 Sini h10a piaawana i atu i ngāldiaf piaulaat i kaio. Ngāhiion i 2019 nama i aun bai. Ia maewa mili. DCU ibawai h10a maewa i piaulaat i narau. Raulat mila ngaka maewa i na m ل Frei moidia. Na hivu nni i waibh ea maewa, ari i maewa i m eseitngu i maewa i maewa, maewa i maewa i meseitngu pobidiaa. One party members in particular from all around the world, developing countries very connected to UNESCO and with a mission linked to the Sustainable Development Goals. So we are really looking forward to hosting the conference with a theme of transforming lives and societies and so here is an invitation for you to look out on our website for the call for papers that you will come out later in the year. I am not sure how good the papers will be, we might not even have keynotes believe pa nama txema nama, ma faciaa txama txema txema iau te skault i Lorde. Keblu anitit. Teontonan ma txema mentu txema. A pa txema tori, te pereziu ma i gama. Txema txema l槍 ma ma txema munti txema txema muntopon, munti txema txema txema munti txema, teka i'n rungi txema txema i bruslas. A txema txema txema txema ilu, teka i txema txema txema txema i bruslasama, rungi txema txema txema txema txema txema i bruslasama, that we have managed to secure in the post Brexit environment free exchange into Dublin, you won't have a problem at the border, you'll be even welcome personally by our immigration staff, so there won't be an issue. Thank you. In a moment our co-chairs will formally welcome everyone to day two as I hand over to them, but there's two more small things I wanted to mention. I know you've all been enjoying the sunny weather with us and refreshments will continue to be served throughout the conference here in the area right next to registration and at the very end of the building. Just to keep in mind that members of the public are using the cafe throughout the conference, so that's not our space as such and so please do try and find our dedicated catering. Some absent friends I wanted to mention is two individuals who've actually made this conference happen very much in the run-up through the event and they're both called Jane, one of them is ALT's finance officer who supports remotely and has done a lot of administration in the run-up to his event and another is our events manager who has just two months ago given birth to the youngest member of ALT, so she's been preparing everything and then handed over to the team as she went on maternity leave, so I just wanted to give them a big shout out they're both watching online remotely and please do join me in saying thank you and welcoming our co-chairs for day two. Good morning everyone how are we feeling this morning or do I need to keep it down a bit? I think we can kind of wake people up but are people out there this morning are people having a good conference? We certainly are, this is amazing. I'd like to welcome people that are just here for day two so just give us a mum-a-dew wave if you're just here for today. Hello, lovely welcome to Bristol and welcome to the Watershed and OER conference. The other thing to maybe explain is Dublin is an incredible city so as Mark just said I would sort of very strongly suggest if anyone can get over to Dublin and perhaps we need to explain what crack meant and in Ireland if you're having crack it means you're having a good time so I thought better just explain that. If you put all sorts of breaking bad far from your mind here. Just one more plug for today so our closing plenary today is looking for five volunteers just to give a five minute share of an idea or a reflection. We've got two people, two very interesting people, one that has found us because he was following us on Twitter yesterday and was going to come into the conference I hope but we're looking for three more people so do just step forward if you think you would just like to share and provide us with one slide or an image just to sort of give you a bit of a backdrop but apart from that I shall hand over to David who's going to introduce our third amazing keynote. Okay, hi guys. So I went to an open education conference in Washington DC in 2015 was it and we were privileged to have Larry Lessig speak to us. People that know a bit of the history of open education, open science will know Larry Lessig working with Aaron Schwartz was one of the people involved in developing the creative common suite of licenses and at the time David Wiley introduced him by saying I'm the only person in the world that can still get Larry Lessig to talk about licensing and in the same vein I'm the only person in the world who can get David Wiley to talk about learning objects. For those of you who have not come across David Wiley before his involvement in open education and sharing educational content goes right back to the early 90s. He developed the open documentation license which was the first open license for written materials for educational materials in parallel with the open source community. He's been at the forefront of the community I think ever since. He's always been a presence at events, at conferences, at workshops. He's always been the person in some respects is slightly unfair. He's always been the person who's been keeping things sensible, keeping things focused, keeping things on the level and achieving the amazing outcomes that open education has seen over the previous 20 years and we continue to see and occasionally I've been one of these as well it's been kind of fashionable to a little bit of a gentle leg pull that he's always been the sensible one and the likes of myself and Jim Groom and Brian Lamb and all of the other people have just been creating all of this chaos off to one side that is somehow more important than actually keeping achieving things. I think this is unfair because at heart I think David Wiley is a little bit of a punk rocker that he I've asked him specifically for this to be provocative and not to be David Wiley the opening conference presenter who welcomes people into the movement and explains the movement to be the David Wiley that reflects the fact that this is still a movement that's growing that's changing that is challenging the way people think about openness, open practice and open education and to bring a little bit of that critical discussion into a conference and a scene that can almost feel like it's constantly about advocacy