Advertisement

Digital Participation and Open Communities: From Widening Access to Porous Boundaries

  • Bill Johnston
  • Sheila MacNeill
  • Keith Smyth
Chapter
Part of the Digital Education and Learning book series (DEAL)

Abstract

In this chapter the issue of widening participation and the role of digital technologies in changing the nature of participation are explored. The current approach to widening participation is considered and critiqued from perspectives in concepts of porosity, open education practice, and the concept of the commons. Perspectives on open education drawn from critical pedagogy (Zobel 2015; Farrow, Learn, Media and Technol 42:130–146, 2017) are contrasted with practices influenced by neoliberalism, and the challenges this contrast poses for university leadership are discussed. Issues of open access, public scholarship, and publishing practices are discussed in relation to the changing nature of academic work following the Finch Report (2012). This discussion of openness as a desired characteristic of the digital university is developed in subsequent chapters.

References

  1. About the Open Education Consortium. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.oeconsortium.org/about-oec/
  2. Buckingham-Shum, S. (2011). Learning Analytics – UNESCO IITE. https://iite.unesco.org/publications/3214711/. Accessed 3 Sept 2017.
  3. Cronin, C. (2017). Openness and Praxis: Exploring the Use of Open Educational Practices in Higher Education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5).  https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3096.
  4. Farrow, R. (2017). Open Education and Critical Pedagogy. Learning, Media and Technology, 42, 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Freire, P. (1974). Education for Critical Consciousness. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  6. HEPI. (2017). Where Next for Widening Participation and Fair Access? New Insights from Leading Thinkers. HEPI. http://www.hepi.ac.uk/2017/08/14/next-widening-participation-fair-access/. Accessed 1 June 2018.
  7. Jordan, K. (2015). Massive Open Online Course Completion Rates Revisited: Assessment, Length and Attrition. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3), 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. MIT OpenCourseWare. (n.d.). Milestones|MIT OpenCourseWare|Free Online Course Materials. Retrieved from https://ocw.mit.edu/about/milestones/
  9. Open Education Handbook/History of Open Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Open_Education_Handbook/History_of_open_education
  10. Pitt, R. (2015). Mainstreaming Open Textbooks: Educator Perspectives on the Impact of OpenStax College Open Textbooks. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(4).  https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i4.2381.
  11. UNESCO. Ljubljana OER Action Plan 2017 Adopted to Support Quality Open Educational Resources. https://en.unesco.org/news/ljubljana-oer-action-plan-2017-adopted-support-quality-open-educational-resources. Accessed 18 June 2018.
  12. Watters, A. (2016). The Curse of the Monsters of Education Technology. Retrieved from http://monsters3.hackeducation.com/
  13. Weller, M. (2014). The Battle for Open: How Openness Won and Why It Doesn’t Feel Like Victory. London: Ubiquity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bill Johnston
    • 1
  • Sheila MacNeill
    • 2
  • Keith Smyth
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Psychological Science and HealthUniversity of StrathclydeGlasgowUK
  2. 2.Academic Quality and DevelopmentGlasgow Caledonian UniversityGlasgowUK
  3. 3.Learning and Teaching AcademyUniversity of the Highlands and IslandsInvernessUK

Personalised recommendations