Week 1: Reflections on the readings

As an academic librarian, I am often driven to see issues like OER in a very localized context, so I appreciated reading about “openness” in education from a less restricted perspective.

The Almeida article and Pomerantz video really hit on some of things I worry about in regards to OER and its future success.  “OER do have value….In a vacuum, OER are impotent and so is abstract, decontextualized rhetoric about the promise of the OER movement.” (Almeida, P. 15).  In my particular professional setting, I feel there is a real opportunity for “openness” to make a positive impact in the educational experience of students and faculty, but how do you effectively and incrementally change your local culture so that OER and openness begin to take root?

I don’t have the magic answer, but I am working with other campus true believers so that we can  (hopefully) make a difference.

Open Education and Learning

pexels-photo-631522.jpeg

One thing the readings this week made clear about Open Education was that we can have all the openness imaginable, but without knowing how to navigate and use these sources and tools, there really is no education.  If you give someone a car, it does not help them get to where they want to go unless we teach them how to drive.

I am viewing Open Education through the lens of a librarian.  I believe my professional colleagues find it their responsibility to connect and educate people about information.  Librarians have always advocated for access to information as well as promoted the skills to evaluate and use information.  Therefore, as discussed this week and stated by Franklin D. Roosevelt, libraries are essential to democracy.

However, what struck me this week was the idea of authority.  Jeffrey Pomerantz discusses how in this age of information overload, we must all take on an authority role when it comes to the evaluation of information.  The new Association of College and Academic Libraries Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education discusses how “authority is constructed and contextual” and an expert user of information is one that has become an expert in the critical evaluation of sources.  Learning will not occur through open education without this level of authority as a critical consumer of information.  I believe this is something librarians instinctively understand and why we need to make sure we continue to be involved in the Open Education movement.

Constant Consideration

dahlia-1614256_1920Photo from pixabay.com

This week in OpenLearning18, I was reminded of how important it is to clearly indicate the meaning of “open.” I was also reminded that if open education and OERs are truly going to be transformative, then we must also continue to ask ourselves some important questions—what does it take to make courses and resources “open”? open to whom? accessible to whom? open in what way? accessible in what way? These and other questions are integral to ensuring the responsible implementation of OERs.

Emotion and Time as My New-Found Open Educational Resources

I need to tell the story of my personal learning this past week in response to and in conjunction with this weeks readings for OpenLearning18. This story has a lot of different threads, but I promise it ends with my response to the question for this week – how did the readings relate to my thoughts on open educational resources?

I need to start this story with some background about me. Yesterday, February 15, was the 1 month anniversary of the start of my new position as an instructional designer for connected learning here at Colgate. This position is an alternative-academic job for me. Before this job, I spent 14 years studying natural resource management in college and grad school. I had always been interested in the relationship between the environment and people, so I took countless courses in social and behavioral sciences, education, city and regional planning, and of course natural resource management. My scholarship was in urban environmental stewardship and I explored strategies for engaging communities in planting and caring for trees and community gardens in cities. Most recently, I taught a course on environmental activism as an adjunct professor in my first post-PhD gig at Colgate University. I loved teaching, but teaching in the context of being an adjunct was really hard for me on multiple levels. I never really wanted a tenure-track job and after getting a PhD, I was still exploring what other things I could do with it.  So after a lot soul searching, I decided to pursue an alternative-academic career and I landed on instructional design. In my soul-searching, I realized another passion of mine was liberal arts undergraduate education, which was what had launched my own environmental career and desire to pursue graduate school in the first place. Instructional design would allow me to help others enhance their own teaching and learning in the liberal arts, all things I care deeply about just like the environment.

As I sit here 1 month into this instructional designer role, I’m confident that pursuing this “alt-ac” career has been the right move for me (so far, so very good!) However, occasionally it feels somewhat strange that I’m not researching or teaching in the environmental field anymore, that faculty don’t see me as having a PhD or as teaching a course like they do. I also sometimes wonder, what contributions would I have made in my field? What cool research projects would I have started? Those types of thoughts bubbled up for me this week when I stumbled upon Erin Bartram’s quit-lit piece in which she reflects on her decision to leave academia.  I don’t feel quite the same level of grief as Erin because I never really wanted to pursue the tenure-track in the first place. But still, a small part of me feels sad that I never “made it” to a tenure-track professor job and that I left all of that blood, sweat and tears that I put into studying environmental issues behind.

I share this because I went into this instructional design position feeling like I had made this big career shift into a completely different field. So in this past month, I have been pleasantly surprised to find countless references to theories and concepts I had encountered in my former career in the environmental world. For example, uses of the word “ecology” in an educational context: learning ecology, classroom ecology, etc. Bronfenbrenner’s “ecological model of development,” which wasn’t originally developed in the context of natural resources, is cited in the Connected Learning framework and was the conceptual framework for my PhD research in urban forestry. Even the term “resources” in open educational resources resonates with me; like natural resources, open educational resources are things that are produced, conserved, managed (in a sustainable or unsustainable way?)

