OU blog

Personal Blogs

Tabitha

An Analysis of the JISC Report on OER

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Tabitha Naisiko, Wednesday, 30 Oct 2019, 14:35

I will base on the OER Evidence Report 2013-2014, (de los Arcos, Perryman and Weller 2014) to discuss three contentious issues about the cross-cutting themes of performance, openness, access, retention, finance, reflection, support, transition, policy, and assessment; all in the area of OER. This report concurs with Fengchun Miao, Sanjaya Mishra and Rory McGreal (2016), who maintain that OER movement has grown and there has been a significant increase in the development, use, and sharing of OER as more and more governments and institutions come to realize their value in enhancing access to educational opportunities, informal and formal. In the OER Evidence Report 2013-2014, there are three critical issues which are: quality assurance and regulations, credentialism of informal learners and OER environment. Details of which are discussed below.

Credentialism arises due to the increasing number of informal learners who follow open learn course as a way of connecting to formal education. This made the production of OER a recruitment strategy for education institutions.  Although some respondents were considering joining the formal study, I observe with concern that (83.2%, n=2197) indicated that they are less likely to take formal study than to carry on using OER. I am concerned whether the learners of OER would get the benefit of the credentials that allow them to join credible universities for further studies and recognition. However, in the report, some informal leaners hope for the possibility of accreditation which seems to be motivating to OER users. I am however concerned if accreditation will be valid for learners in developing countries; especially when opting for opportunities that require international standards. 

Quality assurance and regulations was another key issue. The report indicated that participation in OER pilots and programs led to policy change at an institutional level. However, there is no evidence of quality assurance procedures undertaken. I am afraid the complacency may open the OER collections to substandard materials which are not pedagogically tested and qualified. Education being a sensitive service that ought to be regulated, otherwise, the risk of miseducation is very possible and detrimental. For instance, the report reveals that policy and regulations top-down initiatives to drive OER adoption, yet examples of bottom-up policy adoption are rarer. It also reports that OER practice is often not formalized as policy as reported by the librarians when asked about their awareness of policy/practices that had taken place since the adaptation of OER in their institutions. However, in some cases, there have been formal adoption of OER policy.

OER environment was a critical issue. To me, the OER environment is a functional stakeholder’s network comprised of the educationalist, the designers, industry and public service, and government ministries of education and finance that can enable the sustainable use of OER. The collaboration indicated in the report is partial and that of only practitioners which albeit may hamper the adaptation and sustainability of the OER resources. As regards developing countries, the entire OER environment paramount because without political will and policy guidelines, OER practices may not be sustainable.  

 

de los Arcos, B., Farrow, R., Perryman, L.-A., Pitt, R. & Weller, M. (2014). OER Evidence Report 2013-2014.  OER Research Hub. Available from http://OERresearchhub.org/about-2/reports/


Permalink
Share post