In the debates around OER quality, two opposing sides have emerged. On one side, scholars say that quality issues will take care of themselves as more OER become available and used; they additionally state that quality control goes against the ethos of the open movement. On the other side, scholars believe that the only way for potential contributors to feel secure in sharing their materials openly is for their OER to go through a quality assurance process.
In this presentation I will explore these debates using data from a case study at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, where both contributors and non-contributors of OER raise concerns around quality. The introduction of an OER repository at the university and the opportunity to share teaching materials highlights various tensions in the institution where there is a lack of guidelines regarding teaching materials.
I will use Social Realism as a theoretical tool to explain the different responses of academics to assessing the readiness of their materials and the possibility of QA. Typically academics who are already contributing are confident in the quality of their material. These academics fit an “autonomous” mode of reflexivity in that they do not rely on the judgement of others to assess their own work. Current non-contributors are typically focused on classroom teaching and are unsure about the suitability of their materials for an outside audience. The majority of these academics are “meta-reflexive” and would like a quality assurance process. However, through detailed analysis it becomes clear that even with a QA structure in place, their willingness to contribute is usually based more on personal concerns than just quality.
In the presentation I will provide a series of recommendations for the community on how to understand these quality issues and move forward in their own institutions in order to sustain OER initiatives.
This presentation is made possible with the support of the Global OER Graduate Network (GO-GN): http://go-gn.net/
