General Value Proposition: OER makes education accessible and expands the universe of what’s possible in education.
  • Licensing Standard: There is general recognition that Creative Commons licenses (excluding those with an ND restriction) are the standard way to license content as OER, where licensing is required.

[[ OER Ecosystem:

Nicole Allen
4:03 PM Jun 18
Note to drafters: Revisit framing of Demand and Capacity descriptions in response to Stephen’s comments. OER is the means to an end, not the end in itself.
Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
1:28 PM Jun 20
I agree that awareness of OER (in terms of knowing that they exist, where to find them and how to use them) and the motivation to use them will guarantee the demand from learners and teachers. Regarding capacity, maybe “Community and systemic support that will sustain open learning” could be a better wording in alignment with Stephen’s idea of OER being the means to an end.
Show less
Nicole Allen
4:52 PM Jul 13
Discussed with Cable, and we realize these are classic economic terms which may not be as applicable outside the US as a framework for looking at strategy. Are there other terms or other ways to frame this that make sense more broadly?
]]

We Have Various Perspectives On…

 

Most Important Strategic Goals of OER

 

There are many strategic goals of OER, and while we generally agree that all of them are important, members of the movement place priority on different aspects. Some of the most typical strategic goals of OER are:

 

  • Reducing barriers to education, including access, cost, language and format.
  • Transforming teaching and learning and enabling effective pedagogy.
  • Enabling the free access to and reuse of expressions of human knowledge, in all of its forms.
  • Enhancing educational opportunities to foster development and more productive, free societies.
  • Empowering educators to have more agency in the classroom.
  • Connecting communities of educators around open content.
  • Increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of public funds spent on education.
  • Expanding the use of internet and digital technologies in education.

[[ Empowering educators to have more agency in the classroom.

Stephen Downes
7:27 PM Jul 13
This is still not the purpose of OERs.
]]

 

Extent of OER Adoption Necessary to Consider the Movement a “Success”

 

There are varied opinions about what extent of OER adoption is necessary for our model to achieve success:

 

  • Disrupting the educational materials and services market so that it flips to OER as the default model for resource production.
  • Shifting public funding models to pay for publishing services, rather than paying for individual copies of textbooks.
  • Mainstreaming OER among educators so it competes with the traditional publishing model in terms of reach and use.
  • Sufficient quantity of high quality OER necessary to provide choice.
  • Measurable increase in learning achievement that leads to employability.
  • Significant number of education and training systems built with curriculum based on OER.

 

Top Strategic Priorities for OER

 

Taking into account the strategic goals listed above, we can define several leading actions to achieve them. While the movement can agree that all of these actions are important, there is no consensus on which one is the top priority. Some of the top priorities are:

 

  • Build OER content to fill gaps in key disciplines or contexts and enable productive reuse, including openly licensed assessment items and openly licensed competency maps and lists of learning outcomes.
  • Develop and implement open licensing policies that require public and foundation funded educational resources are openly licensed by default.
  • Create and communicate effective research studies in conjunction with OER development and use.
  • Grow and foster communities that support, in a grassroots manner, the development and mainstreaming of OER.
  • Develop models or strategies for OER adoption, development and/or evaluation that can be replicated in other contexts.
  • Build key tools that enable more effective development, management, discovery and reuse.
  • Broaden our focus to include the practices of educators and learners that can be achieved with a shift to open resources, for example, open pedagogy, open educational practices, open assessment, open credentials, etc.
  • Better communicate the value of OER to educators, policy makers and other key constituencies.
  • Scale OER in a specific sector, i.e. K-12, higher education, workforce development, lifelong learning, etc.

 

Movement Strengths

 

The OER movement has achieved multiple victories and successes. Among the most important ones are:

 

  • Breadth of Content: Over years, different projects have tested and developed a wide range of open resources that are high quality, cost-effective, effective in supporting learning, and sustainable. Resources include content repositories, textbooks, and courses. Resources span all levels of education from early childhood to adult, and cover manifold topics and subject areas.
  • Strong Policy Models: Successful OER advocacy has led to the design and deployment of policies supporting OER production and use, at different levels: school, city, national and international. Policies have also been developed by private educational foundations and private companies. Together, they provide a broad template that can be adapted and reused.
  • Collective Impact: Coalitions have been proven to be successful in promoting OER, advocating for policies, and achieving change. They provide for a strong legitimization by a collective voice of varied actors with an interest in education: non-governmental organisations, public institutions and individual activists.
  • Growing Ties with the Open Movement: OER activism as part of a broader open movement is benefitting from growing ties with advocates of open science, open data, open access publishing, free and open source software, open culture, and/or open government. For example, students and young researchers think about OER and Open Access (OA) together; librarians with good understanding of OA are a growing force supporting OER; and OER policies are strengthened by including them in broader open government policies.
  • Individual Champions: Significant successes in OER are often attributed to passionate, persevering champions, particularly in the policy and adoption arenas. Such individuals are able to achieve significant change almost single-handedly. They’re especially important when their experience and knowledge can be multiplied, by building collaborations, mentorship models, and networks with other activists.
  • Global Reach and Significance: OER has been recognised by key international organizations active in education, and has support at institutions across the globe.
  • Supportive Research: Key projects and scholars have been conducting research on OER and its impacts, and the breadth and depth of this research continues to grow.

 

Movement Challenges

 

Challenges include both external (conditions in greater educational environment) and internal

(issues within the OER movement). Not all challenges are present in every national or local context, but many themes arise frequently in strategy conversations, including:

 

  • Linear Rate of Growth: Momentum is building, but adoptions are still primarily happening on a one-by-one basis, and we’re still piloting and proving one example at a time. While pilots often prove successful, the models rarely end up being replicated or brought to scale. For full impact to be realized, growth needs to be exponential rather than linear, both within national contexts and internationally.
  • Absence of Broad Standards: Other segments of the open movement have standardized models, such as the “green” and “gold” routes for Open Access or the 5 Star Open Data standard. The OER movement employs standardized open licenses, yet we still lack a single standard or unified message that is applicable around the globe. This is in part due to the diversity of the education sector, which spans education from infants to the elderly, and employs a variety of resources and tools. This is also due to a large variance between local and national autonomy of education, especially at primary and secondary levels, and variations in systems from country to country. Finally, use and reuse practices are crucial in education, as well as personalised approaches to learning – these don’t standardize easily. However, in order for OER to scale, some standards or standard pathways are needed.
  • Insufficient Awareness: Awareness of OER is still very low. This is true both in terms of understanding that OER exists as an alternative to currently used materials, and a deeper understanding of the benefits, quality, and potential innovations that can happen when it is adopted. While awareness is not a sufficient (or in some cases, even necessary) condition for adoption, it is a common barrier faced toward achieving the benefits of OER.
  • Difficulty of Discovery, Use and Remix: OER discovery, curation and re-use are often laborious and complicated. This is a consistent challenge across the commons. Repositories are varied and do not have shared search terms and metadata. Materials are presented in a wide variety of formats. Tools to assist with remix, curation and reuse are insufficient, not well known, and/or are not themselves open.
  • Inconsistent Breadth and Depth: OER supply is uneven across subject areas and disciplines. Some OER is very complete, while others are little more than links or shells. This can undermine the impacts of awareness raising and slow down momentum if people who want to adopt OER don’t have OER to adopt.
  • Lack of Evidence: A persistent area of frustration for OER supporters is the lack of compelling, locally-relevant evidence for the impact of OER. This includes research demonstrating efficacy and illustrative case studies. Just as important is a better understanding of contextual variables that affect OER adoption and impact, such as educator practices, and the ways resources and IT are employed in education.
  • Questions About Sustainability: Business models, public funding models for supporting OER continue to develop, with numerous case studies of each. However, there are still questions surrounding long-term sustainability and the ability for OER to “stick” in the marketplace without philanthropic support.
  • Minimal Evidence of Reuse: Potential for reuse is one of the key arguments OER advocates use to promote their model; using OER can make teachers and students into active creators and collaborators, while resources become dynamic and improve over time. Yet we don’t have enough compelling testimonials, case studies or evidence that this is taking place, nor have we connected this advantage to a broader problem that stakeholders care about. Cultural and legal barriers can also stand in the way.
  • All or Nothing Thinking. Many of the faculty and teachers who do evaluate OER look for a single resource to replace their existing textbook (which is also a single resource). If they can’t find a single resource that satisfies their needs they are likely to continue using their proprietary textbook. Faculty and teachers need help understanding that OER are designed to mix and match pieces from a range of sources – they are designed to be revised and remixed. If faculty cannot move beyond the “adopt a book” mentality of the previous 100 years the potential of OER will likely go unfulfilled.
  • Poor Branding: In recent years, the term “open” is used in education ever more widely, with a variety of meanings. It gives opportunity to bring OER into a broader educational debate – but with several definitions of “open”, educators and learners are understandably confused. We are at risk of others “openwashing” OER. At the same time, paradoxically, the term OER is little known, difficult and technical – not a perfect educational “buzzword”.
  • Perfect as an Enemy of the Good: It is critical to maintain a strong definition of OER to avoid “openwashing,” but this can also create a dynamic where efforts that take a step in the right direction, but do not meet our definition, are excluded and not given recognition.
  • Lack of OER heroes: Mainstreaming OER requires stories that make people pay attention – exciting and engaging enough to make them interested in a relatively challenging subject that combines pedagogy, technology and law. We have good stories, but not great ones. Some of the really big stories in modern, digital education, such as Khan Academy and MOOCs, are at best ambivalent about open.

 

Opportunities

 

Many opportunities exist for advancing OER, both in new ways and by expanding on opportunities that have already proven successful. We have organized the opportunities below based on the three components necessary for OER adoption: demand (awareness and motivation to use OER), supply (content and tools to use it), and capacity (community and systemic support for sustainability). These opportunities identify key places where the OER movement can intervene to help advance OER, and are intended to provide a useful starting point for developing strategies.

Demand

 

    • Increase Awareness: It is essential to raise awareness of OER as an option, both as an alternative to proprietary materials (and publishers’ new lease-not-own models) and also in new markets underserved by traditional publishers. Also, there is a significant awareness opportunity within populations already using openly licensed materials without fully realizing that they are  OER or that they can exercise 5R rights.
    • Build Evidence Base:  Improve the body of evidence showing the positive impacts of OER, focusing on contexts where OER presents an especially critical solution to a problem. This includes efficacy research that looks at key areas such as improved learning outcomes, business models, innovative reuse, improving equity, and cost savings.  It also includes compelling case studies and stories that illustrate the impacts.
    • Improve Communications: Build a stronger case for OER to strengthen its branding and value proposition. Be more active in communicating by developing resources, coordinating messages, and working with other segments of the open movement. Consider the key target audiences of OER, and tailor resources to reach those audiences. Assets such as compelling human stories, infographics, and plain language resources will be key.

 

  • Embed OER In the Teaching Profession: Take advantage of ready-made pathways for instructors to become aware of and learn to effectively use OER. In the short term, this could be linking OER with professional development activities that educational systems already conduct. In the long term, this would be integrating OER into teacher training and teacher prep programs.

 

    • Engage Key Constituencies: OER adoption is not just about engaging the teachers, schools and policymakers who make resource decisions. Other constituencies, particularly librarians and students, can play a key role in helping to catalyze and support these decision makers. Librarians are experts at finding, curating and sharing resources. This community wasn’t originally deeply engaged in OER, but has increasingly become involved. Students are also key as the beneficiaries of education, and also the largest constituency in terms of numbers. Students can also be mobilized to raise awareness and as a catalyst for action. Other key constituencies include copyright officers, Accessibility services, and instructional designers.
    • Empower the grassroots: Without grassroots support from educators, OER policies will never fulfill their potential. In particular, the promise of re-use cannot be met without the engagement of users with open resources.

 

  • Coordinate Demand With Supply: Focus on building demand in areas where supply exists.

 

 

Supply

 

    • Focus on Productization: OER is easier to adopt when it is presented as a “turnkey” solution that is ready to use immediately without extra work, particularly in developed markets. Meeting the expectation of convenience that teachers and faculty have come to expect from traditional materials can help OER adoption spread on a faster and wider scale. Once practitioners are using OER in a familiar form, more work can be done to support their exploration of innovative remixing and use.
    • Develop Strategic Tools: While building tools alone is not enough to solve problems, there are some central challenges that can be removed through strategic, interoperable tools to support the OER lifecycle: development, management, discoverability and reuse. The most immediate need to support adoption is tools for the effective discoverability of OER, but also tools that enable users to fulfill the promise of OER in terms of creation, licensing, reuse and remix for teachers and students.

 

  • Build Supply to Meet Demand: The movement has learned that the “build it and they will come” philosophy is not successful for OER. It is more effective to prioritize building OER in areas where there is high potential for large scale adoptions, both in terms of the number of students served and the potential for institutional commitment and resources to support OER development and use.
  • Accessibility: The flexibility offered by the 5Rs offers significant benefits over traditional materials in terms of accessibility for students with disabilities. This benefit can be leveraged when creating supply, to demonstrate the benefits in contexts where accessibility is important.

 

  • Open Up Existing Platforms and Resources: Evangelizing open can help turn existing services and resources into OER. This is a key, alternative tactic to creating new, open resources. This allows our movement to benefit from already existing resources, networks and communities, once they are made open.
  • Learners as Creators: Inherent in open pedagogies and open educational practices is the idea of students as creators. If harnessed effectively, engaging students in the development, improvement and assessment of content could help drive the supply side of the market.