that it's constantly selling itself. So this is absolutely more than enough words for me it just reminds me to say all the way from West Virginia and possibly the finest Curly McClain ever to grace the stage. David Wiley. Gracious. Thank you. Thanks for the invitation to be here and I have to say it's a little counterintuitive how liberating it is to be given a specific topic to address instead of being able to choose anything one might want to. At the Creative Commons Summit last week they continued their humans of the Commons project where they were taking photos of people and sharing those online and I had on one of my Creative Commons t-shirts here which says I love to share on the back and they said turn around let's get a shot of you from the back there and I don't see myself from the back a lot. It's much worse than I had anticipated. This was driven home to me when I recently went to see Ready Player One at the movie theater and the sweet young lady at the ticket desk sold me a senior citizen ticket. That's what senior means there. So I guess I'm getting old and maybe that's part of why the co-chairs invited me to talk about history of the movement a little bit. So I am going to specifically address learning objects and then talk some about the connection between the open source movement and the open content movement. I'm going to tell stories and I want to just be clear right now that these timelines do overlap a little bit but I'm not going to take the time to try to weave them together. I'm going to tell them in blocks. I'm going to ask several questions but I'm going to work very hard at least not to give any answers. So for those of you who are Bill Nye fans, I will have a couple of blue screens here where I'll just ask you to pause and consider the following. So learning objects. Who remembers learning objects? Oh jeez, I am so sorry. Talk about a misspent youth. I did a lot of work on learning objects when I was younger including work on the definition of learning objects and if you think my writing about the definition of OER is tedious and pedantic, you really missed out on my kind of finest years. I think this is from 2002 when my blog would start with 13 definitions and then just brutally work its way through a series of propositions using all those definitions to try to establish a point. Unfortunately, I was professionally rewarded for my work on definitions which then conditioned me to want to continue working on definitions. So let me pause for a second and I'm actually literally just going to pause for 15 seconds or so and ask you to think about this question. What is the relationship between the clarity and stability of definitions and the progress of science over time? Any talk on learning objects would be incomplete without the mention of the usability paradox. This particular slide is beautiful because this is me reusing a slide created by Clint Lalonde which is using a graphic originally created by me so there is some inception happening here. But if you remember the usability paradox, the idea here was that there's an inverse relationship between pedagogical value and potential for reuse by which I mean a single image of a galaxy is very easy to reuse. You can find lots of spots that you can drop that image into and do something useful and productive with it but by looking at that image alone there's not much that you can learn. Contrast that with an entire section out of a chapter about what does this say, properties of galaxies. There's a lot more I can learn from that entire chapter but there are far fewer places that I can pick that whole chapter up and drop it in and have it make some kind of sense. So there's this backwards relationship between reusability and pedagogical value and so this worried me a lot, a lot, a lot. I did a lot of writing and thinking about that and it turns out that the the reusability paradox existed because you can't change learning objects. You can't modify them. What you really want is you want to be able to find that big piece and see the image used in context and understand what it might want to teach out and might function in a pedagogical context and then you want permission to take it out and go do something else with it. But back in the day we couldn't do that because of copyright. I will now debut a poem about copyright. Copyright, ubiquitous, ambient, like an unquestionable law of nature. We should do something about it. So I want to get into now the history of open source and draw this connection out between open source and open content. I remember from yesterday we had a couple of historians in the room but I assume most people want to die looking at this slide so I assure you I'm actually only going to talk about these first two parts. I'm going to talk about open source. I'm going to try to avoid actually talking about OER but I do want to plug some work that I did with students two years ago. The URL is here openedreader.org. This is a collection of what I think are the seminal papers in our movement with summaries, commentaries, discussion questions all written by students for use in an introduction to open education course. So if you want more of the history of OER, at least as viewed through the seminal works, I'd recommend this book to you but that's actually not what I'm going to talk about. Who's this? Richard Stallman. Richard Stallman dressed as Saint Ignucius here. This being a play on the GNU project of which he is the father. Richard is the father of free software as many of you will know and the thing that is perhaps most compelling about the work that Richard did was the invention of the GPL. The first what we would consider open license for software. But he didn't call it open, he called it free software and that turned out to be very important. That led to work by this woman Christine Peters and a number of others in late 97, early 98, began to worry about the effect of this word free, free software. It was confusing to a lot of people and it was actually scary to some people. And in my attempt to be provocative or at least to break rules, I'm going to break the first rule of PowerPoint several times today and I'm just going to read to you extended quotes off a slide. So this is Christine. The introduction of the term open source software was a deliberate effort to make this field of endeavour more