So earlier this week, I read “50 Shades of Open” by Jeffrey Pomerantz and Robin Peek, which started out with the example of Garret Hardin’s idea of the “commons;” the idea that natural resources that are available for use, but are not publicly owned. Hardin was an ecologist and this idea is foundational to environmental studies: environmental problems are essentially “tragedies of the commons” because stocks of natural resources freely available to all can be depleted if they are overused. Plus, I’m married to an environmental economist, so “the commons” is a recurring theme in my household as well; clearly, this notion of the “commons” resonates with me. Pomerantz and Peek referenced natural resources later in their article, discussing how “open” was used in agriculture and beekeeping initiatives. Their article, as well as Nora Almeida’s article, also mentioned the term “openwashing” which is a riff on “greenwashing,” or the idea that consumer products, for example, are “green” or environmentally sustainable in name only. Again, an environmental term that resonates with me!

Later in the week, I somehow came across Michael Caulfield’s notion of info-environmentalism, which applies the idea of environmentalism and activism on behalf of the natural world to the information “environment” found on the internet. I will delve into my thoughts and excitement around this idea in another post, but all I will say is it blew my mind away. Not because of the concept itself per se, but because it demonstrated perhaps the clearest connection yet between my environmental background and this new field of instructional design around connected learning. Notions of environmental activism and stewardship applied to the internet? to learning? to teaching? Wow. Just wow.

So how do this weeks materials for OpenLearning18 relate to my thoughts on open educational resources? What they relate to is my own thinking about my new role as an instructional designer in which I’ve had access to 2 resources that have felt previously felt CLOSED to me in my former roles as a teacher/scholar. The first resource is time. In my 1st month, my schedule has been largely OPEN compared to my teaching/research schedule of the past. I’ve had time to dive into this cMOOC, blogs, Twitter, readings and to sit and think about them. The second resource is emotion. Because I’ve had time to essentially sit, read and think, I’ve been able to be OPEN to the emotions that my readings tapped into for me. In the case of this past week, it was sadness about leaving academia/the environmental field, which turned into happiness that a lot of the ideas I had encountered and cared so much about in academia/the environmental field were still relevant in my new “alt-ac” position. And most significantly, that I was able to apply my previous knowledge to this new area of connected/open learning that I’m currently learning about. I think the role of emotion is important here because I know from my background in environmental psychology that emotions drive attitudes, which can shape behavior, so positive emotions toward the work I do is critically important, so the excitement I feel is meaningful and being able to express it here on this blog feels empowering…

Perhaps I feel empowered now because time and emotion are two resources that often feel CLOSED within higher education. Time is a obviously a very limited resource for faculty. Emotion is something that at least scientists are taught to avoid to remain objective. Emotion = bias = something to be controlled. As I explained, time and emotion have been opened to me this past month now that I’m not teaching or researching anymore. And that openness has led to personal reflection and to learning (metacognition!) related to this new phase of my professional life. I look back on all of the education I got that lead me here – to this instructional design position where I’m now learning about learning in a new way – and I recall that the most powerful and memorable moments as learner were when my college professors openly expressed their emotions in front of an entire class, or during one-on-one meetings with me during office hours. My most memorable moments as a teacher were when I was able to tap into student emotions and create a setting where they felt free to share with each other and with me during a class discussion. My most memorable moments as a mentee in both undergrad and grad school was when I could share my emotions (usually fears) related to post-college jobs or conducting field research and when they made time to listen to me. So time and emotion absolutely have educational value, as I know from my personal experience as a learner, teacher and mentee in higher education, but they aren’t always out there in the open…

So now, in this new position as an instructional designer for connected learning, I’m asking myself: How can I open up these valuable resources of time and emotion for faculty? What kinds of spaces/places/times can I design or tap into to create more openness to emotion and the learning/reflection that can result? And toward what ends? For me, I hope toward instilling in them the same sort of renewed excitement for teaching, for learning, for making connections, that was instilled in me this past week.

Kal-toh, chess, and tic-tac-toe

This week we peeked into the world of open and flew into a worm hole.  There is sooo much that can be read into one word, and so many uses of the concept that it gets difficult for me to see the multidimensionality of it.  I have a tendency to stay on the surface because that’s what I understand.

On the surface, open education is teaching through a free means.  Open educational resources are the items used in the teaching that are also free.  I’m good here, this is easy to understand.  No cost to teachers or students for textbooks, articles, or any materials the instructor wants to use.

