OpenEd: Week 2,3,4 Background Readings in Open Education

QUESTIONS: What do these overviews of the field have in common? What do they emphasize differently? What are the aims of the authors of each report? Do you see a bias toward or against any ideas, organizations, or approaches in any of the reports? Which report spoke the most clearly to you, and why do you think it did? Based on where the field is now, and these initial ideas about where it might go, what part of the open education movement is most interesting to you? Why?

The common matter in theses overviews is the OER movement what it is developing in current time, studying about their enablers and inhibitors. (See attributes to be an OER)

The OER (Open Educational Resources) movement is very recent and arise the needed to address all initiatives of different institutions and foundations about it.

The first overviews define some concepts, who are involved, enablers and inhibitors of the movement and treat the situation with general view point enumerating the different projects existents, organizations and the financial needs to support this work. In this overview, Giving Knowledge for Free, the OECD emphasize in the economic point, sustainability of OER projects with the cooperation between organizations. Also so many costs and revenue models are mentioned here, for example, the replacement model, the foundation, donation or endowment model, the segmentation model, the conversion model, the voluntary support model, the contributor pays model.(See mass collaboration model)

The second overview developed by OLCOS organization, Open Educational Practices and Resources, speak about a roadmap, five years hence, on 2012. They purpose some objectives in different matters like rights, educational practices (social software), use of ICT for lifelong learning needs and others. This roadmap has been carried out to inform and support a transformation in new educational practices (See a claim from Elisa Spadavecchia).

The third overview speaks about the role of Flora Hewlett Foundation like leadership of this movement in the future. They speak about their capability to carry out this role with their OPLI initiative. Also speak about the need of join with other movements as e-science and CI (cyberinfrastructure) to benefit from them.

In my opinion, this seem well that somebody tries to analyze this movement and look for the barriers and opportunities, but I am against of a leadership that dictate the steps to follow, I think that the organizations must cooperate between them.

All reports speak clearly for me; all make references and put examples, figures and hyperlinks for improvement the knowledge.

The two first overviews are very interesting for me. Both speak about the enablers and inhibitors, but in concrete term, the first overview like me when talk the economic sustainability of different project, and the second when speak about new educational practices and the use of social software to make a collaborative practices. See how the Wiki and Weblog software are used to carry out a course, is more interesting and make me think about the possibility of integration between social software (wiki, weblog, messenger, etc..) and LMS(open; warning, Blackboard patents the concept of an LMS), CMS(open) and others tools more specific, oriented to educational area.