understandable to newcomers and to business which was viewed as necessary to its spread to a broader community of users. The problem with the main earlier label free software was not its political connotations although I would dispute that, but that to newcomers its seeming focus on price is distracting. A term was needed that focuses on the key issue of source code and that does not immediately confuse those new to the concept. The first term that came along at the right time and fulfilled those requirements was rapidly adopted open source. And this is a term that Christine invented and then proposed at a strategy meeting in February of 98 which was attended by a number of people who you will know or who you should know including this person. Who's this? This is Eric Raymond. Eric Raymond is the author of what I would argue is the seminal piece of work in open an essay called the Cathedral in the Bazaar which if all you get out of my presentation today is you go find the Cathedral in the Bazaar and you read it you will have gained at least something of value. Eric published this essay in 97. It was very influential when Netscape open sourced its browser. They cited Cathedral in the Bazaar as one of the things that really influenced their thinking. And so Eric was given the task of going out and kind of propagandising this new term open source software and slash dot which was where everything that happened happened at the time. Anybody remember slash dot from back in the day? You know ran this story about Eric Raymond saying we should talk about open source software and that the idea already was supported by people like Linus Torvalds and Bruce Parrins. So Richard had feelings about this Richard Stallman. He says that for the free software movement free software is an ethical imperative. Essential respect for the user's freedom. By contrast the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make software better in a practical sense only. It says that non-free software is an inferior solution to the practical problem at hand. Most discussion of open source pays no attention to right or wrong. Because in Richard's mind free as they say free as in freedom it's an ethical issue. It's an issue of right or wrong and it was partly this moralizing on the part of free software people that created the need some felt for an additional term and a new way of talking and thinking about the work that was going on. You know when asked you've advocated for the label open source over free software why Eric said because the term free software frightens and confuses people who wear suits. Those people have money and decision making power that we need so not confusing and frightening them is smart. So this all happened February, March, April of 1998 and about that same time I left my job as the web master at Marshall University in West Virginia where I did my undergrad, moved to Utah to go to graduate school and one day that summer was cutting this little plot of grass in the yard of the triplex where my wife and our oldest son and I were living and I was as I was pushing the mower along through there I thought this open source thing is the answer to this problem we're having in with learning objects. We need to do something like open source software but we need to do it for content. So I sent emails to Richard and to Eric and said hey I have this idea I think it'd be nice if there were these kinds of open source style licenses for content and we could do like journal articles and textbooks and it could be education but it could be more like what do you think about that and Eric wrote back a very supportive letter kind of saying this seems like a great idea I really want to encourage you to go after that let me know I can help and Richard wrote back and essentially said yeah just the important thing here is whatever you do make sure that you call it free whatever and not open whatever that that'll be the most important thing that you can do and secondly I think the whole idea of getting a phd stupid you should drop out of school and focus your energy on this. So based on those two pieces of feedback which in retrospect really don't surprise me um you know I got out a pad of paper and went through and kind of brainstormed in a mad libs kind of way like names and came up with a name open content and so of course slash dot is a place where you announce these things so announce slash dot or announce open content on slash dot and this from the website as it was in 1998 open contents only excuse for existing is to facilitate the prolific creation of freely available high quality well-maintained content this content can then be used in an infinity of ways restricted only by the imagination of the user one of the most significant uses may be supporting instruction and helping people learn open content is freely available for modification use and redistribution under a license similar to those used in the open source free software community so in 98 we released the open content principles and license which was really just a adaptation of the gpl for content and then in 99 we released the open publication license which is primarily written by Eric and which went on to have quite a successful little life for itself hundreds of thousands of pieces of information on the internet were licensed with this license in 2002 creative commons came along and released their licenses and pretty shortly after that we disavowed the work we had been doing on licenses because I'm not a lawyer Eric's not a lawyer nobody wanted our licenses to go to court that would have been a disaster if that had happened so creative commons came along at just the right time and allowed us both to go back to focusing on things that we cared a little more about so I think in many kind of important ways the open source movement is kind of the older sibling of the open content and the OER movement and in the same way that creative commons does its state of the commons report every year where they share statistics about how many things have been licensed under cc licenses the linux foundation releases this kernel development report every year linux is one of the most successful pieces of open source software and in 2017 this is what they had to say about the state of linux linux is dominating many sectors and as I looked at that I just thought gosh what you know