I still can’t figure out Twitter… I have two accounts and end up using the @delftia one instead of my personal one. Chris Aldrich talked about “A Twitter of Our Own” as OERxDomains21 Day 2. Aldrich started by talking about why be on Twitter if there are “healthier” alternatives? I don’t use Twitter much because of that: I end up getting frustrated or losing time clicking mindlessly. Nevertheless, I do realize important timely information is shared on Academic Twitter that I miss out on! Aldrich talked about the components of a Twitter: posts, likes, replies, @mentions… notifications and lots of scrolling. He mentioned how IndieWeb helped create tools. Aldrich showed a demo of Yarns, a social reader and content server. You can use Yarns on WordPress to subscribe to feeds and store them for a default of 14 days. Aldrich also described how Monocle can be used to handle, store, and read streams. You can reply to posts that then get posted to your own domain! You can even have domain-to-domain conversations without Twitter! Hmmm, this is enticing. Aldrich mentioned that maybe PressBooks and Manifold will have this functionality. One example was educators post and respond to assignments or… we start conversations about Delftia and high-throughput technologies! Thinking about the future, Aldrich mentioned using this approach for private posts/interactions, limiting audience, private groups, and expand its discovery features. Aldrich answered several questions and explained that the functionality he was using was enabled with just a couple of plugins. Hmm… is this a project I want to start?
The last OERxDomains21 session was the closing keynote by Rajiv Jhangiani. The abstract included is awesome:
Curious Contradictions and Open-ended Questions What does it mean to be open? Who gets to decide what is open enough? Is being open always a good thing? Can one employ closed means to achieve open ends? Can open means used to advance closed ends? If open is the means then what is the end? How can being open also be closed? How can being closed also be open? Will the uncomfortable questions ever end? No.
Jhangiani talked about his childhood in India and going from a financially secure family to living with his grandparents and moving to Canada to pursue an education. Jhangiani talked about how Open Education can and open access books fused his scholarly interests and educational philosophy. Jhangiani described the Open book he wrote and open education community he works with and helps champion. Jhangiani described the partnership with Robin DeRosa and the Open Pedagogy Notebook and Open at the Margins projects.
“What does it mean to be Open?” was the first question that Jhangiani asked, questioning if open goes beyond licensing an access and addresses social justice principles. Providing a free textbook redistributes resources and allows access to marginalized communities… however, we must consider representation and recognition of people.
“Who gets to decide what is Open enough?” was the next question Jhangiani addressed. Several types of licenses and restrictions were displayed . Jhangiani talked about the motivations behind deciding what license: hopes and fears? The next question was about the ethics of open: “is being open always good?” Citing several examples including indigenous knowledge and digitalization of previously produced materials, Jhangiani talked about respecting ownership. I did not know about the “TK” labels for use of traditional knowledge: localcontexts.org.
“How can being Open also be closed?” Jhangiani listed technical openness, accessibility, internet access, and data privacy examples of Open being closed or limiting for some! One intriguing thought was that Open can often be practiced only by those in positions of privilege (tenure, secure job) leading to lack of representation for some. Adequate compensation for creativity and openness is also critical. “Can one employ closed means to achieve open ends?” was a question I had not considered: an example of un-annotating was eloquently described. Also, agency and choice should have value, mentioned Jhangiani: students working on OER and open projects should be able to decide to keep them “closed”! Jhangiani emphasized representational justice and using OER for transformative purposes. Referring to a graphic of toggles with justice and open, Jhangiani said:
Choice is the key word as without the agency we are stripped of the power to toggle these buttons…
Rajiv Jhangiani
What a thoughtful yet critical way of asking the questions that will make Open better! This was my first OERxDomains21 session, and I learned so much. I think I watched every single session and learned something from each one.