 

Capacity

 

  • International Growth: Successful OER projects tend to have a relatively small scale and have not widely spread to other institutions, regions, countries. Using key projects as models for scaling is a major opportunity for our movement. At the international level, it is important to build foundations of the OER movement by examining local needs and priorities, and then using and adapting best practices, advice and tools from existing projects and experiences.
  • National Mainstreaming: Multiple projects prove sustainability and benefits of OER, but OER has still not entered the mainstream at a global scale. In countries with relatively developed OER activities, a key opportunity is is an opportunity to shift from a narrow OER community to the broad education community, by addressing broader values and needs of educators. It is crucial to develop, at national level, an integrated set of activities that combines policy work, content production and assembly, community building, etc. into a holistic model for OER growth.
  • Institutionalization: The long term sustainability of OER depends on institutions becoming not only the creators and users of OER, but also the complete support systems behind it. Efforts to embed OER in teacher training, professional development, student orientation, information literacy, tenure and promotion, and other relevant institutional processes will help build this capacity.
    • Open as an Aspect of Digital in Education: The Paris Declaration sees OER as an aspect and key element of digital education. OER can be successfully introduced if merged with IT in education initiatives – and vice-versa: digital education strategies are more sound, effective and sustainable if they include the OER model.

 

  • Government Funding: Governments are the largest potential source for funding that can bring OER to scale. In many cases they are already spending money directly on course materials, or on programs that create course materials. We need strategies such as open license funding requirements (ideally CC BY by default) that will redirect some or all of that money to OER.
  • Improve Movement-Wide Coordination: Members of the movement are doing effective, impactful work, but there is a lack of coordination between segments of the movement that may have similar or complementary aims. Increasing communication and coordination among groups within the movement can help accelerate progress through shared best practices, improve efficiency by avoiding duplication of efforts, and amplify impact by identifying areas of synergy and common messages. This could take the shape of a lateral network that connects various nodes, not a top-down or time-intensive requirement. The goal is not to stop people from doing good work, but rather to insure that the work being done is amplified and built upon for better service to the movement as a whole.
  • Connect With Other Open Movements: Movements for openness in research publishing, science, data, software, and other areas are pursuing similar goals and are facing similar challenges. While some areas of OER are beginning to forge ties, a more deliberate effort to coordinate messages and actions will help build a stronger and broader open movement that benefits us all.

 

 

Next Steps

 

This document is a synthesis of discussions held during the initial strategy meeting in Washington, DC and feedback received from the OER community through conferences, meetings and sharing this document. We invite the global OER community to share their feedback on any aspect of the document, and particularly welcome feedback on our assessment of the state of OER and the broad priorities of the open education movement. Our aim is to create a document and related activities that support the community to engage in conversations about effective strategies for the adoption of OER, and to promote better coordination between different segments of the community so that we can better support each other.

 

For the immediate future, we would like to focus the conversations within the OER community. We encourage you to share this document and hold conversations in your OER networks, conferences, seminars and meet-ups. Our goal is to end with a document that is a useful foundation for effective strategy development.

 

 

Don Gorges
07:54 29 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Don Gorges
06:54 25 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Cable Green
20:18 17 Jul
Selected text:
Build OER that educators want to adopt
suggested replacement for: “Focus on Productization” section. Thoughts?
Reply
Resolve

Nicole Allen

Looks great to me. Let’s leave these comments up to the end of the week, then resolve.

08:30 23 Jul

Cable Green
20:17 17 Jul
Add: “Build OER that educators want to adopt: Some educators want a “turnkey” education resources solution…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

This looks great Cable, nice work!!

08:28 23 Jul

Don Gorges
 
08:29 21 Jul
Delete: “redirect some or all of that money to OER”
 
Add space
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

10:16 21 Jul

David Wiley
03:07 19 Jun
Selected text:

support their exploration of innovative remixing and use

If faculty have to find a single resource they can adopt “as is” (turnkey) in order to participate in OER, they will continue to be very slow in coming. We need to do better helping them overcome this “all or nothing” attitude.
Reply
Resolve

Ryan Merkley

True, but if adopting OER means every educator has to built it themselves from pieces, we’ll reduce the addressable market considerably. So there has to be more than one approach, I’d suggest.

21:48 19 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I agree that we need to do better at helping them overcome the “all or nothing” attitude. I think that metadata and detailed descriptions in repositories can help; also, the comments from other teachers on how they used the resource and even their own redistribution of revised material. It also has to do with helping teachers empower learners to be responsible for their own learning: having a broader array of resources to learn from and cater their needs allows this.

15:43 20 Jun

Cable Green

Is this re-framing better? “Build OER that educators want to adopt” – see new proposed paragraph.

20:30 17 Jul

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

Yes, “OER that educators want to adopt” sets a broader purpose, and I agree that it is important to acknowledge both interests (ready-to-use and freedom to adapt). The OER movement is inclusive, and as in all communities of practice, there will be those participating in the periphery, using OER “as they are” and providing valuable feedback for updated versions, perhaps from original authors or others interested in editing; little by little, they can move to the center, engaging in revising and remixing. I would only suggest to remove/reword the phrase “without extra work”. When I read it, the image of “laziness” came to my mind…

08:46 21 Jul

Nicole Allen
16:23 13 Jul
Selected text:

Absence of Broad Standards: Other segments of the open movement have standardized models, such as the “green” and “gold” routes for Open Access or the 5 Star Open Data standard. The OER movement employs standardized open licenses, yet we still lack a single standard or unified message that is applicable around the globe. This is in part due to the diversity of the education sector, which spans education from infants to the elderly, and employs a variety of resources and tools. This is also due to a large variance between local and national autonomy of education, especially at primary and secondary levels, and variations in systems from country to country. Finally, use and reuse practices are crucial in education, as well as personalised approaches to learning – these don’t standardize easily. However, in order for OER to scale, some standards or standard pathways are needed.

Discussed w/Cable and we recommend just taking this out — everything important we say elsewhere, and discussing standards can be a sore point. Any objections? +mlforward@openedconsortium.org +delia.browne@gmail.com +atarkowski@centrumcyfrowe.pl
Reply
Resolve

Stephen Downes

+stephen@downes.ca

19:16 13 Jul

Cable Green

+ 1 – agree // +nicole@sparc.arl.org – do you want to resolve and remove the section? Or wait for more comments? All of the comments point to removing it.

19:55 17 Jul (edited 13:24 18 Jul)

Alek Tarkowski

-1. if standards are bad, why is OA a (I hope we all agree) success? why are we happy there is a single set of commonly used free licenses? I’m happy to develop this argument further. I acknowledge that this is controversial, but please let’s not simply delete it.

16:57 20 Jul

Nicole Allen

Happy to work with you to develop further. I agree it’s an important point, it seems to be the word “standards” that is causing issues. The core substance (minus the word standards) is addressed elsewhere. Could we perhaps simplify to talk in terms of “communicating pathways to OER”?

19:21 20 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:10 18 Jun
Selected text:

needed

The value of everybody saying the same thing, meaning the same thing, doing the same thing, etc. has always been greatly exaggerated. We should learn from the web, which is based in the first instance on protocols, which are voluntary engagements. We need to be able to create mechanisms for interoperability that are flexible and variable, and can grow and adapt. Standards are the opposite of this.
Reply
Resolve

Nicole Allen

Do other commenters have thoughts on this? Standards aren’t the only way to do things obvi (and won’t apply in every situation), but do you consider the lack of standards a challenge? Would it help improve communications?

15:44 18 Jun

Amy Hofer

It seems to me that there are a lot of different standards already in the ed sector – for example, common core for k-12 in the US, professional standards, etc. In what way do OER need unique and distinct standards from those already in place? I like the point above about metadata as one example.

18:17 7 Jul

Cable Green

See above – the recommendation is to simply remove this section on “standards.”

19:56 17 Jul

Alek Tarkowski

Standards can be voluntary – a lot of the protocls Stephen mentions are in fact standards. this might be a linguistic / framing issue… and we’re not really writing about standards but “standard solutions”; and there does not need to be one. just to give a practical example: I’ve been talking over the last months with people from Central Asia, interested in promoting OER in their countries. if we were talking about OA, I would tell them to set up a repository. if this was open data, I’d tell them to open all public data sets, be able to name the key ones, and recommend a repository as well. with OER, there’s no blueprint to recommend.

17:01 20 Jul

Don Gorges
14:52 20 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Scott Robison
09:24 19 Jun
Selected text:

Meeting the expectation of convenience that teachers and faculty have come to expect from traditional materials

This implies the focus is on replacing one product for another product. OERs are not products. They are processes. I’m all for convenience in adopting and adapting but this isn’t about finding or creating a product that “looks” like publisher content.
Reply
Resolve

rderosa

I agree. I think we will end up devaluing our “product” if we “productize” it. OER is most valuable when it is seen as a pedagogical tool rather than a stable artifact, so we shouldn’t “undersell” what OER is in order to make the quick sale.

11:33 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

The idea here is not to say that “productized” OER is more valuable. It is that such OER is easier for faculty adopt. The logic is “adopt before adapt” – if we can get OER into their hands, we can teach them how to use it in innovative ways. These opportunities are NOT meant to be universal and mutually exclusive with other strategies. They are meant to highlight pathways that can work, and it’s up to you to decide whether this is something relevant to your context. +ryan@creativecommons.org may wish to weigh in here.

21:11 19 Jun

Ryan Merkley

Nicole, thanks for the ping. I think this point is vital if we want to ever go beyond niche adoption to mainstream use and relevance.

I often find the term “productize” confusing because it carries some negative feelings as if it was “dumbed down”. I don’t think that’s what we mean here. A product, in this instance, is a complete solution that is built to satisfy some/all of its user’s needs.

The reality is we are “competing” against traditional materials and approaches, because in order to adopt OER, people need to see unique value from it. Getting them beyond the inertia of what they already know to the benefits of what OER can provide will require us to make it easy to adopt. A useful corollary might be cameras — first you give them point and shoots, which have some of the benefits, and some of the features, and eventually they want more, meet peers who share their interests, and come looking for high-end cameras with multiple lenses so they can do exactly what they want and get the full benefits.

21:46 19 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I agree: the value of OER is in the process and the new habits it will start generating among teachers and learners.

15:27 20 Jun

Amy Hofer

As above, there is some reasoning here that doesn’t take into account the contingent faculty model that is in place at US colleges and universities. Adjuncts may want to do all the Rs but they are not paid for course development and often don’t know what they’re teaching until the week of classes (so don’t have time to adapt materials even if they were willing to volunteer). It would be a shame to leave those people out of the OER movement.

18:40 7 Jul

Amy Hofer

In fact, the more I think about this discussion thread, the more I’m feeling a disconnect with my own work. For me OER isn’t about a process or a product, it’s about helping students. I’m sure at the end of the day we all feel that way. I’d like to see a way of reframing the issue that’s less about how the sausage gets made.

18:54 7 Jul

Fiona MacAlister

I agree. I’m pretty new to the OER movement but one thing that I have found frustrating in my travels over the past few months is the lack of focus on the consumers of OERs. All of the focus seems to be on the promotion of the movement which is not a bad thing but we do then lose sight of the ultimate purpose.

There is also a distinct lack of focus on the wildly varying levels of digital literacy on the part of the producers. For me this is a key area that is contributing to the slow uptake in the mainstream. You can’t expect teachers/academics to become enthusiastic about something for which they don’t have the basic skills or tools. It is a barrier I have come up against time and time again in my e-learning travels. I am not talking about the development of high level ID/e-Learning but being comfortable, on a very simple level, within the digital environment. In my experience, the majority of teachers/academics are not at all comfortable. This is where I think the OER movement is missing the boat. It needs to be a core component of our strategies. There is a diffusion of responsibility in this area with the assumption that most producers have basic digital skills or someone else is teaching them to use the tools. In my opinion we are putting the cart before the horse if we expect people to be enthusiastic about or produce material as OERS when they are uncomfortable in the environment to begin with.

06:09 10 Jul

Cable Green

Is this re-framing better? “Build OER that educators want to adopt” – see new proposed paragraph. I tried to include (and show respect for) both educators who want (a) ready-to-go without much revision OER and (b) a buffet of OER from which to revise / remix.

20:23 17 Jul

rderosa

I appreciate everyone’s willingness to work on this! I totally get the turnkey approach both in using OER and in “selling” OER to certain faculty. In general, I like to push against the idea that there is such a thing, though, since I think the double value of “openness” is only present when the materials are fully integrated into a custom pedagogy. I think by talking about OER as replacement textbooks, our rhetoric undervalues their potential at a long-range cost to our movement. Everyone who uses a traditional textbook modifies it in actual use; OER acknowledges the reality of how we teach, and we should highlight that from the outset. All that being said, you guys are my heroes and totally sold me on this whole movement, so I don’t want to derail your well-informed approaches about how this should go. Thank you for letting the squeaky wheels squeak! I think this doc is wonderful!

