This is a fascinating article, one that deserves more attention than I can give it in this short item. Chris Lott defends (what he perceives to be) the OER movement against (what he perceives to be) its critics - people like Brian Lamb and Leigh Blackall. These two veterans of open content and open access can defend themselves, and certainly don't need my help. But they are right and Lott is wrong - the point of the OER movement continues largely to be, as the OECD report states, Giving Knowledge For Free, while the real open content movement is about (in my view), "volunteers and incentives, community and partnerships, co-production and sharing, distributed management and control." That doesn't mean people like Mike Caulfield do not work hard and do not deserve our support - they do. But, of course, all of us do. And that doesn't mean that the OCWC isn't one of the good guys - they mean well, but you know, it's about sharing control, and I see no evidence that the big universities, their professors, sponsors and advertisers are about to do anything like that any time soon. P.S. Tony Hirst on this is worth a read, too.
Today: 0 Total: 21