I would like to follow up on the some of the notions that “jsener” and Paul West (via Christine Geith) make about getting a good perspective of where we are right now and the ambitions of the Cape Town Open Education Declaration and various institutional models for Open Education. It seems to me that the idea of Open Education is important because it provides a goal, sort of a “magnetic north” for us to use as we refine practice.
Recognizing that open software (FLOSS) is not education and that open content (OER) is not education, are important ways to ensure that we continue to (more or less) travel north toward our goal. I would prefer to think that FLOSS and OER are enablers, necessary but not sufficient, for the incremental progress toward Open Education. David Wiley captures this in his recent posting tilted Content Is Infrastructure, in which he posits that content, like physical infrastructure such as roads, liberates possibilities by reducing barriers to travelers.
I am wondering if our next steps have something to do with helping individuals and institutions use those roads (content) to meet their own needs, while not being too overly critical about whether or not they are traveling “true north,” so long as it seems is if we are traveling with a purpose. It is important that we have trail blazers, but it is equally important that we have individuals and institutions willing to travel along those paths. So, who is using the content made available through the OCWC participants, Open Learn, WikiEducator, etc.? I see many trail blazers from which to learn, but it would be great to hear from those making good use of the paths that are have been created. I have a feeling that there is good practice and use.
- 1134 reads