11:18 20 Jul

Stephen Downes
19:19 13 Jul
Selected text:

(ideally CC BY by default)

There’s still significant disagreement on this. c.f. Steven Harnad on the open access lists. To me this is a deal-breaker — if you can’t include the >50% of people who want to use a NC license, then this is a divisive document, and not a unifying one.
Reply
Resolve

Cable Green

Hi Stephen: I would argue there is significant consensus re: requiring that publicly funded educational resources be openly licensed – and to use CC BY (or similar) wherever possible: the 51 member organizations of the Open Policy Network operate under this principle: https://openpolicynetwork.org/about/#members

Guiding principles: https://openpolicynetwork.org/about/#principles

19:45 17 Jul

Stephen Downes

You guys are like the European Commission, a bunch of unelected bodies who appoint themselves and then declare a “consensus” where there obviously isn’t one. Most of the world prefers not to have their work turned into fodder for clickbait mills. You should be honest and say that AS REPRESENTATIVE OF PUBLISHERS and the commercial content industry, you have agreed that the world’s creative output should be free for you to monetize.

(I imagine thus comment will be ‘resolved’ out of existence by Nicole Allen the way most of my previous comments and suggestions have been).

22:18 17 Jul

Cable Green

Thanks Stephen for your lively comments. Suggesting members of the open policy network are “reps of the publishers” gave me a good laugh 😉 … (1) I softened the text to (e.g., CC BY). (2) The main argument for CC BY on open licensing policies is to maximize the degrees of freedom / flexibility for the public. In other words, fewer license restrictions / conditions = max flexibility for anyone to do what they want to do with the OER. See the remix possibilities at: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Wiki/cc_license_compatibility … In other words, CC BY licensed OER can be remixed with more CC licensed content than can other CC licensed OER with more restrictions / conditions. (3) Happy to discuss / debate this with you in another forum anytime … the gdocs comments don’t work well for long written responses. Good weekend.

13:37 18 Jul

Cable Green
13:26 18 Jul
Delete: “by default”
Reply

Cable Green
13:26 18 Jul
Replace: “ideally” with “e.g.,”
Reply

Cable Green
13:23 18 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Cable Green
13:20 18 Jul
Add: “Publicly funded educational resources should be openly licensed by default.”
Reply

Stephen Downes
19:27 13 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Empowering educators to have more agency in the classroom

This is still not the purpose of OERs.
Reply

Cable Green

Isn’t educators having the legal rights to do the 5 Rs – to use, modify and share educational resources as they see fit – without having to ask permission – one (among many I grant) goals of OER? Makes me think this bullet should be rewritten to make the point better.

19:52 17 Jul (edited 20:44 17 Jul)

Stephen Downes

If that’s what you believe, say that. Not the vague and misleading ‘agency’ clause. 

22:22 17 Jul

Cable Green

Thanks Stephen – I will rewrite the point. If you have better text – please suggest.

13:13 18 Jul

Cable Green

replaced with: “Ensuring educators have the legal rights to retain, reuse, revise, remix and redistribute educational resources as they determine – without having to ask permission.” // resolving this comment

13:17 18 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

13:17 18 Jul

Cable Green
13:17 18 Jul
Selected text:

Ensuring educators

new suggested text (per Stephens comment to be more clear) – replacing: “Empowering educators to have more agency in the classroom.”
Reply
Resolve

Cable Green
13:14 18 Jul
Add: “Ensuring educators have the legal rights to retain, reuse, revise, remix and redistribute educationa…”
Reply

Cable Green
20:40 17 Jul
Selected text:

Develop Open Learning Analytics Platforms:

Added this new section. Thoughts? +nbier@cmu.edu +cthille05@yahoo.com
Reply
Resolve

Cable Green
20:38 17 Jul
Add: “Develop Open Learning Analytics Platforms: As OER goes mainstream, publishers will cede educational …”
Reply

David Wiley
03:04 19 Jun
Selected text:

ready to use immediately without extra work

While I clearly understand the sentiment expressed here, this idea is dangerous because it encourages faculty to ignore revise, remix, and other 5R activities. If we really wanted to advocate for turnkey solutions, the ND licenses would be acceptable.
Reply
Resolve

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I agree that this idea is dangerous for the OER movement. The value of OER is the opportunity for collaboration, engagement, customization and reach that it allows. The “ready to use” attribute is true in some way, but it should not be the end goal. Stephen reminds us that OERs are means to an end (a high end). There can be OER that teachers may use “as it is”, but that does not mean it is offered as “all inclusive”. The room for revising, remixing and redistributing is there to enrich the network.

15:26 20 Jun

Nicole Allen

Someone added this response in the text (not sure who): Why? Leave it to faculty choice. Those that remix do not need encouragement and those that want the full package are ok. There is nothing intrinsically better about remixing.

15:45 13 Jul

Cable Green

Is this re-framing better? “Build OER that educators want to adopt” – see new proposed paragraph.

20:21 17 Jul

Nicole Allen
14:39 13 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Focus on Productization

Drafters: The overarching point here is to make OER that is easy for “the mainstream” to use. Let’s find a softer way to say this.
Reply

Nicole Allen

(Also note to self: mention mapping OER to competencies)

14:39 13 Jul

Cable Green

Cable will (a) edit this bullet and (b) write a bullet re: the need for open analytics systems to host / deliver OER.

17:11 13 Jul

Cable Green

added new section “Build OER that educators want to adopt” as suggested replacement for “Focus on Productization”

20:20 17 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

20:20 17 Jul

Cable Green
20:17 17 Jul
Format bullet: strike-through
Format: strike-through
Reply

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:18 17 Jul

David Wiley
02:56 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Absence of Standards

The idea of standards here terrifies me a little. What kind of standard would we have? A “quality” standard? It would almost certainly be based on the OER development process, sidelining individual contributors without the resources to mimic traditional publisher processes. It would also overlook the fact that EFFICACY is the primary thing we need to be targeting. I would be very supportive of “models” but maybe not standards.
Reply

Anonymous

Thanks David, great point. I think what we mean here is more along the lines of models than standard — something like we have the “green” and “gold” routes for OA (though we don’t like those terms) which make it very easy to communicate the pathways to making articles open. The OER space is more nebulous, which makes it harder to identify strategies and pathways. I think we can say this in a way that doesn’t use the word “standard” and maybe also shorten this point.

10:49 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

That was me. 🙂 Yes, can see how standards might not be the right term here, we can reword.

10:51 19 Jun

Irwin DeVries

“established practices”?

01:12 20 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I would suggest to have standards for the use of metadata to ease the search for OERs. I believe that if users and potential users can find OERs easily in a common search engine, adoption of OERs becomes more expedite. As Jeff mentions below, “[to] drive adoption…get good resources (that happen to be OER) in front of faculty”.

13:39 20 Jun

Phil Barker

This is a very odd section. It presents good arguments for why standards aren’t applicable and then says they are needed. What problem are you trying to solve with standards?

04:01 23 Jun

Cable Green

resolving this thread of comments – as the same topic is dealt with below – see Nicole’s (and my) proposal to remove this section on “standards”

19:54 17 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

19:55 17 Jul

Priscila Gonsales
12:15 15 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

where licensing is required.

I completely agree with this, but I have doubts about this when some institutions are resistant to OER in a first moment. I’ve noticed that use ND can be a first step to enter in the world of openness.
Reply

Cable Green

HI Priscila – I agree that ND can be a good first step. The point here is ND licensed educational resources are not OER – they don’t meet the definition requirement of the public having the legal rights to modify the work.

19:32 17 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

19:51 17 Jul

lshochberg
11:17 24 Jun
Selected text:

Extent of Market Penetration

None of these measure any of the 5Rs – these are essentially about “free”. If the 5Rs are important, shouldn’t some measure of that actually happening be included in “success”? Perhaps something specifically about use of OER in enhancement tools provided by vendors, as that has been assumed to be one of the values of open content and unlimited reuse (and may turn out to be a more substantial means of the 5Rs than by end users.)
Reply
Resolve

Cable Green

Good point, Scott. +david.wiley@gmail.com … David – do you want to draft a few bullets?

19:50 17 Jul

David Wiley
02:42 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Extent of Market Penetration

Should rename this heading. The bullets below do not address varying extents of market penetration.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Agree. We went through multiple iterations of it, and even considered taking out this whole section. Does anyone have ideas for the title here? We tried “Definition of Success” (too broad), and “Target Level of Adoption” (unclear).

09:11 19 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

Could it be something like “Achievements/Milestones to consider successful adoption of OER”?

13:37 20 Jun

Devon Ritter

Or perhaps just, “Signals of OER ‘Success'”

12:14 22 Jun

Amy Hofer

Long Term Goals

14:00 7 Jul

Nicole Allen

Ok guys, thanks for the input! We settled on “Extent of OER Adoption Necessary to Consider the Movement a “Success”” — better?

16:25 13 Jul

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

Yes, it’s better.

07:40 15 Jul

Cable Green

resolving – feel free to reopen if needed

19:48 17 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

19:48 17 Jul

Don Gorges
00:53 17 Jul
Add paragraph
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

02:40 17 Jul

Don Gorges
18:27 14 Jul
Format: normal text
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

18:27 14 Jul

Don Gorges
18:13 14 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Nicole Allen
15:40 13 Jul
Selected text:

.

I will come back and edit this.
Reply
Resolve

David Wiley
03:10 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

What cannot be copied

Local needs and priorities are different as well, and solutions from one locale cannot be cut and pasted into another locale. Many times not even within the same country.
Reply

Ryan Merkley

+1 +david.wiley@gmail.com. Separate point: At the other end, what do we think can be copied? Methods for evaluating effectiveness? Open business models? Repositories? Data collection? I think there’s value in identifying the things we think could be re-used internationally.

21:51 19 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I guess the issue here is the word “copy”. We can try to imitate models and follow the lead, but implementation is unique based on local needs. Adapting best practices is better.

15:30 20 Jun (edited 15:42 20 Jun)

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the comments guys! All great points. We’re removing this text (for other reasons) so resolving this comment. Made a few tweaks to reflect that it’s not about carbon copies, but about adapting to the local context.

17:23 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:23 13 Jul

Scott Robison
18:10 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

open pedagogies

Open pedagogy isn’t really defined anywhere, only mentioned (somewhat oddly) once above. I would consider thoroughly explaining it elsewhere or taking it out and just going with open educational practices.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the suggestion. Do others here have input on this?

00:10 19 Jun

rderosa

I agree with Scott. I think “open pedagogy” adds a whole layer that is integrally related to OER, but also distinct from it (for example, the connection between enrolled course learners and wider publics is emphasized; learners are seen as engaged in the revision and production of knowledge, not just its transmission; course work is relevantly connected to public need and individual learning goals). I would imagine one foundational goal of our work now would be give educators a more comprehensive idea of how to embed OER into a broader open pedagogy. So either we should add something more clear about that higher up, or just stick with practice here, and aim for the pedagogical aspect to OER that engages teachers and students with the revising/remixing and creation of their own course texts.

11:41 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Transplanting comment by Rory: Open pedagogy is tangential to OER. Theere areother pedagogies that can be incorporated as OER. We in the OER movement should be agnostic on the pedagogy. We need a wide umbrella and not be captivve to one peagogy.

21:15 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Another comment by Rory: Open pedagogy is a bag of hammers with different meanings to different people. We should focus on OER exclusively. Asessement and Credetnialing are part of OER and should be included.

21:16 19 Jun

Brian Mulligan

I agree that credentialling may be a key issue in getting OER used by learners. However, it may bypass many faculty by going straight to the learners and won’t necessarily help adoption by faculty.

06:56 8 Jul

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the feedback everyone. We discussed this, and since the focus of the document is very narrowly on OER, we’re going to keep it simple and not dive into the topics of open pedagogy, OEP, etc. We did however add open pedagogy and OEP up top under strategic goals, since OER is part of the infrastructure that can support these ends.

17:18 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:18 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
17:12 13 Jul
Selected text:

Build Supply to Meet Demand

Drafters: Let’s revisit this in the context of whether to use supply/demand as a framework. Maybe demand is the wrong word here.
Reply
Resolve

David Wiley
02:44 19 Jun
Add: “, including openly licensed assessment items and openly licensed competency maps and lists of learni…”
Reply

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

17:01 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
14:28 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

usage

A value proposition should underline the benefit received, but not necessarily the mechanism through which the benefit is realized. It stresses what we want to get from the thing. Hence here we should stress this: “OER makes education accessible and expands the universe of what’s possible in education.” Whether it’s the 5Rs or some other aspect or attribute of OERs can still be open to clarification or definition.
Reply

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

What I see in the value proposition is that it is focused on the educator, and it also needs to focus on the learner. Stephen’s suggestion of stressing the “accessibility and the expansion of the possibilities in education” includes both. I also think that the 5Rs and similar attributes are critical to define OERs; therefore, this needs to be explicit in the Definition of OER but not in its value proposition.

13:31 20 Jun

Amy Hofer

If a licensing standard is kept, does that open the door to other minimum thresholds, for example an accessibility/universal design standard?

13:56 7 Jul

Cable Green

Nicole and Cable discussed – and decided to keep it simple and shorten the sentence as Stephen suggests.

16:59 13 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

16:59 13 Jul

lshochberg
11:09 24 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

General Value Proposition: OER makes education accessible and expands the universe of what’s possible in education by allowing the 5Rs (reuse, revise, remix, redistribute, retain), and amplifying educators’ agency by increasing choices around content usage.

