Skip to main content

Is "Open Scholarship" still locked?

Scholars writing about Open Educational Resources (OER), including myself, use expansive vocabulary about the potential for the democratization of learning.  For instance, this "lockbox" statement from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (2013) regarding the OER movement provides an example of such liberal democratic sentiment:

 "These digital materials have the potential to give people everywhere equal access to our collective knowledge and provide many more people around the world with access to quality education by making lectures, books, and curricula widely available on the Internet for little or no cost. By enabling virtually anyone to tap into, translate, and tailor educational materials previously reserved only for students at elite universities, OER has the potential to jump start careers and economic development in communities that lag behind. Millions worldwide have already opened this educational lockbox, but if OER is going to democratize learning and transform the classroom and teaching, then it must move from the periphery of education practice to center stage."

This "education for everyone, everywhere" philosophy of unlocking the lockbox applies to open scholarship, as well.  Publishing scholarship openly should allow people all over the world, regardless of situation, to have access to the most current information.  In this way, learning is "unlocked."  However, Velstianos and Kimmons (2022) suggest taking a constructively critical view of these assumptions.

The problem is that the potential for open scholarship is in conflict with multiple difficult realities.  For instance, these authors point out, scholars publishing in open access journals may be asked to pay (through their institutions) for publishing costs, which sets up a paywall and limits all voices from participating equally.  Hence, learning appears to be open but is still selectively locked. Furthermore, Velestianos and Kimmons (2022) point out how MOOCs that were originally meant to provide educational opportunities for those without traditional access to higher education has become "commodified education" in the case of initiatives like Coursera and Udacity and EdX.  As the embodied practices of openness iterate, it is important that they not iterate too far from the ideals of OER founders.  The danger is that the most vulnerable learners and scholars will be blocked by the banner of openness in a way that openness actually obscures their disenfranchisement.  


 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Changing How We Evaluate Scholarship

While major universities recognize the impact of open scholarship for distribution through institutional repositories, they do not go far enough in “counting” open scholarship in its various forms towards rank and advancement.  In this post, I am comparing the recommendations of DORA, the Leiden Manifesto, and HuMetrics on how we can change the way we evaluate scholarship to be more quality-centered.  While none of the publications define quality in scholarship, there is definitely overlap in their recommendations for change, despite the fact that these organizations come from different disciplines. These could act as general areas of consideration for proposing a shift in the evaluation of scholarship. 1) Quality over quantity. All three publications agree on emphasizing quality as defined by experts in the field, not exclusively by journal metrics.  Journal metrics are a part of the picture, but not the whole picture.  Institutions, funders, and researchers alike ...
Post a Comment
Read more

OER-phoria

"Sunrise Acrobatics"  by  Zach Dischner  is licensed under  CC BY-SA 2.0 I was sitting in Zoom class with OER-expert Dr. David Wiley, who teaches one class every other year in the Master’s program I am enrolled in, along with eight other students, when I got caught up in OER-phoria.  The realization that copyright was straight jacketing contemporary culture and creativity and that open licenses could democratize education globally was mind-blowing.  Now, David Wiley was in no way encouraging any band-wagon hopping. There were no drums, but I felt ready to march.  There was no flag, but I was ready to wave one high in the air.  In fact, I may or may not have handed in a creative assignment where I wrote a song about the benefits and challenges of OER through the years set to the tune of Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah.”  Though it was meant to be funny, I had forgotten during the pandemic that I was not a gifted singer.  I fear it registered ...
Post a Comment
Read more