Chess
“Kal-toh is to chess as chess is to tic-tac-toe.” (Tuvok: VOY: “Alter Ego”)

But let’s talk about free.  Free starts to get complicated because free should just be that, but it isn’t.  Just like free from a library isn’t free if you can’t get to the library or you live outside the service area, free on the internet isn’t free if you can’t get onto the internet.  You need a computer and access to get to the free. So what exactly is free? and how do we provide it to ALL to create real openness?  Also, is free, free when we make students pay to be taught?  And here is when I stop playing kal-toh and go back to tic-tac-toe.

So how does this relate to my own idea of open education?  I’m not sure I have an idea about open education… yet.  I do know that  in my practice I want to save the student from having to purchase material to learn something when practical application and discussion can accomplish the same thing.  But the materials we use are the library databases that are not free since they are licensed via the library budget.  So even though they don’t have a textbook, their tuition pays for the subscriptions, so in all technicality that is not free or open.

Can I create assignments that are completely open?  The easy answer is yes, by using open access articles to do information literacy objectives, I could use all free materials. But again… this is not truly free for the student who doesn’t have a computer or the internet at home, because they would not be able to access the material anyway.  To further complicate this, they have already paid for my class.  I’m not sharing my expertise free of charge, which again technically would not be completely open or free.  I keep getting stuck in the free aspect of open.  Because really, nothing in our society is free.

I keep thinking about Star Trek.  The open society where you explore your passions for self-improvement, self-enrichment, and the betterment of all humanity. There is no money.  Everyone (supposedly) has the same opportunities for learning and working.  In this world open education is open and free.  In our world, there are too many facets to “open” and “free” to truly be either.

So until we can live in the Star Trek world, we do the best we can and cut cost to the student where it is feasible.  To me that means, finding ways to provide open educational resources to the faculty to use, finding ways to integrate what the library already owns into an easier medium for the faculty and student to use, and to explore whatever options present themselves to make the life of the student easier.  As a librarian, I am a facilitator of access.

A Cautionary Tale about Expectations

I was talking the other day to a fairly senior administrator in academic affairs about OpenLearning18.  This administrator has been very supportive of our institution’s open initiative, and so I was just bringing him/her up to date on things open.

I made a comment about his/her boss only seeming interested in OER, but not the other “opens.” The admin looked chagrinned and said, “I’m not sure I understand any of the opens besides OER.”  I was, in a word, surprised.   I have been talking with this admin for years about the various aspects of open that I’ve been involved with, and I just assumed he/she understood what I was talking about.  Though in retrospect, I guess most of what I’d talked about in detail was OER.

I wonder how many academic leaders, that each of us interact with, do we think understand the various dimensions of open, but who really don’t.  Could that be a reason it’s been difficult to get traction?  How can we best address these wrong expectations, or more precisely, how can we better educate our leaders on the range of opens?

Something to think about!

What I’m Looking Forward To in Open Learning ’18

What do you hope to get from Open Learning ’18? 
“Open Educational Resources” is a prevalent term in the library world, but many don’t realize what it actually means (myself included at times). I hope to gain a better understanding of open resources through participating in this course as well as learning how to advocate for open resources by gaining the knowledge to define them for others. 

What do you hope to contribute to Open Learning ’18?
In the abstract, I hope to contribute my own (albeit limited) knowledge of open resources and share thoughts with others about how to advocate for, use, and teach open educational resources in libraries and on college campuses. However, as I am unsure of the format of this course, I’m can’t say exactly how much I can contribute. I hope to learn a lot, and take it day by day. 

What I’m Looking Forward To in Open Learning ’18

In response to the pre-cMOOC week blogging opportunity (I know I’m a few days late!):

What do you hope to get from Open Learning ’18?

As I mentioned in the Twitter chat on 2/8, I’ve been hearing about Open Educational Resources (OER) in the library world for awhile, but I’m hoping this cMOOC will get me to a better place to advocate for them on my campus. I’m also intrigued by this idea of “All the Opens.” I’ve only ever thought in terms of OER, but to be exposed to different ideas of open classrooms and learning is new to me. As a librarian, instruction is a key component to my job, so I look forward to learning how to make the classroom a more open space in terms of shared ideas and giving students more of a say (and hopefully, more buy-in) in the learning process.

What do you hope to contribute to Open Learning ’18?

I’m not sure yet! I really responded to Sue Erickson’s blog post, which was one of the pre-cMOOC readings. I set up a Twitter account specifically for this experience (and I’ve already participated in my first Twitter chat!). I’m blogging for the first time in over a year. I’m an expert lurker, so this idea of connecting is out of my comfort zone. I don’t feel like I’m going to become a Node during this cMOOC, but I hope to step out a bit and explore the possibilities. I’m just hoping that my participation will add to the conversations that will happen during this course.

 

The network is the deliverable