Copyright and OER in the same debate is not a good mix

Yesterday I attended a «policy breakfast» on OER at the EU parlament in Brussels. The event was be held in the European Parlament, with introductory speeches from OECD experts and with the presence of EP members.

The event focused on the European level of policymaking, with the goal of discussing possibilities of strengthening European policies and programs that support open education. These kinds of events provide an excellent opportunity to compare experiences and discuss recommendations about policies, and at the same time try to influence parlament members. The event is part of the important work of the Centrum Cyfrowe Projekt:Polska, their mission is to work towards social change and enhancing citizens’ participation through the use of digital technologies and open, cooperative models based on sharing knowledge and other resources.

When trying to bring the issues on Open education to the attention of policymakers it is hard to keep the message simple as there is a rather complex forrest of different problems and issues to be solved.

Copyright and OER in the same debate

The «policy breakfast» tried to combine two discussions, the first is on OER and the second one is copyright reform. These to issues are closely linked as they both affect what kind of content the teacher can use in the classroom and to me this seemed like a good idea when I read it in the invitation. After the meeting my conclusion is that it might have been a bit confusing for those not well wandered in this mace of legal matters and open licenses. While copyright is all about harmonizing the laws across european countries and all the legal and technical issues that comes with it, on the the discussion around Copyright the «devil is most definitely in the details».

The discussion around OER on the other hand is is much more focused on how to promote a policy that increases the development of freely licensed content and all the benefits that comes with sharing and reusing digital learning resources. For those focused on solving issues of copyright and faire use in different European countries the OER movement is only part of the solution.

My advice is to avoid mixing these to issues like we did yesterday. It would have been hard nought to get EU parlament members in the room to understand one of these issues over the course of 90 minutes. So I think it is a lesson to be learned for us OER advocates.

Creative Commons License
This work by Christer Gundersen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Timeline – the history of open educational resources

Open Educational Resources (OER) are freely accessible, openly licensed documents and media that are useful for teaching, learning, and assessing as well as for research purposes. For anyone that wants to understand why Open educational resources in so many ways are changing global education today, I think it is crucial to understand the history of OER.

During the last weeks I have been setting up a list of projects that I feel has had an impact on this open educational movement, and at one point I decided to make a timeline.  As many of you might be aware of the OER movement was inspired by the free software movement and open source. I have chosen to start my timeline in 1985 when Richard Stallman founded the Free Software Foundation.

Although OER is the leading trend in distance education as a consequence of the openness movement, many OERs are not truly open. When listing these OER projects I have been very liberal in terms of witch projects to include. So this is by no means a list of OERs but rather a list of projects that have influenced the development of OERs.

Do you know about any projects that should be in the timeline? All feedback is appreciate!

Technological roadmap for developing OER

We at NDLA are working on a roadmap that will define the guidelines for all our future projects, architecture and technological plattform. This is work in progress but we have narrowed the scope to focus on some core elements. From these core elements I have picked out the most important ones and written down my thoughts.

It all starts with User Experience

Start developing with strong focus the user experience and always keep the user at the centre of you development. Its natural to think about UX when developing the fronted of a solution but one tends to forget that the way we build APIs and other infrastructure components also affects the user experience.

User experience is«a person’s perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service»

Build your systems for change

The edTech marked is changing rapidly and new and innovative solutions is being presented on a weekly basis. Not all of these new services will of course be relevant for projects developing OER but…. as we see fields like adaptive learning, learning analytics, crowdsourcing and game based learning developing over the next decade it will be important not to build OER plattforms as monolithic structures.

Open licenses, open source and open standards

We at NDLA(Norwegian Digital Learning Arena) have build our project on a strategy with open content and open source as core elements. We do this for many reasons. The most important aspects are that openness gives us flexibility in terms of development and higher quality on the end product. At the same time it prevents vendor lock-in and lets other projects re-use and build on our content. Many OER projects are looking to a more decentralized model of production. Having a free license on the content is crucial to support this transition.

It is important to be aware that having a strategi with open content does not exclude the possibility of also bundling with Copyright material.

