OER November 20, 2010
I am just catching up with OER (and discovering it has officially closed but we can still write to it ).
I wanted to echo Wayne's comment that " Very often in these discussions we find ourselves focusing on existing economic models associated with traditional publishing rather than taking a more generative and systemic view." I have also noticed other references related to critical mass needed to enable change.
With those thoughts in mind I would like to offer some relevant ideas (from outside the formal educational system) related to education, OERs and the future:
- The first item (around 800 words) provides a general view of the future (where sharing knowledge through OERs would be natural and mainstream rather than problematic). It is written as if that future had already arrived (i.e. some time after the time of the necessary critical mass) http://www.coalitionblog.org/2010/11/the-future-we-got-%E2%80%93-earth-date-zero-plus-twenty/
- The second (also around 800 words) is a learner's view of using the Internet to learn, thanks to freely available resources and discussion groups.http://www.appropedia.org/TheFWD_pamela_mclean_The_Education_We_Deserve
www.dadamac.net
Hi Benjamin & JoyceOn Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Benjamin Stewart <bnleez@gmail.com> cited Joyce:Ben -- I agree great discussion.You ask, If everyone had to freely [give] away their knowledge because OER was the only option, would folks who need to earn a living through knowledge creation survive?Very often in these discussions we find ourselves focusing on existing economic models associated with traditional publishing rather than taking a more generative and systemic view.
Consider the huge waste of social capital when measured by the billions of individuals who are unable to access quality education opportunities. I would suggest that the potential contribution of OER to the global economy by widening access to education opportunities far exceeds any loss of income that may arise from reduced sales of closed texts.
The mechanics of the traditional publishing model in a digital world are fundamentally broken. Attempting to generate market value from digital learning artefacts where the marginal cost of reproduction is near zero can only be achieved by restricting and artificially controlling access to that knowledge through restrictive copyright. It's not rocket science -- restricting access will result in price increases. The tragedy of the digital commons in a closed world is the fact that the distributors are regulating access -- not the creators of the knowledge. How and why did we let this happen?
On a positive note -- those of us collaborating in the free culture to produce free (libre and gratis) alternatives will succeed because the economic fundamentals are on our (or should I say oer) side ;-). It is only a matter of time. Our responsibility is to decide how long this inevitable future will take.
Cheers
Wayne