Digital Content

Day 1: From Resources to Practice: why ‘mere access’ isn’t enough

Open Education: From Resources to Practice

Written by Adrian Stagg and Emma Power, University of Southern Queensland

Sharing Coffee, by januarylark, CC-BY, downloaded 20/10/17

Welcome to the second Coffee Course on Open Education. You may have taken our first coffee course back in March as part of International Open Education Week, or you may be new to the ideas that we’ll discuss. Either way, your participation, and conversation are encouraged. You’ll find that the richness in this sort of course comes from discussing ideas with colleagues and we always learn from the participants too.

Through the daily posts, we’ll explore deeper aspects of openness (‘down the rabbit hole’) and discuss some of the practical elements of creating, (re)using, storing, and sharing Open Educational Resources. There will be one or two Learning Activities each day; you can respond to these in the comments section below.  The flexibility of this course is that you can engage when you have the time – to paraphrase Gandalf from ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’a learner is neither late nor early to a Coffee Course; they engage precisely when they intend to.

Learning Activity 1: Joining the community

As your first activity, please go to the comments section and introduce yourself (you can access this by scrolling down to the bottom of the page).  You should include:

  • Your name
  • Your university or sector
  • Your role, and
  • What ‘being open’ in education means to you.

I’d then encourage you to look over the comments posted by others and respond to at least one other person who raised a perspective that you either haven’t considered, or builds on your own ideas further.


You’ll probably see that ‘open’ means many different things – and it’s possible to have a discussion about openness with a wide range of views represented, and respected.

Why ‘mere access’ isn’t enough

Open Educational Resources (OER) became quite the discussion for higher education starting almost twenty years ago. With the advent of the Creative Commons Licence, creators had a mechanism that allowed clarity of reuse, that could be ‘ported’ into local legal systems (Australia has done this). It means that creators can set the terms of legal use (and reuse) for anyone.

At this point, you might like to watch a short video explaining the rationale and use of the licences:

However, ‘mere access’ to resources is not enough. If uploading content to a website doesn’t guarantee learning, then how would open educators expect that filling repositories with open content would change or supplement educational systems?

Reading Activity

At this point, Daniel Ulf-Ehlers and Grainne Conole coined the term ‘Open Educational Practice’ (OEP) to denote that in order to be successful, OER needed more.  In the definitive article Unleashing the power of OER, they outlined the dimensions of openness and the factors that influence whether the movement would be successful. If you would like to gain an understanding of the main concepts, read pages 1-5 of the article.

So let’s bring this all together:

  • The heart of open education is about the freedoms that come with free and open licencing. Creative Commons allows for free sharing, (re)use, repurpose, revision, retention, and remixing. Open isn’t just about ‘free resources’, but should always include the freedoms associated with sharing. Read more: What difference does it make?
  • When one moves from resources to practice, the conversations change dramatically. Instead of asking questions about how one makes content open, and where it should be stored, institutions ask ‘what teaching practices are now possible that weren’t before?’, ‘how do we work with others to co-create resources?’, and ‘how do we create an environment in which engaging with OEP is recognised, supported, and rewarded?’. You can see that the second set of questions are much deeper – and much more complex – but need discussions for open education to be sustainable and usable.

As you can see, open education started to move beyond a simplistic notion of providing access to learning content, but how to use it, share it, grow it, and recognise open practitioners.

Context drives priorities

Whilst the freedoms to (re)use materials, and a recognition that open education needed to move beyond access were important steps, the third part of the discussion should be context.  Whilst reading today’s post, you might have thought ‘I’m not sure that would work for me’, or ‘what if open practitioners knew about this great tool at my institution?’ – and you should, because context matters.

Your approach to learning and teaching, role, discipline, school, institution, country, local policy, access to technology, and many more criteria make up the context for your use of OER. It’s a complex environment that needs to be acknowledged before any plans for OEP can be put in place.

An example of context mapping occurred in 2007 through an international community of interest led by Susan D’Antoni. The resulting report showed critical differences in openness priorities by geographic region, but as we’ve already discussed there are many more factors to consider than just location. Whilst the report is now a decade old, more current literature drawn from these participating countries shows very little shift in the priorities identified by D’Antoni’s work.

