I'd be interested to hear more about the things to be concerned about in:
Of course, it is not all good. There is a deeply disturbing and absurd movement to try to accreditthe so-called “open educational resources,” with UNESCO seeming to wish to do this for reasonsthat are of dubious benefit. Any attempt to accredit content will only serve to slow down the rateof production, and is as sensible as accrediting books on library shelves. Instead, what should beaccredited is an institution's alignment to a framework of Freedom and Openness.
I don't know about UNESCO, but I can see benefits in streamlining migration of people with skills and qualifications that are internationally recognised. And I see that international recognition possibly developing through collaborative efforts in OER development. What exactly are the absurdities and dubious benefits your are referring to? I think I can agree that accrediting content is a silly idea, but OER could be about much more than just content. As a friend asked me recently, does OER really refer to resources, or is it more accurate to refer to it as Open Education Reform. In that sense, OER would be about much more than content, and all about networked learning, networked teaching, group learning, student exchange programs, teacher exchange programs, and a mashup of short courses offered by a range of people and institutions that could amount to an international degree or other sort of certificate or qualification.
- 807 reads
