I chose to read the OER Evidence Report 2013-14 (de los Arcos et al, 2014) for this activity.
This report identifies three main stakeholder groups –
educators, learners in formal (paid for) education and those undertaking
informal, free courses – and highlights 3 key issues to me.
1.
Study support
in informal and formal learning is different.
According to the report there is a
statistically significant difference in how these two groups of learners secure
study support. Informal
learners don’t, it seems, expect tutor support as much as their formal
counterparts (8 out of 10 do not consider the lack of a tutor a
barrier to learning). Instead they are more likely to
use blogs and discussion forums and although this could be through necessity rather
than design, it demonstrates the resourcefulness and resilience of informal
learners. Salmon et al (2015) similarly argue
that learners on MOOCs use technologies such as social media to suit their needs.
The successful use of technology as a means of supporting study may therefore
depend on the ability of learners to exercise their autonomy.
2.
The meaning of quality in OERs is
broad and multidimensional
Despite difficulties in measuring
the success of OERs in terms of traditional performance parameters, there is
stakeholder agreement that they improve student satisfaction. Experience is an important aspect of quality
for learners, as demonstrated by the report findings that half of all learners
select OERs based on their ease of download.
For educators, quality is more
closely related to reputation and reliability of content. They consider open
licensing and reputable sources to be more important than learners, which may
be a result of greater awareness of the risks to their selves and organisation. Nevertheless, de los Arcos et al (2014) argue
that OERs have the potential to improve the quality of teaching practice by promoting
the practitioner's critical reflection and raising self-awareness. This finding is consistent across educational
contexts and OER formats, which the authors suggest is due to exposure to
different practices and opportunities to collaborate. The benefits of this phenomenon are under-recognised
by educational organisations and deserve further investigation.
3.
Using OERs to save costs and generate income is
complex
The cost saving benefits of OERs
for students may also be realised institutionally through the use of open
textbooks at scale. de los Arcos et al
(2014) also suggest that open courses may become recruitment devices in competitive educational markets, arguing that 1/3rd
of learners have used OERs in a “try before you buy” model. In the report, the Open University is quoted
as having a 10% conversion rate of open to paying students (p.17).
The situation is, however, more
nuanced that this suggests. The OER
report (de los Arcos et al, 2014) predicts that most informal learners will
continue to study in this format. If (as
in the cited case of Saylor) the OER is of sufficiently high quality, paying
for a similar course confers learners no net benefit.
Equally, a perception of poor quality in an open course is unlikely to instill confidence in its fee-attracting counterpart.
This fine balance may relate as
much to individual motivations and societal expectations as to the OER itself
and should be explored further before open courses can be promoted as a viable business
opportunities.
References
de los
Arcos, B., Farrow, R., Perryman, L.-A., Pitt, R. and Weller, M. (2014), OER
Evidence Report 2013–2014, OER Research Hub [online]. Available from https://oerresearchhub.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/oerrh-evidence-report-2014.pdf (accessed 3 April 2016).
Salmon, G., Ross, B., Pechenkina, E. and Chase, A.-M. (2015) ‘The
space for social media in structured online learning’, Research in Learning
Technology; Vol 23 (2015), [online] Available from:
http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/view/28507
(accessed 3 April 2016).
