Edited by Jonathan Turner, Thursday, 27 Mar 2014, 07:03
Establishing a framework for OER
This rather catch all term relates to a number of issues. These include legal and trust issues, design, diffusion and sustainability.
Perhaps the reason that commentators do not describe ‘a framework’ for OER is that there is no single solution, or perhaps that as an emerging paradigm it is premature to talk about frameworks. But without a framework it seems that more solid and fleshed out models for OER cannot be developed. And we should also bear in mind that a framework is just that, and not a finished structure, so there is still leeway for individual differences within this wider context.
I will divide the framework into three sections, legality/trust, design and diffusion/sustainability.
McGill et al (2013) describe legality and trust in terms of ‘licensing and trust’ and argue that without these ‘policies and practice’ could not be develop to support staff to be able to ultimately create and manage OER. Whilst legality is a large part of this, so is trust amongst staff and learners. There is resistance amongst staff according to MsGill et al (2013) who contend that staff see the current OER model as working against their own interests within the current HE paradigm, which as the authors point out is a tight knot community. Amongst learners, according to the OER research hub hypothesis G see trust as a major factor when selecting an OER.
Design refers to the way the learning takes place within the OER and indeed how that learning is accessed and shared amongst learners, designers and teachers within the stakeholder groups. Issues include, does the OER use features of social networking to harness social learning? Does it have sufficient course notes? (OER Research Hub hypothesis H). How does the creation of OERs affect the process of content creation and ultimately the institutional culture of those institutions engaged in producing materials? And indeed not only at institutional level but within the wider disciplinary community? McGill et al (2013).
Diffusion/sustainability is perhaps the widest issue. It begins at a fundamental level, who has access to OERs? What are the languages of OERs and how accessible are they to non-native speakers of English? How accessible are OERs to people from developing countries, can they can be used without a permanent internet connection? And how accessible are OER’s for disabled users? And for those who access OERs from the developed world English speaking world, so they have well-developed digital literacy skills, or in fact would we see OERs being accessed by ‘usual suspects’ i.e. learners with high digital literacy and an existing high level of ‘traditional’ education? And whilst rich western universities continue to produce OER through centralized funding, how much longer can this be maintained without some way of monetizing content? How can other stakeholders get in on the game and begin to design OER courses if they do have access to funding? And doesn’t this mean that OER is Open as long as you are from the right ‘club’? And if you are not then you are destined to consumer rather than share and produce?
Week 8 activity 7
Establishing a framework for OER
This rather catch all term relates to a number of issues. These include legal and trust issues, design, diffusion and sustainability.
Perhaps the reason that commentators do not describe ‘a framework’ for OER is that there is no single solution, or perhaps that as an emerging paradigm it is premature to talk about frameworks. But without a framework it seems that more solid and fleshed out models for OER cannot be developed. And we should also bear in mind that a framework is just that, and not a finished structure, so there is still leeway for individual differences within this wider context.
I will divide the framework into three sections, legality/trust, design and diffusion/sustainability.
McGill et al (2013) describe legality and trust in terms of ‘licensing and trust’ and argue that without these ‘policies and practice’ could not be develop to support staff to be able to ultimately create and manage OER. Whilst legality is a large part of this, so is trust amongst staff and learners. There is resistance amongst staff according to MsGill et al (2013) who contend that staff see the current OER model as working against their own interests within the current HE paradigm, which as the authors point out is a tight knot community. Amongst learners, according to the OER research hub hypothesis G see trust as a major factor when selecting an OER.
Design refers to the way the learning takes place within the OER and indeed how that learning is accessed and shared amongst learners, designers and teachers within the stakeholder groups. Issues include, does the OER use features of social networking to harness social learning? Does it have sufficient course notes? (OER Research Hub hypothesis H). How does the creation of OERs affect the process of content creation and ultimately the institutional culture of those institutions engaged in producing materials? And indeed not only at institutional level but within the wider disciplinary community? McGill et al (2013).
Diffusion/sustainability is perhaps the widest issue. It begins at a fundamental level, who has access to OERs? What are the languages of OERs and how accessible are they to non-native speakers of English? How accessible are OERs to people from developing countries, can they can be used without a permanent internet connection? And how accessible are OER’s for disabled users? And for those who access OERs from the developed world English speaking world, so they have well-developed digital literacy skills, or in fact would we see OERs being accessed by ‘usual suspects’ i.e. learners with high digital literacy and an existing high level of ‘traditional’ education? And whilst rich western universities continue to produce OER through centralized funding, how much longer can this be maintained without some way of monetizing content? How can other stakeholders get in on the game and begin to design OER courses if they do have access to funding? And doesn’t this mean that OER is Open as long as you are from the right ‘club’? And if you are not then you are destined to consumer rather than share and produce?