Pasqua Rosée opened the first coffee house in London in 1652, prompting a revolution in London society. “British culture was intensely hierarchical and structured. The idea that you could go and sit next to someone as an equal was radical,” says Markman Ellis, author of The Coffee House: A Cultural History.
for - trivia / history - first coffee house in London - opened in 1652 by - Pasqua Rosee - revolution in London society - broke through hierarchy of British society
At the critical bleeding edge of OER, citing David Wiley is no longer fashionable.
To the people of 1833 it was new to have a photography museum today we have selfie museums what was new in 1833 is not new to us in 2021
David Wiley
Background on #OpenEd confs.
There is a growing need to establish literacies around open education, copyright, social media and networked learning as a foundational skill.
Among both students AND instructors. Instructors teach what they know, and if they do not feel comfortable themselves working in these environments b/c they lack digital skills, then they will not encourage students to work openly.
For students to work in the open, everything they use has to be original content, openly licensed, or in the public domain
have to disagree here. Students can link, quote, summarize, paraphrase, and thus build or contribute to open resources from closed information
Between publishers' higher costs of textbooks and students' struggle with large amounts of reading materials, getting students to both access and engage more deeply with texts is a challenge.
Two challenges that #OER and #annotation together can provide infrastructure to help solve: the high cost of learning materials and engaging teachers and learners in social reading, discussion and analysis.
Issues to solve: both OER and annotation don't require digital reading, but are both made more powerful through it. Yet technology access and reading preferences don't always support to digital reading.
Solution: Explore online and offline, digital and print experiments in OER and annotation/social reading.
most of all, re-establishes education as a force for equity and social mobility — and I think open licensing is a crucial piece of that equation.I’m not content, though, with open licensing being the extent of our vision, and I hope many others feel the same way.
Amen: open licensing as key infrastructure in improving public education rather than an end in itself!
Administrators who are charged with the development of open education policy may not fully understand the opportunities inherent in OER and OEP, partic-ularly for learners.
The other key area of alignment: with learners.
Open Education: Policies
Join other folks annotating the full PDFs of @EDUCAUSELI's other two related posts about content and practices in open education:
They clearly align the open education policy with the university’s mission statement and strategic goals.
Institutional alignment is absolutely critical so the policies can be shaped for the institution and so leadership can provide aligned support.
See also 7 Things You Should Know About Open Education: Content and 7 Things You Should Know About Open Education: Practices.
Open Education: Practices
Join other folks annotating the full PDFs of @EDUCAUSELI's other two related posts about content and policies in open education:
While I think this post does a good job of summarizing OEP, I'm disheartened to see the piece shaped so clearly from the perspective that OER is the necessary heart or foundation of OEP. From my POV, OER and open-licensing is a key infrastructural component, but is neither necessary nor sufficient in the larger and more important project to "reconceptualize and improve pedagogy and advance authentic, participatory, engaged learning" that this work rightly champions. Why must OEP always rest so heavily on OER? It's as if we have mistaken tactics for goals.
Open Education: Content
Join other folks annotating the full PDFs of @EDUCAUSELI's other two related posts about practices and policies in open education:
7 Things You Should Know About Open Education: Policies
Join other folks annotating the full PDFs of @EDUCAUSELI's three related posts about content, practices and policies in open education:
7 Things You Should Know About Open Education: Content
Join other folks annotating the full PDFs of @EDUCAUSELI's three related posts about content, practices and policies in open education:
7 Things You Should Know About Open Education: Practices
Join other folks annotating the full PDFs of @EDUCAUSELI's three related posts about content, practices and policies in open education:
Open Education
I'd raise Open Education up from #10, but then again, I'm biased. I'd put it at maybe #7 and push the others down.
How information is accessed, created, and shared is revealing about the future of learning
This is talking about information literacy in a broad sense.
what does it mean to be human in a digital age
Been thinking about this from the infolit angle for a few years. Info is easy to find and access, and a little less easy to filter and evaluate. What matters more is creativity - what we can do with info, how we can connect it, what we can make out of it - all of which is impeded by copyright and enabled by openness.
how we make decisions with that data needs to be as transparent as the content
another black box that needs to be opened
And so, that part I think was the second marking point for me was this idea of connectedness, and that by being connected-- being transparent and connected-- you produced this huge array of potential knowledge futures in these areas.