Do we have data showing that the 5Rs are something that a substantial percentage of users are actually doing? Or are they simply using OER as a low-cost alternative to commercial texts? I agree that the 5Rs add value, but have they been significant enough in actual OER use to be the core of the “general value proposition”? And does it vary by type of user? Who has info on how OER is actually used — David perhaps for the higher ed space?
Reply

andyb.lane

I have long argued that OER does not necessarily make education accessible to all or even to many. There remain issues of availability, accessibility, affordability and acceptability for learners and/or teachers when attempting to use OER within formal, non-formal and informal setting. However I agree it expands the universe of what’s possible.

10:51 7 Jul

Cable Green

We decided to keep it simple and reduce the sentence to what Stephen suggested below.

16:59 13 Jul

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

16:59 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
16:03 18 Jun
Selected text:

OER Ecosystem

Note to drafters: Revisit framing of Demand and Capacity descriptions in response to Stephen’s comments. OER is the means to an end, not the end in itself.
Reply
Resolve

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I agree that awareness of OER (in terms of knowing that they exist, where to find them and how to use them) and the motivation to use them will guarantee the demand from learners and teachers. Regarding capacity, maybe “Community and systemic support that will sustain open learning” could be a better wording in alignment with Stephen’s idea of OER being the means to an end.

13:28 20 Jun

Nicole Allen

Discussed with Cable, and we realize these are classic economic terms which may not be as applicable outside the US as a framework for looking at strategy. Are there other terms or other ways to frame this that make sense more broadly?

16:52 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
15:54 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

necessary change in education

Need to refine. Stephen suggested “change in society to support learning”
Reply

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I believe that the OER movement is introducing a new vision. It is indeed guiding society reformulate its perspective about helping to learn. Informal, formal and non-formal education may be starting to combine in the OER effort to support learning. I see Stephen’s suggestion as a way to help OER advocates and adopters to maintain a broad scope, keeping in mind that every OER shared represents a mind shift in society because of the way it is starting to generate a wide network to support learning openly and collectively.

13:22 20 Jun

Amy Hofer

Perhaps the sentence would be clearer with a brief statement about what’s positive – for example, lowering student costs and rethinking pedagogy.

12:58 7 Jul

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the suggestions! We changed “necessary” to “meaningful” and we’re going to leave it to the rest of this section to outline the reasons why.

16:46 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:46 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
14:34 18 Jun
Add: “for students and teachers”
Reply

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

How about learners and teachers? I understand “student” with a more “institutional” connotation. If we say “learner” we are including all those interested in learning whether participating in an institution or not. I would suggest using “learner” throughout the document. Both the Paris and the Cape Town Declaration also use “learner” instead of “student”.

13:24 20 Jun

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the suggestions! I think we’re going to keep this simple and just say “free to access”

16:43 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

16:43 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
13:51 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

free

I think that people may get distracted by quibbles over the nuances of “free.” What about no-cost instead? (I don’t think that “low-cost” is appropriate at an international scale.)
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the suggestion Amy! Since this document is community-focused I think it’s safe to use free here.

16:43 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:43 13 Jul

Brian Mulligan
06:19 8 Jul
Add: “Significant numbers of people gaining useful learning experiences (measured by employability) primar…”
Reply

Cable Green

re-wrote as: “Significant number of education and training systems built with curriculum based on OER.” Thanks!

16:37 13 Jul

Cable Green

Suggestion rejected

16:37 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
15:35 13 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Other

Drafters: we should think about a way to re-word this. I think people agree with the sentiment, but it could be articulated more effectively.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:23 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
15:34 13 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

(ideally CC BY by default)

Adding this here in response to Cable and Stephen’s discussion above.
Reply

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

16:14 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:04 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

CC BY license preferred

Why would you undermine the nuance above with this blunt declaration that some types of OER are more equal than others?
Reply

Stephen Downes

p.s. this phrase by itself would cause me to withdraw any support for this document. And – again – there are tons of people working in OER who employ NC licenses, and prefer them. It’s not always about creating free stuff for commercial publishers to reprint.

15:05 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Note this point isn’t about what license is best for OER, it’s about which should be the default for publicly funded resources, which is a different discussion, and one with little controversy. Though I can see how this might draw misunderstandings, so perhaps we should remove the parenthetical. I believe we make the point about policy elsewhere. +cable.green@gmail.com

15:30 18 Jun

Cable Green

Agree with Nicole – we’re talking about open licensing policies here – not OER licensing in general. Given the Open Policy Network is the leading voice on open policy best practices – maybe we could use their [revised to meet this context] language from: https://openpolicynetwork.org/about:

(1) remove the parenthetical

(2) add a new sentence:

Open licensing policies should require, as a default, licenses compliant with the Open Definition, with a preference for open licenses that at most require attribution to the author (such as CC BY) for publicly funded content and no rights reserved (such as CC0) for publicly funded data. We recognize there may be limited exceptions to the default.

15:45 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

I think a better place to address this is under the Government Funding point in opportunities. We can add a brief sentence at the end defining what we mean by open licensing.

16:07 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:14 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
14:04 26 Mar
Re-open
Selected text:

Draft 1.0

Please add comments via the google doc, or you can download and send comments back via email to nicole@sparc.arl.org for the drafting committee.
Reply

Pete Forsyth

Could you add a short section at the top describing the origin of this — whether similar strategic docs have been produced in the past (e.g., the Seely Brown doc) and what prompted this one, as well as what the editing schedule is (i.e., most significantly, deadlines for comments/revisions)?

19:26 27 Mar

Nicole Allen

Thanks Pete! The drafting group will be sure to add in a note about the overall timeline. For the immediate future, we’re holding our next discussion in Cardiff on April 14-15th, so we’ll probably look to incorporate these comments into Draft 1.1 then. Regarding the rest of the points, I think the Purpose of Document section covers most of it, with the exception of the one note I added. Do you think we need to be more explicit?

18:09 29 Mar

Alek Tarkowski

what’s the “Seely Brown doc”? Is it an important point of reference? I know the researcher, but don’t know the doc 🙂

14:40 4 May

Matt McGregor

Marked as resolved

20:08 21 Jun

Matt McGregor

Re-opened

20:08 21 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:11 13 Jul

Irwin DeVries
02:43 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

“turnkey” solution

can we find a better term (sounds like a commercial marketing pitch) – maybe “complete package (e.g. open textbook with all ancillary resources included)”?
Reply

Nicole Allen

We’ve gone back and forth about this. It’s a US centric term, but this point is largely directed at the US, so it may be appropriate to leave in.

17:20 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:57 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:19 24 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Productization

horrible word! productization?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Yep, we’ll change it to something. 🙂

15:43 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:43 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
18:33 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Other key constituencies

Accessibility services
Reply

Nicole Allen

We mention Accessibility in a separate point, so adding this here to draw the connection. Thanks!

15:43 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:43 13 Jul

William Cross
10:39 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Librarians are experts at finding, curating and sharing resources

I think is an important point that could be underlined further. Marshaling resources that provide access to information is a core value for librarians, so they are natural partners that can support (via grants, etc.) but also promote discoverability, build tools for creation and remix, and leverage deep, trusted relationships with faculty and students.

Libraries are also significantly engaged with the larger open movement, leading the way on OA and now doing lots of work with open data.

As a profession, librarians have deep expertise in the legal and technical issues that many instructors lack, and the recent investment in scholarly communication issues with full-time positions, centers, etc. makes libraries likely to get more involved going forward.

Reply

Nicole Allen

🙂 I couldn’t agree more!!!! For the purposes of this document, we are (trying) to keep it lightweight and succinct. I think one of the useful things that could come out of the expanded “toolkit” you talk about below would be something mapping how librarians can contribute to advancing these strategies.

15:42 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:42 13 Jul

Anonymous
19:29 31 Mar
Re-open
Selected text:

Awareness of OER is an essential precondition to expanding adoption,

Awareness of OER is NOT an essential precondition (at least not among higher ed faculty). There are more faculty using OER than are aware of OER, and adoption decisions even among those aware of the concept of OER often ignore the OER aspect of the resource. Faculty select the best resources – OER or not. If you want to drive adoption it is NOT required to build better awareness of the broad concepts of OER, but rather get good resources (that happen to be OER) in front of faculty. Once they have and use them, then you can work on their understanding of just what they now have. -Jeff Seaman, BSRG
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Jeff, this is valuable insight for U.S. discussions about implementation. Perhaps we could change the word “essential” to something a little softer. Do others in other countries/contexts feel we need to modify or qualify this point?

08:51 1 Apr

Matt McGregor

Awareness is a definite barrier here (in NZ), where we are attempting to create a commons of OER produced by and for K-12 teachers. There’s no way to do this without making teachers aware of what OERs are, what problems they solve, etc.

Also, if you want faculty to adapt, revise and re-distribute resources – to achieve some of the broader strategic goals listed above – then I think they’re going to need to be aware of the legalities of doing so.

tl;dr: in relation to the strategic goals listed above, ‘essential’ seems appropriate.

21:20 18 Jun

Archana Thakran

Awareness certainly is a great barrier in here in India as well. Majority of the faculty have never heard about the term ‘OER’. So ‘essential’ is very apt here.

01:49 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Thanks all. Added this sentence to the end “While awareness is not a sufficient (or in some cases, even necessary) condition for adoption, it is a common barrier faced toward achieving the benefits of OER.”

15:37 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:37 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:03 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

reuse

Maybe ‘identify the gaps’ ought to be first. The world is filled with tons of open content, yet advocates sometimes act as though it doesn’t exist
Reply

Nicole Allen

This is a critical point, but I think it is implicit enough for the purposes of this section.

15:32 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:32 13 Jul

Nicole Allen
17:12 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

excluding those with an ND restriction

Anonymous commenter asked why NC is not excluded. Responses?
Reply

Brian Mulligan

Because people earning money from open knowledge is a good thing and does not restrict that knowledge being used by others.

06:12 20 Jun

Nicole Allen

Agreed. 🙂 There is general consensus that while NC is not ideal for enabling OER reuse, it falls within the scope of the Hewlett and UNESCO definitions, and should not be excluded for the purposes of developing strategies.

15:30 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:30 13 Jul

lshochberg
11:13 24 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

There are many strategic goals of OER,

Following on my comment about the value proposition, many of these goals do not seem to require the 5Rs (though they may add value in some cases),
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks, great point. I think it’s ok that connections 5Rs are not drawn directly here, but definitely something we need to think about in terms of communicating the goals and benefits of OER.

15:29 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:29 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:05 24 Jun
Add: “the use of”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:23 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:01 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

teaching

Is this really a goal of OERs? When I think ‘professional’ I think of doctors, lawyers, architects – really expensive people to hire, who provide specialized services that most people in the world can’t afford.
Reply

Nicole Allen

This actually came up several times in our discussions around this document. The idea is that teachers are becoming de-professionalized as curriculum increasingly comes “in a box”, and OER provides a platform for teachers to gain more agency in the classroom. (I’m sure someone else can articulate this more eloquently)

15:06 18 Jun

J Marks

I have always framed this as empowering educators and giving them responsibility to adjust the materials to fit the needs of their local community and culture, as well as the special needs of individuals.

19:34 18 Jun

Teresa Mackinnon

Although the discourse is often framed in terms of “professionalism” I agree with Steven that the language is problematic. This is a about empowering teachers and recognising the craft of teaching which exists as part of a community of practice within a discipline or area of activity.

12:43 19 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I totally understand the point of OER creating a “platform for teachers to gain more agency in the classroom”, but I don’t think “re-professionalizing teaching” is the best way to say it. Teachers are no longer the content providers; they are mentors/coaches/helpers of the learners. When teachers have OERs to rely on, they have time to do what only humans can: interact with the learner’s whole being to understand how he/she is progressing and provide the help needed. How about “empowering teachers to guide learning closely” .

13:33 20 Jun

Nicole Allen

Thanks all, fantastic feedback. Changing this to “empowering educators to have more agency in the classroom”

15:22 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:22 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
14:32 18 Jun
Add: “more or less”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Do other commenters agree with this change?

15:54 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

adding “generally”

15:15 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:15 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
12:56 7 Jul
Replace: “seems to unite” with “unites”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Keeping this a little softer, but thanks for all of your fantastic edits!

15:15 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:15 13 Jul

Pete Collins
05:19 22 Jun
Format: indent first line
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:14 13 Jul

Anonymous
21:38 23 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:13 13 Jul

Anonymous
21:40 23 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:13 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:00 24 Jun
Add: “ranges across”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:13 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
04:59 24 Jun
Add: “s”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thank you Kate, your copy editing has been extraordinarily helpful!!

15:13 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:13 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
04:58 24 Jun
Add: “s”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:13 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
13:52 7 Jul
Replace: “are hoping” with “hope”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:09 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
13:52 7 Jul
Replace: “place more emphasis or priority on” with “prioritize”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:09 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:23 24 Jun
Add: “that”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:06 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:23 24 Jun
Add: “that”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:06 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:22 24 Jun
Replace: “,” with “:”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:06 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:20 24 Jun
Replace: “A” with “a”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:05 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:20 24 Jun
Replace: “A” with “a”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:05 13 Jul

Phil Barker
04:06 23 Jun
Add space
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:05 13 Jul

Phil Barker
04:06 23 Jun
Add space
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:05 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
18:35 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Students can also be mobilized to drive demand and as a catalyst for action

I try to make this point in a more nuanced way when I’m talking with people. It may not be the best approach for students to directly try to change faculty. But they can be powerful advocates with administrators, who in turn can provide support to faculty who convert their courses.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Amy, softened it a bit.

