The Value of Open and Open as a Value

Adoption of sharing and reuse of open materials in Dutch HE

Robert Schuwer & Ben Janssen

Agenda

• Motivation• Methodology• Findings• Conclusions & recommendations

Motivation

• National strategic Agenda HO2525 “Value of knowledge”• Action plan taskforce Ministry of Education• Survey Fall 2015: no widespread adoption of OER• No clear picture of state-of-the-art in Dutch HE

CC-BY Hester Jelgerhuis

Methodology

Research question

What will lead to or is needed for widespread adoption of sharing and reusing open learning materials and online courses by academic and teaching staff (teachers) in publicly funded Higher Education institutions in the Netherlands?

Terminology and assumptions

• Widespread adoption: adoption by early majority (Rogers)• Open sharing and reuse: sharing and reusing open

learning materials and online courses• Open sharing and reuse is seen as an innovation in Dutch

HE (OECD, 2014)• Teachers are decisive change agents in the process of

adoption (autonomous) (Sloep & Jochems, 2007)

Teacher

Management

Support

Motives

Ambition

Barrier

Experience

TeacherMinistry Institution

Accelerator

Institution

Department/team

Policy

Boundary condition

Teacher

TeacherTeacherTeacherTeacher

Methodology

• Approach: Theory of diffusion of innovations (Rogers, 2002) (Rogers, 2003)

• Semi-structured interview– In total 55, each 30-60 minutes– Recorded, transcripted, coded

• Teachers, management, support staff– Some experience with “open sharing and reuse”– Mixture of subject fields

• Connected to interviewee’s idea of “open”

HE institutions

Model

• Open license• In OER repository

or on MOOC-site• For the world

• Copyright clearing• Metadating

(Issack, 2011)

Code treeCode

Ambition Role of the teacher

Policy

Role open online education Notion of open

Motives Share, reuse

Behaviour Share, reuse

Accelerators Stimulate sharing, stimulate reuse

Barriers Cultural, infrastructural, legal, QA, organisation, professionalisation

Support

Boundary conditions Policy, financial, infrastructural, legal, knowledge about open, vision on quality, organisation

Influences Top down, bottom up, outside in

Findings

CC-BY Hester Jelgerhuis

Findings, quantitative

Findings, quantitative

Findings, qualitative

Motives

• Institutional gains: marketing, reaching new target groups, financial (expensive resources)

• Educational gains: blended learning, efficiency, handling diversity, improving quality

• Personal gains: recognition, idealistic, counterbalancing commercial publishers

Some quotes

Whatever materials staff has prepared, fact is that these materials have a life cycle of just one year. (...) The speed of progress is so fast that we in fact discourage the development of materials by our staff.

Take the basics of mathematics for example, why should we develop materials on this matter ourselves?

I myself have developed an increasing hate against this copyrights’ terror (...). I also think (...) that if an edition of a book is ten years old, by definition the book should be made available by open access, period.

For the sake of our children and the planet, it is necessary that all those people cooperate and solve problems in cooperation

There are many examples of teachers who really want to help others with their knowledge. In return, they often receive input for their research. I sometimes call these people knowledge communists.

Sharing• There exists a great variety of practices of sharing and

reuse of learning materials:– Informally (between 2 teachers, across institutions)– With and without open license– A variety of channels (Youtube, Slideshare, Facebook, Dropbox)– In teams, within a faculty, within institution, between institutions, for the world

• Receiving feedback on shared materials is a crucial factor in achieving a structural behavior of sharing by teachers

• MOOC as a format for sharing is more attractive

Some quotes

One has to be very careful, especially if one also stores materials. So to protect myself, if I use things of which I have doubts, I will not even try to use our own portal, because it could bring my institution into trouble.

My impression is that, at least with teachers with whom I speak, all of them are very willing to share

Reuse

• Most mentioned: video and slides• Awareness on copyrights (open license) not always

present

Reuse has bigger advantages when you give a basic course, while a course in the Master's phase or a more advanced course you modify the materials in line with the associated research.

Barriers

• Most mentioned: lack of time, copyrights• IT-skills and aversion to IT• Not aware of opportunities of open learning materials• Too little support available• Uncertainty about quality and what is allowed

Some quotesBecause of all the effort invested into creating resources, I also would be very nervous about letting them out on the street and never hear anything about them.

The not invented here syndrome is heavily present here (...). And this attitude holds for nearly everything, except for the publishers. I really can’t figure out why publishers are seen as right.

One of the things I really notice, is the unfamiliarity of teachers with anything regarding copyright. (..). And they have no idea what they are doing. So when we want to open it using Creative Commons, we are in trouble.

Being an excellent researcher and being less in teaching is accepted much more than vice versa

An LMS like Blackboard impedes sharing of learning materials.

Support

• Legal• IT• Educational• Necessary precondition• Often unknown if support is available

Some quotes

Every now and you have a “yes-but” type of person in your team, who says: yes, it is nice but have you thought about this? Have you thought about that? This is not always a pleasure, but I think it ultimately helps to improve the quality.

What I find important is convenience; so automatic metadata, automatic recommendations based on the learning materials you are just creating, have contact with colleagues, et cetera.

Conclusions & recommendations

CC-BY Hester Jelgerhuis

Conclusions (1)• Autonomy of teacher is recognized by both management and teacher• Teachers are insufficiently familiar with presence or content of policies

of their management with regard to sharing and reuse of learning materials;

• Support and “what’s in it for me” are necessary preconditions for adoption

Conclusions (2)

• Publishing MOOCs is experienced as an accelerator for the adoption of open sharing of materials and courses within an institution

• Acceptance of open sharing and reuse at institutional level, expressing itself in a policy that is translated into concrete activities and guidelines, affects widespread adoption by teachers in a positive way

Recommendations (1)

1. Make the added value of open sharing and reuse of learning materials clear to teachers;

2. Ensure that this change towards open sharing and reuse is accompanied by structural support, in terms of time (money), a supporting infrastructure, IT-related services, legal and educational support, and safe spaces for experiments;

Recommendations (2)

3. Formulate policies on open sharing and reuse of learning materials, both at the level of institution and departments, in order to enable the activities mentioned under recommendations 1 and 2;

4. Link these policies on open sharing and reuse to other themes on educational innovation or to themes like internationalization.

Thank you!

r.schuwer@fontys.nl openedconsult@xs4all.nl

ColofonReferencesIssack, S.M. (2011). OERs in Context--Case Study of Innovation and Sustainability of Educational Practices at the University of Mauritius.European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.OECD (2014). Measuring Innovation in Education: A New Perspective, Educational research and Innovation, OECD Publishing. Series.Rogers, E.M. (2002). Diffusion of preventive innovations. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 989–993. Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th. Edition, Free Press, New York Sloep, P. B., & Jochems, W. (2007). De e-lerende burger. In J. de Haan & J. Steyaert (red.), Jaarboek ICT en samenleving 2007; Eindelijk digitaal (171-187). Amsterdam: Boom

PicturesWinding road: CC BY-SA https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_old_road_winding_over_St._Gotthard_pass_(el._2106_m._or_6,909_ft.)_high_in_the_Swiss_Alps.JPGFree bird: CC BY https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Banner_Free_as_a_Bird_Fundraising_2010_without_text.jpg