Being somewhat of
a self-proclaimed “geek”, to me, the term “Open” within the context of higher
education is similar to the definition of open source software; “computer
software with its source code made available and licensed with a license in
which the copyright holder provides the rights to study, change and distribute
the software to anyone and for any purpose” (Wikipedia). In this sense, education is available to all,
without cost. But more importantly, like
open source software, people are not only allowed access to use these educational
opportunities, but they are encouraged to join a community of users and
collaborate in an effort to improve the resources. Carr (2013) defines open as having the legal
right to revise, remix and redistribute the resources.
In particular, I found the articles
pertaining to Open Educational Resources to be really encouraging. We all know how exorbitant the costs of
higher education are and the concept of not only making educational
opportunities and resources available either at a discounted cost or for free
is amazing. But what is more amazing, is
the potential for people to be able to customize these course resources to suit
their needs. In terms of MOOCS, I always
understood their “openness” to mean that anyone could participate, free of
charge, and that all of the educational resources would be made readily available,
free of charge as well. After all, if
there was some type of fee associated with a MOOC, then it truly are not open.
Resources
Open-source software.
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software
Carr, D. (2013, August
14). In shadow of moocs, open education makes progress. Retrieved from
http://www.informationweek.com/education/leadership/in-shadow-of-moocs-open-education-makes/240159865
Hi James,
ReplyDeleteThanks for another interesting post! I enjoyed the comparison to open source software and indeed wish there were an open source platform for moocs. I also think there's a distinction to be make between xmoocs and cmoocs, to say that the latter in some senses is more open than the former. While they both allow open enrollment without cost (although you can pay to enroll for credit in many cmoocs), the former seems to me at least a bit less open as far as content and materials go. I think that's to be expected given the for-profit nature. It would be great if we had truly open courses, open from the sense of access/enrollment, who could view the conversations, who could modify and use resources, and who could build upon and thus improve the platform. Yeah, probably not gonna happen, but it would be nice!