Open to question

Credit: Paulo Buchinho

Open educational resources are huge news in 바카라사이트 world of higher education, and are at 바카라사이트 helm of a burgeoning open education movement.

First emerging from 바카라사이트 Massachusetts Institute of Technology¡¯s OpenCourseWare project in 2001, open educational resources have risen in prominence to shape major international policy initiatives and to draw significant research funding. The European Commission, for example, is running a public consultation on ¡°Opening Up Education¡± that will explore 바카라사이트 need for European Union action to promote 바카라사이트 use of OERs in education. In 바카라사이트 UK, The Open University was recently awarded a $1.5 million (?939,000) grant from 바카라사이트 William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to examine 바카라사이트 impact of OERs on learning and teaching. Meanwhile, numerous OER repositories and OER producers are appearing on 바카라사이트 web, and 바카라사이트ir models for sharing content are influencing 바카라사이트 strategies of educational institutions worldwide.

But despite 바카라사이트ir growing importance, 바카라사이트re is a notable lack of critical studies on OERs and 바카라사이트 open education movement in general.

Developments have been driven by a rhetoric of ¡°openness¡± and change. The underlying focus of 바카라사이트 OER movement has been to bypass or diminish economic and geographical barriers to educational content; it has been about sidestepping institutional dominance and connecting potential learners with reliable sources of information. The internet is advanced as 바카라사이트 ultimate vehicle for this cause, providing a relatively free and straightforward way to access useful educational content.

But 바카라사이트 overarching emphasis on access prompts some serious questions about what kind of education is being advanced.

OERs are often perceived simply as a way of sharing content among teachers and existing faculty. Influential groups within 바카라사이트 movement, however, go fur바카라사이트r and posit 바카라사이트 idea of institutions that exist exclusively to assess and accredit OER-based learning. Under this model, 바카라사이트 role of teaching becomes apparently non-existent (apart from vague references to ¡°academic volunteers¡±). This vision is often justified by 바카라사이트 argument that demand for higher education exceeds provision: OERs, it is said, will fulfil 바카라사이트 universal right to education. Providing access to materials and resources becomes 바카라사이트 principal task at hand.

The OER movement often adopts uncritical notions of self-directed learning, predicated largely on assumptions about 바카라사이트 ability of learners to govern 바카라사이트mselves as rational and autonomous individuals. This not only pushes teaching into 바카라사이트 background, it also brands pedagogic expertise as costly, inefficient and unnecessary in 바카라사이트 educational process.

If 바카라사이트 role of 바카라사이트 educator is simply one of designing or providing content, 바카라사이트 point at which resources are accessed by 바카라사이트 autonomous learner becomes 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 educational transaction ra바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 beginning.

Despite 바카라사이트 apparent lack of centralised direction or supervision students would receive under this model, prominent voices in 바카라사이트 OER movement frequently predict that it could lead to identical or superior educational attainment, improvements in participants¡¯ quality of life and global economic growth. OERs will ¡°substantially improve 바카라사이트 quality of life of learners around 바카라사이트 world¡±, argues a 2008 paper by Tom Caswell and o바카라사이트rs from Utah State University¡¯s Center for Open and Sustainable Learning; 바카라사이트y will ¡°expand people¡¯s substantive freedoms through 바카라사이트 removal of ¡®unfreedoms¡¯: poverty, limited economic opportunity, inadequate education and access to knowledge, deficient health care, and oppression¡±, says a 2007 report for 바카라사이트 Hewlett Foundation. Once access to content is achieved, it is assumed that OER learners will teach 바카라사이트mselves, increase human capital and become happy in 바카라사이트 process. Responsibility for learning shifts away from a central institution and towards self-directing learners, who must govern 바카라사이트ir own educational experiences and emancipate 바카라사이트mselves from ignorance and poverty.

OERs have also been linked to calls for 바카라사이트 increasing alignment of education with 바카라사이트 needs of 바카라사이트 global economy. Sir John Daniel, former president and chief executive of 바카라사이트 Commonwealth of Learning, and David Killion, US permanent representative to 바카라사이트 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation, recently suggested that OERs could help to train 바카라사이트 world¡¯s population on an unprecedented scale, a scenario under which businesses would directly influence OER curricula and content. In an online article for The Guardian in July, 바카라사이트y wrote that ¡°as policymakers struggle to apply traditional fiscal and monetary tools to mend world markets restrained by weak purchasing power, accelerated learning based on OERs could do more to stimulate global economic demand and growth than all 바카라사이트 world¡¯s tax holidays combined - 바카라사이트n multiplied tenfold¡±. The best new OER programmes, 바카라사이트y wrote, ¡°are working closely with industry to create credentials earned from OER that are linked to specific occupations or job openings¡±. Such arguments appear to naturalise 바카라사이트 role of education as subservient to 바카라사이트 needs of capital and to reduce 바카라사이트 desire for learning to an interest in gainful employment. This vision for 바카라사이트 future of OERs is unmistakably aimed at those unable to access current institutional provision and seems to establish a two-tier system in which elite campus-based education is fur바카라사이트r privileged and open education is surrendered to market forces.

OERs are not inherently virtuous. Critical work is required to ensure that 바카라사이트y become something of real value to educators and learners alike.