what if five years from now we could say the same kinds of things for OER um which it makes you stop and want to ask yourself the question so I'll invite you to stop and ask yourself the question to what degree is broad adoption of OER something that's desirable I found a good spot right here it's squeaky now I promised I was going to try not to answer any of the questions that I asked but let's just assume for a minute that we think it is a good idea that we might want to support the broad adoption of OER I think there are at least four important lessons for us from the open source movement let you look at those for a second and then I will take us through them the first is that the movement needs purists and pragmatists I think you see this kind of balance that has played out between the free software movement it's focused on ethics on what's right or wrong on principles and the very pragmatic approach of the open source advocate saying actually there are times when not being open is okay there are times when a proprietary solution is the right solution and we should recognize that and then the fist shaking over here about no freedom is good that tension has been really productive over the years and the movement is a lot stronger for having strong voices on both sides of it and any Monty Python fans you know it's not it's not just the people's front of Judea and the Judean people's front and they're just different in name only but it's exactly the same thing right they're actually meaningful differences between the free software advocates and the open source advocates I do worry a bit about getting from a place where we have purists and pragmatists to a place where we have purists versus pragmatists and compromise becomes impossible and when compromise is impossible then progress becomes either very difficult or impossible so let me ask you to pause and think for a moment you know which of these two views do you feel like you more natively identify with in terms of a kind of pure approach or a pragmatic approach and do you think the OER movement will split in a way similar to the way the free software and open source movements split or maybe you think it's split already do you think it should moving on you win when you don't discriminate both the open source movement and the free software movement have been very explicit in their statement of their principles around not discriminating the open source definition is a statement of 10 kinds of rules that a license has to meet to be certified by the open source initiative as an open source license one of those is no discrimination against persons or groups but another of them is no discrimination against fields of endeavor so back in the day it wasn't uncommon to have a license that said this can't be used by the military or the software can't be used for genetic research or this software can't be used by a commercial interest and so when they got together and formed up and formalized the set of principles that they would use to judge licenses to determine whether a license was going to be open source approved or not this no discrimination against fields of endeavor was one of the pieces that came there and you can see the rationale is that the intent of this clause is to prohibit license traps that prevent open source from being used commercially we want commercial users to join our community not feel excluded from it free software has a similar statement of principles that are called the four freedoms and because they're programmers the first one is numbered zero freedom zero is the freedom to run the purpose as you the program for as you wish for any purpose and then it's described below free software does not mean non-commercial a free program must be available for commercial use commercial development commercial distribution commercial development of free software is no longer unusual such free commercial software is very important so how is that commitment to not discriminating against commercial involvement in open source worked out for the movement in the 2017 kernel report I referenced a moment ago 4.7 kernel release included just under 83,000 contributions to it different people contributing bits of code to the kernel 4300 individual developers representing 519 corporations in fact only 8% of contributions to the kernel came from people who are not supported by a company the overwhelming majority of the work done in open source is done by people who work at companies that use and benefit from that software and who work and consequently work on and contribute back to it this this is the one kind of explicit reference I'll make to the OER movement when several of us got together in Cape Town a little over a decade ago and wrote the Cape Town Open Education Declaration which you are familiar with well while we were there we talked about it and then it was written afterward based on those conversations you know the Cape Town Declaration says the open movement is built on the belief that everyone should have the freedom to use customized improve and redistribute educational resources without constraint we invite learners educators trainers authors schools colleges universities publishers unions professional societies etc etc we now have the opportunity to grow this movement to engage entrepreneurs and publishers who are developing innovative open business models so I think the next thing I would ask you to consider is does today's OER movement have no discrimination as core value and if the answers know what are the potential impacts of that if the answer is yes what are the potential impacts of that and how do you feel about it personally potentially about the involvement of commercial players in the space bless you as as is made clear in the open source and free software kind of guiding principal documents the third lesson here is that early adoption does not look like mainstream adoption and vice versa any links users in the room anybody remember links couple people this this was the web right back in the day back when we did everything at the terminal this is what surfing the web looked like this is what installing a piece of software looked like and importantly installing a piece of software always ended in an error now that's actually not a bug that's a feature it turns out this is Linus Torvalds he's the person responsible for first