Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

OpenEd2012 - Carolina Rossini


Published on

Apresentação de Carolina Rossini na OpenEd 2012

Published in: Education
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

OpenEd2012 - Carolina Rossini

  1. 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. 2. “Informa(on  is  an  ac(vity;  informa(on  is  a  life  form;     and  informa(on  is  a  rela(on.”     John.  P.  Barlow  
  3. 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. 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. 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. 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
  7. 7. •  think  beyond  content  >  Design  •  think  beyond  content  >  People   Photo  credit:  Maxim  Malevich  
  8. 8. Interoperability (legal and technical) as essential condition for new institutions = An issue of design
  9. 9. Paul  Baran  (1964)    
  10. 10. GNU  General  Public  License:  The  use  of  IPs  to  create  freedom  
  11. 11. Open Science
  12. 12. "Under the right circumstances, groups areremarkably intelligent, and are often smarter than the smartest people in them.” @The Wisdom of the Crowd
  13. 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. 14. the  opposite  of  open  isn’t  “closed”  
  15. 15. the  opposite  of  open  is  “broken”  
  16. 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. 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. 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. 19. People  >  empowerment  +  engagement  
  20. 20. Who  are  our  people?     Everybody!  
  21. 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.
  22. 22. hTp://    
  23. 23. •  Efficient use of public funds to increase student success and access to quality educational materials.
  24. 24. hTp://­‐2012-­‐ENG.pdf  
  25. 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
  26. 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. 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. 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.
  29. 29. 47  quesHons  and  answers    
  30. 30. hTp://  
  31. 31. hTp://­‐no-­‐brasil-­‐e-­‐no-­‐mundo/rea-­‐no-­‐brasil/  hTp://­‐no-­‐brasil-­‐e-­‐no-­‐mundo/projetos-­‐mistos/    
  32. 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://  
  33. 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. 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://­‐livro-­‐didaHco)      2011/2012  –  Government  debats  the  use  of  e-­‐readers  in  public  schools  
  35. 35. hTp://  
  36. 36. hTp://  
  37. 37.    
  38. 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://­‐future-­‐of-­‐publishing/? p=all#ixzz1qYt50Lzq  
  39. 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. 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. 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.
  42. 42. hTp://  
  43. 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. 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. 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)
  46. 46. Conclusions
  47. 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. 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. 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. 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. 51. “It  just  takes  all  of  some  of  us!”   @wilbanks  
  52. 52. Thank you! @EFF Defending your rights in the Digital World!