15:04 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:04 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:15 24 Jun
Replace: “is” with “they are”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:03 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:16 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

open

I’m an open hero. 😉

More seriously, the story of why this is the case is complex, and not limited to OERs. MOOCs were first developed specifically to use OERs, and were very popular, but did not become a but ‘story’ until adopted (and coopted) by people from Stanford and MIT. When we look to elites for inspiration, it’s pretty hard to find instances of populist and democratic ideas.

Reply

Nicole Allen

Perfect parallel. Though this is a critique of society as a whole. The way we get around this from a communications standpoint, I think, is that we need to focus less on the ideals, and more on the impacts. Open doesn’t need to be the thing that gets attention, just the awesome things that happen only because of open. But that doesn’t change the problem, only gets around it.

15:40 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:03 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:13 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

recognition

Right. Maybe highlight this. Because there’s no value of ‘our’ that satisfies the criterion of ‘our definition’.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:03 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
18:19 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

Tools

Is there a way to include the help of librarians here?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Absolutely!! We mention below that librarians are key to engage, and will make a note to draw a connection to this point.

15:02 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:02 13 Jul

sunyeen
21:14 23 Jun
Delete: “lack”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Sunny!

14:56 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:56 13 Jul

Stephen Downes
15:08 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

internationally

It depends how you define OER. If you are referring to materials created by funded and institutional OER builders, then yes, it’s linear – and will always be linear, because of limitations in the production method. But if you view OER more widely, there has been (arguably) exponential growth.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Stephen, could you explain a little more? What would a wider view of OER look like vs. what we’ve presented here?

15:46 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Adding the word “broad” to the title.

14:55 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:55 13 Jul

Devon Ritter
12:33 22 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Individual Champions

Not really sure how this is a victory for the movement as a whole.
Reply

Amy Hofer

I think that’s a good point. The movement benefits when the efforts of champions are integrated into their organizations so that they persist beyond the influence of one individual.

14:31 7 Jul

Nicole Allen

This section is supposed to be identifying the movement’s strengths, and this is one area where we have been strong. Your point is excellent – and identifies perhaps a challenge that we could overcome to make the movement stronger (that the great efforts of one champion don’t end up being institutionalized). Taking this as a point to work in later.

14:54 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:55 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:30 7 Jul
Add: “,”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Ok fine. 😉

14:50 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:50 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:29 7 Jul
Add: “open access publishing,”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:50 13 Jul

Nelson Piedra
08:37 14 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

open

Please add “Linked Open Data”. We advocate the use of a Linked Open Data approach to OER repositories providing a more interoperable and integrated system for sharing, connecting, and discovering educational resources, educational data, and metadata of OER initiatives. This also can
be an enabler for the development of the next generation of open educational resources (Linked OER Data). Moreover, OER resource metadata can be enriched using datasets hosted by the Linked Open Data cloud. OER + Linked Open Data approach is key to apply the semantic annotation of OERs and the entity data enrichment available on the Data Web to enable smarter searches. @nopiedra
Reply

Nicole Allen

Excellent points. I think the best place to capture this is under the opportunities section below, both in building tools to support OER and also how we work with other areas of openness. We allude to it, but can strengthen the language — making sure this all fits together is key.

11:38 14 Apr

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:50 13 Jul

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
11:25 20 Jun
Replace: “i” with “a”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks!

14:49 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:49 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:10 24 Jun
Add: “an”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks!

14:49 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:49 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:29 7 Jul
Add: “,”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:49 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:25 7 Jul
Replace: “The types of r” with “R”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:49 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:24 7 Jul
Add: “,”
Reply

Nicole Allen

A rare place where I will support the use of the oxford comma. 😉

14:49 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:49 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:24 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

effective, effective

word choice?
Reply

Nicole Allen

🙂

14:48 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:48 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:24 7 Jul
Replace: “prove to be” with “are”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:48 13 Jul

Brian Mulligan
06:29 8 Jul
Add: “Encourage educational institutions and professional associations to use challenge examinations or co…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the suggestion. I think this is getting a little out of scope for this doc (the focus is pretty narrowly on OER) but we haven’t talked much about CBA here (if at all – will need to check), so will take this note back to the group and see where we can fit it in.

14:48 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

14:48 13 Jul

Teri Karobonik
17:42 2 Jul
Add: “to educators and policy makers”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for your suggestions!

14:46 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:46 13 Jul

Teri Karobonik
17:42 2 Jul
Delete: “about”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:45 13 Jul

Teri Karobonik
17:41 2 Jul
Replace: “ions” with “e”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:45 13 Jul

Kate Makowiecka
05:07 24 Jun
Delete: “ing”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:45 13 Jul

Amy Hofer
14:23 7 Jul
Re-open
Selected text:

communities

Perhaps this could be more specific. Communities of authors? Faculty interested in adoption? Students advocating with administrators and governments?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Amy, great suggestions! We’re trying to keep this section lightweight but go into more detail about this below. Will double check that we have these constituencies covered!

14:45 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:45 13 Jul

John Milam
11:19 23 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

lists

With a TAACCCT grant, we are working to map competencies to OERs for use in personalized learning plans. Student use of OERs in a PLE with a personal LMS and competency mapping to OERs should be other top priorities.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks great addition. Moving down under Opportunities: Supply below.

14:43 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:43 13 Jul

Brian Mulligan
06:24 8 Jul
Add: “Build open programmes of study within disciplines based on the above which satisfy existing defined …”
Reply

Brian Mulligan

I believe that a possible strategy that could have a big impact is to develop a complete professional course based on OER and accredited by one or more institutions in an area of skills shortage (employable) perhaps in the developing world that would be seen as disrupting the existing approach. Such a single project might have greater uptake by learners (not faculty) and a bigger publicity impact for OER than scattered resources.

06:44 8 Jul

Nicole Allen

This is a great idea. I’m moving down under Opportunities:Supply below.

14:42 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

14:42 13 Jul

John Milam
11:19 23 Jun
Add: “Map competencies to OERs.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Good idea. This isn’t the place but have added a note to add below under Opportunities:Supply.

14:41 13 Jul

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

14:41 13 Jul

Don Gorges
01:31 10 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Don Gorges
01:01 10 Jul
Add paragraph
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

01:05 10 Jul

David Wiley
03:08 19 Jun
Selected text:

large scale adoptions

A large addressable market doesn’t imply demand. “Building supply to meet demand” would mean something like finding 50 schools that want to adopt Nursing OER in place of textbooks, and then building those resources with them. “Demand” implies someone who wants OER.
Reply
Resolve

Nicole Allen

Great point +david.wiley@gmail.com. Do you have recommendations on how we can reframe? (We can come up with something, but your ideas are usually better!)

21:13 19 Jun

Brian Mulligan

How about looking beyond institutions and faculty to learners who need training for jobs – build programmes based on OER that make people employable. Added accreditation would enhance attractiveness and make the impact more visible.

06:49 8 Jul

Ryan Merkley
21:55 19 Jun
Selected text:

If faculty cannot move beyond the “adopt a book” mentality of the previous 100 years the potential of OER will likely go unfulfilled.

This is a critical point for me. Put another way, this says “users must agree to adopt an entirely different method of finding and using teaching resources in order to participate in OER”. That’s a very tough sell, especially the first time. Those who transformed markets in this way had to have a very good benefit (usually one the current option could not attain) at the end of the value chain to convince people to adopt entirely new approaches. So either we get way better at showing the benefits, or we have to meet educators closer to where they live.
Reply
Resolve

Irwin DeVries

Agree – and also contradicts the “turn-key” idea earlier.

01:08 20 Jun

Amy Hofer

The way that this is worded places the responsibility for the problem on faculty, which doesn’t seem fair to the adjunct and contingent work force. Does the OER movement propose to tackle that problem? Perhaps there is a way of showing that this is yet one more way in which the current labor model is not working for students.

18:27 7 Jul

Brian Mulligan

I’m not sure that this is realistic. Faculty won’t adopt OER unless it makes their lives easier. It is up to the OER movement to prioritise the structuring of OER into courses (and full programmes) so that it is more immediately useful to faculty and learners.

06:39 8 Jul

Amy Hofer
18:28 7 Jul
Selected text:

Poor Branding

I don’t see this as an important challenge. As pointed out above, many faculty have been teaching without a traditional textbook since before the current jargon was in use. I find that people understand the concept of lowering textbook costs for students.
Reply
Resolve

Don Gorges
01:56 3 Jul
Delete space
Add space
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

01:57 3 Jul

Don Gorges
15:32 1 Jul
Made a suggestion
Reply

Don Gorges
16:26 28 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Gema Santos
11:53 26 Jun
Replace: “The most immediate need to support adoption is tools for the effective discoverability of OER, but a…” with “,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,”
Reply

Anonymous
16:23 24 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Nicole Allen
17:16 19 Jun
Selected text:

Next Steps

Please post general feedback the drafters should follow up on here in this comment.
Reply
Resolve

Nicole Allen

Scott R asked us to refine the use of “Reuse” vs. “Remix” – make sure we’re using consistently and not confusing 5Rs.

17:17 19 Jun

Matt McGregor

Some general feedback: From reading the document and the comments, my feeling is that if we want to expand the pool of OER advocates – and simultaneously make those advocates more effective – then we need more documentation / toolkit resources that spell out exactly how the strategies in this document might be implemented. These would include international best practice and models to adapt for local conditions. I think this document gives a great framework for what these resources would need to cover.

I know it’s an obvious point, but the need for toolkit resources is especially worth underlining with respect to OERs, where the scale of what we are trying to achieve, coupled with the diversity of the various education systems we are working within, means that most of the work of implementation is going to be quite localised – much more so than OA, IMO.

If the movement grows as we want it to, the OER movement is going to be relying on local, institutional champions who find themselves advocating for OER in addition to their day-jobs. My feeling is that the role of the various international leaders (and leading organisations) in OER is to empower and support these local advocates, as much as they possibly can – even if this comes at the expense of a more cohesive international OER project (which it doesn’t necessarily need to, of course).

20:11 21 Jun

sunyeen

Speaking as a librarian at a community college, these comments very much reflect my experience as a supporter of OER. Our faculty get galvanized about the need to help our students, but it sometimes astonishes our teaching faculty how much work it takes to convert to OER. Over the years many faculty have helped students with fair use no-cost sharing of materials, so sometimes the extra work is not attractive. I’m all for best practices and toolkits and I greatly appreciate all the shared “how-to” resources out there.

22:16 23 Jun

S P
21:30 23 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Don Gorges
11:29 23 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Steven Bell
09:04 23 Jun
Selected text:

help

Is another way to think of “all or nothing” a heading such as “Move Beyond Textbook Model” – and make a case that we need to get beyond thinking that learning content can only come packaged between to covers and be called a textbook. Make the case that learning material can be whatever content faculty choose to present that advances student learning. Is part of the problem that much OER follows the textbook model so that it is familiar to faculty and students. Is the movement held back by the term “textbook” and if so should it recommend moving beyond textbooks?
Reply
Resolve

Ethan Senack
11:25 22 Jun
Add space
Reply

Ethan Senack

Suggestion rejected

11:25 22 Jun

Edmundo Tovar
15:03 21 Jun
Delete: “actualizing”
Reply

Edmundo Tovar

Suggestion rejected

15:03 21 Jun

Don Gorges
03:27 21 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Don Gorges
16:29 20 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

David Wiley
02:57 19 Jun
Add: “All or Nothing Thinking. Many of the faculty and teachers who do evaluate OER look for a single reso…”
Reply

Scott Robison

Agreed. A mentality of replacing a product (publisher content) with a process (OER).

09:12 19 Jun

Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez

I can see this as the need to help teachers build new habits. Using one single resource is practical. Searching for different resources is time-consuming. The impact of the second practice is what needs to be emphasized: how mixing and matching resources benefits the learners by customizing their experience, helping them develop a broader and more dynamic approach to learning, fostering diversity, etc. We need to make digging for OER easier and less time consuming to help teachers develop and enjoy the habit of using multiple resources to help learners learn. In some way, this also has to do with the shift from content- to competency-oriented learning, and the idea that there are many possible ways to reach a learning goal.

13:50 20 Jun

Don Gorges
07:22 20 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Don Gorges
00:28 20 Jun
Add paragraph
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

07:06 20 Jun

helen galatis
22:49 19 Jun
Add first-page header
Add first-page footer
Reply

helen galatis

Suggestion rejected

22:49 19 Jun

Don Gorges
17:00 19 Jun
Add space
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

21:19 19 Jun

Rory McGreal
16:54 19 Jun
Add: “Open pedagogy is a bag of hammers with different meanings to different people. We should focus on OE…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Rory, transplanting elsewhere.

21:15 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

21:15 19 Jun

Rory McGreal
17:18 19 Jun
Add: “Open pedagogy is tangential to OER. Theere areother pedagogies that can be incorporated as OER. We i…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Rory, transplanting this comment elsewhere.