The priority list for respondents included (in no particular order):

  • Awareness raising
  • Communities and networking
  • Sustainability
  • Quality assurance
  • Copyright and licencing
  • Capacity development
  • Accessibility
  • Financing
  • Standards
  • Learning support services
  • Research support
  • Policies
  • Technology tools
  • Assessment of learning

It’s certainly possible to merge some of these priorities, and suggest a few more, but we’ll work with this list for our closing activity today.


Learning Activity 2

Consider three contexts: your immediate practice; your team (this could be a work team, a discipline team, or a organisational unit like a School/Faculty), and your institution.

From the list above, select up to two priorities for action for each context, and provide a brief explanation outlining why they apply to those contexts.

Please post your responses in the comments.


Today has set the scene for exploring different facets of openness. Tomorrow, we throw the ‘quality cat’ into the ‘learning and teaching pigeons’ – discussions about quality in higher education are always lively, so we look forward to your company.


The text of this work is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence.  All images and videos retain their respective licences.

29 thoughts on “Day 1: From Resources to Practice: why ‘mere access’ isn’t enough

  1. Hello, good morning,
    My name is Rey Guerrero-Proenza, I am professor of Educational Technology and Artificial Intelligence, working at University of Informatics Science of Havana ( I have been thinking on “openness”, mainly when researching anf studying on MOOCs, their problems and possible (and practical) ways to overcome them. There have been many dabates around what “open” means in that kind of courses. Might be the most extended opinion is that open means “free”. But it is regarding MOOCs; concerning OER, currently I can’t figure out a “non-procoustian” definition, but I feel that it is a multidimentional concept; it is a resource propierty; it is not a natural one, but in its relations with learning actors.

    I prefer to read the rest of this post and later continuing commenting on openness, “on the shoulders of Giants”.

    1. Welcome to the coffee course Rey. Feel free to post your further reflections upon finishing the post and your thoughts on others’ comments too as they post throughout the day.

      I’d be interested to hear what Adrian thinks on what ‘open’ means for MOOCs and the current debates around each. He’ll be posting either tonight or tomorrow (due to airline delays flying beck from a conference) so check back in then.

      1. Back to first activity… After reading activity, and analyzing post and comments, I realize that my intuitive understanding of “being open” was, essentially, based on the concept of “access”. But now I am moving on, to more exact conceptualization.

        On the other hand, I have an interpretation of the idea of “moving from resources to practices”. I think, when it is regarding to educational process, it means that one move from tools to activities. But activities are systemic, then, it can be inferred that our reasoning on being open is evolving from the component based approach to systemic based approach. The last one is more complicated, because relations are taking into account, based on relations we have the concept of structure.If following the widely accepted characterizations of the concept of system, the existence of hierarchical relations should be considered, it means, ordering by levels. That is a really multidimensional approach, very complex, but representing (probably modeling is a better term) more exactly what in fact is happening.

    2. Hi Rey, glad to have you in the course, and thanks for the comments about MOOCs. There was a standing meme circulated about MOOCs by open practitioners during the early hype that stated every letter in the word was contested space – and it is right. The way we use words, and expect others to understand the terms is a good starting point for consensus (or at least to understand the other person).

      ‘Free’ and ‘open’ are generally conflated in this area, but generally for something to be ‘fully open’ (another interesting term), we speak about ‘free and open’ (no Oxford comma, either). 🙂
      You’ve seen correctly that it is a multidimensional space (I like that term, I think I’ll reuse it), but it is essentially about ‘standing on the shoulders of giants’ as you say. In my field, it’s not worth creating new resources staring me as the lecturer if I can find a colleagues work that will explain the concept easier, more succinctly, or from a vantage point of specialist knowledge.

      Thanks for posting, and I look forward to speaking with you more during the week.

  2. Good morning everyone! Welcome to our second Coffee Course on OEP.
    I’m one of the co-facilitators of the course this week, and I look forward to hearing your reflections each day, and the discussions that evolve from that.
    Just to let everyone know, my colleague Adrian Stagg is in the process of flying back to Australia from a conference in Toronto. Unfortunately due to a series of airline cancellations and flight issues he won’t be able to comment and join us until either tonight or tomorrow (Aus time). Rest assured he is looking forward to contributing to the discussion and replying to your posts from today once he is back. In the meantime I’ll be taking the lead on discussions.
    See you all in the comments!

