that set of teaching and learning practices only possible in the context of the free access and 4R permissions characteristic of open educational resources<\/em><\/p>\nIt will be seen later in this section that Wiley has since (2017<\/a>) recanted on this definition and indeed questions the whole idea of an open pedagogy. However, this definition was influential in framing the more recent discussion of open pedagogy around the use of OER (see DeRosa and Jhangiani, 2017<\/a>, for an excellent discussion about open pedagogy, its origins, and its development since 2013).\n\nIndeed, even in 2019, BCcampus still defined open pedagog<\/a>y as follows:\n Open pedagogy, also known as open educational practices (OEP), is the use of open educational resources (OER) to support learning, or the open sharing of teaching practices with a goal of improving education and training at the institutional, professional, and individual level.<\/em><\/p>\nHowever, it is now realised that for open educational resources to be widely adopted, as well as to change teaching practice, OER need to be embedded in a much broader ecology of teaching and learning, of which open pedagogy is a critical component. The following definition from the University of Texas Arlington Libraries<\/a> represents this thinking:\n Open pedagogy is the practice of engaging with students as creators of information rather than simply consumers of it. It's a form of experiential learning in which students demonstrate understanding through the act of creation. The products of open pedagogy are student created and openly licensed so that they may live outside of the classroom in a way that has an impact on the greater community.\u00a0Open projects frequently result in the creation of\u00a0open educational resources\u00a0(OER).\u00a0OER are free teaching and learning materials that are licensed to allow for revision and reuse. They can be fully self-contained textbooks, videos, quizzes, learning modules, and more.<\/em><\/p>\nI like the above definition because it focuses on student behaviour, where open educational materials are a by-product of their learning, rather than the starting point, although open pedagogy can also embrace OER as a starting point.\n\nHegarty (2015<\/a>) describes eight attributes of open pedagogy:\n By replacing a static textbook \u2014 or other stable learning material \u2014 with one that is openly licensed, faculty have the opportunity to create a new relationship between learners and the information they access in the course. Instead of thinking of knowledge as something students need to download into their brains, we start thinking of knowledge as something continuously created and revised. Whether students participate in the development and revision of OER or not, this redefined relationship between students and their course \u2018texts\u2019 is central to the philosophy of learning that the course espouses.\u00a0If faculty involve their students in interacting with OER, this relationship becomes even more explicit, as students are expected to critique and contribute to the body of knowledge from which they are learning. In this sense, knowledge is less a product that has distinct beginning and end points and is instead a process in which students can engage, ideally beyond the bounds of the course.<\/em><\/p>\n\n Une p\u00e9dagogie ouverte est centr\u00e9e sur l'interaction qui existe dans une classe entre l'\u00e9tudiant et l'environnement \u00e9ducatif qui lui est propos\u00e9....Il s'agit d'une fa\u00e7on de penser et d'une fa\u00e7on d'agir.\u00a0L'\u00e9ducateur aura donc pour r\u00f4le premier de contribuer \u00e0 l'am\u00e9nagement de cet environnement \u00e9ducatif.<\/em><\/p>\n [My translation: Open pedagogy is focused on the interaction within a class between a learner and the educational environment that is created for him. It is about a way of thinking and a way of acting. The primary role of the teacher then is to contribute to the management of this educational environment.'<\/p>\n Note that there is no mention of free or open educational resources, and the quote could have come straight from Rousseau's 'Emile' (1972<\/a>). It is the basis for the whole of Chapter 6<\/a> in this book.<\/p>\nDavid Wiley (who was the originator of the term 'open educational resources') writes (2017<\/a>):\n \u201cOpen\u201d .... does not have anything to say about the nature of learning. ...you can\u2019t actually build a pedagogy on a foundation of open (well, not one that isn\u2019t incredibly impoverished). Your foundational commitments in terms of pedagogy should be to an understanding of how learning happens. Once we have made fundamental commitments in terms of a theory of learning, then we can add open to our list of facilitating methods in order get better leverage.