21:14 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

21:14 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:48 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

high quality, cost-effective, useful and sustainable

This list should include “effective in supporting learning,” and this criterion should arguably receive priority above others. If this is what “useful” was intended to mean, let’s be more specific about it.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

21:00 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Re-opened

21:00 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

done

21:00 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

21:00 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:45 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

OER models

Adoption models? Development models? Evaluation models?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

20:58 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Re-opened

21:00 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

done

21:00 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

21:00 19 Jun

Irwin DeVries
02:37 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Extent of Market Penetration Necessary to Consider OER a “Success”

Sustainability of resources is a big issue too – especially for open textbooks. Otherwise one-time wonders that fade away over time.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Very true. We discuss this later in the doc – let us know if you agree with our assessment!

20:55 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

20:55 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:40 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

human knowledge

OER deal with expressions of human knowledge, not knowledge itself. Only a person can know – a book or webpage can’t know. Consequently, only a person can have knowledge. We need to be careful that we speak about expressions and not about knowledge. Only expressions can be openly licensed. Knowledge itself is outside the scope of any intellectual property regime.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

20:54 19 Jun

Scott Robison
17:56 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:
Build key tools that enable more effective development, management, discovery and reuse.
Moving beyond content-related issues and focusing on the practices of educators that can be achieved with a shift to open resources, for example, open pedagogy, open assessment, open credentials, etc.

The bullet and sub-bullet items seem pretty unrelated to each other. I would expect the sub-bullet to include tools (or ideas for tools) that are needed to develop, manage, remix, and share OERs.
Additionally, the sub-bullet alludes to something that should actually frame the entire OER movement: Open Pedagogy (including, but not limited to open content/OER, open activities, open assignments, open assessments) which fosters a learner-centered course/community. OER is a component of open pedagogy. Open pedagogy necessarily includes OER. To use open pedagogy the way it is used here is confusing at best, if not misunderstood.
Reply

J Marks

I would add a bullet on media and content source and presentation forms; metadata; version control; and object level usage tracking as important needs.

I agree Open Pedagogy is a complacently different topic. We are focused on resources here.

19:40 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Thanks guys! It’s actually just an error, the sub-bullet is supposed to be a separate bullet and it somehow got indented. Does change your feedback? Do you think we should move the mention of pedagogy somewhere else?

23:43 18 Jun

sarobison

Open pedagogy is a much broader topic that includes OER. From my perspective, OP is the motivator for using OER, not the other way around. But I understand this document is about OER. I like David’s “Broadening…” edit if we’re going to stick with the OER -> OP pathway.

09:04 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Ok thanks! Really helpful feedback.

09:14 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:27 19 Jun

Rory McGreal
17:21 19 Jun
Add: “and assembly”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

17:26 19 Jun

l.a.perryman1
17:06 23 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

high potential for large scale adoptions

though… scale isn’t everything and in prioritising scale we risk further excluding already excluded minority communities who could benefit most from OER. Maybe we should be prioritising collaborative development of OER to meet diverse needs (e.g. as with the VUSSC initiative).
Reply

Nicole Allen

Based on our session yesterday, I’m very much in favor of adding a point relating to collaborative development and students as creators. However, I don’t think it’s mutually exclusive with this point, which is a strategy directed toward more developed countries.

19:30 24 Apr

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:25 19 Jun

Rory McGreal
17:12 19 Jun
Add: “Why? Leave it to faculty choice. Those that remix do not need encouragement andthose that want the f…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Rory. Adding this to our list of comments outside the doc.

17:25 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

17:25 19 Jun

Irwin DeVries
01:56 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Other constituencies

others that could be mentioned: learning designers, school copyright officers
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks! Added at the end.

17:20 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:20 19 Jun

Scott Robison
16:47 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

re-use

Does re-use mean use the resource again with or without changes? Or both? “Remix” instead? Or add remix to the list? Remix and reuse are used in the last sentence.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the feedback, we’ll take a look at making sure we use consistent language throughout the doc. “Reuse” is often used as shorthand (see Hewlett OER definition) but that may not be appropriate here.

10:53 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:17 19 Jun

Rory McGreal
17:01 19 Jun
Add: “Rather than fight this trend e should build more OER that are full texts or even full courses and pr…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Rory for the suggestion, this important point is already captured under the opportunities section.

17:17 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:17 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:49 19 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

can benefit

I agree we wold benefit from more of this, but this is supposed to be a list of strengths, not potential strengths, right?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

17:15 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:46 19 Jun
Replace: “Moving beyond content-related issues and focusing on” with “Broadening our focus to include”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

17:13 19 Jun

Rory McGreal
16:51 19 Jun
Add: “Keep this in.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks Rory!

17:13 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:13 19 Jun

Anonymous
16:41 19 Jun
Add: “t should be excluded also.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:12 19 Jun

Anonymous
16:41 19 Jun
Add: “? I”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:12 19 Jun

Anonymous
16:41 19 Jun
Add: “NC here”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:11 19 Jun

Anonymous
16:41 19 Jun
Add: “isn’t”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:11 19 Jun

Anonymous
16:41 19 Jun
Add: “hy”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:11 19 Jun

Anonymous
16:41 19 Jun
Add: “W”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

17:11 19 Jun

Don Gorges
16:27 19 Jun
Add space
Reply

Don Gorges

Suggestion rejected

16:32 19 Jun

Ovidiu Voicu
16:09 19 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

David Wiley
02:50 19 Jun
Add: “and adoption”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

10:59 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:50 19 Jun
Add: “s”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

10:59 19 Jun

Irwin DeVries
01:44 19 Jun
Add: “s”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

10:57 19 Jun

Scott Robison
16:43 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Unfulfilled Promise

Maybe “Minimal Evidence…” OER doesn’t “promise” anything.
Reply

David Wiley

+1

02:57 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Thanks, making this change

10:54 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

10:54 19 Jun

Scott Robison
22:03 18 Jun
Replace: “re-use” with “remix”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

10:51 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:48 19 Jun
Add: “`”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

09:14 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:45 19 Jun
Replace: “enable” with “communicate”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

09:12 19 Jun

David Wiley
02:41 19 Jun
Replace: “primary” with “default”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

09:04 19 Jun

Cheryl Hodgkinson-Williams
03:16 19 Jun
Add: “of”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

09:01 19 Jun

Cheryl Hodgkinson-Williams
04:59 19 Jun
Add space
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

09:01 19 Jun

Don Gorges
08:04 19 Jun
Add space
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

09:00 19 Jun

theo kuechel
03:21 19 Jun
Made a suggestion
Reply

Irwin DeVries
02:00 19 Jun
Delete: ““turnkey” solution”
Add: ““turnkey” solution”
Reply

Irwin DeVries

Suggestion rejected

02:00 19 Jun

Scott Robison
16:40 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

policies

I don’t think “policies” are what empower teachers and students to be active creators… It’s the licensing (e.g. CC-BY or SA, but not CC-ND). Maybe just drop policies or change to “and the particular CC license attribute”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks great point! Will tweak this phrasing – the point is more general about using OER.

00:04 19 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

00:05 19 Jun

Scott Robison
16:44 18 Jun
Replace: “and Use” with “, Use and Remix”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

23:38 18 Jun

Scott Robison
16:45 18 Jun
Replace: “re-use” with “reuse”
Reply

Scott Robison

Suggestion rejected

16:45 18 Jun

Scott Robison
16:38 18 Jun
Delete: “pen.”
Reply

Scott Robison

Suggestion rejected

16:39 18 Jun

Scott Robison
15:51 18 Jun
Add: “and students”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

16:27 18 Jun

David Kernohan
06:26 14 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

adoption of OER

I’m not sure this captures the (notoriously slippy, to be fair) “open practice” position of public academic practice…
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the feedback. We intentionally kept the scope of this doc to resources vs. open education overall since there wasn’t a common understanding of what that means and it made strategy conversations exponentially more complex (especially in an international context).

09:32 14 Apr

Alek Tarkowski

I would be in favour of mentioning that for many, but not everyone, practices built on top of resources are an important secondary goal. we can add a caveat that this is largely beyond the scope of the document

14:42 4 May

Nicole Allen

I added “practices” alongside “impacts and audiences” in the next sentence about where we have different visions. We also capture different types of practice under the “Top Strategic Priorities” section below.

David: If you have thoughts on how to improve representation of practice there please let us know.

14:40 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:04 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:40 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

OER

I don’t have a good wording here, but this wording suggests a funding infrastructure on a system and institutional basis. I don’t want to presuppose this. That’s not to discount the usefulness of this type of support, but I think it is neither necessary nor sufficient. I often compare OERs to a language. What does a language need to be a ‘living’ language. We don’t need to fund words themselves, or even the use of words. Support comes in the form of a social recognition of the usefulness of it, and where necessary, an investment in systems that employ it. This is very different from the model of directly supporting OERs.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the comment. I think this is reflected where we expand on this point below (please point out if we don’t) but we can look at reframing this here.

15:02 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:03 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:36 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

it

I would word this very different. Demand is created by fitness for purposes. In other words, for demand to exist, OERs must answer genuine and real needs. It must also be knowable as a means to meet those needs.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Agreed. I think we capture this where we expand on this point below, but we can look at reframing the language here.

15:01 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

16:03 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:33 18 Jun
Replace: “education” with “society to support learning”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Agree this needs to be said differently. Not sure this is on message but will flag for follow up.

15:53 18 Jun (edited 15:53 18 Jun)

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:53 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:41 18 Jun
Replace: “T” with “In cases where licensing is required, t”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:47 18 Jun

Nelson Piedra
08:43 14 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

OER to scale

“and interoperate repositories and resources,” A key requirement, is to improve the metadata interoperability between various collections of open material, so as to facilitate the discoverability and subsequent combining, remixing, or adapting OER; that is, OER data should be easily accessible to any user (human or machine).
Reply

Nicole Allen

I think we capture a lot of this under the next bullet point about discovery. Let us know if you have any suggestions how we can articulate it more clearly. Thanks!

11:40 14 Apr

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:33 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:06 18 Jun
Add: “open assessment, open credentials, etc.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:32 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:07 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

etc

meh
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:31 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:06 18 Jun
Replace: “.” with “,”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:31 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:06 18 Jun
Replace: “i.e.” with “for example,”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:31 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:02 18 Jun
Replace: “into” with “in”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:06 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:01 18 Jun
Replace: “Introducing” with “Leveraging”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:06 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
15:01 18 Jun
Replace: “openly licensed” with “open”
Reply

Stephen Downes

Again, not necessarily licensed

15:01 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:06 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:33 18 Jun
Add: “use of”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:03 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:33 18 Jun
Add: “s”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

15:02 18 Jun

Stephen Downes
14:33 18 Jun
Delete: “adoption”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

15:02 18 Jun

Jason Jones
14:17 18 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

Cape Town Declaration and Paris Declaration

Add links to these?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks. Added!

14:45 18 Jun

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:45 18 Jun

Anonymous
11:43 4 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

.

and feedback received from the OER community through conferences, meetings and sharing this document.
Reply

Cable Green

will add – thanks

20:57 15 Jun (edited 20:57 15 Jun)

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

20:57 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
14:22 14 May
Add: “Institutionalization: The long term sustainability of OER depends on institutions becoming not only …”
Reply

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:57 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
14:09 14 May
Add: “Learners as Creators: Inherent in open pedagogies and open educational practices is the idea of stud…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Added this based on feedback from #OEglobal about emphasizing the role of learners and engaging them in content creation.

14:09 14 May

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:56 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
14:14 12 May
Add: “to support the OER lifecycle: development, management, discoverability and reuse. The most immediate…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Added this to be consistent with Jan Neumann’s feedback above. We may consider removing the second sentence.

14:14 12 May

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:50 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
14:02 14 May
Add: “Increase Awareness: It is essential to raise awareness of OER as an option, both as an alternative t…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Added based on feedback from #OEglobal session and #OER15 tweets

14:03 14 May

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:50 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
14:33 14 May
Delete: “is an essential precondition to expanding adoption, but generally”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Removing this segment in response to Jeff’s comment above. I think it’s an unnecessary thing to state here, and he has a point.

14:34 14 May

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:49 15 Jun

Anonymous
11:40 4 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

level

levels
Reply

Cable Green

fixed

20:48 15 Jun (edited 20:48 15 Jun)

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

20:48 15 Jun

Anonymous
11:39 4 Jun
Re-open
Selected text:

educational

education
Reply

Cable Green

fixed – thanks

20:47 15 Jun

Cable Green

Marked as resolved

20:47 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
13:55 14 May
Delete: “Now is the time to articulate the positive educational opportunities that can happen with “open” tha…”
Reply

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:46 15 Jun

Cable Green
18:03 1 May
Add: “Now is the time to articulate the positive educational opportunities that can happen with “open” tha…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

This is great, but too specific for this section. Is there a way we can capture this somewhere in the opportunities section?

14:14 12 May

Cable Green

OK – will remove

20:46 15 Jun

Cable Green

Suggestion rejected

20:46 15 Jun

Nicole Allen
14:16 14 May
Add: “Licensing Standard: There is general recognition that Creative Commons licenses (excluding those wit…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

This is a new addition generally agreed upon by all members of the drafting committee (not just those from CC/CC affiliates). We originally did not include this to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, but after discussing realized that this is simple truth and do not believe there is a conflict in recognizing it.

14:17 14 May (edited 14:18 14 May)

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

20:43 15 Jun

l.a.perryman1
16:43 23 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

about

I’d add that we need to gain a proper understanding of why the promise of reuse is unfulfilled. For example, in developing countries such as India cultural facttors such as attitudes towards expertise and a hierarchical view of knowledge ownership can inhibit full engagement with OER.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks, great point. We’ll look into this. We’re trying to avoid making this doc too detail heavy, but I think we can clarify this bullet a way that addresses your concern.