  3. Hello, I am Tom Worthington, an Honorary Lecturer in Computer Science at ANU.

    Being open in education means many things to me.

    One of the oldest meanings is in terms of providing access for people who would not otherwise be able to study. There have been “open” universities for decades, which take students who do not have the prior education demanded by other institutions, which do not require full time attendance on campus (or in some cases none at all), provide education at a lower cost and may have forms of real world assessment (or no assessment at all).

    There are also open access educational materials, which are available for anyone to read and use (and mostly provided without charge).

    Then there is open source educational software which can be used to provide courses more widely and at lower cost.

    Linked to my name above, you will find a personal reflection on openness, which was the topic of an assignment when I was a student at a Canadian open university.

    1. Welcome Tom, thank you for your reflection on what openness means to you.
      I think that open educations’ role in equity of access for students, by helping to remove some of the barriers to learning is great, and one of the areas I’m quite interested in.
      Did any of D’Antoni’s priorities resonate for you particularly in your context as a lecturer at ANU?

    2. Hi Tom, and welcome back from the first course! I’ll make some time to read your reflections on openness and wanted to thank you for sharing – repurposing this work is a perfect task for our course. 🙂
      My question (without having read it yet) is: when did you write this, and has your perception changed since writing it? I think it would be extremely interesting to see whether there has been changed.

      As for broadening access to education, you certainly have one of the core aims. I attended an excellent panel last week at the ICDE conference on online learning that spoke about the social justice, access, and participation angles of openness. I’ll dig out my notes and post something later on this. However, one notion did strike me and I put it to the panel – as universities we all have Social Justice Plans (or equivalent); and we all have Learning & Teaching Plans (or equivalent). If we agree that Open Educational Practice has roots in social justice, do institutions have explicit links between those plans, and are they written (and consulted) by a common core of people? Or are they written in isolation? For me, it’s backing up the ‘widening access’ access agenda with policy to raise awareness.

      What do you think about this angle?

  4. Hi Emma (and Adrian-to-be) and Rey & Tom,

    I’m Alison Fields, a senior lecturer in Library and Information Studies at the Open Polytechnic of New Zealand. It’s a public holiday here (Labour Day) and I’m celebrating by doing something for me (this coffee course) rather than work as such.

    To me, being ‘open’ in the broad sense is sharing, or anything in the Commons. If you look at society as being a balance between the Market, the State and the Commons, then ‘open’ is part of the commons. ‘Open’ is not part of a business enterprise and is not highly regulated, but exists between people for the common good.
    In reality I know it’s different, but that’s my line in the sand right there….

    1. Hi Alison, welcome to the course! Thank you for taking the time to join us on your day off, we appreciate your contributions to the discussion today.
      I really like your comment that Open “exists between people for the common good”, what a wonderful perspective on openness, thanks for sharing it.

    2. Hi Alison, great to see another returning ‘Coffee Course-r’ from earlier in the year!

      I agree with you on the balance between Market, State, and Commons, and actually think there is a lot of tension between them. There are business models that embrace openness, showing that you can create commercial opportunities that align with educating society; but they are often a hard sell to institutions. For me, I’ve had the most success when speaking about accessing previously untapped student cohorts, or generating new revenue streams. Does that really align ideologically with ‘the Commons’?
      In education – your comment has re-sparked some thinking for me, so excuse the possible stream of consciousness – we’re at the centre of the tension between these three forces. The Government expects certain outcomes of education and uses certain language to describe us (usually in terms of ‘economic prosperity,), education is increasingly seen as a commodity to be sold (the Market), but universities have (in my opinion) a strong societal role to examine, create, and distribute knowledge for the betterment of the communities they serve (the Commons). Balancing the three therefore is very tricky, and one could argue that is you removed the Commons then things become less complex – but there is less impact too.

      Am I following/extending your thinking, or am I on the wrong track?

      1. Hi Adrian,
        You’re on the right track. But I’m thinking down a slightly different version. I don’t see how Commons, State and Market can be separated at all. Activities (like education) do not fit solely into one category or another. Education is provided by the State (e.g. primary and secondary schools), and by the Market (e.g tutoring, specialised topics, private tertiary providers, etc) and by the Commons (e.g. mutual professional development, volunteer work, mentoring, etc). And I am involved in all three:I teach at a Polytechnic (degree-level – equivalent to Charles Sturt) which is both state and market to some extent and I run a small consultancy which is mostly market and work as a volunteer (for free) for 2 Professional Associations, as a Journal editor and have a role as a mentor, which is commons.
        I’d like the share of Commons to be bigger than it is across the board, but don’t think we can survive without either state or market, so advocate personally on there being more balance between the three. And that’s at a personal level as well as at a corporate level.

