Dear Gerd,
Thank you for your very measured and considered response. I think you have clarified several of the points that I personally had concerns about, particularly with regard to the specific type of institution and usage scenarios you were referring to. As David has already clarified, the textbook issue does not resonate quite the same way in the UK as it does on the other side of the pond.
As I said in my post, you have certainly raised a lot of valid questions but I do rather feel that there is some interesting and relevant work going on that might start to address some of the very pertinent issues you have raised. Personally I am still not convinced that a global enterprise level system is the answer to encouraging the creation and adoption of open educational resources, particularly not in the UK F/HE sector. We advocated a very different approach in the UKOER programmes, I believe with some success. Having said that, I am all in favour of letting a thousand flowers bloom, we are certainly in agreement there!
Thanks again for sparking a very lively debate!
Cheers
Lorna
________________________________________
From: Open Educational Resources [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gerd Kortemeyer [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 28 February 2013 21:46
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Educause paper on OER
Hi,
I think people are overlooking a word in the title: "traditional" - nowhere does the paper say that OERs have "failed - period." That statement would make no sense, since you have to say "failed at what?"
What the article tries to discuss is "why have OERs failed to have significant impact in TRADITIONAL higher education," i.e., campus-based for-credit universities like the one I work at, Michigan State University? Why are the students still forced to buy textbooks for $180 if all of the content is indeed freely available? Why are faculty now buying into restrictive, overpriced e-texts? Why are even the all-new MOOCs full of non-open content? …?
The article tries to explore why traditional faculty at traditional universities might not take advantage of OERs. If it comes across like a sales pitch, I am sorry. At least so far, we have nothing for sale. LON-CAPA is open-source and free.
I have been in charge of this free open-source learning content management system for 13 years. We have lived from grant funding, funding from Michigan State University, funding from other universities, good will, some service contract … in total, we are exhausted from 20 years of trying to live like hippies, and we have learned a lot of lessons the hard way along the way.
I wish I could earn that free drink from David Kernohan, since I sincerely wish I could prove myself false with an argument that does not "make me sound like a smelly hippie" (his words). I would also like a non-hippie argument to address those hurdles I am outlining.
I am a little offended by suddenly being associated with the "ugly establishment," while really I am trying to find a *realistic* and sustainable way to bring OERs into traditional higher education. I have no intentions of quitting my day job as an educator, which is the job I love. Building CourseWeaver and the required organizational infrastructure around it takes an estimated six million dollars. We are still planning on an option to use this system for free (Option A in http://www.courseweaver.org/concept/pricing/ - that one is free for free content).
Do OERs have to live inside of a system like CourseWeaver? Of course not! This is not meant to be exclusive! Let there be OERs (including the same OERs) inside and outside of such a system. Let a thousand flowers bloom! All I am arguing is that if you want OERs to *also* penetrate traditional higher education, you have to overcome the hurdles I am outlining.
BTW, there is no censorship in the comments for EDUCAUSE, this is not one big conspiracy. I sincerely hope a productive and reasoned discussion would ensue around the article.
Cheers,
- Gerd.
On Feb 28, 2013, at 2:25 PM, Lorna Campbell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Against my better judgement, I've taken up David's challenge and written a response to *that* Educause post. It was the offer of drink wot did it...
>
> http://blogs.cetis.ac.uk/lmc/2013/02/28/taking-up-the-challenge/
>
> Cheers
> Lorna
>
> David Kernohan wrote:
>
> "Ten years later: why open educational resources have not noticeably
> affected higher education and why we should care"
>
> http://t.co/6Vb3M4lQbI
>
> I don't want to have a go at this paper specifically(*), but this is an
> egregious example of a tendency that suggests that OER would be a far
> better idea if it was just under more control, better organised and more
> structured. I hear this kind of argument a reasonable amount and I'd love
> to have a response to it that doesn't make me sound like a smelly hippy.
>
> With the understanding that the wider ukoer community most likely gets why
> solutions like this are unviable, I offered a prize for the most
> interesting response (as a blog post) via twitter - and I want to offer if
> here too.
>
> One large drink (of the author's choice) for the best (by my personal
> judgement... cause, hey, I'm buying the drink) blogged response to the
> paper from a UKOER community member.
>
> Deadline would be the start of CETIS13 (12th March)
>
> David
>
> * I'll let you do that....
|