Innovation in pedagogy

The development of communication technology has had a huge impact on all areas of the world. Also, technology has had a great impact on education, and e-learning is a typical example. It is revolutionary to be able to get the education when we want and where we want, even if we are not in a certain place at a specific time. This makes it easier for more people to reach education. Beyond the limits of education, creating explosive demand can be considered a demand-side approach.
Open pedagogy, on the other hand, can be regarded as a supply-side approach that allows for diverse, participatory and living education. The concept of open pedagogy is not really new or imaginative. However, Open Educational Resources (OERs) make this possible. In some respects, the characteristics of OERs indicate the difference in the supply of education. OERs are educational materials that are openly-licensed, usually with Creative Commons licenses, and they are generally characterized by the Rs: they can be reused, retained, redistributed, revised, and remixed. The most important feature is that not only teachers can access educational materials, but all people who can participate in education can access them. If it is the first educational innovation that has enabled anyone to receive education through Internet technology, open education is the second innovation that has made everyone a provider of education. As Rajiv said, everyone can act as a provider.
But change and innovation are accompanied by side effects. Anyone who can participate means that anyone can distort information. From a traditional point of view, the person who supplies education must be qualified. We could easily trust them because educators had to be tested to a certain level of academic personality. However, the current OER is intentionally distorted or alterable by someone. Even if purification is done, I think that it is not easy to cleanse anyone who has an evil intention. It is important for educators to be prepared for side effects so that complete innovation can be achieved.


10 thoughts on “Innovation in pedagogy

  1. It’s an interesting point that you bring up about distortion, falsifying and validity of OER content. There was a great deal of similar concern about wikipedia a few years back, but apparently the transparency of the editing system and the gradual community push to use more citations acted as a firewall against sabotage and fakery. I’m not sure if the same can be applied to OER in general. I think ( like the users of the old web 1.0) we are living in the golden age where every contributor to the open pedagogy realm is a good-intentioned one.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi Arash,
      There are many villain around the world. In the past, I thought it was a big problem that articles in blogs are used as references. With the power of blogs with many subscribers rising, they occasionally used power in bad places. This will happen because it is difficult for people to make consensus. Especially in social science or political science, I think the OER will make bigger problems.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Hi Seungbee, I think the problem you mentioned is very important. Open pedagogy makes it difficult for educators to control the content, but do you think is there a need for internet censorship? Many people would worry about it may limit their freedom.


  3. I may be naive but I agree with Arash. I would like to believe that if a sufficient number of people had access to OERs, their collective editing power would keep the content within acceptable proximity of the truth. James Surowiecki, in his book The Wisdom of Crowds, tells a story about an experiment run by Francis Galton in 1906. There is a contest at a county fair where individuals try to guess the weight of an ox. No one individual guessed the weight correctly, but the average of all of the guesses (supposedly around 800) was within one pound of the actual weight. I think I originally heard this on a RadioLab podcast, but there are a number of articles on the internet about it also.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Hey Seungbee, You bring up an interesting point about the potential for distortion and misinformation in OER platforms. I agree with Arash’s comment that in the case of Wikipedia, the OER has worked because there are more people interested in sharing truth rather than spreading fiction. I’d also like to comment that unlike in a physical textbook where you might have the opinion or interpretation of one or a handful of authors, OERs may provide the opportunity for people to share other points of view that may help to engage different students or help facilitate discussion. Great post! I look forward to discussing this further in class tonight.


  5. I think that it’s important to be critical of any information source, and I agree that OER does allow the opportunity for more people to distort information if that’s their intent, but I would also argue that it’s almost safer since it allows for a greater group of people to critique that distorted information and correct it.

    When it comes to information and resources that are “closed,” a few folks have all the power to control exactly what is being said. While in the ideal world, these would be a select group of experts who are willing to critically evaluate each other’s work, I’m inclined to think that power and privilege play as much of a role in expertise in determining who sets those narratives. If that “expert” narrative then carries a bias and is viewed as closed to critique, there’s no way it can systematically be corrected. With OER, anyone can then criticize that expert view and refine it.


  6. Interesting points here about how open access can often mean that anyone has the right to “distort” the information. While I know some have had easier times, I worked with a religion class as an undergraduate to alter the historical Jesus Wikipedia page, and although we were guided by a faculty member, were met with much resistance in our attempt to alter the site. I think the ability of people to alter information varies quite a lot.


  7. You bring up a good point about incoming technology assisting in education. It certainly seems like it will be a hard balancing act especially in the future when more people have access to self-learning resources. From my point of view I feel that industry companies and firms will need to put a lot more work into verification that who they hire are truly capable of doing the work vs trusting an academic institution to verify their achievements.


  8. I agree that there is a risk that the data may be distorted by certain powers/actors. We’re seeing that right now in the US with the increase of fake news created by organizations/states intended to influence people.
    I’m also unsure about how much OAR would influence content. If there is a threshold for contribution to a book (e.g. you need to be an ‘expert’ in the field), I’m not sure if content would be impacted that much. (Or conversely, some sections may be sources of debate for rival academics?)


Leave a Reply to antoniofuentes333000544 Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s