  5. Hi again Everyone,
    Looks like I’m the lucky first for this activity! I have no idea if I’m interpreting these terms correctly, but will list and explain them in my own eyes anyway. I’ll go through half the list and leave it there for just now so someone else can jump in and also have first dibs.

    Context 1: My immediate practice:
    Capacity Development: I need to be able to do more or achieve more or at least see more and do more about it in terms of my own practice. If OEP can work towards this, then I’m up for that.
    Sustainability: Whatever I develop/produce/create, if it can be sustainable, then it can carry on while I do other things. I also want what I do to be robust enough to outlast me, in whatever ways it can.

    Context 2: My organisational unit:
    Technology Tools: As we develop new courses and new ways of teaching them, learning more about how to identify and use other technology tools may be of great benefit to the learning opportunities we can provide.


    1. Hi Alison, thanks for being the first to try out Activity 2.
      I like your reflection on sustainability as a priority for your immediate practice in particular. I’m curious, does that relate back to your philosophy as a lecturer and approach to teaching?

      I can certainly see the value of how Technology Tools could enhance learning opportunities for your organisations’ students. I’m wondering if yourself or any of other participants have any experiences of finding and utilising “software tools to facilitate the development, access and sharing of OER”, as D’Antoni phrases it (pg. 20).

  6. Rey, greetings from Canberra (Australia). I have my doubts over the long term viability of MOOCs. Many seem to be provided without a fee, but are not free in terms of being able to access and modify the materials access (Gratis not libre). Not free as in beer, as Richard Stallman said when he visited us at the Australian National University, a few years ago. 😉

    Tom W.

    1. Tom, greetings from the other end of the World, thank for your comment. I understand, initially MOOCs were conceived to be open, not only being “gratis” (free), but as open as the Social Web, Web 2.0 can be. In fact, the first MOOC, as far as I know, was a cMOOC. Currently, most of existing offers are behind the walls of platforms, supporting courses and the content is mostly given from the beggining, those are xMOOC.

      Regarding viability, I think that current trends lead to have doubts over the long term existence of MOOC, but we should have in mind one factor: conditions, social needs that are behind the MOOC creation, are here, they have not desapeared. Might be they, and experiences (good and not so good) in teaching in MOOC, and the development of research on systemic applications of Big data, analytics, semantic web, adaptative envirnments, and in Artificial Intelligence, could help to overcome, not suddenly, but step by step, current (and future) problems of massive learning.


      1. Good points Tom and Rey,
        I too look at long-term sustainability of MOOCs and question it, but mostly from two persepctives:
        1) I’d like to know if most of the universities offering MOOCs know why they are doing so. What do they hope to achieve by offering an ‘open’ course this way? If you don’t know your desired outcome, how can you measure the actual outcome? Current research does suggest that this type of explicit articulation is lacking in a number of usiniversities
        2) Polarisation of the discussion. There seems to be ‘MOOCs are good’ and ‘MOOCs are bad’ camps that don’t often explore the middle ground. I tend to be a little magpie-like in my practice, and collect elements that go together pragmatically and effectively. As such, my question is whether there are discrete elements of MOOCs that we can repurpose in education more broadly. Rey very correctly points out the the social drivers that gave rise to MOOCs haven’t disappeared.

        I’d ask then, if the social drivers haven’t disappeared, what elements of MOOCs might we take away and repurpose?

  7. Sorry, but I didn’t understand “Learning Activity 2”.

    We are to select one or two items from the list (“Awareness raising, Communities and networking …”) and “provide a brief explanation outlining why they apply to those contexts”. But in what sense these are “priorities”?

    In my immediate practice I use OER and produce OER. I do this because it is easier for me as a contracted educator, than having to negotiate licenses for materials, ever time I go to teach something. I can take a course I designed for one institution, modify and deliver it at another institution, as the materials are under an open access license.

    Tom W.

    1. Hi Tom,

      Sorry that Learning Activity 2 was unclear, that’s good feedback for us to reflect on.

