1. You Cannot Build Open Policy Without People The OER Brazil Case and Beyond Carolina Rossini Director for International Intellectual Property @EFF @carolinarossini #OpenEd2012
2. “Informa(on is an ac(vity; informa(on is a life form; and informa(on is a rela(on.” John. P. Barlow
3. 1. Open systems and open networks can create newmodes of innovation and collaboration 2. New modes of innovation can be helped, or hurt, byinstitutional and government policies and design 3. Brazil and Brazilian (and many countries around theworld) institutions are experimenting with openness, butit is just in the beginning
4. “Nearly one-third of the world’s population(29.3%) is under 15.Today there are 158 millionpeople enrolled in tertiary education1. Projectionssuggest that that participation will peak at 263million2 in 2025. Accommodating the additional 105 millionstudents would require more than fourmajor universities (30,000 students) toopen every week for the next 15 years.” 1 ISCED levels 5 & 6 UNESCO Ins(tute of Sta(s(cs ﬁgures 2 Bri(sh Council and IDP Australia projec(ons
5. • Open education policy: Governments, school boards, colleges and universities should make taxpayer- funded educational resources OER. • Open content licenses: OER should be freely shared through open licenses which facilitate use, revision, translation, improvement and sharing. • Collaborative production: Educators and students can participate in creating, using, adapting and improving OER.
6. The OER 4 freedoms Reuse the right to reuse the content in its unaltered / verbatim form Revise the right to adapt, adjust, modify, or alter the content itself Remix the right to combine the original or revised content with other content to create something new Redistribute the right to share copies of the original content, your revisions, or your remixes with others http://opencontent.org/deﬁnition/
8. Interoperability (legal and technical) as essential condition for new institutions = An issue of design
9. Paul Baran (1964)
10. GNU General Public License: The use of IPs to create freedom
11. Open Science
12. "Under the right circumstances, groups areremarkably intelligent, and are often smarter than the smartest people in them.” @The Wisdom of the Crowd
13. “What do Wikipedia, Zip Car’s businessmodel, Barack Obamas presidentialcampaign, and a small group of lobsterﬁshermen have in common? They allshow the power and promise ofhuman cooperation intransforming our businesses, ourgovernment, and our society atlarge. Because today, when the costs ofcollaborating are lower than ever before,there are no limits to what we can achieveby working together.” @The Penguin and the Leviathan: How cooperation Thriumphs Over Self-Interest Yochai Benkler
14. the opposite of open isn’t “closed”
15. the opposite of open is “broken”
16. Terms that can be used for a derivaHve work or adaptaHon Compa<bility chart by by-‐nc by-‐nc-‐nd by-‐nc-‐sa by-‐nd by-‐sa pd pd by by-‐nc Status of original by-‐nc-‐nd work by-‐nc-‐sa by-‐nd by-‐sa
17. Reasons to join the OER movement: 1. In you are public funded; 2. Digital technology will surpass current teaching and learning structures; 3. Cost implications on continuing to rely on Statutory License schemes and only very restrictive uses permitted; 4. OER are easier to manage: • No complex copying limits; • No restrictions on audience ie. Parents, community members and lifelong learners; • Allows teachers and students to modify and share resources. 5. Educational institutions (particularly those publicly funded) should leverage taxpayers money by allowing free sharing and reuse of resources. 6. Quality can be improved and costs of content development reduced by sharing and reusing. 7. Open sharing will speed up development of learning resources.
18. • ImplementaHon needs to be relevant naHon-‐ to-‐naHon; • ImplementaHon needs to be relevant to diﬀerent insHtuHonal cultures; • We need to build capacity inside the insHtuHons;
19. People > empowerment + engagement
20. Who are our people? Everybody!
21. Partner with Legislators who care about: • efﬁcient use of national / state money coming from taxes; • saving students money; • increasing access to education; • Understand the need to innovate in educational methodology.
