The document discusses the difference between content-centric and process-centric approaches to open educational resources (OER). It argues that an emphasis on content perpetuates the view of OER as an end in itself rather than as a means to foster knowledge sharing, collaboration, and customization. Examples of process-centric OER efforts like the Dynamic Textbook Project and ChemWiki are provided. The document also notes that faculty surveys indicate concerns over quality, versioning, and availability of print materials, showing a content-centric view that fails to promote OER's benefits of knowledge sharing. It concludes that sustainability requires adopting a community of practice approach where OER development and reuse become normal.

1. Content-Centric OERas Untenable: Means vs. Ends Judy Baker, Ph.D. Dean of Technology and Innovation Foothill College

2. Value of OER Emphasis on content in curating OER perpetuates the belief in OER as an end rather than as a means Value of OER Not about free content, it’s about the knowledge sharing,collaboration, and customizing that it affords Disruptive innovation that allows educators to gaingreater control and customization of learning materials for teaching

5. OER as Means vs. Ends

6. Content-Centric OER Efforts

7. Process-Centric OEREfforts

8. Dynamic Textbook Project A multi-institutional collaborative venture to develop the next generation of open-access textbooks to improve STEM post-secondary education to develop and disseminate free, virtual, customizable textbooks that will substitute for current, commercial paper texts in multiple courses at post-secondary institutions ChemWiki Open Access textbook environment constantly being written by faculty and students

9. ChemPaths Not an Online Textbook, A Student Portal Student Portal of the Chemical Education Digital Library Built to assist instructors put online tutorials and web-resources multimedia resources into one cohesive package ready for student-use

10. Content or Process Centric?

11. Content-CentricReviewers Compensated

12. Process-centric Review of OER? Crowdsourced rating systems

13. Original Homepage Current Homepage

14. Process-centric Reviewers voluntary

15. Faculty Attitudes about OER Foothill-De Anza Community College faculty surveys indicate that major factors in faculty decisions about adoption of open textbooks and open contents are content-centric: Concerns about quality and versioning Availability of affordable options for students to order shipped printed copies Availability of a printed and bound instructor’s copy of the open textbook Content-centric OER efforts perpetuate such faculty attitudes and fail to promote a culture of knowledge sharing with an awareness of other benefits of OER

16. “The value of OER will not be best achieved through static resources, but rather through their potential to engage a wide range of educators and learners to share ideas and expertise, and collaborative knowledge building. … a culture of openness and sharing will only emerge when OER has embedded and become an integral partof teaching practice and learning process in HE.” ~ JISC CETIS Li Yuan’s Blog

17. Sustainability of OER practice Need educators to participate in communities of practice where OER development and reuse becomes a normative Encourage institutions and educators to adopt a community of practice approach to create and maintain content and use existing networks to disseminate and share resources