It seems to me that OER has been around for a long time. Socrates was probably its first proponent. It’s been a while since I read any Plato, but I am pretty sure Socrates was given his hemlock smoothie because he didn’t agree with the Sophists charging their students for education. More specifically, the Sophists didn’t agree with Socrates giving away education for free. There was a trial and, to the shock of no one, the government agreed with the wealthier side. Socrates was killed.
Listening to David Wiley’s address “Openness, Disaggregation, and the Future of Education” it’s hard not to think that there is an inevitability about the growth of OERs. Over the long term this is probably true- but don’t expect the modern day equivalents of Socrates’ Sophists (good name for a University Band) to go down without a fight. There are a great number of people and institutions that rely on the existing “for profit” structures who will not be swayed by moral arguments in the form of Youtube cartoons. I’m not just talking about textbook and educational software companies either. I can’t imagine that teachers unions are going to be very open to openness.
Wiley is correct in pointing out that schools’ monopoly on knowledge is coming to an end, but the real monopoly lies in certification and credentials that schooling can confer upon people. His examples of Cisco and Microsoft credentials notwithstanding, for better or worse, schools are still our most reliable means of measuring ability. They will fight hard to make sure that they, and they alone, determine the value of educational credentials.
Setting aside for a moment the questions of “how will this work” or even simply “will this work”, do I think we should we be giving away knowledge for free- absolutely! As Steven Johnson explains in his TedTalk, Where Good Ideas Come From, “Good ideas usually come from the collision of smaller hunches… often the thing that turns a hunch into a real breakthrough is another hunch in somebody else’s mind”. I believe that the more we share our knowledge the more likely we are to benefit from innovations and different points of view.
I know OER will face some resistance. It always has. But consider this: 2400 years after his death we pretty much know every thought that Socrates ever had. He is revered. We only have a few fragments of the Sophist’s teachings and the word sophistry has come to mean “the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving”. The morale of the story is, when it comes to the spread of knowledge you can try to slow it down, but the truth will out in the end.
Wiley is correct in pointing out that schools’ monopoly on knowledge is coming to an end, but the real monopoly lies in certification and credentials that schooling can confer upon people. His examples of Cisco and Microsoft credentials notwithstanding, for better or worse, schools are still our most reliable means of measuring ability. They will fight hard to make sure that they, and they alone, determine the value of educational credentials.
Setting aside for a moment the questions of “how will this work” or even simply “will this work”, do I think we should we be giving away knowledge for free- absolutely! As Steven Johnson explains in his TedTalk, Where Good Ideas Come From, “Good ideas usually come from the collision of smaller hunches… often the thing that turns a hunch into a real breakthrough is another hunch in somebody else’s mind”. I believe that the more we share our knowledge the more likely we are to benefit from innovations and different points of view.
I know OER will face some resistance. It always has. But consider this: 2400 years after his death we pretty much know every thought that Socrates ever had. He is revered. We only have a few fragments of the Sophist’s teachings and the word sophistry has come to mean “the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving”. The morale of the story is, when it comes to the spread of knowledge you can try to slow it down, but the truth will out in the end.