Open Education versus Open Educational Resources

In light of the recent Open Education Conference in Vancouver, British Columbia, and the fact I am delivering a short presentation on the topic shortly, I want to spend some time exploring the differences between the larger landscape of open education (OpenEd) and the more specific topic of open educational resources (OER) – at least insomuch as I view the discussion.

While there has been growing attention into the subject of open education over the last few years, the notion of OpenEd and OER can be traced back decades – if not longer. However having followed discussions on the matter for the last couple of years now, it seems fairly obvious that there is no clear consensus on the implications of it all – nor the best way forward.

At the risk of over-generalisation, it would appear that the discussion can be boiled down to two schools of thought – the first that focuses primarily on resources, platforms, sharing and reuse; the second that sees OER as just one component in a larger whole.

This is not to say that the former does not recognise the wider landscape within which OER are situated and created, nor that the latter disputes the significance of OER. Rather, it relates to the emphasis and focal point.

In my opinion, and based on my experience, focusing too much on the resources and not enough on the underlying ideals, characteristics and relationships of the culture of open education can prove ineffective.

Yes, OER are an integral component of a much broader landscape. Yes, the resources, software and other platforms are critical to the activities of the broader networks and communities, and in many regards serve as the fuel that powers the engine, facilitates connections and flow of dialogue. However in my view, the existence of OER and indeed their value arises as a direct result of an underlying culture, and it is through the context of this culture that the utility and significance. of OER are ultimately realised.

Rather than being a primary focal point, OER are artefacts that symbolise the dynamics, ideals, and relationships of the open educational movement; they mark where OpenEd has been and help reveal where it’s going. Yes, OER are self-contained and can therefore standalone outside the context of OpenEd, however in the absence of a culture that recognises their significance and understands the implications of their existence, OER quickly diminish in relevance, value, and impact.

To understand OER, you must look at the wider landscape within which they were created. Certainly sharing, reuse and openness permeate this landscape, but it’s much more than than – it’s more intangible, and one might say even esoteric.

Looking at this another way, take formal education. In a university you would not say that owning a text book and syllabus, and having access to assessments and assignments is equivalent to engaging in a course that incorporates them. Throw in supporting technical frameworks – even open ones – and it’s still not the same thing.

Certainly the resources facilitate the experience, but ultimately it’s the presence of people – of communities, networks or groups – and the social structures and relationships that shape them that provides the greatest context and relative value to the experience.

Placed in an environment where walled gardens rule; strict hierarchical structures control flow of dialogue, interaction and information; and learning is scripted and controlled by a central body or individual, and the impact of OER will suffer. Place the same OER in an open environment, with fluid social boundaries where everyone has the opportunity to speak and share, develop their own interpretations and contribute to the social construction of meaning, and you will see an entirely different outcome.

Through interaction with people we are able to recognise significance, meaning and value in the world around us. We’re able to externalise around knowledge, establish patterns and frameworks for sense-making; gain exposure to alternative perspectives and opinions: engage in debate and discussion. Resources can provide elements of context, but only to a point; after that it’s dependant on the context of the learner, and indeed on the culture within which the learner themselves is situated.

It should stand to reason then, that advocacy of open education needs to address not just the topics of sharing and reuse, open licensing and open frameworks and open resources, but the ideological reasons as to why it’s better, and what it means to be open. Open education needs to demonstrate all this in practice, and encourage people to start to engage in the process themselves. To focus primarily on the resources themselves is to ignore critical elements of the learning process that directly affect the outcomes of OERs.

Open education is a mind-set; it’s a way of working. You don’t produce openness, you are open.