OU blog

Personal Blogs

H817 / Open Learn Week 3 Activity 11 Big and Little OER

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Deirdre Robson, Saturday, 13 Apr 2013, 11:39

 

Blog Post: Benefits and Drawback of Big & Little OER

Characteristics of  'Big' and 'Little' OER

Big OER

Little OER

Public access to facilities

 

Public access to knowledge

Public access to knowledge

Student engagement

Student engagement

Faculty engagement

 

Widening participation

Widening participation

Encouraging economic regeneration

 

Institutional relationship/partnership building

 

Top-down model

'Bottom-up' model

 

Social engagement with course organisers

 

Community engagement & sharing a default

Institutional team generated content

User generated content

 

Contributor opportunity to explore ideas

 

Creativity and fun

 

Educator - ego and scholarly status

'short-tail model - high set up & technical costs.

'Frictionless' long tail model - reducing relative importance of set up and content generation costs.

Predictable - project and measurable output led.

Unpredictability welcomed

 

 

From the above it can be seen that the benefit of 'Big' OER  is that it embraces 'openness' to a degree; it 'broadcasts' knowledge to a much wider community than conventional institutional learning has done before, and has a more demonstrable commitment to the wider community  (both educational and public at large)..  However, the most obvious disadvantages of 'Big' OER is that such 'openness' is relative.   Any 'Big' OER is shaped, fundamentally, by its institutional roots.       It tends to be 'top-down', and is driven by policies and procedures, projects and measurable outputs.  It is relatively expensive and thus has sustainability issues.

In many ways (at least according to Weller) the benefits of 'Little' OER are  often in what this offers in the way of greater opportunities for openness,  for widening community, for 'bottom-up' initiatives, for re-usability and re-visioning of content.   'Little' OER  offers the possibility of greater opportunities for content creators (educators) to place content and thus interact with the wider learning community (with the proviso that engagement will be unpredictable).  As such OER is inherently low cost, however,  even if there is little obvious 'pay back' there will still be benefits.   The unpredictability might be said to be a drawback, however, as this does not necessarily enhance any sense of 'community' (except in an abstract sense).   The issues of money and time are, as Weller notes, commonly posed caveats to this activity, as is the perception that such activity is 'additional activity'.  Weller dismisses this, but  if an educator works within an institution which does not take the view that such activity is 'genuine' scholarly activity then this will continue to be a 'minus' for any individual would-be participant in 'little' OER.

References
Weller, M. (2011a) Academic Output as Collateral Damage [online], slidecast. Available at http://www.slideshare.net/ mweller/ academic-output-as-collateral-damage (Accessed 12 April 2013)

Weller, M. (2011b) 'Public engagement as collateral damage' in The Digital Scholar, London, Bloomsbury Academic. Also available online at http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/ view/ DigitalScholar_9781849666275/ chapter-ba-9781849666275-chapter-007.xmll (Accessed 13 April 2013

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post