The end
of Week 4 already, and it has been a week of highs and lows. I started the week
thinking a lot about last week’s readings and videos. A silly joke stuck in my
mind. I tried out a new piece of software and created the joke at the same
time. Well, it wasn’t the funniest, but it WAS great fun to create!
One of
the courses I put together and teach is Appreciation of eLearning Tools, which
is why I am always playing with software. I have worked for Manukau Institute
of Technology for 17 years, but I have only been in my current position since
February 2017. Since then I have revamped four courses in the Graduate
Certificate in Applied eLearning, I have revamped a course in the old
Certificate in Tertiary Teaching, and I am currently looking at creating
content for two courses in the new NZ certificate in Tertiary Teaching. The one
course is Creative Delivery. Finding OER resources is a perfect way to go!
I enjoyed reading David Wiley’s blog (May 2, 2017) On
OER Enabled
Pedagogy
. He claimed that the “the terms “open pedagogy” and “open educational
practices” are understood so differently by so many people that there is
literally no hope of achieving a useful consensus about the meaning of either
of these terms”. I have noticed this in the readings and in the interviews I
conducted for my Week 3 video. The use of the term OER-enabled pedagogy seems
to be a laudible solution. David defined OER-enabled pedagogy as “
the
set of teaching and learning practices only possible or practical when you have
permission to engage in the 5R activities”. This definition looks at the
teaching and learning strategies using OER that are made possible through the
use of OER and how these strategies impact on both learners and teachers. There
is a simple logic underlying this pedagogical approach:
- we learn by “doing” 4
- copyright limits what we can do, therefore, it limits the way we learn 4
- removing copyright opens up the possibilities and allows us to learn in new ways.
I
also acknowledge the logic in the argument from Stephen Downes on Creating,
Finding, and Using OERs
. He discussed the
background of Connectivism and his conversations with George Siemens. The
similarity between the 5 Rs and the Connectivist model of learning with aggregation,
remix, repurpose, and feed forward, is striking. Stephen argued that the
underlying value and importance of OERs is not just in the realm of educational
content. He suggested that instead of looking at OERs as merely educational
content, we should be seeing them as conversations between learner and teacher,
and between the learners themselves, with the ultimate goal of learning.
I
have downloaded a copy of the book Open:
The Philosophy and Practices that are Revolutionizing Education and Science
,
edited by Robert Biswas-Diener and Rajiv Jhangiani. I have enjoyed the chapters
of this book that I have read so far. The book’s introduction outlined some
ideas on open access to education, something dear to my heart, As a foundation
(bridging/enabling) educator for nearly ten years, teaching on a programme with
open access, I have thought about these issues intensively. I attended a
conference called Success and opportunity in Challenging Times (National
Association of Enabling Educators of Australia, NAEEA 2015, held at Western
Sydney University). I wrote
a
review
of the discussion which centred on the reach of
education, widening participation, and open access.
Western Sydney University, NAEEA, 2015 |
The
book Open was of particular interest as the educators come from a background as
researchers in psychology. Prior to qualifying as an educator at all levels of
the curriculum, I was a qualified psychologist. I am very aware of the benefit
of open research and open data in the area of psychology.
In
the final chapter by Rajiv Jhangiani stated “The opposite of open is not
closed; the opposite of open is broken”. He backed up his argument by referring
to broken academic publishing practices, broken science protocols, and even
“chips and cracks” in pedagogical beliefs. As he stated, “A great many
educators continue to teach in a manner that assumes their principal role is
that of content delivery, despite living in an age of unparalleled access to
information” (p.268). He outlined the requirements for making open access, open
science, open educational resources, and open pedagogy, the default practices
in higher education.
Jhangiani
used a delightful analogy, “The pencil metaphor” by The William and Flora
Hewlett Foundation (licensed under CC BY 4.0.) based an idea from a friend and
mentor, a fellow member of the Virtual Worlds Working Group, Lindy Orwin. Pencil Metaphor |
He
stated that instead of approaching open evangelism as disparate factions, we
should be united in a recognition and response to the wood (the audience), i.e.
the mainstream who would follow open practice if it was required or they could
see the benefits of doing so. I like to see myself as a sharp one, following
the leaders, in this care George and David!
So,
why do I mention lows for the week? One low stands out so clearly for me. If
you want to find out what I did, check out my little video (a direct export from
PowerPoint 2016, so nothing flash!) I cannot mention it again – if you want the
facts, check out the video!
The
highs? Well, using the information provided in the course material, I have been
searching for resources using the links provided. What a wealth of material! I
had not even realised that the Google Advanced Search would sort by usage
rights. The OER Commons and the Creative Commons search – wonderful! My only
problem now is selecting from the huge amount of OER resources available. I am
so looking forward to the Week 6 challenge! I want to use, create, adapt, and
contribute towards OER.