Are We Asking Too Much of OER? A Conversation on OER from OE Global 2023.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Are We Asking Too Much of OER? A Conversation on OER from OE Global 2023.
Authors:	Flinn, Chad¹, Openo, Jason²
Source:	International Review of Research in Open & Distributed Learning. Nov2024, Vol. 25 Issue 4, p201-214. 14p.
Subject Terms:	Intellectual property, Electronic textbooks, Education conferences, Educational technology, *Conversation, Social intelligence, Trade secrets
Geographic Terms:	Edmonton (Alta.)
Abstract:	This paper examines the pervasive discourse of disruption in OER literature by recounting a facilitated conversation hosted at the 2023 Open Education Global conference held in Edmonton, Alberta. This dialogue used Bacchi's "what is the problem represented to be" (WPR) approach to structure the conversation in four movements. The first movement problematized the concept of OER by discussing the educational challenges OER supposedly addresses, such as the high cost of textbooks. The second movement considered the genealogy, historical development, and philosophical underpinnings of OER. The third movement accounted for the disruptors within the OER movement, exploring what OER have disrupted and discussing if disruption is even a legitimate goal of OER. The fourth and final movement pivoted to examine resistors and forms of resistance to OER, including the protection of intellectual property rights, copyright concerns, and Marcuse's idea of repressive tolerance. This single conversation generated a small but important piece of social intelligence within a much larger dialogue about open education, open pedagogy, and OER during a time of flux (characterized by intense politicization, the relentless progression of educational technology, the intensification of marketization, and the growing popularity of all-inclusive textbooks). This social intelligence can be used to guide the next transition phase for OER development. While the conversation does not offer tidy solutions or even clear recommendations, it does suggest that the next wave of OER practitioners would always do well to focus on the goals OER can achieve, not what they hope to disrupt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of International Review of Research in Open & Distributed Learning is the property of Governors of Athabasca University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	This paper examines the pervasive discourse of disruption in OER literature by recounting a facilitated conversation hosted at the 2023 Open Education Global conference held in Edmonton, Alberta. This dialogue used Bacchi's "what is the problem represented to be" (WPR) approach to structure the conversation in four movements. The first movement problematized the concept of OER by discussing the educational challenges OER supposedly addresses, such as the high cost of textbooks. The second movement considered the genealogy, historical development, and philosophical underpinnings of OER. The third movement accounted for the disruptors within the OER movement, exploring what OER have disrupted and discussing if disruption is even a legitimate goal of OER. The fourth and final movement pivoted to examine resistors and forms of resistance to OER, including the protection of intellectual property rights, copyright concerns, and Marcuse's idea of repressive tolerance. This single conversation generated a small but important piece of social intelligence within a much larger dialogue about open education, open pedagogy, and OER during a time of flux (characterized by intense politicization, the relentless progression of educational technology, the intensification of marketization, and the growing popularity of all-inclusive textbooks). This social intelligence can be used to guide the next transition phase for OER development. While the conversation does not offer tidy solutions or even clear recommendations, it does suggest that the next wave of OER practitioners would always do well to focus on the goals OER can achieve, not what they hope to disrupt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	14923831
DOI:	10.19173/irrodl.v25i4.7744