Separate technology, design and content

It is a goal in itself not to develop content for a specific technology or platform. If you manage to separate content from technology it will provide easier transition from one platform to another and it also provides greater opportunity to introduce the digital resources to your users on different platforms based on the same core content.

A practical example is an online resource developed for a web based plattform where you at one point would like to use the same content in an mobile app. If implemented correctly the content(or parts of the content) can be presented to the user seamlessly between these to plattforms.

In many projects, it is to costly to implement this strategy fully. For these projects there are standards for embedding content from different platforms together. One of these is LTI.

A modular approach to development

In computing, microservices is a software architecture style in which complex applications are composed of small, independent processes.  These services are small, highly decoupled and focus on doing a small task, facilitating a modular approach to system-building.

Some key properties of microservices architecture:

  • The services are easy to replace
  • Services are organized around capabilities, e.g. user interface front-end, recommendation, logistics, billing, etc
  • Services can be implemented using different programming languages, databases, hardware and software environment, depending on what fits best
  • Architectures are symmetrical rather than hierarchical (producer – consumer)

The term «Microservice arcithectur» simply means you focus on building small in order to keep it simple.

As mentioned earlier in this blog post, this is something we’re working on right now, and the areas that I have mentioned her are only a selection.  This means that this bloggpost by not in any way represents our final roadmap.

Creative Commons License
This work by Christer Gundersen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at

How does openly-licensed content stack up against traditional textbooks?

There are still teachers and politicians leaning towards the old school textbook when choosing resources to use in the classroom. This is based on what I would call the «Gutenberg paradigm» where publishers control the decimation of knowledge together with an elite group of authors. The assumption is that «you get what you pay for».

At the same time there are constant discussions on whether open educational resources and EdTech in the classroom has any documented effect. One relevant question in this context is of course: how does traditional textbooks stack up against open educational resources and free, openly-licensed textbooks. Is the frase, «you get what you pay for» still true when it comes to textbooks?  

In fact,  researchers at Brigham Young University have found that this is not the case anymore.

A new multi-institutional study the researchers have been looking at the academic outcomes of students assigned free, openly-licensed textbooks versus those assigned traditionally-published textbooks. What the study finds is the opposite of what folk wisdom tells us: expensive textbooks are notsuperior to free ones. In fact, the results show a striking trend that students assigned free, open textbooks do as well or better than their peers in terms of grades, course completion, and other measures of academic success.

If traditional textbooks are not producing better outcomes, then what exactly arestudents paying for?

Here’s a breakdown of the results:

  • Course completion: In all of the courses studied, students who were assigned open textbooks were as likely or more likely to complete their course than those assigned traditional textbooks. In one course, the completion rate was remarkably 15 percentage points higher for students using open textbooks.
  • Grades: Students who were assigned open textbooks tended to have final grades equivalent to or better than those assigned traditional textbooks. In more than a quarter of the courses, students using open textbooks achieved higher grades, and only one course using open textbooks showed lower grades (which is at least partially explained by the course’s significantly higher completion rate, which includes the grades of students who would have otherwise dropped out).
  • Credit load: Students who were assigned open textbooks took approximately 2 credits more both in the semester of the study and in the following semester. This is a sign that students are reinvesting money saved on textbooks into more courses, which can accelerate graduation times and potentially reduce debt.
  • Overall success: Overall, students in more than half of the courses that used open textbooks did better according to at least one academic measure used in the study, and students in 93% of these courses did at least as well by all of the measures.

The study is based on more than 16,000 students across 10 institutions, and is the largest and most rigorous study of its kind. Naturally, there are some limitations, most notably that the researchers cannot conclusively claim that textbooks are the sole cause of differences in student outcomes, since uncontrolled factors such as variation in teaching methods may have played a role. However, more than a dozen other studies have been published over the last five years that find a similar correlation between open textbooks and as-good-or-better student outcomes, which shows a definitive trend.

In addition to results in these studies it is important to take in account other aspects of the open license like the possible translation into new languages and the the fact that it is possible to adapt an change books to meet local needs.