25. • The right to copy books; • Taxpayer funding; • Government providing tax • exemptions, funding and buying; • 30% out of print • Problems access due to high cost • 90% covered by state through scholarships http://www.gpopai.usp.br/
26. Who pays? Yes – we pay twice! 86% of the books (sample of 1,910 books adopted by 25 different courses in morethan 14 institutions) were authored by full-time, employed professors frompublic institutions. the total invested by universities and public ﬁnancial agencies (such as the Sao PauloResearch Foundation - FAPESP), through scholarships and publication grants, is R$78,410over three years per master’s thesis per student and R$155,344 over three years perdoctoral thesis per student. By comparing these values with that invested by publishers of books derived from theses,the GPOPAI (2008) study concluded that 17.9% of the total cost of a bookbased on a master thesis comes from private investment, while 82.1%comes from public investment. For doctoral theses, 9.9% is from private sources, while the remaining 90.1%comes from public investment.
27. The Green Paper*There are four axes of structure to the OER context in Brazil, echoing internalstructures of traditional education as well as the new opportunities afforded by themove to digital networks for dissemination and use of educational materials:• public access to educational materials in general, as an open education strategy toinclude the individual, the family, the community and the whole society in the process oflearning and of collaborative knowledge production;• the economic cycle of educational materials production and its impact on the “right ofcitizens to learn”;• the possible benefits OER may bring to learning strategies, the production ofeducational resources more sensitive to issues driven regional diversity and regionalstandards of quality;• the impact of digital, online, open resources on teachers’ continuous professionaldevelopment
28. Case Studies• Analysis of more that 14 Brazilian Projects which missions are to provide (open) educational recourses.• The analysis was done on its legal and technical interoperability, and in regard to who owns the rights over the content.• Conclusions and recommendations were built.
32. The NaHonal Plan of EducaHon (PNE) represents the highest level of educaHonal policy in Brazil. Discussions to include OER in the PNE direcHves started in 2008. More than 3,000 changes unHl now, the Plan sets guidelines, goals, and prioriHes to be implemented by 2020. OER is menHoned in two guidelines (7.10 and 7.12) hTp://www.camara.gov.br/proposicoesWeb/ﬁchadetramitacao?idProposicao=490116
33. “Há muitos anos trabalho a questão de acesso ao conhecimento e entendo a Internet como instrumento fundamental a tal ﬁm. Ao repensar a educação na era da sociedade do conhecimento, me deparei com o conceito de recursos educacionais abertos e percebi como nossa legislação não trabalha esta questão. O Brasil não pode ﬁcar de fora deste debate, ainda mais porque nosso governo é um dos maiores ﬁnanciadores de recursos educacionais, seja por meio de compras públicas, seja por meio de salários e bolsas de estudo e pesquisa, seja por meio de isenção de impostos em toda a cadeia produva de livros. Os números impressionam! Creio que todos, empresas e pessoas, que recebem tal montanha de dinheiro vindo dos cofres públicos, têm uma obrigação para com a sociedade: comparHlhar o resultado de suas pesquisas e o desenvolvimento delas com a sociedade que o/a ﬁnanciou, permiHndo o uso livre de tal recurso educacional” Deputado Paulo Teixeira
34. 2010 – The Federal Government spent R$1.077.805.377,28 to buy, evaluate and distribute texbooks 2011 – Government spent R$ 1,2 billions to buy textbooks -‐ introducHons of the “consumable texbook” : the student use it for one year and trow it away, in oposiHon of many books that one student have to give back at the end of the year and it is used for up to 3 years (hTp://www.fnde.gov.br/index.php/programas-‐livro-‐didaHco) 2011/2012 – Government debats the use of e-‐readers in public schools
38. • “There is no doubt that e-‐books are a bright spot in the dismal economics of publishing. The current market is strong — according to a recent Harris InteracHve poll, one in six Americans now uses an e-‐reader, and that number will grow as consumers become more comfortable with the technology.” • The AssociaHon of American Publishers reports that e-‐books have risen in 2010 to 6.4% of the trade market, up from 0.6% in 2008. The InsHtute for Publishing Research predicts that by 2015, e-‐book sales will increase to $3.6 billion, from $78 million in 2008. In publishing terms, that’s petrodollars. hTp://www.forward.com/arHcles/148713/the-‐future-‐of-‐publishing/? p=all#ixzz1qYt50Lzq