<\/em><\/p>\n I wonder if it isn\u2019t nonsensical to talk about \u201copen pedagogy\u201d at all ...... Perhaps we should only use open as a modifier for other pedagogies, like \u201copen constructionist pedagogy\u201d or \u201copen connectivist pedagogy\u201d or \u201copen constructivist pedagogy.\u201d It\u2019s clear in each of those cases how open gives you better leverage in terms of supporting learning.<\/em><\/p>\nAlthough many of the practices associated with open pedagogy have been around long before open educational resources were created, OER nevertheless make such practices much easier to implement and more powerful. But does this make a new pedagogy?\n\nMorgan (2017<\/a>) raises this issue with respect to the project she worked on for the Universidad de Guadalajara's Agora project.\n The Agora design process was focussed on what an open design would actually\u00a0be <\/em>a means to\u00a0which can be summarized as:<\/em><\/p>\n\n Ultimately we did create content that fits quite nicely with the 5Rs, but the goal of our open pedagogy design process was not to create OERs as a means towards or even as an essential component of open pedagogy. The Agora was alternatively all of the \u2018isms \u2013 \u00a0behaviourism, connectivism, constructivism, constructionism \u2013 but\u00a0the ism doesn\u2019t really matter. \u00a0Importantly, the open pedagogy design\u00a0was at times technology-enabled and at times it didn\u2019t use technology or the internet at all. \u00a0OERs didn\u2019t allow us to practice a different pedagogy, rather the open pedagogy of the Agora was a bricolage of activities and practices that at times resulted in OERs and at times didn\u2019t.<\/em><\/p>\nPedagogy is primarily about practice: what teachers or learners do. Obviously, practice is and should be driven by ideas and beliefs, but it is different from philosophy. Learner-centred teaching or learners creating knowledge (with or without OER) is a pedagogy; 'open' is more of an idea and a value. In other words, looking at the quotations above, open is more a philosophy, a way of thinking, that informs practice, rather than the practice itself. However, this is a somewhat academic distinction. OER is enabling changes in teaching practice. However, I prefer a broader vision for teaching in a digital age than one so closely tied to OER.\n Jhangiani, R.\u00a0 and Biswas-Diener, R. (eds.) (2017)\u00a0Open: The Philosophy and Practices that are Revolutionizing Education and Science<\/a>\u00a0<\/i>London: Ubiquity Press.<\/p>\n Mak, S. et al. (2010). Blogs and forums as communication and learning tools in a MOOC<\/a>\u00a0 in L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010 (pp. 275\u2013284)<\/p>\nMorgan, T. (2017)\u00a0Reflections on #OER17 \u2013 From Beyond Content to Open Pedagogy<\/a> Explorations in the Ed Tech World,\u00a0<\/em>13 April\n\nPaquette, C. (1979)\u00a0Quelques fondements d\u2019une p\u00e9dagogie ouverte<\/a> Qu\u00e9bec Fran\u00e7ais<\/em>, Vol. 36\n\nRousseau, J.-J. (1762)\u00a0\u00c9mile,\u00a0ou de l\u2019\u00c9ducation<\/em>\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0(Trans. Allan Bloom). New York: Basic Books,\u00a01979\n\nStacey, P. (2018) Global Education Commons Steward<\/a> Musings on the Ed Tech Frontier, <\/em>February 8\n\nWiley, D. (2013) What is Open Pedagogy<\/a>,\u00a0improving learning, <\/em>October 21\n\nWiley, D. (2017) When opens collide<\/a>, iterating toward openness<\/em>, 21 April\n <\/p>\n David Wiley (2013<\/a>) originally defined open pedagogy as:<\/p>\n that set of teaching and learning practices only possible in the context of the free access and 4R permissions characteristic of open educational resources<\/em><\/p>\n It will be seen later in this section that Wiley has since (2017<\/a>) recanted on this definition and indeed questions the whole idea of an open pedagogy. However, this definition was influential in framing the more recent discussion of open pedagogy around the use of OER (see DeRosa and Jhangiani, 2017<\/a>, for an excellent discussion about open pedagogy, its origins, and its development since 2013).<\/p>\n Indeed, even in 2019, BCcampus still defined open pedagog<\/a>y as follows:<\/p>\n Open pedagogy, also known as open educational practices (OEP), is the use of open educational resources (OER) to support learning, or the open sharing of teaching practices with a goal of improving education and training at the institutional, professional, and individual level.