OLR Open Learning Resources. OLR. Freedom to access copy modify redistribute Foote 2005, Doyle 2005. Conditions? Attribution Share-Alike Non-commercial No-modify Educational Other?. Matter more in conditions of scarcity, not abundance. What resources?. Not just courseware….
Foote 2005, Doyle 2005
Matter more in conditions of scarcity, not abundance
Not just courseware…
Numerous funding models…
these vary mostly by source
but models have other implications
who authors (whose point of view)?
who controls (funds, resources)
Eg. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
$US 3 to 4 million fund
Eg. OCW Consortium
Eg. Wikipedia foundation Apache foundation
"In the Conversion model, you give something away for free and then convert the consumer of the freebie to a paying customer."
Sterne and Herring (2005)
charges for this process will be met by funding bodies, such as the Wellcome Trust - 1% of their annual spend.
Eg. Public Library of Science
Think about YouTube, Blogger, Flickr (pro)
MIT iCampus Outreach Initiative (Microsoft) (CORE, 2005)
Stanford on iTunes project (Apple)
Open Knowledge Initiative
All from MIT
It usually manages it, too… and there may be side-benefits
Universities, colleges, schools
Most of the barriers to the sustainability of OERs have nothing to do with money
There are billions of free resources out there
The problem is control…
… and ownership
OERs today are about giving people the means to create
And then stepping out of the way
Flickr Facebook YouTube Blogger MySpace Yahoo-Groups Revver Writely Wikipedia LiveJournal WordPress Drupal PHP
‘Giving Knowledge for Free’ ….?
So long as we think of OERs as charity…
as something we create
and that we give to the indigent
OERs will never be sustainable
Use volunteer programmers to create the software; make source code open and available to all users
Give Linux operating system away free of charge to those who download it (charge a small fee to users who want a copy on CD)
Make money by employing a cadre of technical support personnel who provide technical support to users for a feeRedhat Linux’s Business Model
Employ a cadre of highly skilled programmers to develop proprietary code; keep source code hidden from users
Sell resulting operating system and software packages to PC makers and users at relatively attractive prices and achieve large unit sales
Most costs arise in developing the software; variable costs are small—once breakeven volume is reached, revenues from additional sales are almost pure profit.
Provide technical support to users at no costMicrosoft’s Business Model
Reiterate and institutionalize F/OSS culture (values, norms, and beliefs)