Ferreira, Giselle M. d. S.
PDF (Accepted Manuscript)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
As a source of materials for education the Web is, to a large extent, shifting ground. Open Educational Resources (OER) provided by Higher Education Institutions constitute, at least in principle, a reliable category of Web-based resources given their association with traditional forms of expert authority. Nevertheless, OER embody different aspects of academic thinking and practice, competing, in an unlevelled field, with other sources that may provide a much more immediate appeal in that they afford quick and easy consumption of information delivered in a piecemeal, often uncritical, fashion.
This paper draws upon a piece of research in the area of ‘online informal learning’ to illustrate issues arising from the availability of open content and, in particular, OER. This research suggests a number of aspects related to the impact of open content on assumed boundaries between teacher/learner, formal/informal learning, training/education, content/presentation and, crucially, in how the blurring of these boundaries may have an impact on the location of ‘value’ within views of education in which marketing and business discourses predominate. The paper argues that, despite the need for critical debate on issues regarding validation, current arguments focusing on ‘expertise’ risk diluting its significance in subtle yet fundamental ways.
|Item Type:||Conference Item|
|Copyright Holders:||2010 The Author|
|Keywords:||Communities; resources; recognition; authority; validation; accreditation; ownership|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Computing and Communications
Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
|Depositing User:||Giselle Ferreira|
|Date Deposited:||23 Nov 2010 11:35|
|Last Modified:||04 Oct 2016 20:26|
|Share this page:|
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.