developing proposing building gathering the community around Linux that we've been talking about and in an email in 1991 announcing this project he was working on and wanted to invite people to he said do you pine for the nice days of minix 11 when men were men and wrote their own device drivers are you without a nice project and just dying to cut your teeth on an operating system you can modify to your needs do you find it frustrating when everything just works no more all-nighters getting that nifty program working this post might be just for you and then he goes on to talk about Linux and I just have to highlight here you're finding it frustrating when everything is that a thought you have ever had in your whole life that you find it frustrating when stuff just works this this notion of everything linux involving bringing 18 different things together that you have to arrange yourself and compile yourself and install yourself inevitably leads every year on linux's birthday to a post like this actually just to the right of the word your there's an expletive there but I've whited it out for to make this presentation family friendly but there's there's definitely this feeling among early adopters of kind of being in the club being there at the beginning really being do-it-yourself kind of maybe in our community we would say edupunk kind of just really engaged at this low level in this really meaningful and deep way well that that couldn't last and eventually graphical user interfaces were introduced to the scene anybody know who this is say it louder neil stevensson neil stevensson author of books like kryptonomicon seven eaves most recently in an essay called in the beginning was the command line wrote this the introduction of the mac triggered a sort of holy war in the computer world where gooey's graphical user interfaces a brilliant design innovation that made computers more human centered and therefore more accessible to the masses leading us toward an unprecedented revolution in human society or an insulting bit of audio visual gim crackery dreamed up by flaky bay area hacker types that stripped computers of their power and flexibility and turned the noble and serious work of computing into childish video game and there were definitely people who felt both ways about that i think there still are how many of you are mac users how many of you knew that the bottom down at the bottom of your mac was an open source kernel underneath your operating system right darwin here the operating system kernel has been adapted from free bsd which is another one of these open source unix kind of clones like linux turns out that mac os x which even has a terminal that you can open up and do terminally things terminally things with you know is is this open source kernel at the bottom and then kind of layers of other either open source or proprietary things curated very specific ways and brought together and packaged together in a way such as to be useful so how do early adopters feel about mainstream users and does it matter graphical user interfaces make common functions accessible to more people by making other functions impossible is that a net gain or is that a net loss and what's the difference between command line oer and gooey oer what would those two things even mean not everyone can or will contribute and and that's okay i'm just going to go out on a limb and say that everyone is familiar with these pieces of software here you may already know you may not know that open source software underlies all three of these chromium and web kit are the you know the underlying open source projects and rendering engine underneath chrome and safari and of course firefox is this completely open source apache and engine x are two open source web servers that collectively run about two thirds of all of the websites on the entire internet you may be familiar with this piece of software called wordpress that some people in our community obsess about which is underlaid by php and my sql all three of these also being open source all of these together running about a third of all the websites on the internet 30% was last estimate i saw so when you think about these tools that you use browsers are open source the web servers are open source the the platforms that you're using to manage and deliver content maybe even in your oer projects are open source do you contribute to these projects you contribute to chrome or to firefox or to wordpress or to php or to apache if you don't contribute to them are you strip mining the commons of open source software a free rider who's just going along not you know driving lots of benefit not giving back if you're paid to teach online courses are you personally profiting from your strip mining of this commons of open source software i don't think so but oh i there's me answering my my own question well that those weren't blue screen questions though these are the blue screen questions who who doesn't contribute to open source and why don't they is the answer different if we ask about oer who doesn't contribute to oer why don't they and what proportion of users need to contribute to these projects for them to be sustainable i think as we have conversations about the sustainability of the work that we're doing i think this is an important question to to ponder and to have an opinion about this basically everyone need to contribute for things to be sustainable can we get by with a small minority of people contributing why would the broad adoption of oer be a highly desirable outcome just my own opinion i want to close with a few thoughts about this by talking about the sexiest topic known to man you're welcome infrastructure brett freshman defines infrastructure this way calls them resources that create benefits for society primarily through the facilitation of downstream productive activities and i have to tell you as a definite definition guy i love this definition facilitating downstream productive activities that sounds a lot to me like maybe enabling innovation or enabling people to do things they haven't done before that could be useful if you don't know you probably know erics work on democratizing innovation if you don't know adam's work on permissionless innovation i'd really recommend it to you want about getting more people involved in the process of of innovating and experimenting