19:30 24 Apr

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:31 14 May

Nicole Allen
14:31 14 May
Add: “Cultural and legal barriers also stand in the way.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:31 14 May

Nicole Allen
14:06 14 May
Replace: “Students can offer a compelling voice and people-power to catalyze action.” with “Students can also be mobilized to drive demand and as a catalyst for action.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Changed this to reflect suggestions around leveraging students to drive demand.

14:06 14 May

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:29 14 May

Nicole Allen
14:24 14 May
Made a suggestion
Reply

Nelson Piedra
08:52 14 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

Tools

Before insulated tools from the rest of OER ecosystem is the use of Linked Open Data for describe repositories and OERs. With this vision, the content and data must be available over the Internet, in a convenient, modifiable, machine-readable form, for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost, under terms that permit reuse, redistribution, and intermixing with other OER collections.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for pointing this out. We’ll clarify here that these tools need to be set up to work with each other.

11:44 14 Apr

Nicole Allen

Added the word “interoperable.” Thanks!

14:18 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:18 12 May

Nicole Allen
14:17 12 May
Add: “, interoperable”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

14:17 12 May

Nelson Piedra
08:41 14 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

Develop national OER models

develop national and INTEROPERABLE OER Models.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Do you mean interoperability should be part of national OER models, or the national models should be interoperable with each other? Both good points, just making sure we understand!

09:34 14 Apr

Nelson Piedra

Hi Nicole, I think that all OER models should be interoperable with each other (repositories, digital resources, educational data, etc.)

09:44 14 Apr

Nicole Allen

Agree 100%. Thanks!

10:40 14 Apr

Alek Tarkowski

I agree too, but reading this now I think that the term “national OER model” might be confusing. maybe let’s just stick with stratgies, or “strategies and implementations”? also, while tools can be interoperable, strategies largely cannot, as they are context-dependent, and context is formed by different educational systems.

14:46 4 May

Nicole Allen

Agree, let’s simplify. I’ve generalized to “models and strategies” (removed “national”) and “other contexts” (removed “countries”)

14:16 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:16 12 May

Jan Neumann
04:04 10 May
Re-open
Selected text:

effective

The tools should address the complete OER life cycle: “Infrastructure development: Build key tools, that enable more effective the development, management, discovery and reuse.” (development & reuse = editors, management=repositories, discovery=search engines)
Reply

Nicole Allen

Great suggestion Jan, I’ve made this change both here and in Opportunities below.

14:16 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:16 12 May

l.a.perryman1
16:26 23 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

modern pedagogy

This is potentially culturally exclusive as the term ‘modern pedagogy’ could suggest we’re prioritising developed world teaching and learning methods (even if we’re not). Maybe replace this with ‘adaptive pedagogies that best meet diverse learners’ needs’.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks for the feedback. We can make this change, but I wonder if it might be better to add a new bullet point addressing less developed environments? How would you articulate the top strategic priority outside of the developed world?

19:29 24 Apr

Alek Tarkowski

I think that even in the developed world “modern” might be confusing / unclear. would “progressive” be better? what’s the best adjective that educators use to describe good pedagogy?

14:44 4 May

Jan Neumann

What about “21st century learning”?

03:28 8 May

Penny Bentley

…..enabling evolving pedagogies?

Alex pedagogy is contextual to student age, subject area etc. How about effective pedagogy to improve student learning?

17:33 11 May (edited 17:39 11 May)

Nicole Allen

Effective ftw. Made this change.

14:15 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:15 12 May

Terry McAndrew
10:00 28 Apr
Add: “Identify gaps by discipline in context.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Great suggestion. Incorporated this into the previous sentence.

14:15 12 May

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

14:15 12 May

Jan Neumann
03:59 10 May
Re-open
Selected text:

Develop

add: “and implement”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Made this change. Great suggestion Jan – very important!!

14:15 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:15 12 May

Pete Forsyth
19:24 27 Mar
Re-open
Selected text:

Create

“creating communities” doesn’t seem right, where communities already exist. Perhaps “empower”, “strengthen,” “nourish”, or “foster”?
Reply

Nicole Allen

Good catch. We’ll change this word to something more inclusive.

20:37 27 Mar (edited 20:37 27 Mar)

Alek Tarkowski

we need both. foster existing one, create (or maybe rather grow?) new ones.

14:45 4 May

Nicole Allen

Great. Change made.

14:15 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:15 12 May

John Hilton
13:24 27 Mar
Add: “Create and enable effective research studies in conjunction with OER development and use.”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Thanks John! I agree with adding this, since research isn’t captured by any of the other bullet points.

17:41 27 Mar

Nicole Allen

Suggestion accepted

14:15 12 May

Terry McAndrew
10:03 28 Apr
Add: “Promote tools and strategies that naturally meet Open requirements for discipline specialists (who a…”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Great point, just a bit too specific for this section. Tools are captured in the point above, and also ease of use (which I think is the key underlying point) is captured below in Opportunities. Thanks for contributing!

14:15 12 May

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

14:15 12 May

Alek Tarkowski
14:46 4 May
Re-open
Selected text:

Promote tools and strategies that naturally meet Open requirements for discipline specialists (who are less familiar with the technologies that underlie them) to be able to participate more easily.

this might be too specific.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Agree. Removed.

14:14 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:14 12 May

Robert Schuwer
05:10 15 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

discoverability of OER

More precise: discoverability of the right OER: the OER found should fit into the specific context of the user.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Added word “effective”

14:14 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

14:14 12 May

David Kernohan
06:24 14 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

organizations

But it is about individuals! Not just organisational models. Recognise little OER as well as big OER.
Reply

Nicole Allen

Great point, thanks. We’ll make this change.

08:18 14 Apr

Alek Tarkowski

+1. I would even stress that OER is foremost about people – starting with individual champions who usually push through policies, and ending on individual educators, on whom we depend for content use but also (re)creation.
by the way, is little / big OER a recognised distinction?

14:41 4 May

Alek Tarkowski

Marked as resolved

15:24 4 May

Nicole Allen

Re-opened

13:29 12 May

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

13:29 12 May

Cable Green
18:10 1 May
Add: “: A DRA”
Reply

Cable Green

Suggestion rejected

18:11 1 May

Cable Green
18:09 1 May
Add header
Reply

Cable Green

Suggestion accepted

18:09 1 May

Terry McAndrew
10:02 28 Apr
Made a suggestion
Reply

Nicole Allen
17:19 29 Mar
Re-open
Selected text:

for a document that looks inward

Based on Pete’s feedback above, potentially add a note that we aren’t aware of any document that currently does this (for the OER movement specifically).
Reply

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

15:49 22 Apr

Alek Tarkowski
17:18 2 Apr
Re-open
Selected text:

Foundations for OER Strategy Development

what’s the tinyurl?
Reply

18:24 2 Apr

Nicole Allen

Marked as resolved

11:50 14 Apr

Pete Forsyth
19:22 27 Mar
Delete paragraph
Reply

Pete Forsyth

Suggestion rejected

19:23 27 Mar

Pete Forsyth
19:22 27 Mar
Made a suggestion
Reply

Anonymous
15:27 26 Mar
Add: “333”
Reply

Nicole Allen

Suggestion rejected

18:35 26 Mar

Eryk Salvaggio
17:11 26 Mar
Delete: “333”
Reply
To enable screen reader support, press shortcut Ctrl+Alt+Z. To learn about keyboard shortcuts, press shortcut Ctrl+slash.

Nicole Allen
16:03 18 Jun
Note to drafters: Revisit framing of Demand and Capacity descriptions in response to Stephen’s comments. OER is the means to an end, not the end in itself.
Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
13:28 20 Jun
I agree that awareness of OER (in terms of knowing that they exist, where to find them and how to use them) and the motivation to use them will guarantee the demand from learners and teachers. Regarding capacity, maybe “Community and systemic support that will sustain open learning” could be a better wording in alignment with Stephen’s idea of OER being the means to an end.
Show more
Nicole Allen
16:52 13 Jul
Discussed with Cable, and we realize these are classic economic terms which may not be as applicable outside the US as a framework for looking at strategy. Are there other terms or other ways to frame this that make sense more broadly?

Cable Green
13:14 18 Jul
Add: “Ensuring educators have the legal rights to retain, reuse, revise, remix and redistribute educationa…”

Cable Green
13:17 18 Jul
new suggested text (per Stephens comment to be more clear) – replacing: “Empowering educators to have more agency in the classroom.”

lshochberg
11:17 24 Jun
None of these measure any of the 5Rs – these are essentially about “free”. If the 5Rs are important, shouldn’t some measure of that actually happening be included in “success”? Perhaps something specifically about use of OER in enhancement tools provided by vendors, as that has been assumed to be one of the values of open content and unlimited reuse (and may turn out to be a more substantial means of the 5Rs than by end users.)
Show more
Cable Green
19:50 17 Jul
Good point, Scott. +david.wiley@gmail.com … David – do you want to draft a few bullets?

Nicole Allen
16:23 13 Jul
Discussed w/Cable and we recommend just taking this out — everything important we say elsewhere, and discussing standards can be a sore point. Any objections? +mlforward@openedconsortium.org +delia.browne@gmail.com +atarkowski@centrumcyfrowe.pl
Stephen Downes
19:16 13 Jul
Show all 4 replies
Alek Tarkowski
16:57 20 Jul
-1. if standards are bad, why is OA a (I hope we all agree) success? why are we happy there is a single set of commonly used free licenses? I’m happy to develop this argument further. I acknowledge that this is controversial, but please let’s not simply delete it.
Nicole Allen
19:21 20 Jul
Happy to work with you to develop further. I agree it’s an important point, it seems to be the word “standards” that is causing issues. The core substance (minus the word standards) is addressed elsewhere. Could we perhaps simplify to talk in terms of “communicating pathways to OER”?

Stephen Downes
15:10 18 Jun
The value of everybody saying the same thing, meaning the same thing, doing the same thing, etc. has always been greatly exaggerated. We should learn from the web, which is based in the first instance on protocols, which are voluntary engagements. We need to be able to create mechanisms for interoperability that are flexible and variable, and can grow and adapt. Standards are the opposite of this.
Show more
Nicole Allen
15:44 18 Jun
Do other commenters have thoughts on this? Standards aren’t the only way to do things obvi (and won’t apply in every situation), but do you consider the lack of standards a challenge? Would it help improve communications?
Show all 4 replies
Cable Green
19:56 17 Jul
See above – the recommendation is to simply remove this section on “standards.”
Alek Tarkowski
17:01 20 Jul
Standards can be voluntary – a lot of the protocls Stephen mentions are in fact standards. this might be a linguistic / framing issue… and we’re not really writing about standards but “standard solutions”; and there does not need to be one. just to give a practical example: I’ve been talking over the last months with people from Central Asia, interested in promoting OER in their countries. if we were talking about OA, I would tell them to set up a repository. if this was open data, I’d tell them to open all public data sets, be able to name the key ones, and recommend a repository as well. with OER, there’s no blueprint to recommend.
Show more

Nicole Allen
15:40 13 Jul
I will come back and edit this.

David Wiley
02:57 19 Jun
Add: “All or Nothing Thinking. Many of the faculty and teachers who do evaluate OER look for a single reso…”
Scott Robison
09:12 19 Jun
Agreed. A mentality of replacing a product (publisher content) with a process (OER).
Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
13:50 20 Jun
I can see this as the need to help teachers build new habits. Using one single resource is practical. Searching for different resources is time-consuming. The impact of the second practice is what needs to be emphasized: how mixing and matching resources benefits the learners by customizing their experience, helping them develop a broader and more dynamic approach to learning, fostering diversity, etc. We need to make digging for OER easier and less time consuming to help teachers develop and enjoy the habit of using multiple resources to help learners learn. In some way, this also has to do with the shift from content- to competency-oriented learning, and the idea that there are many possible ways to reach a learning goal.
Show more

Steven Bell
09:04 23 Jun
Is another way to think of “all or nothing” a heading such as “Move Beyond Textbook Model” – and make a case that we need to get beyond thinking that learning content can only come packaged between to covers and be called a textbook. Make the case that learning material can be whatever content faculty choose to present that advances student learning. Is part of the problem that much OER follows the textbook model so that it is familiar to faculty and students. Is the movement held back by the term “textbook” and if so should it recommend moving beyond textbooks?
Show more

Ryan Merkley
21:55 19 Jun
This is a critical point for me. Put another way, this says “users must agree to adopt an entirely different method of finding and using teaching resources in order to participate in OER”. That’s a very tough sell, especially the first time. Those who transformed markets in this way had to have a very good benefit (usually one the current option could not attain) at the end of the value chain to convince people to adopt entirely new approaches. So either we get way better at showing the benefits, or we have to meet educators closer to where they live.
Show more
Irwin DeVries
01:08 20 Jun
Agree – and also contradicts the “turn-key” idea earlier.
Amy Hofer
18:27 7 Jul
The way that this is worded places the responsibility for the problem on faculty, which doesn’t seem fair to the adjunct and contingent work force. Does the OER movement propose to tackle that problem? Perhaps there is a way of showing that this is yet one more way in which the current labor model is not working for students.
Brian Mulligan
06:39 8 Jul
I’m not sure that this is realistic. Faculty won’t adopt OER unless it makes their lives easier. It is up to the OER movement to prioritise the structuring of OER into courses (and full programmes) so that it is more immediately useful to faculty and learners.