39. Naonal Context • For the ﬁrst Hme in history, most states are implemenHng Common College and Career Ready Standards in Reading, Language Arts, and MathemaHcs, providing an unprecedented opportunity for collaboraHon. • New telecommunicaHons and informaHon technologies support intra/ inter-‐state collaboraHon and provide opportuniHes to improve the coverage, interacHvity, and Hmeliness of instrucHonal materials and help teachers beTer understand student engagement and understanding. • These historic developments are catalyzing educaHon innovaHon, including causing states to review and modernize policies for evaluaHng and selecHng instrucHonal materials
40. Emerging State Reform Vision – OER moves into the mainstream State collaboraHon aimed at supporHng Common Core implementaHon, has led to the idenHﬁcaHon of shared state concerns about historic (typically pre-‐digital age) instrucHonal materials policies and a vision for updaHng them. Among other policy reforms in this area, states seek to provide teachers/students with: • More ﬂexible use and control of content to meet a range of instrucHonal approaches aimed at individualizing instrucHon • Engaging, interacHve material available through a range of media (print, online, audio, video) • Material that are updated/improved frequently and available on demand at the Hme and place of learning (in and out of school) • The ability to more easily parHcipate in content development and systems of ongoing improvement and enhancements. • Embedded formaHve assessment, stronger feedback loops, and a focus on performance based systems. • Easily discoverable (tagged to standards), aﬀordable and high quality materials.
41. What are OERs Advantages? • Support personalization by providing teachers and learners the ability to remix and customize content • Promote educator/student collaboration by supporting sharing, adaption and reuse. • Providing a pathway supporting educator developed content and timely updates. • Supports anytime/any place learning models.
43. “All digital software, educational resources and knowledge produced through competitive grants, offered through and/or managed by the SBCTC, will carry a Creative Commons attribution license; and the open licensing policy applies to all funding sources (state, federal, foundation and/or other fund sources) that ﬂow through SBCTC as a competitive grant to any party...”
44. “Open High School of Utah curriculum is built from open educationalresources. These resources are the foundation for their content and are aligned with Utah state standards to ensure the highest quality educational experience. The teachers enhance with screencasts, interactive components, and engaging activities to create high quality curricula for their students...”
45. Impact Physics! Sociology! Psychology! Law!Management! Education! Business! Health Sci! Political Sci! Economics! Biology! 0! 50! 100! 150! 200! 250! % increase in citations with Open Access! Range = 36%-200% (Data: Stevan Harnad and co-workers)
47. if you care about the emergence of knowledge federation systems that allow broader access to knowledge) you may have to have some kind ofintervention…and not wait for organic emergence.
48. Inclusion/cooperation Wide dissemination of education contributes to more inclusive and cohesive societies, fosters equal opportunities and innovation in line with the priorities of a renewed social agenda focused on the knowledge society. In this sense, this study brings a series of recommendations to foster this dialogue.
49. “Social inclusion has today a new and important dimension: digital inclusion. Digital inclusion is an aTribute of ciHzenship: a new right in itself and a way to ensure basic rights to people, such as free expression and access to culture and educaHon. For Brazil, digital inclusion is a tool to ensure that ciHzens and insHtuHons have the means to access, use, produce and distribute informaHon and knowledge through InformaHon and CommunicaHon Technologies (ICT) so that they can parHcipate acHvely in InformaHon Society, as receivers and providers of knowledge.” Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Aﬀairs at UNECO OER@Paris Conference
50. 1. Open systems and open networks can create newmodes of innovation and collaboration 2. New modes of innovation can be helped, or hurt, byinstitutional and government policies and design 3. Brazil and Brazilian (and many countries around theworld) institutions are experimenting with openness, butit is just in the beginning
51. “It just takes all of some of us!” @wilbanks
52. Thank you! Carolina@eff.org @EFF Defending your rights in the Digital World!