and the other about the importance of removing obstacles and barriers and expense from the process of innovating and experimenting and i think there's a close relationship between innovation and infrastructure good infrastructure is generally inexpensive and gives you broad permissions let me give you an example talking about the internet as a piece of infrastructure if broadband costs $500 a month or if a high speed connection costs $5,000 a month does amazon exist if it costs $500 a month for you to have a high speed connection at your house does google exist cost $500 a month do online courses exist cost $500 a month to connect to the internet i'd say probably not if you need a broadcast license to put video online or to write words and put them online does blogging exist does youtube exist do online courses exist if you need a broadcast license these kinds of things whether it's blogging or teaching and learning online or whatever it might be we're able to engage in experiments to see if these things are useful and whether they'll kind of when we throw them at the wall will they stick or not when the costs and the obstacles are low more people can engage in that kind of experimentation and the more people who do the kind of work the more likely we are to find things that will actually stick to the wall i'm particularly interested in thinking about the intellectual infrastructure of education which i think is comprised of at least these three components which i think is comprised of at least these three components one way of looking at the slow glacial pace of change in our institutions is that this infrastructure is expensive and has very narrow permissions associated with it which makes it very expensive to try to run experiments to try to do things differently and means that there are obstacles if we can open this intellectual infrastructure we can make it possible for people to engage in a whole range of downstream productive activities that they can't currently because it either costs too much or take too long or it's too hard to get permission to do and whether that's we are enabled pedagogy or open credentialing models or open business models or whatever those things might be when the infrastructure is open lots of interesting stuff can happen on top of that and i think that realization that when we make things open the primary thing we're doing is we're giving permission to someone else to try something crazy is really about admitting that i don't know all the best possible ways that this resource created can be used you might be able to think of a different way a better way in your local context to use this resource than i was able to at the beginning and one of the reasons that you might apply an open license to something you create is to recognize that there are uses that you can't anticipate you don't know all the things you would need to know sitting in your office wherever you are about how that resource is going to be used halfway across the world and so there's a humility i think in the act of applying an open license that we don't talk about and that we don't fully appreciate this is probably my favorite quote from Linus talking about the development of of tools in the open source ecosystem he said don't ever make the mistake that you and i should put a sick there but this is the this is the quote don't ever make the mistake that you can design something better than what you get from ruthless massively parallel trial and error with the feedback cycle that is giving your intelligence much too much credit and how do we enable massive parallel experimentation we do that by making the infrastructure free and broadly permission uh last slide you're looking at this kind of history of where things are going and of course there's overlap here that's the nature of trying to create these buckets i'm particularly interested in what happens five to ten years from now as the first students who came up through the system using oer become faculty they're going to have expectations about the kinds of things that they're going to be able to do and it would be great if when they showed up if we had paved the roads already and the infrastructure was in place and they could come in with their ideas and their energy and their enthusiasm and be able to act on all of it thank you very much thank you david i've had the benefit of watching the conversations on twitter you have started a lot of hairs running you've started a lot of conversations and i want to really thank you again for doing that for sparking this these conversations and exposing these difficult kind of almost ugly bits of open education and practice that we need to be conscious of like open source like every other movement open education is not a perfect movement it has its flaws it has its problems it does not properly reflect diversity it does not properly reflect the amazing contributions of women people of colour of people from non-western backgrounds and it's on us is what i got for that it's on us to fix this it's on us to make this the community that we want to be want to be a part of so thank you very much again that was wonderful um thanks well and i have to say this is not the talk i would have given if just left to my own devices right so i think this invitation to speak about this specific topic i was really grateful for that so thank you to the organisers too for the invitation i'm in bearing in mind the caveat that we probably don't have the answers i would like to invite questions comments and discussions and mics on both sides we have a first question right at the back there from Doug i think um is that you Doug um it's just there's um a mic uh gonna come the way it's just because we're live streaming across this um incredible infrastructure that we have it would be good for everyone to hear what you say so thanks carry on David thank you um as somebody who's worked on open source and in open education it's really important the stuff you talked about you haven't got time to talk about everything and you talked about the focus being different from what you would have talked about otherwise but i'm really interested in the concept of ownership and i think that a lot of people here one of the reasons that they might feel attention certainly i have in my career is that um commercial companies using open source make