Understanding Open. It has to be one of the greatest professional challenges ahead for institutional leaders and CIO’s especially on OER and the MOOC. So, if you are intellectually lazy you should know up front there are no shortcuts.
Free ≠ Open
Shortcuts, like those taken by the corporate MOOC pioneers and institutions who are selling out their brands and values in the name of Open. I suppose the allure of first mover status is just too powerful to prevent conflating Free and Open to deliver their MOOC.
Audrey Waters piece yesterday on Naming Names is not only a compelling article in its own right, it is also a reminder that sometimes you just have to name names. Now I am not a shy flower and don’t require any encouragement to be direct, but I admit to not always sharing my thoughts and findings on broader educational topics.
But lets face it, we are not just IT thinkers and this MOOC thing strikes a chord in me. OK maybe two chords. One chord is what I will call my consumer activist nerve that being pinched by the commercial MOOC and their shills. The other is my business innovation chord that sees the commercial MOOC as a placebo whipped up by the alchemist in the ivory tower.
I don’t know if I can even help you with understanding open beyond what has been shared here in many other posts. Mostly, I come down to pointing out that just because it appears Free doesn’t mean its Open. And, I am also quick to suggest that by definition Open has to be Free.
So, I will have to settle for encouraging you to read the The Open Issue of Think Quarterly by Google. This is the current issue dedicated entirely to helping people understand open. I will admit the education references are tired and limited but you will broaden your thinking on what it means to be open and what a truly Open MOOC might look like.