The video about creative licences was informative (Process Arts, 2011) to sort out how to make sure that my online material won’t be used in a manner that I didn’t intend. However, I’m not so concerned about getting credit so I’d probably just the CC0 licence (Creative Commons, 2020). If anyone use my material, it’s nice, but they don’t need to attribute it to me, unless it’d be something that I make money on myself. Of course, I can also use the creative licences for my own teaching, for example by using Flickr (2020).

I disagree with Wiley (2010) who insinuates that selfishness is the reason why teachers don’t share more than they do. At the very least, it isn’t personal selfishness. We teachers have a responsibility towards both our universities and the creators of textbooks that we use. I agree with him that expertise and expression of expertise can be freely shared but that seems quite obvious to me. I have lived almost my whole life in a digital world so the possibility of sharing has no novelty for me. However, I like that this topic in the ONL course challenges me to question why I don’t actually share my course material more, and what I could to in order to achieve this. I do not think that Swedish universities have anything against their teachers sharing their knowledge with the world. However, I use quite a lot of content from the textbooks that I use in my courses, and if I want to share something in those courses, I’d either need to ask the permission from the authors (which I’d be unlikely to obtain) or find other, open, course material. 

Nevertheless, even if I did change to open course material, why would I want to? What would I gain? What would my students gain? What would society gain? 

References