When looking at the same document for weeks on end, it’s easy to start to miss ways in which others might perceive or understand what is written. Feedback, then, is an excellent way to gauge the reception of others, allowing for changes to the written work by adding perspectives. In my speaking with one of my advisors, as well as with my project sponsor, it became clear that the key term Open Educational Resources (OER) required additional clarification.<\/p>\n
In the first instance, my one advisor provided feedback on my project proposal, notes regarding what was well-written and some items that needed further clarification or citation to be clear. Under the Key Terms section I had referenced Bates (2019), that OER would be understood to be, “any freely available resource, accessible and downloadable through the internet for use by others at no cost to them” (Bates, 2019, p. 53, para. 6; Joubert, 2022, p. 5). What was recommended was adding further detail by David Wiley, noting that his definition of OER is seminal, describing not only OER but also Creative Commons (CC).<\/p>\n
Likewise, in conversation with my project sponsor it came up that my desire was for the completed quality assessment tool to be freely available for remixing and reuse by others. The concern raised was that, given the amount of time I am spending on this, how I might ensure recognition should someone use the resource. It was also noted that there were concerns regarding the commercialization of the resource without my consent. With regard to this, my thought is, and has been, to use a CC license to require attribution but none of this was noted in the project proposal. Clearly some edits were in order.<\/p>\n
I began by adding in clearer detail to Wiley’s 5Rs of openness (2014), describing that users retail the right to keep a copy of the resource, reuse, revise, remix and redistribute the resource (Wiley, 2014; Moist, 2017). I retained the write-up referencing Bates as I find the summary useful in context, and noted how the resource would be released under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (Creative Commons, n.d.). By clarifying in this way, the resource will be freely available for anyone to reuse according to Wiley’s definition of an OER, will remain free for use, reuse, remixing, etc., and will require attribution for this and any subsequent iterations.<\/p>\n
While whether someone respects licensing requirements on the internet is always up for debate, these changes provide needed clarification and coverage for both my efforts and the resource itself. As such, this feedback and the discussions have been invaluable in ensuring that definitions, intentions and requirements are all as clear as possible.<\/p>\n
References<\/strong><\/p>\n Bates, A. W. (Tony). (2019). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning<\/i> (Second). Tony Bates Associates Ltd. https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/teachinginadigitalagev2\/<\/a><\/p>\n Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 international<\/i>. (n.d.). Creative Commons. Retrieved February 7, 2022, from https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/<\/a><\/p>\n Joubert, J.-P. (2022). Creating an Quality Assessment Tool for Online Mental Health Courses<\/i> (pp. 1\u201338).<\/p>\n Moist, S. (2017). Faculty OER toolkit<\/i>. BCcampus. https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/facultyoertoolkit\/chapter\/oer-definition\/<\/a><\/p>\n