<\/em><\/p>\n However, it is now realised that for open educational resources to be widely adopted, as well as to change teaching practice, OER need to be embedded in a much broader ecology of teaching and learning, of which open pedagogy is a critical component. The following definition from the University of Texas Arlington Libraries<\/a> represents this thinking:<\/p>\n Open pedagogy is the practice of engaging with students as creators of information rather than simply consumers of it. It’s a form of experiential learning in which students demonstrate understanding through the act of creation. The products of open pedagogy are student created and openly licensed so that they may live outside of the classroom in a way that has an impact on the greater community.\u00a0Open projects frequently result in the creation of\u00a0open educational resources\u00a0(OER).\u00a0OER are free teaching and learning materials that are licensed to allow for revision and reuse. They can be fully self-contained textbooks, videos, quizzes, learning modules, and more.<\/em><\/p>\n I like the above definition because it focuses on student behaviour, where open educational materials are a by-product of their learning, rather than the starting point, although open pedagogy can also embrace OER as a starting point.<\/p>\n Hegarty (2015<\/a>) describes eight attributes of open pedagogy:<\/p>\n Hegarty also makes the point that it is almost impossible to separate the components of an open pedagogy into neat, segregated dimensions. Components in each of the eight dimensions overlap in many ways.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n DeRosa and Robison (2017<\/a>) set out the key idea of open pedagogy in the following:<\/p>\n By replacing a static textbook \u2014 or other stable learning material \u2014 with one that is openly licensed, faculty have the opportunity to create a new relationship between learners and the information they access in the course. Instead of thinking of knowledge as something students need to download into their brains, we start thinking of knowledge as something continuously created and revised. Whether students participate in the development and revision of OER or not, this redefined relationship between students and their course \u2018texts\u2019 is central to the philosophy of learning that the course espouses.\u00a0If faculty involve their students in interacting with OER, this relationship becomes even more explicit, as students are expected to critique and contribute to the body of knowledge from which they are learning. In this sense, knowledge is less a product that has distinct beginning and end points and is instead a process in which students can engage, ideally beyond the bounds of the course.<\/em><\/p>\n There is a close connection between networking, social media such as blogs and wikis, which enable students to create open educational resources, and open pedagogy.<\/p>\n Jon Beasley-Murray’s course where students created a Wikipedia entry on Latin American literature<\/a> is a good example, as is the Math Exam Resources<\/a> created by graduate students at UBC (see Chapter 10, Section 8.8.3<\/a>). This approach is particularly valuable for partly redressing cultural and historical bias, through the organization of Wikipedia edit-a-thons<\/a>. For two examples, see Women in Red\/Indigenous Women.<\/a>\u00a0and Indigenous Literature Edit-a-Thon.<\/a><\/p>\n The Universidad de Guadalajara (Mexico) has an interesting web site (in English)<\/a> that provides a number of examples of open pedagogy from around the world, related to its Agora<\/a> project.<\/p>\n Another practice of open pedagogy are textbook-free degrees, called Zed Creds or Z-degrees <\/a>but also ZTC (zero textbook cost).\u00a0Royal Roads University\u2019s\u00a0Master of Arts in Learning and Technology<\/a>\u00a0is the first master of arts degree in Canada to go textbook-free. Students can access all of the course materials through open educational resources, e-books, journal articles and other free digital resources. These types of courses\u00a0aim to improve access to education and enhance student outcomes.<\/p>\n Many more examples of open pedagogy in practice can be found in Jhangiani and Biswas-Diener (2017<\/a>) and in the Open Pedagogy Notebook.<\/a><\/p>\n Lastly, there is a related movement around open educational infrastructure and technology that challenges educational institutions and students to think about who owns the technology and data being used for teaching and learning and how open education practices can be enabled by open educational technologies (see, for example OpenETC<\/a>.)