      Openness priorities are quickly summarised on Page 20 & 21 of D’Antoni’s 2007 report: From your response I’m thinking that perhaps a priority for your immediate practice is Accessibility and Sustainability, under the Removing Barriers to OER category (pg. 21).

      Do you think that fits well with what you described? Or do you think another priority from that report better fits your context?

    2. Hi Tom,
      Good question. The ‘Priorities’ are meant to be read as ‘areas for action’.

      So, for example, if you were confident in your knowledge about openness, you’d probably not see ‘Capability Development’ as an area for personal action. However, you might have seen the list, and linked the ‘Communities’ priority to your practice because you want to work with others, or at least stay current on open topics and projects.

      Does this example help?

  8. Hi all,
    I’m Dan, and I’m a PhD student examining OEP with a focus on instructional design. Openness in education means to me that course content is developed from OER, that the course is itself openly licensed, and that instructional approaches used for open education (oer OER-enabled instruction) are based on solid research. Please see David Wiley’s blog post on OER-enabled pedagogy for more info:

    For those of you who aren’t aware, there’s a course on EdX that is live now, called “Introduction to Open Education”. It’s in itst 4th of 6 weeks and is linked here:


    – your immediate practice;
    Capacity development
    Communities and networking

    By trade, I’m an instructional designer, so when I work with and learn about OER and OEP, my main interest is figuring out what kinds of instructional design can be most beneficial when considering the affordances of open education. Equally, I’m interested in building up a network of people interested in open education to see what others have to say about this topic, and what kinds of projects we can collaborate on.

    – your team
    Quality assurance
    Instructional design
    Speaking of collaborations, I’m involved in the OERu’s Quality Review team, and you can be too! We’re trying to develop quality assurance standards for courses used in the OERu network. I feel that knowledge of instructional design is highly useful for quality assurance. I know it wasn’t on the list of topics, but I feel it’s more relevant than any other item on the list. I like to promote conversations about open instruction whenever I can!

    – and your institution
    Awareness raising
    Capacity development
    At my uni, there is definitely a lack of awareness about OER. Some people would like to see awareness-raising and capacity development through training about OER and OEP, and I hope that it happens and that I get to be involved!

    1. Hi Dan; another familiar face from last time!

      I would certainly recommend checking out the EdX course; thanks for providing the link for everyone. The three facets for openness (built on OER, openly licenced, designed with an evidence-based approach) are a great trio. When I think about the range of open courses that I’ve seen, the ones that tend to disappoint (which is a very strong word; I’m struggling for something a little softer) are those that have either poor learning design, or are built purely on proprietary content. As someone who is always on the lookout for alternate ways of presenting information, closed resources are frustrating because I can’t always use them.

      Added to this is the element of practice. If someone designs a course and labels it ‘open’, I have certain expectations about the way the course runs, the licencing of the resources, and really whether the course reflects open values.

      Revising the list of Priorities to include Instructional Design is worthwhile, but I wonder if ID intersects with a range of items already on the list – quality assurance, copyright, accessibility, learning support, and assessment are on the list. Do you feel that Instructional Design needs to be a separate category to highlight it explicitly? It’s a grey area to be sure as you could say that the areas I identified above contain elements of design, and when aggregated give a certain picture; but there is a case for a new Priority.
      How do you feel about this?

  9. Hello,
    I’m Jack Fenner, an academic fellow teaching archaeology at the Australian National University. I’m starting this course a day late but will try to catch up. To date, when I’ve given any thought at all to open education it has been about “mere access” to resources as discussed in the day one material. My perception is that there is precious little available that is of any value, and that it takes as long to separate the wheat from the chaff as it would to just start fresh and create it myself. If open education is meant to be MOOCs and the like, then I’m even more skeptical. But I’m a big fan of open software, open standards, and open data so maybe I should find out more about open education.

    Regarding priorities, in my immediate practice I suppose the priorities would be quality assurance and sustainability. If by “my team” I take it to mean my school within the university, then perhaps raising awareness would be the top priority since I’ve never heard anyone talk about open education within the school other than in the context of MOOCs. I don’t really know what’s going on at the university level so don’t know the priorities there.

