As we read about in this week's readings and as many have reiterated in the discussion, one of the most difficult things to overcome when implementing OER initiatives is awareness of what OER are and instilling the confidence in instructors and departments that OER is a viable, sustainable, model with longevity.
During the outset of an OER initiative I think that it is important to target instructors who might have been using OER (they might not be calling it OER) before the initiative was put in place. These are low-hanging-fruit. They might be rogue in that this individual "OER" pursuit does not have the explicit support of their department or college, therefore any support or encouragement at all from libraries or otherwise will likely go a long way towards their continued use of OER. Because these adopters will be distributed widely across campus, there will likely be no coherency across their efforts and supporting them will be difficult at scale. This early stage may last two, maybe three, years but following that a more concerted effort will be necessary to deploy OER at scale.
During the next phase of OER adoption broader support might be necessary. That is, OER champions might need to target departments in addition to individual faculty. Using the rogue adoptions as examples of the possible, departments might see how their support could yield change within them. At this stage it is conceivable that departments' contributions, if any, will be monetary. It might be that they can supplement or match capital incentives provided by the OER championing body. It might also be the case that they agree to fund the position of a graduate student or staff person to help individuals in their department adopt OER in lieu of direct salary supplements. This will hopefully spur a more concerted effort still within departments significantly increasing adoption numbers over the course of a few years.
If successful, it could be that departments would be willing to support OER champions even more than before having seen results of their early influence. If they are OER champions could begin focusing efforts on large-scale adoptions. A large-scale OER adoption would be on the order of replacing the textbook of a course with multiple sections and multiple instructors, perhaps more than ten, with OER. Of course care to preserve academic freedom on the part of the instructors should be at the forefront of this effort -perhaps not easily done. As we discussed in the first week of the course, one of the benefits of utilizing OER is the preservation of academic freedom. (OEToolkit) Convincing instructors of this is will likely be a challenge, but providing them with the understanding, tools, and staff support to realize those modifications is paramount. It could be that all of the instructors in the cohort only need to agree on a resource that will be the basis of what is used in their course, OpenStax Calculus, for example. They could all use it in any way they like, supplementing or detracting from it as necessary as long as their choices are costless. Adoptions such as this will have the most impact and with time and will become noteworthy on campus.
This is a dream scenario. This scenario would require the luxury of significant funding from university administrators perhaps even regents. It would also require the cooperation of instructional designers, college deans, and staff to be successful. That is not to mention that it will not happen over night. Implementing a model such as this would take several years and at least one full-time staff to coordinate the entire effort.
OEToolkit Draft 0.7. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2017, from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iqaDI04UO9NoAmK9kCtJLVBopgB_68uoRt6R0FMDKlM/edit#heading=h.3whwml4
Chapter 3, "Open education supports true academic freedom"
During the outset of an OER initiative I think that it is important to target instructors who might have been using OER (they might not be calling it OER) before the initiative was put in place. These are low-hanging-fruit. They might be rogue in that this individual "OER" pursuit does not have the explicit support of their department or college, therefore any support or encouragement at all from libraries or otherwise will likely go a long way towards their continued use of OER. Because these adopters will be distributed widely across campus, there will likely be no coherency across their efforts and supporting them will be difficult at scale. This early stage may last two, maybe three, years but following that a more concerted effort will be necessary to deploy OER at scale.
During the next phase of OER adoption broader support might be necessary. That is, OER champions might need to target departments in addition to individual faculty. Using the rogue adoptions as examples of the possible, departments might see how their support could yield change within them. At this stage it is conceivable that departments' contributions, if any, will be monetary. It might be that they can supplement or match capital incentives provided by the OER championing body. It might also be the case that they agree to fund the position of a graduate student or staff person to help individuals in their department adopt OER in lieu of direct salary supplements. This will hopefully spur a more concerted effort still within departments significantly increasing adoption numbers over the course of a few years.
If successful, it could be that departments would be willing to support OER champions even more than before having seen results of their early influence. If they are OER champions could begin focusing efforts on large-scale adoptions. A large-scale OER adoption would be on the order of replacing the textbook of a course with multiple sections and multiple instructors, perhaps more than ten, with OER. Of course care to preserve academic freedom on the part of the instructors should be at the forefront of this effort -perhaps not easily done. As we discussed in the first week of the course, one of the benefits of utilizing OER is the preservation of academic freedom. (OEToolkit) Convincing instructors of this is will likely be a challenge, but providing them with the understanding, tools, and staff support to realize those modifications is paramount. It could be that all of the instructors in the cohort only need to agree on a resource that will be the basis of what is used in their course, OpenStax Calculus, for example. They could all use it in any way they like, supplementing or detracting from it as necessary as long as their choices are costless. Adoptions such as this will have the most impact and with time and will become noteworthy on campus.
This is a dream scenario. This scenario would require the luxury of significant funding from university administrators perhaps even regents. It would also require the cooperation of instructional designers, college deans, and staff to be successful. That is not to mention that it will not happen over night. Implementing a model such as this would take several years and at least one full-time staff to coordinate the entire effort.
OEToolkit Draft 0.7. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2017, from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iqaDI04UO9NoAmK9kCtJLVBopgB_68uoRt6R0FMDKlM/edit#heading=h.3whwml4
Chapter 3, "Open education supports true academic freedom"
Comments
Post a Comment