Amy Hofer
18:28 7 Jul
I don’t see this as an important challenge. As pointed out above, many faculty have been teaching without a traditional textbook since before the current jargon was in use. I find that people understand the concept of lowering textbook costs for students.

David Wiley
03:04 19 Jun
While I clearly understand the sentiment expressed here, this idea is dangerous because it encourages faculty to ignore revise, remix, and other 5R activities. If we really wanted to advocate for turnkey solutions, the ND licenses would be acceptable.
Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
15:26 20 Jun
I agree that this idea is dangerous for the OER movement. The value of OER is the opportunity for collaboration, engagement, customization and reach that it allows. The “ready to use” attribute is true in some way, but it should not be the end goal. Stephen reminds us that OERs are means to an end (a high end). There can be OER that teachers may use “as it is”, but that does not mean it is offered as “all inclusive”. The room for revising, remixing and redistributing is there to enrich the network.
Show more
Nicole Allen
15:45 13 Jul
Someone added this response in the text (not sure who): Why? Leave it to faculty choice. Those that remix do not need encouragement and those that want the full package are ok. There is nothing intrinsically better about remixing.
Cable Green
20:21 17 Jul
Is this re-framing better? “Build OER that educators want to adopt” – see new proposed paragraph.

Scott Robison
09:24 19 Jun
This implies the focus is on replacing one product for another product. OERs are not products. They are processes. I’m all for convenience in adopting and adapting but this isn’t about finding or creating a product that “looks” like publisher content.
rderosa
11:33 19 Jun
I agree. I think we will end up devaluing our “product” if we “productize” it. OER is most valuable when it is seen as a pedagogical tool rather than a stable artifact, so we shouldn’t “undersell” what OER is in order to make the quick sale.
Show all 9 replies
Cable Green
20:23 17 Jul
Is this re-framing better? “Build OER that educators want to adopt” – see new proposed paragraph. I tried to include (and show respect for) both educators who want (a) ready-to-go without much revision OER and (b) a buffet of OER from which to revise / remix.
rderosa
11:18 20 Jul
I appreciate everyone’s willingness to work on this! I totally get the turnkey approach both in using OER and in “selling” OER to certain faculty. In general, I like to push against the idea that there is such a thing, though, since I think the double value of “openness” is only present when the materials are fully integrated into a custom pedagogy. I think by talking about OER as replacement textbooks, our rhetoric undervalues their potential at a long-range cost to our movement. Everyone who uses a traditional textbook modifies it in actual use; OER acknowledges the reality of how we teach, and we should highlight that from the outset. All that being said, you guys are my heroes and totally sold me on this whole movement, so I don’t want to derail your well-informed approaches about how this should go. Thank you for letting the squeaky wheels squeak! I think this doc is wonderful!
Show more

David Wiley
03:07 19 Jun
If faculty have to find a single resource they can adopt “as is” (turnkey) in order to participate in OER, they will continue to be very slow in coming. We need to do better helping them overcome this “all or nothing” attitude.
Ryan Merkley
21:48 19 Jun
True, but if adopting OER means every educator has to built it themselves from pieces, we’ll reduce the addressable market considerably. So there has to be more than one approach, I’d suggest.
Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
15:43 20 Jun
I agree that we need to do better at helping them overcome the “all or nothing” attitude. I think that metadata and detailed descriptions in repositories can help; also, the comments from other teachers on how they used the resource and even their own redistribution of revised material. It also has to do with helping teachers empower learners to be responsible for their own learning: having a broader array of resources to learn from and cater their needs allows this.
Show more
Cable Green
20:30 17 Jul
Is this re-framing better? “Build OER that educators want to adopt” – see new proposed paragraph.
Mónica Sulecio de Álvarez
08:46 21 Jul
Yes, “OER that educators want to adopt” sets a broader purpose, and I agree that it is important to acknowledge both interests (ready-to-use and freedom to adapt). The OER movement is inclusive, and as in all communities of practice, there will be those participating in the periphery, using OER “as they are” and providing valuable feedback for updated versions, perhaps from original authors or others interested in editing; little by little, they can move to the center, engaging in revising and remixing. I would only suggest to remove/reword the phrase “without extra work”. When I read it, the image of “laziness” came to my mind…
Show more

Cable Green
20:17 17 Jul
Add: “Build OER that educators want to adopt: Some educators want a “turnkey” education resources solution…”
Nicole Allen
08:28 23 Jul
This looks great Cable, nice work!!

Cable Green
20:18 17 Jul
suggested replacement for: “Focus on Productization” section. Thoughts?
Nicole Allen
08:30 23 Jul
Looks great to me. Let’s leave these comments up to the end of the week, then resolve.

Nicole Allen
17:12 13 Jul
Drafters: Let’s revisit this in the context of whether to use supply/demand as a framework. Maybe demand is the wrong word here.

David Wiley
03:08 19 Jun
A large addressable market doesn’t imply demand. “Building supply to meet demand” would mean something like finding 50 schools that want to adopt Nursing OER in place of textbooks, and then building those resources with them. “Demand” implies someone who wants OER.
Nicole Allen
21:13 19 Jun
Great point +david.wiley@gmail.com. Do you have recommendations on how we can reframe? (We can come up with something, but your ideas are usually better!)
Brian Mulligan
06:49 8 Jul
How about looking beyond institutions and faculty to learners who need training for jobs – build programmes based on OER that make people employable. Added accreditation would enhance attractiveness and make the impact more visible.

Cable Green
20:38 17 Jul
Add: “Develop Open Learning Analytics Platforms: As OER goes mainstream, publishers will cede educational …”

Cable Green
20:40 17 Jul
Added this new section. Thoughts? +nbier@cmu.edu +cthille05@yahoo.com

Stephen Downes
19:19 13 Jul
There’s still significant disagreement on this. c.f. Steven Harnad on the open access lists. To me this is a deal-breaker — if you can’t include the >50% of people who want to use a NC license, then this is a divisive document, and not a unifying one.
Cable Green
19:45 17 Jul

Hi Stephen: I would argue there is significant consensus re: requiring that publicly funded educational resources be openly licensed – and to use CC BY (or similar) wherever possible: the 51 member organizations of the Open Policy Network operate under this principle: https://openpolicynetwork.org/about/#members

Guiding principles: https://openpolicynetwork.org/about/#principles

Show more
Stephen Downes
22:18 17 Jul

You guys are like the European Commission, a bunch of unelected bodies who appoint themselves and then declare a “consensus” where there obviously isn’t one. Most of the world prefers not to have their work turned into fodder for clickbait mills. You should be honest and say that AS REPRESENTATIVE OF PUBLISHERS and the commercial content industry, you have agreed that the world’s creative output should be free for you to monetize.

(I imagine thus comment will be ‘resolved’ out of existence by Nicole Allen the way most of my previous comments and suggestions have been).

Show more
Cable Green
13:37 18 Jul
Thanks Stephen for your lively comments. Suggesting members of the open policy network are “reps of the publishers” gave me a good laugh 😉 … (1) I softened the text to (e.g., CC BY). (2) The main argument for CC BY on open licensing policies is to maximize the degrees of freedom / flexibility for the public. In other words, fewer license restrictions / conditions = max flexibility for anyone to do what they want to do with the OER. See the remix possibilities at: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Wiki/cc_license_compatibility … In other words, CC BY licensed OER can be remixed with more CC licensed content than can other CC licensed OER with more restrictions / conditions. (3) Happy to discuss / debate this with you in another forum anytime … the gdocs comments don’t work well for long written responses. Good weekend.
Show more

Cable Green
13:26 18 Jul
Replace: “ideally” with “e.g.,”

Cable Green
13:26 18 Jul
Delete: “by default”

Cable Green
13:20 18 Jul
Add: “Publicly funded educational resources should be openly licensed by default.”

Nicole Allen
17:16 19 Jun
Please post general feedback the drafters should follow up on here in this comment.
Nicole Allen
17:17 19 Jun
Scott R asked us to refine the use of “Reuse” vs. “Remix” – make sure we’re using consistently and not confusing 5Rs.
Matt McGregor
20:11 21 Jun

Some general feedback: From reading the document and the comments, my feeling is that if we want to expand the pool of OER advocates – and simultaneously make those advocates more effective – then we need more documentation / toolkit resources that spell out exactly how the strategies in this document might be implemented. These would include international best practice and models to adapt for local conditions. I think this document gives a great framework for what these resources would need to cover.

I know it’s an obvious point, but the need for toolkit resources is especially worth underlining with respect to OERs, where the scale of what we are trying to achieve, coupled with the diversity of the various education systems we are working within, means that most of the work of implementation is going to be quite localised – much more so than OA, IMO.

If the movement grows as we want it to, the OER movement is going to be relying on local, institutional champions who find themselves advocating for OER in addition to their day-jobs. My feeling is that the role of the various international leaders (and leading organisations) in OER is to empower and support these local advocates, as much as they possibly can – even if this comes at the expense of a more cohesive international OER project (which it doesn’t necessarily need to, of course).

Show more
sunyeen
22:16 23 Jun
Speaking as a librarian at a community college, these comments very much reflect my experience as a supporter of OER. Our faculty get galvanized about the need to help our students, but it sometimes astonishes our teaching faculty how much work it takes to convert to OER. Over the years many faculty have helped students with fair use no-cost sharing of materials, so sometimes the extra work is not attractive. I’m all for best practices and toolkits and I greatly appreciate all the shared “how-to” resources out there.
Show more

 

7:21 PM Sep 20

Cable Green

Discuss whether we want to turn this into a commitment opportunity and/or organize more events around it. (from Alek T)

7:21 PM Sep 20

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

Draft 1.2 Updated: 20 September, 2015

Foundations for OER Strategy Development

Drafting committee members: Nicole Allen, Delia Browne, Mary Lou Forward, Cable Green and Alek Tarkowski

Purpose of Document

 

For more than a decade the movement for Open Educational Resources (OER) has evolved from a collection of small, localized efforts to a broad international network of institutions, organizations, governments, practitioners, advocates, and funders. While significant progress has been made on both expanding the availability of OER content and expanding its use, OER has not reached its full potential of entering mainstream education on a global scale.

 

The goals and broader vision for OER are outlined in foundational documents including the Cape Town and Paris OER Declarations. These documents are critical for communicating the case for OER to the outside world and providing a unifying voice for the movement. But while the goals for OER are clear and broadly agreed upon by the movement, the means and strategies for achieving them are not. To actualize the full vision of OER, a need has emerged for a document that looks inward and addresses strategic questions about how we, as the global OER movement, can reach our collective goals.

 

The purpose of this document is to provide a concise analysis of where the global OER movement currently stands: what the common threads are, where the greatest opportunities and challenges lie, and how we can more effectively work together as a community. The first draft was born from a meeting of 26 OER leaders in February 2015. We then shared this document on global and local OER lists and had in-person discussions with members of the international OER community at the 2015 Hewlett OER grantees meeting, OER15, and Open Ed Global 2015. Comments from all three meetings were integrated into this draft document.

 

Our hope is that this document will serve as a starting point for conversations about strategies for mainstreaming OER and extending its reach and impact globally. We also hope that this document, and the strategies within, will evolve as the conversation evolves to provide useful insight for both global coordination and local action.

 

State of the Movement

 

The OER movement consists of diverse individuals and organizations spanning educational institutions, IGOs, NGOs, governments – and activities at all levels, from teaching infants to seniors; and ranges across a diversity of countries around the globe, with varied educational systems and social, economic and cultural contexts. The diversity of our perspectives, resources, and capacities is one of our movement’s great strengths, but it can also make strategy conversations challenging, as these discussions must start with a shared sense of what the strategy hopes to achieve. While the movement generally can agree upon the goals and vision outlined in the Cape Town and Paris Declarations, the specific missions and priorities of community members vary widely.

 

The common thread that seems to unite the movement is the need to expand the adoption of OER. While there are different visions for the specific practices, impacts, and audiences to be served and supported by expanding OER, we can all generally agree on what OER is, and that widespread use of OER is a positive and meaningful change in education. Given this common understanding, strategies can grow out of identifying the common challenges and opportunities around OER, and developing a shared sense of priority about what kind of actions will help advance the proliferation of OER development and use.

 

We Have Similar Perspectives On…

 

 

  • Definition of OER: The movement broadly agrees on the definition of OER as put forth by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation or UNESCO, noting that there may be some differences around which specific open licenses qualify as OER (such as those restricting commercial use). However, the general understanding that OER must be both free (no cost) for anyone to access and to legally modify (according to the 5R activities: retain, reuse, revise, remix, redistribute) is widely accepted.
  • Overall Vision: The Cape Town and Paris Declarations each outline aspirational visions and goals for actualizing the potential of OER. While community members may prioritize some elements over others, in general the movement agrees that these documents form the basis for what we hope to accomplish.
  • Necessity of OER Adoption: While members of the community hold different goals for OER use, and different perspectives on the aspects of OER that are most important, we are united in asserting that OER adoption is necessary to actualize its potential. We understand adoption as a two-step process: people adopting OER instead of non-open resources, and people taking advantage of the rights and permissions granted by OER, to use and