Open Education: a view from the South

Open Education: research from the SouthDr Glenda CoxSenior LecturerCentre for Innovation in Learning and TeachingUniversity of Cape Town

Transition to Library (2014 ongoing)-Training Advocacy and SupportManagement (2010-2014)Research

PhD 2013-2016

Glenda Cox

VOLUNTARY contribution of openly licensed materialsNo mandate. 2

University on the slopes of Table Mountain (Devils peak in the background) This research was done at UCT a medium size; 27 993 students and 4808 staff

including 1000 permanent academics across the seven faculties

3

27 993 STUDENTS4808STAFF

The local organizing committee is from the University of Cape Town27 993 students and 4808 staffResidential with increasing blended and online approaches4

Open Education at UCTScholar

ScholarScholar

StudentScholar

Community

2007200820092010201120122013201420152016

VC StudentOER ProjectHealth OER Project

UCT the home of OpenAdd 2016 and IP Law- Tobias CC legal Lead SA5

Research into the Social and Cultural acceptability of Open Educational Resources (OER) in the Global South (South Africa)

Glenda CoxSenior Lecturer, Centre for Innovation in Learning and Teaching (CILT), University of Cape TownHenry TrotterResearcher, CILT

Research questions

Primary research question: Why do South African lecturers adopt or not adopt OER?Subsidiary research questions:Which factors shape lecturers OER adoption decisions? How do lecturers social conditions shape OER adoption?How does an institutions culture shape lecturers adoption of OER?How do lecturers attitudes towards OER, particularly as relates to quality, shape OER adoption?

University ProfilesUCTUFHUNISAStudent accessResidentialResidentialDistanceStudent numbers26 00011 000 400 000+LocationUrbanRuralDispersedApproachTraditionalTraditionalComprehensiveInstitutional cultureCollegialBureaucraticManagerialCopyright owner of teaching materialsLecturersInstitutionInstitution

We travelled to the other universities and conducted workshops on OER and Creative Commons. These universities have quite different characteristics, as the table shows.10

6 interviewees per universityStructuredOne-on-one30 minutes1 hour interviews50-56 questionsCovering multiple elements of teaching and OER activity

Interviews (18)

After conducting the workshops, we interviewed 6 staff members at each university on their teaching and OER in/activities.11

OER adoption pyramid

As we were conducting our research, it became clear that a number of factors shaped OER adoption decisions at these universities. But 6 of them stood out as having a determinative effect on OER activity and its potential. These are factors which, if you ask, can OER activity proceed here without them?, the answer would be no. So we developed what we call The OER Adoption Pyramid.12

OER Readiness:academics as creatorsUCTUFHUNISAVolitionAvailabilityCapacityAwarenessPermissionAccess

Level of OER readinessVery lowLowMediumHighVery high

In this second one, this shows OER readiness when the academic is taken as OER creators. Here the key feature is that UFH and UNISA possess copyright over academics teaching materials, so academics are not able to create and share OER from their teaching materials. They do not have permission.13

OER Readiness:institutions as creatorsUCTUFHUNISAVolitionAvailabilityCapacityAwarenessPermissionAccess

Level of OER readinessVery lowLowMediumHighVery high

This third OER readiness table looks at institutions as creators, which shows challenges for a university like UCT (which has given copyright over teaching materials to the academics), challenges for UFH (which lacks awareness and volition) and real opportunities for UNISA which has developed an OER Strategy to potentially (in the future) share its IP assets as OER materials. (There is no need for a table showing institutions as users, because institutions do not typically use educational resources; rather academics do that.)

14

Which institution is OER ready?UCT is OER ready if the individual academic is viewed as the agent of activity :personal volition is the keyUNISA is OER ready if the institution is viewed as the agent of activity :institutional volition is the keyUFH is not OER ready for either OER use or creation because: both the institution and academics lack awareness; academics lack permission to create

15

Explaining Volition

Attitudes towards OERThis study also revealed more personal concerns about sharing from the interviews at the three institutions.

2 Key FindingsThe openness of an OER is rarely more important than the practical, pedagogical concerns surrounding any educational materials relevance and quality in terms of a specific intended use.

