I thought that I had been quite open with my teaching materials through my use of personal website and learning management system. In my personal website, I share what I did, e.g. projects, without sharing comprehensively about the content of projects due to confidentiality. In the learning management system set up by the university, I put up my teaching materials and give access to students, including those not in my class.
As I am reading the topic of Open Education in ONL, I have the opportunity to look at resources at Creative Commons, SlideShare and others. Creative Commons, in particular, is a place that I just recently explored. Before this course, although I knew about it, I did not explore. My takeaway is that Creative Commons allows proliferation of materials with proper licensing and gives me avenue if I want to do so.
After reading this topic, I calibrate my understanding about what it means to be open in education and will consider myself not open (at least so far). Now that I have a calibrated my understanding about open education, I ask myself about being open in my teaching. To do this, I’d like to walk through my own teaching. Suppose I want to teach students how to design a wheelchair, what will I do?
First, using the Design Thinking methodology (Brown, 2008), I will teach students about how to gain insights from wheelchair users about their needs. I can share materials to students about the steps to collect information from users. I suppose I can be open about these materials (for example, by putting it up online). However, I am not sure I can be open when it comes to guiding students on how to process information and translating information into insights. Unpacking information requires discussion, questioning and critiquing that I am not sure whether it can be done in an open education environment. This aspect of “experiential learning” requires thinking through.
Second, when it comes to technical design of a wheelchair, elementary knowledge such as load dynamic may be taught using a rather standard approach and hence can be made in an open education environment. I am not sure about subsequent, more advanced concepts like component selection, which requires not only information about load dynamic, but also supply chain, price, alternatives and making judgement call based on these multiple inputs.
I like how Weller (2014) phrase the question: “what sort of open” we want when we talk about open education. I would like to think from this perspective. Referring to Cormier’s (2013) suggestion of what it means to be open in education:
• If open means open entry without entrance requirements, then I will beg to differ. Some subjects require pre-requisite knowledge, which is really important to understand the content.
• If open means transparency, then I think I already embrace this. I have been open about learning objectives, marking schemes and consultation to my students.
• If open means equal opportunity, then I agree with it although I will caution that there are existing barriers, e.g. unequal access to internet. I think I will contribute by not amplifying the existing barriers.
• If open means accessible, then I think I will softly agree. Although I appreciate the intent, there are some operational matters that I think need to be thought through when it comes to “experiential learning” and “advanced concepts”.
References:
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review, pp. 84-95.
Weller, M. (2014). The Battle for Open: How Openness Won and Why It Doesn’t Feel Like Victory. Ubiquity Press.
Cormier, D. (2013, April 12). What Do You Mean … Open? Dave’s Educational Blog. http://davecormier.com/edblog/2013/04/12/what-do-you-mean-open/.
I enjoyed reading your blog post, Andi! And I must say that I’m thrilled to have found similar sentiments in yours. I especially liked what you said “Unpacking information requires discussion, questioning and critiquing that I am not sure whether it can be done in an open education environment. ” You said it best there! Exactly my thoughts and thinking about my inertias for moving towards the concept of openness, perhaps this is still something that I have to figure out. Funny enough, I thought that it’s a matter of “letting go”. Maybe one day, if I got that figured out, I’ll share with you how that goes! 🙂
Look forward to your sharing, Nadya!
On the surface, the issues surrounding open education may be dominated by ownership, but I think that there is another issue of accountability. We want to put correct information out there. Information that requires contextual understanding, however, requires further thinking. The nature of being open makes it harder to “attach” the context to the information — something we have no problem with when it is not “open”.
While concerns about ownership appear to be at the forefront of debates over open education, I believe that concerns about responsibility are just as important. Our goal is to disseminate accurate data. However, more thought is needed to comprehend data that has to be placed in context. We have no trouble doing so when the information is not “open,” but when it is, it becomes more difficult to “attach” the context to it. gorilla tag
“I really appreciate your thoughtful reflection on the complexities of implementing open education, especially your candid exploration of its limitations and opportunities. It’s inspiring to see educators like you consider how openness can enhance teaching and learning while acknowledging the challenges it presents.” Quhud