[okfn-br] Fwd: [OER] OER adoption and HE innovation in the US and abroad

[Carolina Rossini]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Fred M Beshears" <fredbeshears em gmail.com>
Date: Nov 7, 2014 7:04 AM
Subject: [OER] OER adoption and HE innovation in the US and abroad
To: "Open Educational Resources - an online discussion forum" <
oer-forum em lists.esn.org.za>
Cc:

The report on OER use in the US funded by The William and Flora Hewlett
Foundation contains a number of important findings on OER use and adoption
in the US.

One finding identifies faculty as the key decision makers for OER adoption:

   - Faculty are the key decision makers for OER adoption. Faculty are
   almost always involved in an adoption decision and — except for rare
   instances — have the primary role. The only exceptions are in a minority of
   two-year and for-profit institutions, where the administration takes the
   lead.


If we see OER adoption as part of teaching innovation and change in
general,  then the OER adoption question becomes a part of a larger
question:

"How does change happen in Higher Education? "

This question has been answered cynically by some as follows:

"One faculty retirement at a time."

In my opinion, this cynical answer is not necessarily correct. In my twenty
years of experience at UC Berkeley, there were many faculty who were very
interested in finding new ways of teaching. So, I'm sure that there are
many faculty who are now very interesting in adopting OER as an alternative
to commercial textbooks if they can either improve the quality of learning
or reduce the cost of instruction by doing so.

However, at the typical research university, conservative professors are
still academically free to ignore the innovations of their more progressive
colleagues. And, in my experience, the conservatives far out number the
progressives.


The report finding above suggests that faculty are ALWAYS involved in the
OER adoption decision and that the ONLY exceptions are "a minority of
two-year and for-profit institutions, where the administration takes the
lead."

While this may be true in the US, there is a major exception to this
generalization in the UK: The British Open University.


There, things are organized a bit differently.  At the British Open
University, content development faculty at Milton Keynes create lesson
plans and content for the teaching faculty to use.

The teaching faculty work directly with the OU's students in teaching
centers. They are obligated to use the lesson plans and teaching materials
created by the senior content development faculty back at Milton Keynes.

So, when the content development faculty want to experiment with new
technology, lesson plans, or content the teaching faculty are obligated to
go along. The OU doesn't have to wait for them to retire.

Also, the content development faculty create content on a work-for-hire
basis. So, there's no question about who owns the content at the end of the
day - the OU does. This means that the OU could make an institutional
decision to place their content in the public domain.

(As as side note: To make this business model work, the OU needs to have a
very large student body, which was around 250K the last time I checked.
Also, the OU tried to establish operations in the U.S. back in the late
eighties. They threw in the towel when they realized that they would have
to go through multiple (eight?) accreditation bodies to establish a
nation-wide operation in the U.S. So, these accreditation bodies are a
barrier to entry, which helps protect smaller state-wide chains (e.g. UC
and CSU) and single campus institutions.)

So, unlike the traditional university, the British Open University's
business model is designed to support the development and maintenance of
learning materials. Further, the content development faculty in Milton
Keynes are in a better position to make the decision to adopt OER than
would be the case of administrators of HE in the US.

So, one way to speed up the adoption of OER in the US (and to speed up
innovation in general) would be for the US to form HE institutions with a
structure and business model similar to that of the British Open
University. This is pretty radical, but we have an existence proof that it
can happen. A Labor government did indeed create the OU mostly from scratch
back in 1969. So, it has happened. Perhaps it can happen again in the US.

Of course, some administrators and progressive faculty at traditional
schools may want to reform their institutions into something that resembles
the British OU thinking that might be the easier route. But, they may
encounter fierce resistance from faculty who prefer the status quo.

Why you ask. The reason has been know for quite some time.

"And let it be noted that there is no more delicate matter to take in hand,
> nor more dangerous to conduct, nor more doubtful in its success, than to
> set up as a leader in the introduction of changes.  For he who innovates
> will have for his enemies all those who are well off under the existing
> order of things, and only the lukewarm supporters in those who might be
> better off under the new.   This lukewarm temper arises partly from the
> fear of adversaries who have the laws on their side and partly from the
> incredulity of mankind, who will never admit the merit of anything new,
> until they have seen it proved by the event."
> Machiavelli
>

Regards,
Fred

_______________________________________________
OER-forum mailing list
OER-forum em lists.esn.org.za
http://lists.esn.org.za/mailman/listinfo/oer-forum
Unsubscribe: OER-forum-unsubscribe em lists.esn.org.za
-------------- Próxima Parte ----------
Um anexo em HTML foi limpo...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-br/attachments/20141106/8f2fd6aa/attachment-0004.html>