<\/p>\n The search for a pedagogical and organizational framework to support the use of open educational resources has been driven partly by the relative slowness of adoption of OER. To give a simple example, instructors are reluctant to move away from expensive commercial first year textbooks, because these books often come with a wide range of support materials, such as interactive web sites with sample exam questions and answers, multiple-choice questions, and alternative reading. Open textbooks need to come with similar supporting materials, student activities and a wider ‘network’ of support to compete with commercial textbooks.<\/p>\n Paul Stacey, the Director of the OEGlobal<\/a>, has mused (2018<\/a>) that too much focus is given to licensing and content development, and not enough to collectively managing open resources so that they are sustainable and dynamic. He argues that OER, to be effective, need ‘commoning’, which reflects the management and sustainability of common, shared resources and services. He argues for:<\/p>\n Open pedagogy could provide an important pedagogical part of such a framework, but Stacey seems to be suggesting that support needs to go beyond pedagogy to a social and management structure.<\/p>\n Some of you may feel like Moli\u00e8re’s Bourgeois Gentilhomme after a lesson from his tutor: ‘I have been speaking prose for 40 years and never realised it.’ The concept of ‘open pedagogy’ has been around for a long time, even if it has seen a revival resulting from the development of OER.<\/p>\n Lord Crowther, in a speech presenting the charter of the British Open University<\/a> in 1969, defined the Open University as:<\/p>\n I am not sure that open pedagogy is the divine efflatus, but Crowther’s understanding of openness in methods is much wider than modern concepts of open pedagogy.<\/p>\n Claude Paquette, following the cultural revolution in Qu\u00e9bec, wrote in 1979<\/a>:<\/p>\n Une p\u00e9dagogie ouverte est centr\u00e9e sur l’interaction qui existe dans une classe entre l’\u00e9tudiant et l’environnement \u00e9ducatif qui lui est propos\u00e9….Il s’agit d’une fa\u00e7on de penser et d’une fa\u00e7on d’agir.\u00a0L’\u00e9ducateur aura donc pour r\u00f4le premier de contribuer \u00e0 l’am\u00e9nagement de cet environnement \u00e9ducatif.<\/em><\/p>\n [My translation: Open pedagogy is focused on the interaction within a class between a learner and the educational environment that is created for him. It is about a way of thinking and a way of acting. The primary role of the teacher then is to contribute to the management of this educational environment.’<\/p>\n Note that there is no mention of free or open educational resources, and the quote could have come straight from Rousseau’s ‘Emile’ (1972<\/a>). It is the basis for the whole of Chapter 6<\/a> in this book.<\/p>\n David Wiley (who was the originator of the term ‘open educational resources’) writes (2017<\/a>):<\/p>\n \u201cOpen\u201d …. does not have anything to say about the nature of learning. …you can\u2019t actually build a pedagogy on a foundation of open (well, not one that isn\u2019t incredibly impoverished). Your foundational commitments in terms of pedagogy should be to an understanding of how learning happens. Once we have made fundamental commitments in terms of a theory of learning, then we can add open to our list of facilitating methods in order get better leverage.<\/em><\/p>\n I wonder if it isn\u2019t nonsensical to talk about \u201copen pedagogy\u201d at all …… Perhaps we should only use open as a modifier for other pedagogies, like \u201copen constructionist pedagogy\u201d or \u201copen connectivist pedagogy\u201d or \u201copen constructivist pedagogy.\u201d It\u2019s clear in each of those cases how open gives you better leverage in terms of supporting learning.<\/em><\/p>\n Although many of the practices associated with open pedagogy have been around long before open educational resources were created, OER nevertheless make such practices much easier to implement and more powerful. But does this make a new pedagogy?<\/p>\n Morgan (2017<\/a>) raises this issue with respect to the project she worked on for the Universidad de Guadalajara’s Agora project.