Hi Dr. Cope,

I did a research project regarding OERs. In my research, I compared the differences between MOOCs and OER. I was curious as to what the differences were between the two as I kept seeing the acronym mentioned when I was searching for research material on MOOCs.

OER uses teaching materials that are free to the users with no supervision in teaching (UNESCO, 2020). The learners gain free access to materials that imply personal studies to boost their academic achievements. There are no restrictions or instructions set for the users on the use and access of .

The OER is an opportunity for all students to access study materials to achieve their educational achievements. The OER helps students access revision materials that are free to access, boosting their academic performance and not affecting school dropouts (Conole & Brown, 2018).

The emergence of various open movements in the era of digital media has indeed presented both opportunities and challenges. While these movements aim to resist commercialism and promote accessibility, there are paradoxes that need to be addressed, particularly in the context of open educational resources (OERs) and the influence of Big Tech companies.

In response to these challenges, it is important to consider a few potential solutions:

Strengthening Copyright Laws: Governments and legal entities can work towards updating and enforcing copyright laws to protect the intellectual property rights of creators. This would discourage unauthorized copying of copyrighted material by Big Tech companies and ensure that content creators are properly compensated for their work.

Encouraging Fair Use Policies: Implementing clear and fair use policies would strike a balance between accessibility and protection of intellectual property rights. Fair use provisions allow limited use of copyrighted material for educational purposes, enabling educators and students to access relevant content while respecting the rights of creators.

Supporting Open Licensing: Promoting the use of open licenses, such as Creative Commons licenses, can provide a framework for creators to share their work while still maintaining certain rights and permissions. Open licenses allow content creators to specify the conditions under which their work can be used, encouraging a more transparent and ethical approach to content sharing.

Funding and Support for OER Development: Governments, educational institutions, and philanthropic organizations can allocate resources to support the development and maintenance of high-quality OERs. This can help ensure that creators are compensated for their efforts and that educational content remains freely accessible to all.

Collaboration between Educators and Technology Companies: Encouraging collaboration between educators, content creators, and technology companies can lead to the development of sustainable models that benefit all parties involved. By working together, educators and technology companies can create platforms and tools that respect intellectual property rights while providing accessible educational resources.

Raising Awareness and Education: Promoting awareness and educating users about the importance of intellectual property rights and responsible use of content can foster a culture of respect for creators. This can help mitigate the negative impact of unauthorized copying and encourage individuals to seek out and support legally obtained educational resources.

By implementing these solutions and engaging in ongoing discussions, we can strive to find a balance between open access to educational resources and the fair treatment of creators. It is crucial to address these issues collaboratively and adapt our practices to create a sustainable and equitable environment for educational content development.

Create a more sustainable funding model for OERs. This could involve government funding, corporate sponsorship, or user donations.

Develop tools and resources to help authors and publishers create and share OERs. This could include training programs, online platforms, and copyright licenses.

Educate the public about the value of OERs. This could involve outreach campaigns, teacher training, and student advocacy.

Work with Big Tech companies to ensure that they are respecting copyright laws and compensating creators fairly. This could involve government regulation, public pressure, or private negotiations.

It is important to note that there is no single solution to the paradox of OERs. A combination of approaches will likely be needed to address the challenges and realize the potential of this important movement.

References:

Conole, G., & Brown, M. (2018). Reflecting on the impact of the Open Education Movement. Journal of Learning for Development, 5(3), 187–203. Retrieved October 3 2022 from jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/ article/view/314/346

UNESCO, (2020). Guidance on Open Educational Practices during COVID-19 pandemic. Retrieved October 3, 2022, from iite.unesco.org/publications/guidance-on-open-educational-practices-during-covid-19-pandemic/

• Nicole Hester Francis

Thanks for these comments Nicole, you make some excellent points!

• William Cope

Reading this article make me very unsettled. A lot of these big tech companies offer 'free' services... finding articles or pages of interest via search engines. A friend of mine asks: 'where do companies go to die a slow, painful death?' Answer: 'The second page of google search results'.

Years ago, a daughter of a friend said she was mad at Facebook, and I asked why. It turns out that she had posted an announcement of her engagement to be married on Facebook. Later on, she posted that the marriage had been canceled. The reason she was mad was because Facebook was still posting ads for diamond rings on her page. She was certain Facebook knew she had called off the marriage, but continued selling diamond ring ads to advertisers, and displaying the non-pertinent content to her.

This illustrates one of the drawbacks of big tech companies that work into quasi-monopoly positions... they are (rightfully) pursuing their business interests, which tend to be inserting themselves as a 'gatekeeper' of information (google), or relationships (facebook), shopping (amazon), music (apple)... etc. They make money by providing access to desired products/services/information-content. Once they become a de-facto standard way of acquiring products, it is extremely difficult to displace them.

This 'centralization' of 'free content' that is NOT actually 'free content' (copyrighted), is similar to early music pirating with mp3 players, and sites like Limewire and Napster, using bit-torrent (a non-centralized distribution system of users). The only real defense for the copyrighted music was to append computer viruses to copyrighted songs, and upload the infected music to the 'free downloading' sites. It punished the downloaders by disabling their computers. Although I don't have any evidence of this actually being the case, it seemed very likely (like governments using clandestine methods to thwart opponents...)

Can we do the same with the Open.Ai's chatgpt? One way to make them change their business model to 'share the wealth' is to feed their engine with false content, so that their output is of reduced value. Only when they 'take the high road', similar to Apple becoming the distributor of music, and paying royalties to the music companies and artists, as well as enforcing digital rights management (DRM) will this dilemma be resolved.

Another possible approach would be to scan the output of ChatGPT and submit the output to a neutral search engine, assigning source attribution 'after the fact'.

Indeed, this is a huge issue, and presents an opportunity for some real innovation of how things will work in the future.

• Dan Waterloo

Yes, big issues indeed, Dan - and as we have argued in this paper, with big implications for education.

• William Cope