2023-04-30
OER is one of those proverbial rabbit holes. There are several reasons.
The term “technology” is used loosely in this context. When I started this journey, writing HTML code was one option, and using \(\LaTeX\) was the other option. Because my material requires the use of mathematical notations, \(\LaTeX\) it was!
Later, I started to use Moodle, which had a fantastic built-in HTML editor. This is similar to what Canvas offers, but much better. So I started to author my material using Moodle’s HTML editor. This option had the added benefit of publishing the content in Moodle is automatic.
And now that Moodle is a thing of the past (due to OEI policy), I am switching to a newer but mature method to author material: Markdown. Compared to \(\LaTeX\), Markdown is less tedious, but just as expressive when it comes to mathematical notations. It can also convert to a variety of formats, including HTML and PDF for publication purposes.
The bottom line here is to be mentally be prepared to “jump ship” from using one tool/technology to something that works better.
This happens with me often. As I use the material to classes, I will start to realize better ways to explain a concept. For certain topics, I have rewritten the material multiple times, each time incorporating a newer (and hopefully better) method.
All I can say do not hesitate to start from scratch. That said, a modular (hence the title of this document!) is always helpful.
If you do not enjoy writing educational material, or want a clean break from work after clocking in 40 hours/week, OER may not be a rabbit hole to get into!
I actually timed myself in terms of how much time it takes to author class (lecture) material initially, not counting subsequent editing. With all the tools already set up, and the workflow already established, the ratio is about 3:1. This means it takes about 3 hours to write the material for a 1-hour lecture. And this was done without any stipent or release time.
This is a little fun fact. There was a semester in which I had to take on three new preps (2 4-unit and 1 3-unit classes) just days before the first day of instructions. I managed to author OER materials for all the classes. The trick is that authoring OER material was a part of class prep, and I actually enjoyed both the content (as a computer science geek) and the process of explaining concepts.
Going down the path of OER may initial get institutional support, or not. This path requires self sufficiency, and a little pinch of self confidence and self esteem.
I know this sounds a little (or maybe not just a little) biting the hand that feeds me. But read on!
When I first started to write my material for classes and not to rely on textbooks, some colleagues commented that I was doing my students a disservice. The rationale was that I had no editors, I was not a professional writer, etc.
Do not let criticism, whether it is from others or yourself stop you. Be open to the opinions and suggestions from others, but evaluate them carefully before deciding what to do with these opinions and suggestions. Always keep in mind why you chose to go down this path to begin with.
Your allies/nakama are colleagues who share your core values. Identify these colleagues and support each other.
The institution is, well, the institution. It is its own entity and needs funding to survive. As such, when OER brings in funding, the institution supports it. However, if OER does not bring in funding, or negatively impacts funding, the institution may not support OER anymore.
Keep in mind that public education is a multi-billion dollar “industry”. As such, it attracts the attention of many for-profit organizations. Imagine how publishers may think when they realize that the $300/semester/student “subscription fee” to textbook material is going down the drain. Imagine how for-profit LMS services like Instructure may respond when they learn that content publication is no longer tied in to their platforms.
These for-profit entities can potentially have a lot of influence not so much at a district level, but at a state level. The interests of these for-profit organizations do not necessarily (to put it gently) align with your interests.
In order to secure your right to self author material and self publish such material in classes, the union (LRCFT) may be able to help. The contract language may specify this right explicitly or implicitly.
For example, the Moodle server that I had been using to maintain OER material had to be decommissioned due to OEI policy (if a district uses the OEI supported Canvas system, any and all local LMS must be decommissioned). One would think that relying on an open source product like Moodle should be safe in terms of having support longivity. Unfortunately, Moodle requires institutionaly infrastructure support (actually, it does not, but that is another long story). And that infrastructural support can be removed.
The lesson learned is to rely on resources that I can support and provide directly. Well, as much as possible. Other than technical support, institutional policies can also potentially interfere with the authoring and/or publication of OER material. Try to be as independent as possible is probably the bottom line.
Authoring lecture/reading material often means also authoring assessment material (quizzes and exams). Now this is a nested rabbit hole that deserves its own section.
As much as we, as educators, want to believe in the integrity of students, technologies have made it impossible to live by the assumption that students are honest. Before the information era, cheating are isolated cases and collaboration of cheaters are limited to small and isolated groups of individuals.
The Internet and related technologies have changed the equation. Now a single individual can post questions and answers to a test, and the entire Internet, with its 4+ billions of individual users, can access the posted questions and answers.
Furthermore, online classes add a new dimension to this discussion. With a face-to-face assessment, live collaboration with another individual is possible, only to those with specialized equipment and the skills to use such equipment. With online classes and online assessments, the technology barrier to is reduced to almost nothing. Furthermore, with the Internet, the sharing of techniques to cheat in an online assessment is as easy as asking a mobile device, by voice!
Educators are led to believe that proctoring technologies work as advertised. A quick consultation with a search engine finds inexpensive (and sometimes free) and effective counter-proctoring techniques. It is safe to claim that if an individual is tempted to cheat, online assessments are more prone to cheating and the chances of getting caught is much reduced compared to face-to-face assessments.
Any decently reliable proctoring technology requires more expensive equipment and invades more privacy. For example, multiple 360-degree live cameras positioned at specific locations in a room can, indeed, ensure academic integrity to a much higher degree. But the cost of equipment, bandwidth requirement, and invasion of privacy all makes this approach impractical in online classes.
It is one thing to author instructional material, it is a whole different experience and process to originate assessment material. What is being assessed, and how is it best assessed? To relate to the previous section, how can an assessment be resistant to dishonest behaviors?
The terms “authentic assessment”, “competency-based assessment” and “evidence-based assessment” have been introduced, and yet how they can be implemented remain vague and a black art to most. Throw resistance to cheating on top, any OER author can feel intimidated.
In college level education, especially in the age of information, assessment of “knowing” (knowledge of) may not be particularly meaningful, especially in the areas of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) and CTE (career technical education).
When we think of competency, we need to think of “how is an employee for competency?” And when we think of “evidence”, we need to think of “how does an employer