Blogs on Improving Learning

You may have heard me say some of this before.

I’ve read some really interesting books this year.

This is another post in my series of posts showing gratitude and appreciation for members of the open education community.

This is another post in my series of posts showing gratitude and appreciation for members of the open education community.

This is another post in my series of posts showing gratitude and appreciation for members of the open education community.

This is another post in my series of posts showing gratitude and appreciation for members of the open education community.

This is another post in my series of posts showing gratitude and appreciation for members of the open education community.

This is the first in my series of posts showing gratitude and appreciation for members of the open education community.

My daughter is on a mission to bring some positivity to her little corner of the internet.

I recently wrote about the CARE Framework.

Stephen shared some thoughts this morning on a recent post of mine.

After reader feedback made it clear that this post was unclear, I am updating it.

tl;dr - If a resource is licensed in a way that grants you permission to engage in the 5R activities, and grants you those permissions for free, it’s an open educational resource (OER) - no matter where you find it or how it’s being used.

One of the defining features of open educational resources is permission to engage in revise and remix activities with regard to OER.

In an article from a few years ago, Michael Feldstein describes courseware as the combination of (1) content, (2) platform, and (3) design (see the graphic at the bottom of the article.)

It’s a real compliment to be compared to John Perry Barlow, even if it’s because someone is claiming you’re both wrong in the same way.

In the spirit of iterating toward openness, I’ve recently had the opportunity to revisit some of my earlier thinking about how to measure the impact of OER-related work.

I’m not the only one celebrating the 20th anniversary of open source and open content this year.

This essay is crossposted from the #OER18 website. 2018 marks the 20th anniversary of open content.

2018 is an important year for me professionally.

Today is one of those liminal days when you come to the end of something you’ve worked on for what feels like forever, and it magically transforms into the beginning of something new, and you can still see both sides of it.

Stephen makes a great point in today’s OLDaily that I want to amplify and expand briefly here.

Two months ago I invited people to respond to a survey regarding the Open Education Conference and how it can be improved. 2,237 people received the invitation by email, and more saw the invitation on Twitter and here on the blog. 139 people responded to…

Though I deeply enjoy my infrequent, often protracted conversations with Stephen - and find them deeply useful for clarifying and advancing my own thinking - I believe this one has just about run its course.

In my recent post I asked us each to consider what “what is the real goal of our OER advocacy?”

My recent post about the cost trap and inclusive access prompted responses by Jim Groom and Stephen Downes.

Imagine that - somehow - you’ve never used the internet before.

Two and half weeks ago I extended an invitation to attendees of the annual OpenEd Conference to “please help make the OpenEd Conference better.”

There was a lot of discussion at OpenEd17 about the relationship between OER and value-added services like platforms.

There were lots of amazing takeaways from #OpenEd17 for me.

This morning I sent the following email to the 2,253 subscribers to the Open Education Conference mailing list.

As you may have heard, my fellow rabble-rouser George Siemens and I are doing a MOOC on open education that launches later this month on edX.

Reading through and pondering the reactions to what was apparently a wonderful ALTC keynote by Bonnie Stewart (UPDATE: here are her slides), I find myself reflecting on the ways my thinking about “open” is influenced by the ideas of negative liberty and p…

I started to post this as a comment on Mike’s amazing essay Information Underload, but I’m going to put it here instead.

Last week I shared a little of my thinking about the problems inherent in the way people in the field talk about OER.

In a recent webinar about OER, organized by one of the major textbook publishers, there was a lot of conversation about whether OER are “free” or “affordable.”

This is just a quick note to say that if you’re following the work being done on JSON feeds (as a compliment to - or potential replacement for - RSS), I’ve activated JSON feeds on opencontent.org.

Today and tomorrow I’m at the EdTech Efficacy Research Academic Symposium in Washington, DC.

Over the last several weeks there has been an incredible amount of writing about open pedagogy and open educational practices (samples collected here by Maha).

Some random thoughts emerging in my mind as a result of yesterday’s wonderful conversation on “open pedagogy.”

In my recent post How is Open Pedagogy Different?

In 2012 Kim Thanos and I founded Lumen Learning because, through our Gates-funded work on the Kaleidoscope Project, we had seen first-hand how hard it was for faculty to replace publisher materials with OER.

A quick search via Google shows that Stephen Downes is mentioned over 500 times on the pages of Iterating Toward Openness.

[caption id="" align=“alignnone” width=“640”] This image from the BBC is not subject to opencontent.org’s Creative Commons license.

UPDATE: For my latest thinking on open pedagogy, see the post When Opens Collide.

In a recent interview, Pearson CEO John Fallon said: “Education like every other sector and sphere of life is going through this digital transformation.

Dumping out some thoughts here so I can return to them when I have more time.

[caption id="" align=“aligncenter” width=“640”] Fireflies and Star Trails No. 1 by Mike Lewinski, CC BY[/caption] I love everything Rajiv is saying in his recent, excellent essay Pragmatism vs.

Five years ago, in an essay called 2017: RIP OER?

Cengage recently announced a new offering called MindTap ACE that includes OER and is now available in pilot.