OER Faculty Roadmap

Return to Roadmap

OER Implementation 

Continuum model of practices, or continua, have emerged as a methodological tool to understand OER use.  Continua are wonderful in that they provide a broad understanding of OER adoption and use in the classroom. Yet, continua are not ‘user-friendly’ and include language that is somewhat esoteric. As Judith and Bull (2016) acknowledge, many would-be users of OER content lack practitioner literacy. This means that many instructors who have the right intent, and want to incorporate OER in their courses, are often stymied by how overwhelming the adoption process can become. Hopefully, the other sections of this Canvas module will help ameliorate this. In this section, we want to simplify OER use in the classroom.

OER use in the classroom refers to the consumption phase of OER resources, where it is employed by the instructor and consumed by the student in the classroom setting. This phase can be envisioned in several stages:

• • The first stage involves how OER will be consumed by students. Is OER used as supplemental material for the course? Or, will OER comprise the main course content? For many instructors in the physical sciences, OER could be supplemental, especially for lab work. For lecture-only courses, such as in the humanities, OER could replace the course textbook.
  • The second stage involves the decision to create open content for classroom use. OER creation is correlated to an identified need by an instructor, usually in their class. Once a decision is made, two paths emerge. The first path is to create open content specifically for the course. This usually involves the development of supplemental material, which may or may not be shared openly, either through the campus department or through an open platform. The second path is to create content specifically to be consumed by instructors in the discipline and not just in the curator’s course. This type of OER is best accompanied by grant and/or fellowship funding as the intent of the work is to reach a broader audience. Still, even these OER projects with the intent for broad consumption originate from a need identified by an instructor in a course.
  • The final stage of OER use in the classroom involves the application of Open Education Practices, or OEP. OER is a central component in OEP; OER resources are often set up for the 5 Rs of OER: reuse, retain, revise, remix, and redistribute. OEP seeks to create a learner-driven classroom environment that values access, affordability, and cultural responsiveness. OEP are a set of pedagogical practices that include engaging students in content creation and making their learning accessible. After OER implementation is understood, the next step is exploring OEP. OEP is discussed in more detail below.

Continuum of Open Practice

Stagg (2014) suggests that there are five stages when in comes to the adoption of OER: (1) Awareness/Access; (2) Original Sharing; (3) Passive Remix; (4) Active Remix; and (5) Developing, or student co-creation. The author does not suggest that OER is only a linear process, where one has to start with the first stage, awareness. For example, a practitioner may start the process at the third stage, passive remix. Stagg also recognizes that a linear model does not properly visualize the interdependence of the five stages. For example, original sharing could be in the classroom, where student co-creation occurs. This then could lead to an active remix for future use.

OER Implementation Framework

Judith and Bull (2014) also provide a continuum of OER use in the classroom. This continuum develops from a broad understanding of the challenges facing OER adoption. Challenges range from identifying suitable OER that meets the learning objectives for a course, to properly retrieving that resource, to ‘use permissions’. Couple this with an overall lack of practitioner literacy and self-efficacy, and there ends up being no single effective strategy on implementing OER in the classroom. The framework below conceptualizes the various strategies, with the assumption that as we move from left to right in a linear fashion, we see more collaboration.

Continuum of Openness

This diverse range of strategies leads Judith and Bull a ‘continuum of openness’, which reflects how the above challenges and strategy adoption ultimately affect the oer use. At one end of the continuum we see more restrictive responses to OER where the institutions supporting the OER creation retain influence over content. A good example would include the Luminos platform by the UC Press. Even though the platform advocates for authors to use the CC-BY license, which allows for the most liberal use of content, the monograph style of writing does not lend itself well to reuse. A monograph is a scholarly piece of writing on a specific topic designed more for individuals with expertise in the field, rather than for reuse in a classroom setting. At the other end of the continuum we see more open processes where user decisions will more affect how the content will look like. At this end, we can see Open Educational Practices (OEP), which we will discuss in our own continuum.

OER Engagement Ladder

Masterman and Wild (2013) develop an OER engagement ladder that represents three different levels regarding OER reuse: piecemeal, strategic, and embedded. Building on the findings from the OER Impact Study, Wild (2012) investigated how UK institutions promote OER among lecturers and how lecturers progress from novice to expert OER users. A framework developed as a result of the study (Figure 1) models progression stages in lecturers’ engagement with OER reuse. The four stages: ‘no engagement’, ‘piecemeal’, ‘strategic’ and ‘embedded’ describe lecturers’ behaviors in using OER. The three steps: ‘understanding’, ‘need’ and ‘reflection’ each represent a change in lecturers’ awareness with regards to OER, which, in turns, triggers a change in behavior and takes a person from one stage to another.

Open Educational Practices 

Open educational practice is a useful umbrella term to bring all the different dimensions of openness in education under one roof, with a focus on the processes of education. In 2018 educators Cronin and MacLaren (2018, p. 128) argued for an “expansive definitions of OEP,” which includes the creation, use, and adoption of OER, open scholarship, open teaching, open assessments and using open-source software. Equipped with this definition of OEP we can outline the why and how of practical OEP implementation.

The Why - OEP Values

Now that we've defined OEP we arrive at the heart of  Open Education Practices, the why. As educators, we understand that there is no value neutrality in the practice of education, the practice of open education is no exception.  By determining the values fundamental to OEP we solidify ourselves as open educators and provide core context from which to base our open practices. The purpose of being an open educator can be distilled into 6 concepts: 

• Sharing: the belief that knowledge and access to it is a human right. 
• Transparency: Everyone should have the ability to learn from and build upon our common human understanding.
• Collaborative Knowledge Construction (CKC): Invites students into the education process and recognizes them as potential co-creators of knowledge. 
• Deconstructing Traditional Power Dynamics (DTPD): Our knowledge systems exclude many perspectives because legacies of injustice are built into their foundations. Racism, colonialism, and other forms of discrimination limit whose voices are heard, whose interests are prioritized, and whose knowledge counts. Paywalls create exclusion at the points of access and participation. Openness creates pathways to more equitable systems of knowledge sharing that can play an important role in addressing larger, multifaceted inequities.
• Personalized Learning: Openness eschews the concept that a one size fits all approach to education is equitable and embraces differentiation through the ability to adapt learning material to local contexts.
• Learner Empowerment: When students are invited into the education process as co-creators and not just consumers of knowledge their agency is acknowledged and they are empowered to contribute

The How - Open Pedagogy in Practice

Drawing from the values fundamental to OEP, educators practice openness within four activities: how the course is designed, what content is used to facilitate learning, and engaging students as co-creators of knowledge via assessments, culminating in the overall application of open pedagogy. Rather than a hierarchy we have chosen to compare OEP to a wheel, each practical application represented by a spoke. As open value based course design,  content, and co-created assessments are implemented in tandem the wheel begins to turn, OEP are achieved and the cycle begins again.

Conclusion - Why open?

Open acknowledges the power in recognizing students' agency, Deconstructing traditional power structures includes seeing students as peers in the learning process (Liu, n.d.). Through this shift, educators disrupt the process of static information being deposited into student’s brains and invite students to contend with and contribute to knowledge (DeRosa & Robison, 2017; Freire, 2000). To utilize open educational practices is to fundamentally democratize the learning experiences of students.

Return to Roadmap

Additional Resources

Conceptualising OEP: A review of theoretical and empirical literature in Open Educational Practices

Implementing Open Pedagogy in Higher Education- Examples and Recommendations.pdf