[Oer-community] Introduction to the discussion - helping to close the cost/non-cost divide

[Paul Bacsich]

Hello all - this week from Mexico
(It's much warmer than in Athabasca, Rory)


I am finding this dialectic fascinating, especially since as many know I am prone from time to time to seek (or be told to seek) for the cost basis of teaching and learning activities in certain institutions. 

I hope in this discussion we can take a broad view of OER as not only material directly involved in the learning of students, but also (for example) in the learning of people in institutions to get better at teaching students. That blurring of the distinction may help to reduce the distance between "them" and "us". We are all students some of the time, and not just in informal learning, especially now with so many professional development programmes at masters and doctoral level.

And while it is often useful to make a clear distinction between internal and external expenditure, it is sometimes useful to recognise that there are collections of institutions and assemblages of people (nations, provinces etc) between "the institution" and "the world" where the full rigours of inter-institution costing may not always apply - even in Anglo-Saxon countries (a bit).

Even costings zealots know that "cost" is only one of the parameters by which institutions make decisions. And while the concept of "public value" * may be getting less attention in these times of recession and "cashable savings" in many countries, it is respectable and researched and the issue still merits discussion.

This is not just theory to me. At present my group has a very real challenge in making the continuing development of a large collection of resources for e-learning professionals into a sustainable activity without taking it back into the "underverse" of commercially-funded private activity.

* See e.g. http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/italics/vol5iss4/eccelsfield-garnett.pdf

Paul

===============
Professor Paul Bacsich
Consultant in e-learning - www.matic-media.co.uk
Gwella Support Team - http://elearning.heacademy.ac.uk/weblogs/gwella/
Senior Consultant, Sero - www.sero.co.uk
Researcher, Re.ViCa - www.virtualcampuses.eu
In Guadalajara (Mexico) for Aprenred V
===============
 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Paul Lefrere 
  To: rory at athabascau.ca 
  Cc: oer-community at athabascau.ca 
  Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 1:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [Oer-community] Introduction to the discussion


  rory <rory at athabascau.ca> writes:
   Paul, et al.


  I did not see this in the same way as you. I saw "in the place of current expenditures" more about external spending than internal. We can replace the payments to publishers and licensing fees of our libraries by using OERs. Then it is no longer zero sum. Internally, I would support (in our context) diverting internal money also from printing and mailing to online access to resources. Of course robbing Peter to pay Paul does not always work as you note below and we should be careful not to penalize  other productive areas of the institution, so I do not disagree there. 



  - Rory, I agree with the direction you are taking (find savings that can release funds for OER), although I wasn't thinking at such a detailed level. If the savings identified are insufficient to meet the OER funding needs, the main options I'd expect an institution to look at would be either finding efficiencies that enable it to meet its OER needs using a lower level of resources; or setting out a clear vision for OER that brings new converts to OER and associated resources; or using insights from OER to find a path to additional resources. The latter could involve doing something new, and/or could include the "wealth creation" that I referred to in my mail. Wealth does not have to be limited to money. A society is wealthier in a deeper sense than financial if its citizens know more than past generations, are tolerant of multiple opinions and ways of living and being, are open to old and new ideas, and share individual insights for the common good, thereby adding to the depth and breadth of their community's knowledge base and giving it more ways to respond to challenges.


  I also would like to respectfully suggest a change in your statement:
  "Think of sustainability not in terms of money, but rather in terms of impact that is wholly positive"
  To
  "Think of sustainability not JUST in terms of money, but rather in terms of impact that is wholly positive"


  - I like your suggestion


  would suggest that anyone who is not looking at the financial implications of sustainability(as well as other factors) is not being systematic. Financial considerations need not rule everything, but that does not mean that they are unimportant and should not be considered.



  - I'm persuaded


  Paul

  -- 
  The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Oer-community mailing list
  Oer-community at athabascau.ca
  https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/listinfo/oer-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/private/oer-community/attachments/20101005/660b40bd/attachment-0001.html