Lecturers appear to be guided by two key principles: they believe in an open educational ethic, and they find that there is pedagogical utility in going through the process of making materials open (especially in anticipating greater scrutiny, and therefore improving the quality of their work)

While the ethic behind this openness may correspond with a potential users personal educational values, it does not override the necessity that the materials meet other subjective standards of relevance, utility and quality.

18

Explaining the relations between CULTURE, structure and agency in Lecturers contribution and non-contribution to Open Educational Resources in a higher education institutionThesis Title:

19

Context

Enabler and Barriers to contribution of OER

Open culture and open philosophy but Lack of awareness. Institutions are not always supportive of sharing and do not have a culture of sharing

OER is premised on the simple and powerful idea that the worlds knowledge is a public good and that technology in general and the World Wide Web in particular provides an extraordinary opportunity for everyone to share, use, and reuse knowledge (Hewlett Foundation) Not everyone has access, Digital divide between Global south and North, Lack of ability and skills

There is a general feeling that quality will improve if materials are available for peer scrutinyBut there are concerns about the readiness of materialsThat some materials may be of poor qualityDifferent views on a quality check: one says up to author and user /other says a quality check would protect the institution and the individual

Policy versus academic freedom in fact the opposite was the case contributors liked the fact that they could choose9 said policy would NOT enable themPolicy and reward would not enable non-contributors, 2 Contributors were enabled by small grants and others said grants are useful

Pedagogy: Using OER can give students more options. Academics can use and share OER an move towards Open practice However, many academics do not want to change their pedagogical practice

20

CultureRelations Empirical evidenceContext

StructureAgent

14 Academics in 7 Faculties

14 academics- 7 contributing, 7 notInterviews and also questionnaires that I will explain a little laterRange of age, gender and rank21

Institutional Culture

McNay 1995

22

Margaret ArcherSocial Realism-Sociological theory

23

CultureRelations

StructureAgentHow does structure influence agency?Margaret Archer (Social Realism)

Archer (2003) is concerned with the burning question: How does structure influence agency? Social theorists have tried to theorise the relationship between the two. Is there a process or causal mechanism that links the two? Archer (2003) argues that it is the properties and powers of agents that is key to the process.

3 stages: structure and culture objectively shape the situations that agents confront involuntarily-and posses poweres of constraints and enablements2. Subjects have concerns and are subjective in their responsesCourses of action are produced through the reflexive deliberations of subjects who subjectively determine their practical projects in relation to their objective circumstances.24

Ultimate concerns...Individuals develop and define their ultimate concerns, those internal goods that they care about most (Archer 2007:42)...develop course (s) of action to realise that concern by elaborating a project...Translated into a set of practices

25

Agents ask:

What do I want and how do I go about getting it?What should I do?

26

Culture Mediated process through internal conver-sations

StructureAgent (Ultimate concerns)Margaret Archer (Social Realism)

Agents have various ways of foreseeing or anticipating challenges, and also acting strategically to discover ways around constraints, agents have to diagnose their situations, they have to identify their own interests, and they must design projects they deem appropriate to attaining their ends(Archer 2003; p9). How do they do this? According to Archer they do this via the internal conversation which Archer defines as the modality through which reflexivity towards self, society and the relationship between them is exercised and she argues it is this reflexivity that is the most important of personal emergent properties. Archer (2003) argues that human reflexivity is central to the process of mediation.27

Bottom linePeople have different ultimate concerns Lecturers who are sharing are concerned about the Global South and sharing educationLecturers who are not sharing are focused on their classrooms but also seem especially self critical and do not see the value of sharing or that their materials are of good enough quality to share

The need for OER in South AfricaWe are currently in a crisis in Higher Education

Opportunity to create more OER while transforming the curriculum

Students can still learn and access materials

Cape Town: host city for the OEC 2017 (7-10 March)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/barbourians/

Celebrations and Communities

Years10CELEBRATING

32

ROER4D SP4 slides prepared by:Henry Trotter henry.trotter@uct.ac.za / trotterhenry@hotmail.com

UCT image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/barbourians/

33