profit from what we do and i just wondered about the tension then if you wanted a chance to talk about that yeah um i mean i think if that is a that's attention that i think everybody feels to greater or lesser degree and i think there's some point along that continuum in which you just make the decision that open sourcing software is not for you um or that you find a pretty exotic license that allows a lot of things but doesn't allow commercial use which wouldn't qualify as an open source license but i'm sure there are several of them out there you know that you could choose and look at it's a choice that every individual has to make you know there's not a there's not a global way to meaningfully talk about that i think accept to say that i think it is interesting that even given the philosophical differences between the free software camp and the open software camp that they both came down very strongly kind of in recognition of the important role that commercial enterprises play in moving the work forward hi David thanks for that um it's more really a comment and maybe some of the things that have been going through my head particularly since mum would use a keynote yesterday and it relates to definitions and who and inclusivity and accessibility and i think we are struggling in terms of definitions and i worry that we in the global north from our white middle class male position of privilege are discussing definitions that are automatically going to exclude a huge part of the population and actually without us actually realizing it because we don't think enough about these things apart you know we can have all the grand statements about inclusivity as we want but unless we all start thinking about it properly and quoting other people and making sure that there is balance in everything that we do we're just going to define people out of the open education movement and i think that's really worrying for for us all as well so i think we need to we need to be really careful about how we address problems of definitions and maybe not be so hung up about definitions but actually look for other parts of the wider community to help us in terms of our definitions if that makes sense yeah you know the the one thing that i'll say in uh in defensive definitions although i agree with everything that you said so this is an and not a but is that if um if you were a material scientist and you were reviewing 10 years of literature uh about how steel works in a range of engineering projects and every article that you read defined steel in a different way as a different mix of ingredients as a different kind of alloy you would be hard pressed to learn something cumulative over your review of all that research if the object of study is something different every time now you know my background is as an instructional designer i'm an educational researcher i want to ask questions like what's the impact on learners when we adopt open educational resources and if every study that asks that question asks it about a different thing we can do that research for a decade or two and not know much more than we did when we started in terms of kind of the accumulation of knowledge that you expect to see in science broadly as time moves forward we hope to understand more so i think there's a tension there as well between the legitimate and important point that you're making and the desire to move the science of learning ahead yeah that's the that's the tension right yeah uh thank you for your talk david i'd like to talk about infrastructure infrastructure is not sexy and but i but i said it was so it's not sexy at all we we often point to infrastructure when it's broken because people begin interest in in infrastructure awareness when it's broken when it works nobody cares nobody notices yeah yes and that's easy for us as an open movement to point to broken infrastructure but i'm not sure if it's helpful or if people might lose interest if the problem is fixed but if is this a sustainable model for raising awareness about the huge questions behind open maybe not you know that this is not the way that i normally talk about it you know um so if we can have more conversation about that afterward i'd love to i'd love to think through that some more question right over there in the far end i can't see who that is i'm sorry you've got a light um i've got a question about um reuse and measuring reuse so uh one of the problems with anything that's open is uh it's very difficult to kind of look at how it's been reused um how have you been able to measure that in the open source community and how will that be kind of measurable in the open education movement um is that something that's ever going to be measurable um yeah put your thoughts on that i think broadly no you know i think when everyone has permission to make as many copies as they want and distribute those to as many peoples they want um no i don't think there will be good ways i think um there are some interesting strategies or tactics that people can employ so for example um open stacks the publisher of open textbooks has um like ancillary materials that are available only to teachers and so if the teachers want that test bank or want those power points or whatever then they need to come and register on the site and verify approve that they are a teacher and then they're able to unlock those other resources so that model gives open stacks the ability to do a little better tracking than just google analytics of how many downloads there were or something like that but the but it's the nature of the the design of the thing that it is just really hard to track yeah i'm conscious we have asked so many questions prompted so many trains of sort here that we could sit here for the rest of the the day and chat about this we have got a rest of a conference that we can do as well um because i'm the co-chair and i can make such decisions we are actually going to do the the the rest of the conference uh i mean david wily will be around for the rest of the day do please come and talk to him and do especially come and talk to him and tell him that he's wrong yes because this is a tremendously important thing for people to do i mean not just david but i mean i mean in this case uh yes exactly just david so um if once again we can thank david wily and we have a small gift for you as well