OpenEd 2009 OER Organization Stakeholders

393 views

Published on

Stakeholder analysis of OER producers and users. Presented at Open Ed 2009: Crossing the Chasm in Vancouver August 11, 2009

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
393
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • noblesse oblige comes from social control masquerading as social benefit.No doubt there are a range of motivations for creating and disseminating Open Education Resources. Some of the motivations will appear quixotic and others will appear unsustainable. Still others will appear self-serving or unethical. We will probably have to wait for history to sort out the categories and expose the ironies.When MIT announced that they were “giving away their courseware” in 2001 it was a radical idea. The disruptive influence of the web on the economics of higher education brought intense debate among established faculties and visionary educators. It also brought marketers, public relations , and enrollment strategists. Clearly courseware now operated on a new stage. People who saw education as a basic human right, also saw Open Education Resources as a “noblesse oblige” of university gatekeepers. Those who had educational resources “should” provide access to locations that did not have them. The goal should be to create more and more open courses as a moral imperative.However, noblesse oblige covers a more sinister goal of status quo maintenance. The powerful and wealthy exist in a linked system to those without power. As goods move from the wealthy to the poor, those links get reinforced. If the nobility fill social needs on their own terms, then status quo is maintained. The education revolutionaries who advocate for mere quantity of open education resources provided from western universities to emerging institutions mask the dependency that flow creates.
  • OpenEd 2009 OER Organization Stakeholders

    1. 1. Striving for Sustaining Values<br />Open Education Resource Organization Stakeholders <br />Curt Madison, PhD<br />Director of eLearning Program Development<br />School of Management<br />University of Alaska Fairbanks<br />Open Ed 2009<br />Vancouver, Canada<br />
    2. 2. Three Organization Types<br />Traditional University creating OER<br />Traditional University importing OER<br />Research Entity creating OER<br />
    3. 3. By allowing citizens to “see through” its workings and investigate whether or not their leaders and organizations have met their expectations, the government brings the public into its inner circles and empowers citizens to contribute to decision-making<br />
    4. 4. Exporting OER<br />Outreach to community with transparency<br />Decrease time-to-degree with transparency<br />Higher retention rates with OER success<br />Increased learning through pre/post-exposure to OER<br />Automatic faculty alignment of sequences<br />Increased publication by faculty members<br />
    5. 5. Outreach through transparency<br />Native Ways of Knowing<br />Recovery.gov<br />UCosmic<br />
    6. 6.
    7. 7.
    8. 8.
    9. 9. Openness vs Competition<br />There are real opportunities to distribute quality content...But this makes more sense for established institutions with robust brands such as Oxford or, in the US, MIT, than it might for other less established or high-profile institutions. For those with exceptional reputations, it is not the access to the material that attracts students so much as the signal of being accepted and included in its formal provision.<br />
    10. 10. Openness vs Competition 2<br />But where the material is more of a direct means to education, there will be greater need to offer a high standard of content and provide it in forms useful to the institution’s own students and to others.<br />Peter Bradwell. 2009. the edgeless university: why higher education must embrace technology. Demos<br />
    11. 11. Time to Degree<br />Excess Student Credit Hours<br />
    12. 12. Most students attending the state’s public universities graduate with credit hours in excess of graduation requirements, which increases state higher education costs. <br />The 780,769 excess hours of students graduating with bachelor’s degrees in FY 2004-05 cost the state $62 million. <br />Twenty percent of the students accounted for over one-half (58%) of all credit hours over the minimum graduation requirements.<br />Florida House of Representatives <br />PCB SPCP 09-02<br />
    13. 13. Days to a Bachelor’s Degree<br />
    14. 14.
    15. 15. Higher Retention Rates<br />Drop out due to:<br />Lack of relevance<br />Lack of Preparation in Math<br />
    16. 16. Increased Depth of Learning<br /><ul><li>Preview OCW prior to enrollment
    17. 17. Review of material in a sequenced course</li></li></ul><li>Automatic Course Alignment<br />Mitigate natural divergence <br />Promote transparency among faculty<br />
    18. 18. Reputation Builder<br />“Publish” a course with peer review<br />Engage public dialog around nascent ideas<br />
    19. 19. Desirable OER Import Features<br />Easily Allow Localization - Derive<br />Aggregate Reading Lists<br />Link Design Choices to Outcomes<br />
    20. 20. Research creating OER<br />Outreach PR with Structured Access<br />Satisfy NSF grant requirements<br />Public Institution mandate to engage k-12<br />Disambiguate professional jargon<br />
    21. 21. National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs<br />http://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=OPP<br />
    22. 22. What Doesn’t Work<br />Selling OER as a franchise revenue stream<br />Satisfying noblesse oblige<br />
    23. 23. Philanthropy<br />While St. Petersburg College has, in a limited fashion, made contributions in the realm of open courseware... Fiscal needs and concerns are the driving forces behind many administrative policies and decisions; the economic reality is that our institution cannot easily afford to give freely of its resources without some financial compensation in return.<br />J. J. Rutledge. UNESCO Forum: Impact of Open Courseware <br />for Higher Education in Developing Countries Preliminary Report.<br />St. Petersburg College, St. Petersburg, FL<br />
    24. 24. Visual Thesaurus<br />“Noblesse Oblige”<br />

    ×