<\/p>\n The Agora design process was focussed on what an open design would actually\u00a0be <\/em>a means to\u00a0which can be summarized as:<\/em><\/p>\n Ultimately we did create content that fits quite nicely with the 5Rs, but the goal of our open pedagogy design process was not to create OERs as a means towards or even as an essential component of open pedagogy. The Agora was alternatively all of the \u2018isms \u2013 \u00a0behaviourism, connectivism, constructivism, constructionism \u2013 but\u00a0the ism doesn\u2019t really matter. \u00a0Importantly, the open pedagogy design\u00a0was at times technology-enabled and at times it didn\u2019t use technology or the internet at all. \u00a0OERs didn\u2019t allow us to practice a different pedagogy, rather the open pedagogy of the Agora was a bricolage of activities and practices that at times resulted in OERs and at times didn\u2019t.<\/em><\/p>\n Pedagogy is primarily about practice: what teachers or learners do. Obviously, practice is and should be driven by ideas and beliefs, but it is different from philosophy. Learner-centred teaching or learners creating knowledge (with or without OER) is a pedagogy; ‘open’ is more of an idea and a value. In other words, looking at the quotations above, open is more a philosophy, a way of thinking, that informs practice, rather than the practice itself. However, this is a somewhat academic distinction. OER is enabling changes in teaching practice. However, I prefer a broader vision for teaching in a digital age than one so closely tied to OER.<\/p>\n The increasing availability of high quality open content is likely to facilitate\u00a0the shift from information transmission by the instructor to knowledge management by the learner. Also in a digital age there is a need for\u00a0greater focus on skills development embedded within a subject domain than on the memorisation of content.<\/p>\n The use of open educational resources\u00a0could enable these developments in a number of ways, such as:<\/p>\n Overall, such developments are likely to\u00a0lead to a severe reduction in lecture-based teaching and a move towards more project work, problem-based learning and collaborative learning. It will also result in a move away from fixed time and place written examinations, to more continuous, portfolio-based forms of assessment.<\/p>\n The role of the instructor then will shift to providing guidance to learners on where and how to find content, how to evaluate the relevance and reliability of content, what content areas are core and what peripheral, and to helping students analyse, apply and present information, within a strong learning design that focuses on clearly defined learning outcomes, particularly with regard to the development of skills. Students will work mainly online and collaboratively, developing multimedia learning artefacts or demonstrations of their learning, managing their online portfolios of work, and editing and presenting selected work for assessment.<\/p>\n This is a far broader vision of pedagogy than that built around the use of OER.<\/p>\n In summary:<\/p>\n Conole, G. (2014)\u00a0The 7Cs of Learning Design \u2013 a new approach to rethinking design practice<\/a>\u00a09th International Conference on Networked Learning<\/em>, Edinburgh<\/p>\n Crowther, G. (1969) This is the Open University<\/a>, London, UK, 23 July<\/p>\n DeRosa, R. and Jhangiani, R. (2017) Open Pedagogy<\/a>, in Mays, E. (ed.) A Guide to making Open Textbooks with Students<\/em><\/a>, The Rebus Community<\/p>\n DeRosa, R. and Robison, S. (2017)\u00a0From OER to Open Pedagogy: Harnessing the Power of Open<\/a> in\u00a0Jhangiani, R S. and Biswas-Diener, R. (2017 Open: The Philosophy and Practices that are Revolutionizing Education and Science<\/a>\u00a0<\/i>London: Ubiquity Press.<\/p>\n\n \t
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2025\/05\/Open-pedagogy-Bronwyn-Hegarty-2.jpg\")
Figure 12.4.2 Hegarty's Attributes of Open Pedagogy. Image: Hegarty, 2015[\/caption]\n\nDeRosa and Robison (2017<\/a>) set out the key idea of open pedagogy in the following:\n12.4.2 Examples of open pedagogy<\/h2>\nThere is a close connection between networking, social media such as blogs and wikis, which enable students to create open educational resources, and open pedagogy.\n\nJon Beasley-Murray's course where students created a Wikipedia entry on Latin American literature<\/a> is a good example, as is the Math Exam Resources<\/a> created by graduate students at UBC (see Chapter 10, Section 8.8.3<\/a>). This approach is particularly valuable for partly redressing cultural and historical bias, through the organization of Wikipedia edit-a-thons<\/a>. For two examples, see Women in Red\/Indigenous Women.<\/a>\u00a0and Indigenous Literature Edit-a-Thon.<\/a>\n\nThe Universidad de Guadalajara (Mexico) has an interesting web site (in English)<\/a> that provides a number of examples of open pedagogy from around the world, related to its Agora<\/a> project.