    1. Hi Jack and welcome to the course. Starting ‘late’ is perfectly fine; it’s all part of the flexible design, so please do hone in on what interests you.
      Open data, open software, and open standards is a great place to start. I’ve been more and more interested in open software since deciding to move away from certain proprietary software. I found that increasingly I was trading my privacy for the software and I was not comfortable with that approach. Open software seems to take privacy seriously, and the ones I’m dealing with tend to have a social conscience (it’s refreshing, and it shouldn’t be).

      As far as open educational resources in archaeology, you piqued my interest so I went a did a bit of searching. You’re right – the coverage for OER in your area is very patchy (and there doesn’t seem to be a lot of recent material produced). I did find part of the Open Access movement called Open Access Archaeology that has a custom search engine to find free and open scholarly publications in this area (

      I can understand your thoughts on MOOCs too; they certainly aren’t a good fit for every discipline. I’m wondering if you can comment on one item for me as I’ve been working with a colleague in archaeology here at USQ. When designing materials for online use, one of the challenges he cites is including teaching that covers the tactile. Being able to handle items (he has a lot of animal bones and the like) and build up a sense of ‘what it feels like’ is – to him – a core skill. Do you have the same experience? If so, I wonder if there is perhaps a big resource gap and potential here. I’d be really quite interested in your thoughts about this, as I’m still learning (and asking silly questions along the way).

  10. Hi Adrian,

    Thanks for showing how ID is indeed addressed in elements already on the list. What I was trying to do was directly highlight the instructional aspect of open education. I feel that open education is still at such an early stage that instructional design has not yet caught up. For example, I haven’t seen ID models suited to global discussions such as can happen in an open course. Such a model would guide students in how they can express themselves in ways that they are more likely to be understood by a diverse group of learners. It could involve showing students how to be brief and how to truly add to a discussion rather than repeating points or adding unclear or rambling thoughts. (This point is about limiting extraneous content that drains the reader’s time and mental energy. An open course with hundreds of students would definitely benefit from such guidance.) Ways to add to a discussion include playing the devil’s advocate or adding nuance to an idea that’s been presented. I feel that in forums open to the public, there may be a fear of appearing too rude which causes people to avoid challenging each other. And yet, when these challenges are done well, they can really push the learning forward! (By the way, I invite people to challenge anything I write. Please feel comfortable doing so!) The model could also help students to manage a potentially high flow of discussion so that they find relevant information – perhaps by using search tools or by visually organizing discussion points.

    1. Hello Dan, it’s great to hear from you again and read your discussion posts. Welcome!
      I think that developing (or finding existing) ID models to guide students to provide and receive constructive (and polite) feedback challenging viewpoints would be valuable. I can see the value of graduates having this ability to use in their future workplaces etc – also like a graduate attribute? I wonder if any of the other participants or Adrian has come across ways that this can be facilitated with students on open online courses?

  11. Introduction to Activity 2:

    My University is a special institution, where all faculties are Computer Science related. I work in the National Center for Distance Education which, along with delivering distances courses, It is responsible for certification the quality of virtual, ICT supported, courses at the University. Finally my responsibilities are related to quality control, HE internationalization, Technological surveillance, and I lecturer of virtual and face-to-face courses of AI, ontology development and ICT in education.

    Institutional scenario:
    For obvious reasons the development and/or reuse and application of OER is highly encouraged in my Institution; consequently, “Increasing awareness of OER through all appropriate channels and among all stakeholders, and explaining its potential and benefits” is an aim that fits with Institutional policy.
    Consequently, from previously mentioned follows that “New approaches may demand new policies to support the creation and re-use of OER, and those who are implicated, such as teachers and learners”.

    Department related scenario:
    From the Department mission follows that: “An agreed set of criteria, some of which may be
    mandatory. For instance, standards for licensing and metadata are needed to ensure interoperability of OER.”
    The Department, due its responsibility in the Institutional and National context, is concerned with “Increasing the capability of individuals, institutions and organizations to create and use OER”

    Personal scenario:
    Currently my research interests are directly connected with two of priority issues for promoting the OER movement:
    “Online services, including forums and communities, to support and enhance learning with OER”, and
    The process of evaluating knowledge, skills and competencies gained through learning with ER, and among them, with OER.

    1. Hi Rey,
      Thanks for sharing your institutional and personal contexts, it is great to see your University supports the use and creation of OER. An interesting read – thanks for sharing!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *