Archive of Nov 5, 2019 #aboerjc

Thank you Lee Graham (@ak_leeg) & Verena Roberts for leading November’s #aboerjc. In this conversation we discussed the following article:

Graham, L. & Roberts, V. (2019) Sharing a Pragmatic Networked Model for Open Pedagogy: The Open Hub Model of Knowledge Generation in Higher Education Environments. International Journal of Innovation in Online Education. Feb 01. DOI: 10.1615/IntJInnovOnlineEdu.2019029340. Retrieved from:

Web and PDF versions of the full Twitter conversation can be found below.

Web version:

PDF version

Archive of Oct 8, 2019 #aboerjc

Thanks @awakaruk for sharing your expertise and leading a conversation on “How to Fight  Fair Use Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt: The Experience of One Open Educational Resource.”  Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 3(1), 1-21.

The web version of our conversation be can be viewed using the link below. There’s also a PDF version available on the Archive page. Conversations presented in reverse chronological order.

Web archive:

PDF version

ABOER Journal Club Twitter discussion, October 8, 2019


Weeramuni,  L., (2019).  How to Fight  Fair Use Fear,  Uncertainty, and Doubt: The  Experience  of One Open  Educational Resource.  Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 3(1), 1-21.

Note: This article was written in a US context, where fair use is a statutory exception to copyright infringement. In Canada, we have a similar legal provision, known as fair dealing.

For reference, section 29 of the Canadian Copyright Act states, “Fair dealing for the purpose of research, private study, education, parody or satire does not infringe copyright.”

Caselaw is used to help assess whether or not a dealing may be fair. At the end of the day, however, only a court of law can determine if a dealing is fair. 

Discussion Questions

Q1: Appendix A of the article is a licence between MIT and MIT faculty members. The licence grants MIT non-exclusive rights to use faculty-created content in OCW. Would such a licence be necessary at your institution? Why or why not? (Hint: IP provisions are usually found in collective agreements. Here is a link to provisions at Alberta colleges and universities: )

Q2: If the faculty member developing the OER holds copyright in the content they create do they need to rely on fair dealing to include it in an OER?

Q3: What is the source of the “fair use fear” as described in this article?

Q4: What type of institutional supports are needed to implement a fair dealing assessment service for OER like the one in place at MIT?

Q5: No Canadian university or college has institutional fair dealing guidelines that support the re-use of an entire work (e.g., cover page of a book) in an OER. Considering the Supreme Court of Canada’s suggested fair dealing factors, is the use of a book’s cover page, as described in the article, likely to be fair?

Factors to consider when assessing whether a dealing is fair:

(i) The Purpose of the Dealing

(ii) The Character of the Dealing

(iii) The Amount of the Dealing

(iv) Alternatives to the Dealing

(v) The Nature of the Work

(vi) Effect of the Dealing on the Work

Archive of Sept 3, 2019 #aboerjc

Thanks for joining @eriksation and friends discuss McNally and Christiansen’s article Open enough? Eight factors to consider when transitioning from closed to open resources and courses: A conceptual frameworkFirst Monday 24(6).

Our usual Twitter archiving tool has been acting up, so we’ve opted to provide the search. If you want to read the conversation in order, please start from the bottom of the page. Scroll down until all tweets have stopped loading. We’ve also provided a static PDF which is located on the Archive page.

Twitter conversation:

PDF version

#aboerjc discussion Sept. 3, 2019

This month’s discussion will be facilitated by Connie Blomgren and Erik Christiansen.

This month’s article was published June 2019 in First Monday, and was written by Michael McNally and Erik Christiansen. It is titled “Open enough? Eight factors to consider when transitioning from closed to open resources and courses: A Conceptual framework.

Discussion Questions

  1. The authors propose a conceptual framework to determine what is ‘open enough’ to help educators estimate workload when developing open courses (p.4). Do you find the framework helpful? How would you have framed it differently?

  2. The authors break down open education into eight factors. Are there other factors you would have added? Eliminated/combined?

  3. In Step 2 of the framework, the authors propose how much willingness/effort is required to implement each of the eight factors (pp. 10-11). Do you agree with their assumptions? Would you reassign willingness/effort differently?

  4. In Step 3 of the framework, the authors argue that accessibility/usability considerations, language, and cultural considerations require the most knowledge from educators when transitioning from closed to open courses (pp  11-12). Do you think this is accurate?

  5. The authors argue that maximizing openness for assessment, language, and support costs can have negative pedagogical trade offs (pp. 7-8). Eg. Instructor feedback (closed & mixed) vs. self-assessment (most open). What do you think of this argument?

  6. In the “Limitations and discussion” (pp. 12-14), the authors propose goal posts around openness (‘open enough’). Are there other suggestions that could have been included?

June 4th Twitter discussion

Article: Student Voice in Textbook Evaluation: Comparing Open and Restricted Textbooks

Authors: Scott Woodward, PhD, Adam Lloyd, and Royce Kimmons, PhD

Discussion Questions

1. What was your main takeaway from this article? Was there anything that surprised you?

2. What are the potential perceived threats of students changing from “silent witnesses” to “active agents” in textbook evaluation? How can students and other OER advocates mitigate these concerns?

3. The authors note that textbook evaluations often ignore student voice. How can students break through decision-making processes around textbook selection and evaluation?

4. The authors note a number of limitations to their findings, and this study was also conducted at a private, high research activity university. Do you think the findings are applicable in your context? Why or why not?

May 7 #ABOERJC Discussion Questions

Our next Twitter chat will be hosted by Rosemarri Klamn (@KlamnJam)

Article: Funk, J. & Mason, J. (2015). Open Education Practices and 21CC: Positioning their Significance. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computers in Education. China: Asia-Pacific Society for Computer in Education.  Retrieved from

1.     Funk & Mason (2015) emphasize the significance of OEP to 21CC (skills), especially in marginalized learner populations of the Northern Territory in Australia.  Do you see a connection between OEP and 21cc in your jurisdiction? Other jurisdictions? How so?

2.     Authors give examples of how OEP is practiced by the Yolngu people of Australia, connecting Learning On Country concepts (p. 289) to develop Indigenous Fisheries Training practices (p.291). What role do culture and technology play in offering DE and OEP to isolated communities? How does this connect to skills training?

3.     Australia (AU) and Canada (CA) have similar challenges with offering educational opportunities to students in isolated communities.  Are you aware of ways that CA uses OEP? Have you experienced designing or delivering learning for isolated/indigenous communities?

4.     Authors extend OER by emphasizing process, competence, application, and qualification vs. experience in developing innovative skills training strategies (p.288).  Do these concepts resonate with your understanding of OEP? Of preparing learners for the workforce?  

5.     Common 21CC are communication, teamwork, problem solving, initiative/enterprise, planning/organizing, self-management, learning skills, and technology.  Are you able to use OEP to shape these skills in your course design and delivery?