In our study of Mobile and Open Learning, we’ve spent a lot of time considering and discussing mobile learning, but less time on the topic of open learning. The recent Moveable Feast project on MOOCs, and a subsequent post about MOOCs, reminded me that in 2013, I helped facilitate a MOOC called “Online Instruction for Open Educators”.
The idea for this, and the drive behind it, came from a friend and former colleague, Jenni Hayman, and with the participation and help of a couple of “celebrity” open educators, Dave Cormier and Terry Anderson, we set out to introduce open education to online instructors (or, conversely, online education to open instructors) by way of a very constructivist cMOOC.
Our focus was on the discovery, exploration and discussion of various online educational technologies (or, technologies that could be repurposed to address educational needs) with an emphasis on both the use of open software when possible (e.g. Open Office rather than Microsoft Office) and on the development of open resources which could be shared, used and modified freely. To this end, the MOOC itself was free to join, and at one point we had triple-digit enrolment, however, as is apparently the norm for a free MOOC, attrition was high, and while there were no formal benchmarks of achievement it would be fair to say that only a few dozen could be said to have “graduated”.
The principles behind open education have as much merit today as then, and indeed many more vendors have adopted open or nearly-open licensing structures, many more instructors and schools have replaced copyrighted textbooks and readings with openly-available or public domain resources, and interest in access, equity, collaboration and the common good in education is as high as ever.
Yet, for some reason, open education hasn’t seemed to have its moment. Jenni’s greater vision was to see universities and colleges make real commitments to the development, use and delivery of open courses and resources, and she persistently peddled the many merits of open education to mostly tone-deaf administrators who, I must assume, found the idea a bit too radical for the times. To be fair, our higher-education funding and delivery model in North America forces universities to be part teacher, part accountant, but it still seems like an opportunity squandered.
What’s your take on open education? Do you use any open resources in your classroom? Would you? Do you worry that when something is free you get what you pay for?
Have you created and shared any open resources? Would you? Are you concerned that if you “give it away” you’ll lose out later?
To help you consider open education, I’ve attached a collaborative project from the end of the MOOC. Participants were asked to collaborate using Padlet to brainstorm their thoughts about open education, and after some curation and tweaking, these were assembled into a “Manifesto for Open Educators”, which I’ve attached here. And of course, in keeping with the principles we explored, the graphic is free to use, share and modify however you wish!
Hi Sean,
I teach French for grades 5 6 and 7, and I recently had them sign up for Duolingo for Schools. My students work on Duolingo when they’re done their assigned school work. It’s a bit gamified, so they gain XP; which gives them bit of incentive. Though their Duolingo use is not linear with the curriculum that I have planned they’re still being exposed to the language, which is the most important.
I think it’s also great for my students to know that platforms like Duolingo exist. They could use something like Coursera, Khan Academy, or any other MOOCs in the future.
Thanks for sharing.
Mark
Hi Sean,
I recognize one of the “celebrity” names, Terry Anderson. I actually used his book a few courses ago on developing a theory of online learning.
I support open education, but I know that not everyone is enthusiastic about learning and sharing knowledge. Further, how has this open educational resource been developed? IS it subsidized by public education, a university, etc? I think immediately of Wikipedia and Khan Academy as beacons of open education. Almost all of the resources I tend to use are free and open in the realm of public education. These resources are teacher subject pages which share content or formative assessments, etc that I can use in my own classroom. Others include the free version of Kahoot for in-class practice. Free resources are not panaceas, they should still be rigorous and comprehensive. Developing these resources takes effort and someone has to really enjoy teaching and learning to contribute a sizeable chunk of free-time to build the resource and sustain it. I have created OERs to satisfy the requirements for a MET course and for subject based resources in 7-12 STEM. In terms of giving it away, and losing later, teachers are constantly sharing resources in a free and open manner. Who knows how much has been pilfered and sold on Teachers Pay Teachers.
Another consideration is the motivation for developing an OER. Why develop free resource that may not be consumed. What makes people want to consume such resources, if not to satisfy the requirement of an academic program or occupation? As a public school teacher I think education is a right, however we will not likely see many MDs “graduate” from an online school of doctoring. So what is most one can do with an OER? What is it we are trying to achieve?
I have never heard of Terry Anderson, or perhaps overlooked journal articles that I may have used in previous courses. Now I am very curious and want to look this person up online. Thanks for pointing this individual out.
Hi Philip. Good point regarding the effective “subsidy” of some open resources created under the authority of a school or university, but I personally don’t think of that as a burden on the school so much as an opportunity for them to fulfil their tacit (or explicit) obligations to the common good and the promotion of learning. Of course the schools also enjoy the benefits of the resource, and one would hope they would ensure that it’s robust and useful and academically rigorous if it represents their brand. The question for schools, I think is not “should we be developing resources?” but rather “since we’re developing resources anyway, why shouldn’t we share them?”
Regarding incentives for educators creating and sharing OEMs, I’m sure it begins with the desire or need to create something of value to their teaching, first and foremost, and the sharing follows their realization that it’s not a zero-sum situation, and sharing what they’ve developed takes nothing away from their and their students’ use of it. An online resource is (or can be) a public good in the classical Economics sense — anyone can use it, and one person’s use of it takes nothing away from others — unless of course schools or educators prefer to keep it all for themselves.