Transparency is an important part of openness that I don't see discussed much in the OER community these days. If we replace an expensive text with free OER there is a great financial benefit for students, but the process of developing and selecting the OER remains something of a black box to the students. But if the students are involved in that development and selection, that process becomes transparent. Students can learn the process as well as the content, and build powerful learning skills, and an increased level of educational independence.
Introduction to Open
by @thatpsychprof and @biswasdiener
This taxonomy serves as a useful guide to OER advocates seeking to diversify or tailor their outreach strategy.
I would also stress that this taxonomy my describe where a person is at a given time, but I have also seen from experience that people move across (up?) this taxonomy, maybe starting out as a consumer and evolving into greater engagement. Not everyone starts (or ends) at the same place.
benefits students
AND faculty!!!
the goal posts must be placed further than simply cheaper textbooks.
For me, the goals should always be improved teaching and learning. Everything else is a means to these ends.
Within this broader vision, significant cost savings to students are the least significant benefit of OER.
Maybe least significant supporting the larger goals of improving teaching and learning, but perhaps most significant as a motivator to initiate change that leads toward those goals.
This begs a broader question: If open educational practices are a game changer, why are OER advocates playing by the rules of the commercial textbook industry?
This is a wonderful question. In part, I think it is to make it as palatable as possible to bring on board new faculty. If you make it like it old, but slightly different (incremental change) it may be easier for some to come around and on board. The problem with this is then OER no longer become truly innovative - it is reactive to the rules of the textbook industry. And that industry is going away.
At the same time, this narrow focus on cost savings is immediately less relevant in countries where faculty are less reliant on expensive textbooks
A North American problem.
To support their employment and other objectives, people will create open learning resources. These resources are direct evidence of their own learning. Often these resources will be produced cooperatively.
And for K12 school assessment? Is this akin to portfolios? "Open Portfolios"? On a domain of one's own?
The purpose of the course isn’t to create a thread of instruction, but rather to help people interested in a topic discover and recommend resources to each other, creating a local and temporary network linking events, groups and communities, and videos and activities.
This would be interesting framed as a way for teachers to "do" professional development together.
Formal learning will be less and less focused on resources, which will be available to everyone, and much more focused on activities.
Link to this article, my introduction to Ds106 and the focus on "resources available to everyone" and also making those resources personal.
The traditional approach suggests that open online learning will consist of courses. While courses may well persist (there are occasions where a linear, focused, and deep study of a subject continues to be a good idea), they are occupying a smaller and smaller space in open online learning.
This is an important consideration in times of smaller budgets... how much do we need to rely on high-cost LMS tools for open education? I'm glad to see openEd innovating away from the Blackboards of the edtech world.
Learning, in both formal and informal settings, will be deepened, peer-based and collaborative, and extend to broader networks. The evolution of these new cultural norms
How do we push the evolution of these "social norms"? For starters, are there OER conferences for teachers? To spread the word, train, etc. OpenEd was this to an extent, but I'd imagine an everyday teacher feeling a little overwhelmed at least by many of the sessions.
The implication is that any depth must exist within the instructional materials accessed through the system.
The linear nature of Modules and learning tasks because of systematic constraints on organization communicates linearity in learning, even if it's not on purpose.
Canvas’ defaults encourage a simplistic, linear course with step-by-step navigation for all tasks.
This is true of any LMS, not just Canvas.
Open education is a means, a way of doing something; it isn’t something. That something is for individuals to arrive at however they want to get there–that’s the point of making it all “open.” I hope they share that awesomeness when they arrive at it, but they don’t have to.
Process not product.
The real problem with textbooks, though, is that focusing on them is focusing on content. When learning, and open education, should focus more on process (a conversation on this from a year ago across my blog, Jim Groom’s, Mike Caulfield’s and David Wiley’s).
“why textbooks?”
Is That What We Meant?