Creative Commons License
This work by Christer Gundersen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Based on work of Nicole Allen available at

You are free to re-blog, adapt and share the content with attribution to the author and a link back to the original version.

The “O” in OER and MOOC is crucial for the future of global education

The word “open” can be used in almost any context and very often it will bring a positive association with it.

In some cases it does not matter if one uses the term precisely, but when used to describe educational resources it is crucial that we understand the difference between “open” as in open access and “open” in its more pure form, for example a resource that is licensed under Creative Commons.

Many of the MOOCs that are launched these days will give open access but the content is not released under a free license. As you might know one of the “O”s in MOOC stands for Open, so this can be confusing.

My top 4 reasons for the “O” to be important are:

  1. An open resource under a Creative Commons license will be free forever – with open access resources the author can revoke your access to their resources at any time.
  2. Open educational resources promote sharing – open access limits sharing 
  3. An open resource gives the teacher(or student) the possibility to make their own version in their own context, this gives every teacher control over the end product presented in the classroom.
  4. Open promotes the dissemination of knowledge into smaller languages trough translation. For teachers and students in smaller languages it will be very important to be able to translate and and re-contextualize instead of starting to develop all their resources from the ground. This is simply a matter of funding and for smaller languages and developing countries

Creative Commons License
This work by Christer Gundersen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

OERs in small Languages – reuse and crowdsourcing is the only way to go

Later today I am talking at The seminar Open Learning in Minority Languages in Leeuwarden(Netherlands) on how we at NDLA build Open Educational Resources for Norwegian Secondary Schools. This seminar is part of the LangOER program supported by the European Commission. When preparing for my talk I started thinking(and now writing) about what I would say are the key factors to promote OER development among smaller and less used languages.

The backdrop for this question is that less used languages face the risk of linguistic/cultural decay in the fast evolving OER/OEP landscape currently dominated by English.

My approach will be based on the experience we have from NDLA and my personal belief the “open” is an important quality in its self.

These are some of the key factors as I see it:

  • Define open as the primary long term strategi(Open content, not only free access)
  • Develop methods to translate and re-contextualize resources from English and other large languages
  • Engage and develop communities to be able to scale maintenance and development of content in the long term
  • Use micropayment as a method to promote a marked of startups and smaller companies
  • Look to Wikipedia and the open source community for inspiration
  • Open standards  to promote plattform independence

Creative Commons License
This work by Christer Gundersen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Startup workshop for Maarifa Initiative in Addis Ababa

In mid July I traveled to Addis Ababa to start up the først Maarifa Initiative project in Ethiopia. On my trip to eLearning Africa in May earlier this year I met with my friend Fasika Minda at Addis Ababa University and Fasika will now lead the work for us in Addis this summer. Together with Zekarias Teshome will be organizing the work of students and development of both content and our website.
During the first workshop now i July we have launched the Ethiopian version of our website at and startet translating content from English to Amharic. We have also recruited students who will work for us during the summer and we have now formed a team of 9 people in Addis.

We will translate and re-contextualize content in three different categories:

  • Basic ICT and web literacy
  • Life skills(teacher resources)
  • Literacy(teacher resources)

As a part of the project in Ethiopia we will also develop new content using H5P, mainly focusing on interactive content like drag and drop and fill in the blanks to add value to the content we translate.

We have re-used Creative Commons resources from The open University and their Tessa project, NDLA(Open educational resources for secondary schools in Norway), The Australian government and Norwegian project)

From August 3 – 6 we organized a larger workshop at Addis Ababa University where students will participate and translate content into Amharic.




Creative Commons License
This work by Christer Gundersen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How we work at the Maarifa Initiative

Over the last two years I have been working on The Maarifa Initiative and this summer we are starting up projects in Kampala, Uganda and Addis Ababa in Ethiopia.

The Maarifa Initiative is all about creating a community of students and teachers working to reuse, adapt and translate digital learning resources from existing global resources into local languages.

A short summery of our workflow looks like this:

  • We start by searching and  finding digitale learning resources
  • translate and re-contextualize
  • re-develop and build new content
  • Publish in a new language and context

This video gives an short introduction to the structure and how we work: