While struggling to find an easier way to explain relatively complicated statistical concepts, I found an entire Youtube channel containing everything I wanted to explain – and more – presented in a manner that was much more straighforward and pedagogic compared to whatever material in could have created (for the curious nerds, here it is: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwJRxp3blEvZyQBTTOMFRP_TDaSdly3gU).
First, I adapted some of his content to my specific lecture material. Then, i thought it would be useful for my students to get the link to his youtube channel, since there they can find much more information….after some thought, i started questioning why would they need MY lectures if they can just check his youtube channel? What would be my role then?
My personal little story would probably fit very well with the more general academic mentality. Universities have been originally created as exclusive institutions where only the best can gain access to – allegedly better – knowledge and science. Accordingly, ”proper” science could only be accessed via journals that would only be available behind physical or – later on – monetary walls. Nowadays though, in a world where MOOCs become increasingly more popular, and there is a clear move towards open access science, wouldn’t the traditional academic institutions and mentalities become obsolete? Why pay for spending years abroad for completing a degree, when there is a possibility to choose among dozens of online degrees, which would mean a cheaper cost , and most likely, a higher quality (since there should be, at least in theory, more competition)?
From a learner’s perspective, open learning and access can only bring advantages. From a knowledge perspective, this also seems to be a better way to go forward; after all, knowledge is worthless if not shared, and science would probably advance even faster if it is fueled by collective / collaborative learning and knowledge. Open source software – particularly Linux – is a great example of that.
However, for us, educators, as well as for our institutions, reality is not as simple, and there are important drawbacks that come along with such an openess. There cannot be openess without copyright infringements, free access without financial losses, knowledge sharing without criticism, and open online content without the need to continually change it. But, we all need to be open to openess, and we need to adjust both mentally and financially (meaning, the universities need a new business model for managing a more open education).
I do believe – and, within my group, i think most of us shared this opinion – that, especially in a post-pandemic world, it is no longer a question of whether there SHOULD be openess, but rather, HOW we do it and TO WHAT EXTENT?
As a final remark, and because i felt that not only myself, but also my group peers felt threatened by whatever OPEN might mean for our courses, resources and learning process, I wanted to link a really interesting (and positive!) TED talk (even if more related generally to online education), that I came across while reading around ONL material:
