A Guide to Making Open Textbooks with Students

sub title

Ed. Elizabeth Mays

Amanda Coolidge, Anna Andrzejewski, Apurva Ashok, Assistant Editors Zoe Wake Hyde, David Squires, Gabriel Higginbotham, Interviews with Alice Barrett, Julie Ward, Matthew Moore, Maxwell Nicholson, Rajiv Jhangiani, Robin DeRosa, Samara Burns, Steel Wagstaff, et Timothy Robbins

The Rebus Community for Open Textbook Creation

Montreal

A Guide to Making Open Textbooks with Students de Rebus Community est sous une licence Licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, sauf indication contraire.

©Elizabeth Mays, Robin DeRosa, Rajiv Jhangiani, Timothy Robbins, David Squires, Julie Ward, Anna Andrzejewski, Samara Burns, Matthew Moore. Interviews with Alice Barrett, Amanda Coolidge, Maxwell Nicholson, Steel Wagstaff, and Gabriel Higginbotham. All authors retain the copyright on their work.

Except where otherwise noted, all work in this book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0), meaning you can use it, adapt it, and redistribute it as you like, but you must provide attribution to the original authors, by retaining this license notice.

We request that you keep this full notice when you use the book.

You can find free copies of this book in multiple formats (web, PDF, EPUB) at: https://press.rebus.community/makingopentextbookswithstudents/.

Print ISBN: 978-1-989014-02-8

Ebook ISBN: 978-1-989014-03-5

Do you have comments about this book? Please visit http://bit.ly/OTwithstudents.

Rebus Community

This book was created with support from the Rebus Community for Open Textbook Creation,  where we are building new collaborative models for creating & sustaining open textbooks. Would you like to collaborate on an open textbook? Join the Rebus Community at projects.rebus.community.

Are you a faculty member or administrator with questions about this book, or about open textbooks generally? Please get in touch with us at contact@rebus.community.

Table des matières

- Introduction

- Contributors

- Partie I. Open Pedagogy

- 1. My own chapter

- 2. Open Pedagogy

- 3. German

- 4. I'm the title

- 5. I'm a new chapter

- 6. New chapter

- Partie II. Project Ideas & Case Studies

- Partie III. Student Rights & Faculty Responsibilities

- Partie IV. Sample Assignments

- Partie V. Resources

1

Introduction

Liz Mays

At the Rebus Community, we are building a new, collaborative model of publishing for open textbooks.

Wrapped up in those words–new, collaborative, publishing, open–are some ambitious goals:

- We want to make it easier for a global community of open textbook practitioners from disparate institutions to find each other and collaborate on Open Educational Resources.

- We want to make the process of building or contributing to an open textbook easier.

- We want to make open textbooks in every subject in every language available free of charge and free of licensing restrictions in every format possible.

No doubt, growing the OER ecosystem on the creation side will make it easier for students to find and use open textbooks in their disciplines. But enabling students to contribute to open textbooks could transform them into even more accessible resources for learning.

Producing such resources hones research, writing, editing, teamwork, and digital literacy skills  Moreover, such experiences can make class learning interactive—going from what one of our contributors describes as a “banking” model of class instruction into an “inquiry-based” and participatory model.[1]

We’re thrilled when we learn about faculty embarking on classroom projects that meet the class’s objectives for student learning outcomes and engagement through projects that involve students in the research, compilation, and production of open textbooks.

This guide aims to both inspire and equip more faculty to follow in these Open Pedagogy pioneers’ tracks in making open textbooks with students.

As with all Rebus open textbooks, this guide is but the first edition of a work designed to evolve, iterate, and expand. It is not complete–there are aspects we did not cover in this first edition–but we hope to fill these gaps going forward. If you have something to add, please let us know by commenting on the Guide to Making Open Textbooks With Students project[2] in the Rebus Community Forum.

1. Timothy Robbins, “Case Study: Expanding the Open Anthology of Earlier American Literature,” Guide to Making Open Textbooks With Students, https://press.rebus.community/makingopentextbookswithstudents/chapter/case-study-expanding-open-anthology-of-earlier-american-literature/. ↵

2. "Project: Making Open Textbooks With Students," Rebus Community Forum, https://forum.rebus.community/topic/119/project-summary-guide-to-making-open-textbooks-with-students/15.↵

2

Contributors

This handbook was compiled, edited and formatted by staff of the Rebus Community for Open Textbook Creation including Elizabeth Mays, Zoe Wake Hyde and Apurva Ashok.

It features essays by Open Pedagogy practitioners Robin DeRosa, director of interdisciplinary studies at Plymouth State University; Rajiv Jhangiani, University Teaching Fellow in Open Studies at Kwantlen Polytechnic University; Timothy Robbins, assistant professor of English at Graceland University; and David Squires, visiting assistant professor at Washington State University; sample assignments from Anna Andrzejewski, art history professor and director of graduate studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Julie Ward, assistant professor of 20th and 21st-century Latin American literature at University of Oklahoma; and Timothy Robbins; as well as the voices of many other faculty and students engaged in open textbook projects. Among them:

- Alice Barrett, student at University of Oklahoma

- Samara Burns, student at University of Calgary

- Amanda Coolidge, senior manager of Open Education at BCcampus

- Gabriel Higginbotham, recent-former student at Open Oregon State

- Matthew Moore, student at Graceland University

- Maxwell Nicholson, student at University of Victoria

- Steel Wagstaff, instructional technology consultant at UW-Madison

We are grateful to all who contributed to this project.

If you would like to add to this guide for an expanded, second edition, please volunteer to add your voice to the project[1] in the Rebus Community Forum.

1. "Project: Making Open Textbooks With Students," Rebus Community Forum, https://forum.rebus.community/topic/119/project-summary-guide-to-making-open-textbooks-with-students/15.↵

I

Open Pedagogy

What is Open Pedagogy? How are professors practicing it in their classrooms to build open textbooks and other Open Educational Resources? What are the advantages to Open Pedagogy?[1] This section answers these questions and provides ideas for working within existing teaching structures to introduce Open Pedagogy into your classes.[2]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Cras feugiat, mi sit amet posuere facilisis, purus purus faucibus sem, quis finibus arcu justo non lorem. Sed varius velit ut eros lobortis maximus. Nullam et justo lacus. In luctus accumsan tellus sodales accumsan. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque rutrum purus ut eros convallis tincidunt. Integer et interdum odio. Proin quis pretium urna. Duis dolor orci, ullamcorper quis urna quis, egestas vestibulum nibh. Aliquam tellus odio, mattis in tempus sed, tempus nec arcu. Phasellus rutrum bibendum libero ut sollicitudin.

Praesent ut tincidunt purus. Sed in sodales orci, vitae commodo eros. Etiam odio ante, gravida sit amet leo in, convallis convallis augue. Integer nunc velit, dapibus faucibus semper id, tempor non justo. Donec ut scelerisque elit, varius lobortis ante. Nulla facilisi. Aenean facilisis consectetur lacus vel vehicula. Nam euismod ex eu lectus sagittis, sed facilisis neque luctus. Aliquam bibendum finibus diam, ut mollis augue tincidunt non. Quisque eget lectus nibh. Donec laoreet risus vitae augue sodales porta. Aliquam erat volutpat.

Quisque sem justo, aliquam eget viverra sed, pellentesque ut lacus. Nullam sed rhoncus nisl, sed vulputate quam. Vestibulum et ante elit. Aenean dictum bibendum velit, a tincidunt nulla egestas eu. Fusce ut massa dictum, accumsan neque id, vulputate mi. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Ut sit amet neque nisl. In pretium dictum rhoncus. Sed gravida tristique mi ut tempus. Donec turpis ante, molestie id diam id, accumsan bibendum augue. Mauris sagittis, ex a mollis euismod, risus leo vestibulum sapien, sed faucibus libero massa a ex. Pellentesque ac molestie massa. Vestibulum vel mauris vel augue volutpat bibendum. Etiam in tortor metus. Suspendisse sed eleifend orci, in lacinia velit. Suspendisse id arcu et urna consectetur facilisis.

In sodales orci eu dolor mattis tempus ac id tellus. Suspendisse scelerisque faucibus ligula nec tincidunt. In commodo magna egestas blandit scelerisque. Sed at eros porttitor, venenatis ipsum nec, feugiat nunc. Donec tincidunt convallis accumsan. Etiam pellentesque turpis et lectus interdum consequat. Cras malesuada purus nec molestie rutrum. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Donec vitae risus bibendum, faucibus erat in, feugiat enim. Donec molestie ipsum ac laoreet maximus.

Suspendisse scelerisque purus at ex ultricies, in euismod ligula luctus. Proin fermentum tincidunt hendrerit. Nullam gravida, neque eget aliquet tincidunt, odio nibh malesuada risus, vitae pharetra ante quam ut augue. Nulla sed elementum ipsum. Curabitur commodo placerat lorem. Aenean facilisis, libero id euismod hendrerit, velit ante vestibulum dui, eu ultrices massa quam vitae turpis. Proin sed orci vitae magna faucibus accumsan. Praesent hendrerit ut magna in ultricies.

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Donec vulputate nunc lectus, nec euismod lorem rhoncus id. Praesent viverra nibh massa, id porta massa vulputate eu. Sed vel consectetur elit. Praesent egestas nulla in massa iaculis, nec posuere felis placerat. Curabitur at ante condimentum, pulvinar purus vestibulum, ultrices metus. Suspendisse eleifend dignissim porttitor. Donec pretium ipsum felis, a rhoncus odio euismod in. Nam laoreet eros urna, vel ullamcorper erat congue vitae.

Suspendisse laoreet odio eu posuere gravida. Donec scelerisque neque neque, id vulputate nunc fermentum sit amet. Fusce gravida sed eros ac dignissim. Morbi bibendum ultricies ipsum a dapibus. Nullam feugiat ex vel dolor congue condimentum. Aliquam posuere, lorem sit amet vestibulum maximus, lorem mi sollicitudin purus, quis consectetur ex dui a diam. Sed lobortis erat a lacus volutpat, laoreet porttitor ipsum hendrerit. Aenean nec commodo ipsum. Suspendisse in fringilla nulla, et bibendum sapien. Suspendisse et augue suscipit, commodo dolor eget, facilisis neque. Proin mattis justo ac aliquam varius. Nullam neque dolor, blandit ac quam vitae, rutrum tincidunt ipsum. Ut lobortis consectetur eros, at aliquam purus cursus sed. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Mauris pretium nec massa nec faucibus. Nullam elementum vestibulum mattis.

Aliquam lorem sem, ultricies nec vulputate in, mattis eu urna. Etiam ac ligula turpis. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Vestibulum sollicitudin libero in mi consectetur bibendum. Nullam eu dui non arcu dapibus blandit et vitae justo. Proin interdum, dolor quis feugiat vehicula, risus mi aliquet tortor, at dictum odio sem ac risus. Proin vestibulum lorem at orci dapibus malesuada. Duis id fringilla elit. Vivamus quis massa mattis, mattis nibh eget, viverra lacus. In bibendum commodo nulla, id eleifend sapien bibendum eget. Ut feugiat, mauris sed pellentesque feugiat, tellus nulla bibendum eros, sed cursus nisi nisl sit amet mi. Sed velit magna, blandit sit amet ligula nec, dictum pellentesque sem. Mauris velit arcu, accumsan eu mollis quis, congue ut enim.

Etiam congue et dolor at gravida. Proin at lectus est. Proin ipsum est, ultricies in pretium id, euismod ac mi. Praesent vitae neque vitae tortor varius elementum vitae vel diam. Fusce ex urna, vulputate nec libero ut, lobortis pharetra lorem. Vestibulum laoreet bibendum faucibus. Aliquam ac ipsum elit. Mauris ornare consectetur purus, quis maximus enim pretium vitae. Sed gravida, libero quis finibus laoreet, justo erat gravida risus, ac faucibus sapien magna eu lectus. Phasellus vehicula gravida pharetra.

Sed ultricies quam dolor, eget imperdiet leo elementum ac. Praesent et lectus bibendum, vestibulum libero malesuada, congue mauris. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Integer justo urna, tempus ac tristique sed, aliquet sed eros. Aliquam erat volutpat. Suspendisse magna sapien, posuere vel eros nec, placerat semper lacus. Aenean ultrices mi erat, id tempor elit fermentum non. Phasellus leo risus, lobortis feugiat dolor at, convallis fermentum urna. Sed dignissim feugiat eros, ac aliquet magna efficitur id.

Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Praesent finibus ex eu efficitur congue. Etiam euismod mi eget tincidunt posuere. Donec interdum malesuada nibh, nec lacinia sapien commodo eget. Fusce sed sem commodo nunc ornare vulputate. Integer condimentum nulla eget porttitor lobortis. In consequat elit non sapien sagittis porta. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Donec quam tortor, consectetur quis nibh at, dapibus posuere lorem. Vivamus ullamcorper interdum enim in consequat. Pellentesque eget mauris quis augue venenatis dictum. Suspendisse risus diam, rutrum ut nisi et, facilisis condimentum purus. Fusce eget ex eu ante rutrum consectetur. Nam tincidunt, arcu ut tempus accumsan, quam urna laoreet arcu, quis aliquet diam mauris eu eros.

Integer placerat dapibus ex aliquet interdum. Duis id mollis velit. Etiam suscipit, nunc at accumsan imperdiet, magna turpis condimentum turpis, a pharetra nisl diam in arcu. Nam vestibulum augue ligula, ac fermentum sapien mollis et. Pellentesque gravida feugiat lorem eu tempor. Morbi eget ante vitae ex pretium ultricies quis at ante. Nullam eu tortor quam. Curabitur lorem lacus, vestibulum at varius vitae, placerat eget risus. Ut vitae ornare lacus. Fusce iaculis elementum sem nec rutrum. Donec magna ex, imperdiet quis ipsum ut, eleifend ullamcorper nunc. Integer at rhoncus ex, et ornare odio. Pellentesque bibendum justo in quam posuere maximus. Maecenas dictum maximus orci, et euismod mi faucibus quis. Quisque sollicitudin laoreet nulla, quis feugiat lectus interdum eget. Donec porta finibus porttitor.

Quisque vehicula urna venenatis elit facilisis mollis. Suspendisse eu nunc id lorem sodales varius at vitae mi. Proin pulvinar elit ac bibendum vestibulum. Morbi vitae enim varius, faucibus risus quis, porta magna. Aliquam dapibus diam quam, ac auctor lacus consectetur eget. Aliquam iaculis tincidunt facilisis. Nunc pellentesque placerat arcu, vel placerat ex vestibulum eu. Quisque nulla velit, maximus a commodo eu, tincidunt non enim.

Morbi vitae neque hendrerit, consequat nisi a, dapibus eros. Sed porttitor cursus ornare. In accumsan sapien id fermentum consequat. Fusce et ultrices tellus. Proin convallis nisl a dui tristique varius. Pellentesque consequat metus id est bibendum feugiat nec in nibh. Suspendisse potenti. Nunc ante nisl, bibendum vel pellentesque vel, sollicitudin ac neque. Proin dapibus semper iaculis. Praesent id risus ac erat tristique ullamcorper.

Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Maecenas eu lectus nec velit placerat fringilla id id nulla. Aliquam libero augue, malesuada a interdum quis, sodales eu sapien. Integer fringilla tristique ligula, id sodales diam. Nulla aliquam consectetur mattis. Vivamus odio velit, mollis vitae tortor eu, dictum vulputate purus. Sed sed sem sit amet ligula sagittis euismod at nec risus. Nulla dapibus et turpis nec fermentum. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Quisque convallis, quam at ultricies hendrerit, velit magna rutrum sapien, ac molestie sapien lectus at quam. Suspendisse id quam id lectus hendrerit pharetra. Vivamus sed ex fringilla, maximus leo cursus, pulvinar dolor. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

1. I’m a footnote ↵

2. I’m another footnote. ↵

1

My own chapter

Test chapter.

Steel Dummy should be able to edit this.

2

Open Pedagogy

Robin DeRosa et Rajiv Jhangiani

There are many ways to begin a discussion of “Open Pedagogy.” Although providing a framing definition might be the obvious place to start, we want to resist that for just a moment to ask a set of related questions: What are your hopes for education, particularly for higher education? What vision do you work toward when you design your daily professional practices in and out of the classroom? How do you see the roles of the learner and the teacher? What challenges do your students face in their learning environments, and how does your pedagogy address them?

“Open Pedagogy,” as we engage with it, is a site of praxis, a place where theories about learning, teaching, technology, and social justice enter into a conversation with each other and inform the development of educational practices and structures. This site is dynamic, contested, constantly under revision, and resists static definitional claims. But it is not a site vacant of meaning or political conviction. In this brief introduction, we offer a pathway for engaging with the current conversations around Open Pedagogy, some ideas about its philosophical foundation, investments, and its utility, and some concrete ways that students and teachers—all of us learners—can “open” education. We hope that this chapter will inspire those of us in education to focus our critical and aspirational lenses on larger questions about the ideology embedded within our educational systems and the ways in which pedagogy impacts these systems. At the same time we hope to provide some tools and techniques to those who want to build a more empowering, collaborative, and just architecture for learning.

“Open Pedagogy” as a named approach to teaching is nothing new. Scholars such as Catherine Cronin,[1] Katy Jordan,[2] Vivien Rolfe,[3] and Tannis Morgan have traced the term back to early etymologies. Morgan cites a 1979 article[4] by the Canadian Claude Paquette: “Paquette outlines three sets of foundational values of Open Pedagogy, namely: autonomy and interdependence; freedom and responsibility; democracy and participation.”

Many of us who work with Open Pedagogy today have come into the conversations not only through an interest in the historical arc of the scholarship of teaching and learning, but also by way of Open Education, and specifically, by way of Open Educational Resources (OERs). OERs are educational materials that are openly-licensed, usually with Creative Commons licenses, and therefore they are generally characterized by the 5 Rs[5]: they can be reused, retained, redistributed, revised, and remixed. As conversations about teaching and learning developed around the experience of adopting and adapting OERs, the phrase “Open Pedagogy” began to re-emerge, this time crucially inflected with the same “open” that inflects the phrase “open license.”

In this way, we can think about Open Pedagogy as a term that is connected to many teaching and learning theories that predate Open Education, but also as a term that is newly energized by its relationship to OERs and the broader ecosystem of open (Open Education, yes, but also Open Access, Open Science, Open Data, Open Source, Open Government, etc.). David Wiley, the Chief Academic Officer of Lumen Learning,[6] was one of the first OER-focused scholars who articulated how the use of OERs could transform pedagogy. He wrote in 2013 about the tragedy of “disposable assignments”[7] that “actually suck value out of the world,” and he postulated not only that OERs offer a free alternative to high-priced commercial textbooks, but also that the open license would allow students (and teaching faculty) to contribute to the knowledge commons, not just consume from it, in meaningful and lasting ways. Recently, Wiley has revised his language to focus on “OER-Enabled Pedagogy,”[8] with an explicit commitment to foregrounding the 5R permissions and the ways that they transform teaching and learning.

As Wiley has focused on students-as-contributors and the role of OERs in education, other Open Pedagogues have widened the lens through which Open Pedagogy refracts. Mike Caulfield, for example, has argued[9] that while OER has been driving the car for a while, Open Pedagogy is in the backseat ready to hop over into the front. Caulfield sees the replacement of the proprietary textbook by OERs as a necessary step in enabling widespread institutional open learning practice. In that post, Caulfield shorthands Open Pedagogy: “student blogs, wikis, etc.” We might delve in a bit deeper here. Beyond participating in the creation of OERs via the 5 Rs, what exactly does it mean to engage in “Open Pedagogy?”

First, we want to recognize that Open Pedagogy shares common investments with many other historical and contemporary schools of pedagogy. For example, constructivist pedagogy, connected learning, and critical digital pedagogy are all recognizable pedagogical strands that overlap with Open Pedagogy. From constructivist pedagogy, particularly as it emerged from John Dewey and, in terms of its relationship to technology, from Seymour Papert, we recognize a critique of industrial and automated models for learning, a valuing of experiential and learner-centered inquiry, and a democratizing vision for the educational process. From connected learning, especially as it coheres in work supported by the Digital Media and Learning Research Hub,[10] we recognize a hope that human connections facilitated by technologies can help learners engage more fully with the knowledge and ideas that shape our world. And from critical digital pedagogy,[11] as developed by Digital Humanities-influenced thinkers at Digital Pedagogy Lab out of educational philosophy espoused by scholars such as Paulo Freire and bell hooks, we recognize a commitment to diversity, collaboration, and structural critique of both educational systems and the technologies that permeate them.

If we merge OER advocacy with the kinds of pedagogical approaches that focus on collaboration, connection, diversity, democracy, and critical assessments of educational tools and structures, we can begin to understand the breadth and power of Open Pedagogy as a guiding praxis. To do this, we need to link these pedagogical investments with the reality of the educational landscape as it now exists. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights[12] asserts that “higher education shall be equally accessible to all.” Yet, even in North America in 2017, “the likelihood of earning a college degree is tied to family income” (Goldrick-Rab).[13] For those of us who work in higher ed, it’s likely that we have been casually aware of the link between family income and college enrollment, attendance, persistence, and completion. But for those of us who teach, it’s also likely that the pedagogies and processes that inflect our daily work are several steps removed from the economic challenges that our students face. Even though 67% of college students in Florida and 54% of those in British Columbia[14] cannot afford to purchase at least one of their required course textbooks, we more readily attribute their inability to complete assigned readings to laziness and entitlement than to unaffordability. This is precisely why the push to reduce the high cost of textbooks that has been the cornerstone of the OER movement has been a wake-up call for many of us who may not always have understood what we could do to directly impact the affordability of a college degree.

When faculty use OERs, we aren’t just saving a student money on textbooks: we are directly impacting that student’s ability to enroll in, persist through, and successfully complete a course.[15] In other words, we are directly impacting that student’s ability to attend, succeed in, and graduate from college. When we talk about OERs, we bring two things into focus: that access is critically important to conversations about academic success, and that faculty and other instructional staff can play a critical role in the process of making learning accessible.

If a central gift that OERs bring to students is that they make college more affordable, one of the central gifts that they bring to faculty is that of agency, and how this can help us rethink our pedagogies in ways that center on access. If we do this, we might start asking broader questions that go beyond “How can I lower the cost of textbooks in this course?” If we think of ourselves as responsible for making sure that everyone can come to our course table to learn, we will find ourselves concerned with the many other expenses that students face in paying for college. How will they get to class if they can’t afford gas money or a bus pass? How will they afford childcare on top of tuition fees? How will they focus on their homework if they haven’t had a square meal in two days or if they don’t know where they will be sleeping that night? How will their families pay rent if they cut back their work hours in order to attend classes? How much more student loan debt will they take on for each additional semester it takes to complete all of their required classes? How will they obtain the credit card they need to purchase an access code? How will they regularly access their free open textbook if they don’t own an expensive laptop or tablet?

And what other access issues do students face as they face these economic challenges? Will they be able to read their Chemistry textbook given their vision impairment? Will their LMS site list them by their birth name rather than their chosen name, and thereby misgender them? Will they have access to the knowledge they need for research if their college restricts their search access or if they don’t have Wi-Fi or a computer at home? Are they safe to participate in online, public collaborations if they are undocumented? Is their college or the required adaptive learning platform collecting data on them, and if so, could those data be used in ways that could put them at risk?

OERs invite faculty to play a direct role in making higher education more accessible. And they invite faculty to ask questions about how we can impact access in ways that go beyond textbook costs. At the very least, they help us see the challenges that students face in accessing higher education as broad, as severe, and as directly related to their academic success, or lack thereof.

So one key component of Open Pedagogy might be that it sees access, broadly writ, as fundamental to learning and to teaching, and agency as an important way of broadening that access. OERs are licensed with open licenses, which reflects not just a commitment to access in terms of the cost of knowledge, but also access in terms of the creation of knowledge. Embedded in the social justice commitment to making college affordable for all students is a related belief that knowledge should not be an elite domain. Knowledge consumption and knowledge creation are not separate but parallel processes, as knowledge is co-constructed, contextualized, cumulative, iterative, and recursive. In this way, Open Pedagogy invites us to focus on how we can increase access to higher education and how we can increase access to knowledge–both its reception and its creation. This is, fundamentally, about the dream of a public learning commons, where learners are empowered to shape the world as they encounter it. With the open license at the heart of our work, we care both about “free” and about “freedom,” about resources and practices, about access and about accessibility, about content and about contribution. This is not a magical thinking[16] approach to digital pedagogy. It’s an honest appraisal of the barriers that exist in our educational systems and a refusal to abdicate responsibility for those barriers.

To summarize, we might think about Open Pedagogy as an access-oriented commitment to learner-driven education AND as a process of designing architectures and using tools for learning that enable students to shape the public knowledge commons of which they are a part. We might insist on the centrality of the 5 Rs to this work, and we might foreground the investments that Open Pedagogy shares with other learner-centered approaches to education. We might reconstitute Open Pedagogy continually, as our contexts shift and change and demand new, site-specific articulations. But if we want to begin “open” our courses, programs, and/or institutions, what practical steps can we take to get started?

OEP, or Open Educational Practices, can be defined as the set of practices that accompany either the use of OERs or, more to our point, the adoption of Open Pedagogy. Here are some simple but profoundly transformative examples of OEPs:

- Adapt or remix OERs with your students. Even the simple act of adding problem sets or discussion questions to an existing open textbook will help contribute to knowledge, to the quality of available OERs, and to your students’ sense of doing work that matters. The adaptation of the open textbook Project Management for Instructional Designers[17] by successive cohorts of graduate students at Brigham Young University provides an excellent example of this approach.

- Build OERs with your students. Though students may be beginners with most of the content in your course, they are often more adept than you at understanding what beginning students need in order to understand the material. Asking students to help reframe and re-present course content in new and inventive ways can add valuable OERs to the commons while also allowing for the work that students do in courses to go on to have meaningful impact once the course ends. Consider the examples of the open textbook Environmental Science Bites[18] written by undergraduate students at the Ohio State University or the brief explainer videos[19] created by Psychology students around the world and curated by the NOBA Project.

- Teach your students how to edit Wikipedia articles. By adding new content, revising existing content, adding citations, or adding images, students can (with the support of the Wiki Education Foundation[20]) make direct contributions to one of the most popular public repositories for information. Indeed, more than 22,000 students already have, including medical students at the University of California San Francisco.[21] More than developing digital literacy and learning how to synthesize, articulate, and share information, students engage with and understand the politics of editing, including how “truth” is negotiated by those who have access to the tools that shape it.

- Facilitate student-created and student-controlled learning environments. The Learning Management System (Canvas, Moodle, Blackboard, etc.) generally locks students into closed environments that prevent sharing and collaboration outside of the class unit; it perpetuates a surveillance model of education in which the instructor is able to consider metrics that students are not given access to; and it presupposes that all student work is disposable (as all of it will be deleted when the new course shell is imported for the next semester). Initiatives such as Domain of One’s Own[22] enable students to build “personal cyberinfrastructures”[23] where they can manage their own learning, control their own data, and design home ports that can serve as sites for collaboration and conversation about their work. Students can choose to openly license the work that they post on these sites, thereby contributing OERs to the commons; they can also choose not to openly license their work, which is an exercising of their rights and perfectly in keeping with the ethos of Open Pedagogy. If students create their own learning architectures, they can (and should) control how public or private they wish to be, how and when to share or license their work, and what kinds of design, tools, and plug-ins will enhance their learning. It is important to point out here that open is not the opposite of private.

- Encourage students to apply their expertise to serve their community. Partner with nonprofit organizations to create opportunities for students to apply their research or marketing skills.[24] Or ask them to write (and submit for publication) op-ed pieces[25] to share evidence-based approaches to tackling a local social problem. Demonstrate the value of both knowledge application and service by scaffolding their entry into public scholarship.

- Engage students in public chats with authors or experts. Platforms such as Twitter can help engage students in scholarly and professional conversations with practitioners in their fields. This is another way that students can contribute to—not just consume—knowledge, and it shifts learning into a dialogic experience. In addition, if students are sharing work publicly, they can also use social media channels to drive mentors, teachers, peers, critics, experts, friends, family, and the public to their work for comment. Opening conversations about academic and transdisciplinary work—both student work and the work of established scholars and practitioners—is, like contributing to OERs, a way to grow a thriving knowledge commons.

- Build course policies, outcomes, assignments, rubrics, and schedules of work collaboratively with students. Once we involve students in creating or revising OERs or in shaping learning architectures, we can begin to see the syllabus as more of a collaborative document, co-generated at least in part with our students. Can students help craft course policies that would support their learning, that they feel more ownership over? Can they add or revise course learning outcomes in order to ensure the relevancy of the course to their future paths? Can they develop assignments for themselves and/or their classmates, and craft rubrics to accompany them to guide an evaluative process? Can they shape the course schedule according to rhythms that will help maximize their efforts and success?

- Let students curate course content. Your course is likely split into a predictable number of units (fourteen, for example) to conform to the academic calendar of the institution within which the course is offered. We would probably all agree that such segmenting of our fields is somewhat arbitrary; there is nothing ontological about Introduction to Psychology being fourteen weeks long (or spanning twenty-eight textbook chapters, etc.). And when we select a novel for a course on postcolonial literature or a lab exercise for Anatomy and Physiology, we are aware that there are a multitude of other good options for each that we could have chosen. We can involve students in the process of curating content for courses, either by offering them limited choices between different texts or by offering them solid time to curate a future unit more or less on their own (or in a group) as a research project. The content of a course may be somewhat prescribed by accreditation or field standards, but within those confines, we can involve students in the curation process, increasing the level of investment they have with the content while helping them acquire a key twenty-first century skill.

- Ask critical questions about “open.” When you develop new pathways based on Open Pedagogy, pay special attention to the barriers, challenges, and problems that emerge. Be explicit about them, honest about them, and share them widely with others working in Open Education so that we can work together to make improvements. Being an open educator in this fashion is especially crucial if we wish to avoid digital redlining,[26] creating inequities (however unintentionally) through the use of technology. Ask yourself: Do your students have access to broadband at home? Do they have the laptops or tablets they need to easily access and engage with OERs? Do they have the supports they need to experiment creatively, often for the first time, with technology tools? Do they have the digital literacies they need to ensure as much as is possible their safety and privacy online? Do you have a full understanding of the terms of service of the EdTech tools you are using in your courses? As you work to increase the accessibility of your own course, are you also evaluating the tools and technologies[27] you are using to ask how they help or hinder your larger vision for higher education?

These are just a few ideas for getting started with Open Pedagogy. Most important, find people to talk with about your ideas. Ask questions about how OERs and the 5 Rs change the nature of a course or the relationships that students have to their learning materials. Look to programs and colleges that are widely accessible and which serve a broad variety of learners and ask questions about how their course designs are distinct or compelling. Ask your students about meaningful academic contributions they have made, and what structures were in place that facilitated those contributions. Try, explore, fail, share, revise.

Open Pedagogy is not a magical panacea for the crises that currently challenge higher ed. That being said, we both feel that Open Pedagogy offers a set of dynamic commitments that could help faculty and students articulate a sustainable, vibrant, and inclusive future for our educational institutions. By focusing on access, agency, and a commons-oriented approach to education, we can clarify our challenges and firmly assert a learner-centered  vision for higher education.

A portion of this article was remixed from “Open Pedagogy and Social Justice” by Rajiv Jhangiani and Robin DeRosa, available under a CC-BY 4.0 license at http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/open-pedagogy-social-justice/.[28]

Robin DeRosa is director of interdisciplinary studies at Plymouth State University, part of the university system of New Hampshire. Her current research and advocacy work focuses on Open Education, and how universities can innovate in order to bring down costs for students, increase interdisciplinary collaboration, and refocus the academic world on strengthening the public good. She is also an editor for Hybrid Pedagogy, an open-access, peer-reviewed journal that combines the strands of critical pedagogy and digital pedagogy to arrive at the best social and civil uses for technology and new media in education.

Rajiv Jhangiani is the University Teaching Fellow in Open Studies and a faculty member in the Department of Psychology at Kwantlen Polytechnic University. He also serves as an Open Education Advisor with BCcampus and an associate editor of Psychology Learning and Teaching. Previously he served as an OER Research Fellow with the Open Education Group, a faculty fellow with the BC Open Textbook Project, a faculty workshop facilitator with the Open Textbook Network, and the associate editor of NOBA Psychology.

1. Catherine Cronin, "Opening Up Open Pedagogy," Catherine Cronin's professional website, April 24, 2017, http://catherinecronin.net/research/opening-up-open-pedagogy/. ↵

2. Katy Jordan, "The History of Open Education", shift+refresh (blog), June 19, 2017, https://shiftandrefresh.wordpress.com/2017/06/19/the-history-of-open-education-a-timeline-and-bibliography/. ↵

3. Vivien Rolfe, "OER18 Open to All," Vivien Rolfe's professional website, http://vivrolfe.com/books-and-publications/. ↵

4. Tannis Morgan, "Open Pedagogy and a Very Brief History of the Concept," Explorations in the EdTech World (blog) Tannis Morgan's professional website, December 21, 2016, https://homonym.ca/uncategorized/open-pedagogy-and-a-very-brief-history-of-the-concept/. ↵

5. David Wiley, "Defining the Open in Open Content and Open Educational Resources," Opencontent.org, http://opencontent.org/definition/. ↵

6. Lumenlearning.com, http://lumenlearning.com/about/mission/. ↵

7. David Wiley, "What is Open Pedagogy," iterating toward openness, October 21, 2013, https://opencontent.org/blog/archives/2975. ↵

8. David Wiley, "OER-enabled Pedagogy," iterating toward openness, May 2, 2017, https://opencontent.org/blog/archives/5009. ↵

9. Mike Caulfield, "Putting Student-Produced OER at the Heart of the Institution," hapgood, Mike Caulfield's professional website, Sept. 7, 2016, https://hapgood.us/2016/09/07/putting-student-produced-oer-at-the-heart-of-the-institution/. ↵

10. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub, https://dmlhub.net/. ↵

11. Jesse Stommel, "Critical Digital Pedagogy: A Definition," Digital Pedagogy Lab, Nov. 18, 2014, http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/critical-digital-pedagogy-definition/. ↵

12. "Universal Declaration of Human Rights," UN.org, http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/. ↵

13. Sara Goldrick-Rab, Paying the Price: College Costs, Financial Aid and the Betrayal of the American Dream (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2016). ↵

14. Rajiv Sunil Jhangiani, Surita Jhangiani, "Investigating the Perceptions, Use, and Impact of Open Textbooks: A Survey of Post-Secondary Students in British Columbia," The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 18, no 4 (2017). ↵

15. John Hilton III, Lane Fischer, David Wiley, and Linda Williams, "Maintaining Momentum Toward Graduation: OER and the Course Throughput Rate." International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 17, no. 6 (December 2016), http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2686/3967. ↵

16. Nicole Mirra, "What Do We Mean When We Talk About 21st Century Learning?" dmlcentral, https://dmlcentral.net/mean-talk-21st-century-learning/#.WSb0VJg29TQ.twitter. ↵

17. Wiley, et al., Project Management for Instructional Designers (2016). https://pm4id.org/.↵

18. Kylienne A. Clark, Travis R. Shaul, and Brian H. Lower, eds., Environmental ScienceBites (Columbus: The Ohio State University, 2015). ↵

19. "2016-17 Noba + Psi Chi Student Video Award Recipients," NOBA, http://nobaproject.com/student-video-award/winners. ↵

20. "Teach With Wikipedia," Wiki Education Foundation, https://wikiedu.org/teach-with-wikipedia/. ↵

21. Eryk Salvaggio, "For Wikipedia, the Doctor Is in … Class," WikiEdu, April 5, 2016, https://wikiedu.org/blog/2016/04/05/medical-students-wikipedia/. ↵

22. Domain of One's Own, http://umw.domains/. ↵

23. Gardner Campbell, "A Personal Cyberinfrastructure," EduCause Review 44, no. 5 (September 4, 2009), http://er.educause.edu/articles/2009/9/a-personal-cyberinfrastructure.↵

24. Lori Rosenthal, "Research for Community Action," Action Teaching, http://www.actionteaching.org/award/community-action. ↵

25. "Assignment Type: Op-Ed," Kent State Online, http://onlineteaching.kent.edu/library/online_assignments/OpEd_Handout.pdf. ↵

26. Chris Gilliard, "Pedagogy and the Logic of Platforms," Educause Review, July 3, 2017, http://er.educause.edu/articles/2017/7/pedagogy-and-the-logic-of-platforms. ↵

27. Jesse Stommel, "Critically Evaluating Digital Tools," Digital Studies 101, https://dgst101.com/activity-critically-evaluating-digital-tools-3f60d468ce74. ↵

28. Rajiv Jhangiani and Robin DeRosa, "Open Pedagogy and Social Justice," Digital Pedagogy Lab, June 2, 2017, http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/open-pedagogy-social-justice/. ↵

3

German adding new content.

4

5

6

New chapter

test chapter

II

Project Ideas & Case Studies

Are you considering embarking on an Open Pedagogy project in your classroom? These projects will inspire you!

III

Student Rights & Faculty Responsibilities

When making open textbooks with students, faculty have a responsibility to keep student rights front of mind. Privacy, licensing, and digital literacy are among the main issues to consider.

IV

Sample Assignments

Use these example assignment materials to create or expand an open textbook as an Open Pedagogy project in your classroom.

V

Resources

Here are some further resources to help you get started making open textbook projects in your classroom. This is the first edition of this guide. We welcome your feedback and ideas to expand it!