Open Education Week is, yes, a celebration of the achievements of Open Education and OER, but where do we have some critical exchanges about it? We have had a few open discussions during the OEWeek Live conversations such as what defines the “open movement”.
And a few people have asked about how much is at stake by become more tied/beholden to commercial platforms and systems.
So not for fighting but some good back and forth I am tossing one into the mix. I am prompted by a tweet this morning by my friend and colleague Andy Rush (Hi Andy!).
Andy is linking to a 2015 blog post by @actualham following her participation at the Open Education 2015 Conference. Back then Robin was making a strong call for going beyond the open resources and content.
Read the whole blog post (remember when people engaged in rich topics in blog post, look at the comments too?) but especially as a highlight:
I don’t think that advocating for a pedagogical approach to OER makes me radical or an outlier. But my sense is that the movement is cohering around the “gateway” of open textbook adoption. But don’t worry, I am told, once we hook ’em, we can slip in the pedagogy!
That hook is going to puncture our foundational beliefs about the power of open.
I am calling for a (radical?) pedagogy caucus, a core, self-identified group committed to placing pedagogy at the center of the OpenEd movement. I am going to stop apologizing for my sense that textbooks are the wrong way to pitch open.
Yes, we have seen more attention and effort on open pedagogy (much of it led by Robin), but have we gotten closer in 8 years to a “(radical?) pedagogy caucus”? Have we placed “pedagogy at the center of the OpenEd movement”?
I’d be very interested in hearing from you, Robin!
Now the gauntlet is put down… who will pick it up?