[Open-education] Is there still an OER movement?

Pat Lockley patrick.lockley at googlemail.com
Fri Aug 22 17:17:23 UTC 2014

I don't think that article is particularly well written (read it a while
back), and reminds of the blog post about why OER has failed that surfaced
a while back

"The primary objective of OER is to address ‘the provision of access to
learning opportunities to those who would not otherwise be able to obtain

Is it? Do we have a recognised list of objectives? Did I sign up to this
when I started? Most of the OER i've made have never been restricted. They
are not liberated, they have never been restricted. In fact, I only make
them because others may find them useful.

" While ‘open’ is used to imply a lack of restrictions *on the learning
resource,* it also implies a lack of regulations *on education*. "

Does it? Surely reuse means it just moves institution? Or teacher?

And given the rest of the paper is based around that I'll stop my critique

Lots of people have definitions of open, and I don't really care for it.
I'd say the definition is plenty theorised enough, though how you can tell
if something is sufficiently theorised is something which I profoundly care

My definition of open is "has a license permitting reuse, or no license
restriction at all." I prefer simplicity and I would assume in doing so I
am fuzzy free.

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Mick FM <mick at flossmanuals.net> wrote:

> On 22/08/14 15:10, Pat Lockley wrote:
>  I do lots of open stuff out of my own pocket and time. I'd not say I was
> involved in an OER movement, or an OER activist. However I am concerned,
> with things such as a new definition of openness and by people drawing
> lines that all we are doing is ostracising people, or giving people the
> idea they aren't doing enough. The term open practice concerns me as it (to
> me) means you are part of a culture, when you might just want to license
> your work and then forget about it.
> Do you think that the vagueness of the open thing can be a bit
> off-putting? I was reading this paper today.
> http://jeremyknox.net/2012/03/28/five-critiques-of-the-open-educational-resources-movement-oer-highered-elearning-edtech/
> The whole thing doesn't really speak to me, it seems slightly
> intentionally obtuse, but I wonder if there are a lot of people who share
> the view on
> *An under-theorisation of the notions of ‘openness’ and ‘freedom’. *
> _______________________________________________
> open-education mailing list
> open-education at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-education
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-education/attachments/20140822/b1af5b17/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the open-education mailing list