\n\nAnother practice of open pedagogy are textbook-free degrees, called Zed Creds or Z-degrees <\/a>but also ZTC (zero textbook cost).\u00a0Royal Roads University\u2019s\u00a0Master of Arts in Learning and Technology<\/a>\u00a0is the first master of arts degree in Canada to go textbook-free. Students can access all of the course materials through open educational resources, e-books, journal articles and other free digital resources. These types of courses\u00a0aim to improve access to education and enhance student outcomes.\n\nMany more examples of open pedagogy in practice can be found in Jhangiani and Biswas-Diener (2017<\/a>) and in the Open Pedagogy Notebook.<\/a>\n\nLastly, there is a related movement around open educational infrastructure and technology that challenges educational institutions and students to think about who owns the technology and data being used for teaching and learning and how open education practices can be enabled by open educational technologies (see, for example OpenETC<\/a>.)\n
11.4.3 The need to provide a framework to support open educational resources<\/h2>\nThe search for a pedagogical and organizational framework to support the use of open educational resources has been driven partly by the relative slowness of adoption of OER. To give a simple example, instructors are reluctant to move away from expensive commercial first year textbooks, because these books often come with a wide range of support materials, such as interactive web sites with sample exam questions and answers, multiple-choice questions, and alternative reading. Open textbooks need to come with similar supporting materials, student activities and a wider 'network' of support to compete with commercial textbooks.\n\nPaul Stacey, the Director of the OEGlobal<\/a>, has mused (2018<\/a>) that too much focus is given to licensing and content development, and not enough to collectively managing open resources so that they are sustainable and dynamic. He argues that OER, to be effective, need 'commoning', which reflects the management and sustainability of common, shared resources and services. He argues for:\n
\n \t
11.4.4 Is open pedagogy a useful construct?<\/h2>\nSome of you may feel like Moli\u00e8re's Bourgeois Gentilhomme after a lesson from his tutor: 'I have been speaking prose for 40 years and never realised it.' The concept of 'open pedagogy' has been around for a long time, even if it has seen a revival resulting from the development of OER.\n\nLord Crowther, in a speech presenting the charter of the British Open University<\/a> in 1969, defined the Open University as:\n
\n \t
\n \t
12.4.5 Another vision for pedagogy in a digital age<\/h2>\nThe increasing availability of high quality open content is likely to facilitate\u00a0the shift from information transmission by the instructor to knowledge management by the learner. Also in a digital age there is a need for\u00a0greater focus on skills development embedded within a subject domain than on the memorisation of content.\n\nThe use of open educational resources\u00a0could enable these developments in a number of ways, such as:\n
\n \t
\n \t
\n \t
12.4.6 Conclusion<\/h2>\nIn summary:\n
\n \t
References<\/h2>\nConole, G. (2014)\u00a0The 7Cs of Learning Design \u2013 a new approach to rethinking design practice<\/a>\u00a09th International Conference on Networked Learning<\/em>, Edinburgh\n\nCrowther, G. (1969) This is the Open University<\/a>, London, UK, 23 July\n\nDeRosa, R. and Jhangiani, R. (2017) Open Pedagogy<\/a>, in Mays, E. (ed.) A Guide to making Open Textbooks with Students<\/em><\/a>, The Rebus Community\n\nDeRosa, R. and Robison, S. (2017)\u00a0From OER to Open Pedagogy: Harnessing the Power of Open<\/a> in\u00a0Jhangiani, R S. and Biswas-Diener, R. (2017 Open: The Philosophy and Practices that are Revolutionizing Education and Science<\/a>\u00a0<\/i>London: Ubiquity Press.\n\nHegarty, B. (2015) Attributes of open pedagogy: a model for using open educational resources<\/a> Educational Technology<\/em>, July-August\n
Activity 12.4 Contemplating Open Pedagogy<\/h3>\n
\n \t
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2015\/02\/Open-landscape-Stacey.png\")
12.4.1 What is open pedagogy?<\/h2>\n
\n
12.4.2 Examples of open pedagogy<\/h2>\n
11.4.3 The need to provide a framework to support open educational resources<\/h2>\n
\n
11.4.4 Is open pedagogy a useful construct?<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
12.4.5 Another vision for pedagogy in a digital age<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
12.4.6 Conclusion<\/h2>\n
\n
References<\/h2>\n