Blog 2 - Reflections on openness in academia: Open or closed or too early to tell?

Some years ago I heard about the OER (Open Educational Resources) initiative launched by MIT (see for example https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-282j-introduction-to-astronomy-spring-2006/).  For several years after I was an avid follower of MIT's open-courseware programmes, but mostly in a casual and dilettantish sort of way.  Nevertheless I did learn a lot and it was an invaluable experience.  Recently I discovered the research reports (academic articles) published by the anthropologists and geologists who had discovered and are exploring the fossilized remains of Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo discovered in the Rising Star complex of caves near Johannesburg in South Africa in 2013.  These reports are all freely available in the open access journal e-life sciences (for example at https://elifesciences.org/articles/09560).  Dedicated reading of these fascinating articles can nurture the amateur anthropologist or geologist in anyone who has enough interest in this field, is determined enough and is armed with a good (online) dictionary.       

Never before has the type of information accessible through MIT or open-access journals such as e-life sciences been available so freely, so easily and so quickly.  Previously one would have had to be enrolled at MIT in order to attend lectures at one of the most prestigious institutions of its kind in the world.  Articles published in scientific journals were accessible only to subscribers or those who had access to university libraries - again usually by way of enrolment - very expensive and for most people utterly unattainable.  

The availability of this type of information in the public domain - and the opportunities it affords people all over the world - must surely, over the long term, be revolutionary?  Yet on the other hand I also don't see significant benefits accruing - and neither am I witnessing the radical transformation of academic publishing or the demise of the traditional university.  Not in the foreseeable future in any case.     

One of the most frequently raised objections to the 'free-to-air' model is that of financial viability or economic sustainability.  Pure altruism is rare and usually not sustainable over the long term.  Not-for-profit models may promote a decline of standards and academic rigour.  Sponsors and funders may also be inclined to meddle into their pet projects.  Middle-of-the-way strategies - for example where a university would offer OER or MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) programmes for reasons of self-promotion or marketing - in other words having their marketing budget subsidise their MOOC offerings - may also still raise questions of sustainability, academic freedom and conflict of interests.  

MOOC's apparently also have high drop-out rates.  Nothing wrong with that, I'd say.  Easy come and easy go, much like I approached my MIT 'studies' a few years ago.  But this brings me to the point that MOOC's are reportedly accessible mostly to students who have already studied, know how to study and are relatively self-reliant.  Those who would really benefit the most from MOOC's are also the students most likely to drop out.  As a citizen of a middle-income developing country such as South Africa with its significant divisions between the haves and the haves not - the rich and poor - I see MOOC's, perhaps organised in a public-private partnership between government and the universities - as an striking opportunity.  But intuitively I also know that the drop out rate will be huge.  What our students and scholars in SA really need are good teachers and equipped class-rooms.  However, the combination of traditional class-rooms and effective teachers together with MOOC's - a blended learning environment in other words - may present a viable, winning combination.  It is not an all-or-nothing situation.       

Arguably we are still in the midst of the long-predicted information revolution, and still too close to the action - to deep into the forest - to see the proverbial wood for the trees.  The battle for openness and freedom of information, knowledge and data will no doubt continue.  The open approach will no doubt earn its place in the sun.  But where exactly the lines between closed and open, between free and paid-for will finally be drawn it is probably too early to tell. 

Or perhaps I'm not even asking the right questions to start with?    

Sources:  

• Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in higher education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 16(1), 53.
• Weller, M. (2014). Battle for Open: How openness won and why it doesn’t feel like victory. London: Ubiquity Press.