On the threat of mass redundancy

Posted on November 18, 2025 by admin

For three days this week, colleagues at the University of Edinburgh are striking as part of UCU Edinburgh‘s ongoing industrial dispute with university management. Colleagues are protesting against the threat of mass redundancies resulting from a manufactured financial crisis. Many hidden redundancies have already taken place through non-renewal of contracts and staff opting to leave rather than face ongoing uncertainty.

I can’t join this week’s strikes as I’m still off work recovering from cancer treatment, however I was able to show support by lobbying my MSPs to ask them to take action on behalf of staff and students at the university. UCU Edinburgh provided a short template but encouraged members to

“Share the impact being made redundant will have on your colleagues, your health, your family/loved ones/community. Share your fears for future students, the future of your discipline, and the reputation of the university.”

This is the letter I sent to all eight of my MSPs (Members of Scottish Parliament).

Dear _________, I am one of your constituents in Glasgow Region. I’m emailing to express my concerns about mass redundancies at the University of Edinburgh where I work.

I have been an employee of the University of Edinburgh since 2015. I work as a Learning Technology Service Manager in Information Services Group where I run the university’s Open Educational Resources (OER) Service. The OER Service shares teaching and learning materials freely under open licence for the benefit of all. This is a role I have a deep personal commitment to.

In February of this year I was diagnosed with stage 2 throat cancer and I have been off work ever since. Treatment has been gruelling, but thankfully successful, and I am due to return to work next month. During my absence I have followed events at the university with increasing anxiety and I am now extremely concerned about returning to an employer who is threatening to make hundreds of unnecessary job cuts in order to meet the bottom line of a highly contested financial plan. These threatened cuts are nothing more than wanton vandalism at an institution that has considerable financial reserves.

I also have a daughter who is a student at the University of Edinburgh and I’m really worried about the impact of these cuts on her learning experience and education. Just recently I referred her to student support provided by the Institute of Academic Development only to learn that it is being shut down and staff being made redundant. This week she is missing almost all her classes due to UCU Edinburgh’s industrial action, however she understands the necessity for these strikes and supports staff who are fighting to save not just their jobs, but our university.

I find it hard to express my anger and concern at this needless situation. Understandably, this is taking a considerable toll on my mental and physical health at a time when I should be focused on recovery and returning to work. However the stress I am experiencing is nothing compared to that of my colleagues who have already had their roles cut, who have had to re-apply for their jobs, and who are facing redundancey. My thoughts are with them.

I am asking you as my MSP for Glasgow Region to:

Call on your colleagues in the Education Committee to launch an inquiry into the University of Edinburgh’s finances, failure to avoid redundancies, and the competency of the senior management team.

Provide a statement of support for staff and students that asks management to rule out compulsory redundancies. This statement will be added to UCU Edinburgh’s website. You can email your statement to me or directly to the UCU Edinburgh branch at ucu@ed.ac.uk.

Write to Principal Peter Mathieson, principal@ed.ac.uk, urging him to reconsider the scale and pace of cuts and to rule out compulsory redundancies.

You are also invited to come to the rally outside the parliament on Wednesday 19th, 1-2pm, to show support to University of Edinburgh staff and students, and to protest this reckless vandalism that threatens to damage the reputation not just of the University of Edinburgh, but the Scottish Higher Education sector as a whole.

What I didn’t add to this email, as it was already getting rather long, is that in my 35 year career in Higher Education I have experienced compulsory redundancy twice, as a result of “restructuring” and real and imagined financial crises. When we work in education we tend to identify strongly with our institutions and their mission and I don’t think anything quite prepares you for the shock of realising that they will throw you under a bus with barely a second thought. No matter how many extra hours you put in, how many evenings, weekends and important life events you sacrifice, it will make little difference. Things can be particularly difficult for colleagues with line management responsibilities who may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to support their staff through the painful process of redundancy, while being made redundant themselves. I’ve been there, and I think I still hold a lot of unresolved trauma from that time. These are all reasons why I urge you to join a union now and to resist the threat of compulsory redundancies wherever the axe might fall.

ETA 18/11/25 So far, other than automated replies, I’ve only received responses from two of my MSPs. Humza Yousef’s (SNP) constituency office sent an email asking for my address and contact details so my case could be logged and a case worker assigned. And Patrick Harvie’s (Scottish Greens) office responded with a lovely supportive email from a real live human being who expressed sympathy and said they would pass my email on to Ross Greer the portfolio holder on Education for the Scottish Greens. Haven’t heard a peep from Labour or the Tories. Make of that what you will.

ETA 24/11/25 I’ve now had additional responses from Humza Yousaf’s office (SNP), Annie Wells (Conservative) and Dr Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative). Humza Yousaf’s office said they were seeking further information and guidance about the issues I raised and would get back to me as soon as possible with a more detailed response. Dr Sandesh Gulhane said that Miles Briggs, Conservative Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Education, is advocating for an Education Committee session at the Scottish Parliament, with the University of Edinburgh, to have full scrutiny and transparency in regards to their financial position. Annie Wells repeated this message along with additional information. All three expressed their personal concern for staff and students of the university and their sympathy for my health issues. I must admit I’m touched and pleasantly surprised by the responses I’ve received so far. They’ve restored my faith in politicians a little. Still no response from Labour…

OER25 – Stepping back and speaking truth to power

Posted on June 19, 2025 by admin

The 16th annual Open Education Conference (OER25) is taking place in London next week and the theme “Speaking truth to power: open education and AI in the age of populism” could be more urgent or important. Chaired by Sheila MacNeil and Dr Louise Drumm, both of whom have a long standing commitment to critical engagement with ed tech, the conference features keynotes by Helen Beetham and Joe Wilson.

Helen’s keynote, “When speaking truth is not enough: repurpose, rebuild, refuse”, will explore the links between the AI industry and the politics of populism. Helen’s thoughtful, contextual approach to education technology and AI in particular has already made me step back and question the foundational concepts of artificial intelligence. I’m still thinking about her keynote at the 2023 ALT Winter Conference “Whose Ethics? Whose AI? A relational approach to the challenge of ethical AI.”

Joe Wilson has been my Open Scotland partner in crime for over a decade now and I’m continually inspired by his optimism and his commitment to openness. Joe’s keynote, “Shaping Open Education ” will focus on the challenges of closing the attainment gap, promoting social mobility, ethical use of AI and keeping open education at the heart of change.

I’m also really pleased to see that Natalie Lafferty and Sharon Flynn will be leading a workshop on reviewing ALT’s Framework for Ethical Learning Technology, which is more critically important now than ever. The workshop will inform an updated version of the framework, which is due to be launched at the end of the year.

I’ve been hugely privileged to attend all fifteen OER Conferences, going right back to OER10 in Cambridge, but unfortunately I won’t be able to go to London this year. I’ve had to step back from all work commitments as I was diagnosed with stage two throat cancer earlier in the year. I’ve already completed six weeks of radiotherapy treatment and am now (hopefully!) on the slow and convoluted road to recovery. (The jury is still out as to whether and how this relates to the autoimmune disease I was diagnosed with last year. That remains to be seen.) Over the last six months I’ve been deeply moved by how immensely kind people have been, I really can’t express my gratitude enough.

I haven’t had much energy to focus on anything other than recovery for the last six months, but during occasional bright spots I’ve found myself turning more and more to independent writing and journalism in an attempt to find some respite from endless doomscrolling. Shout out to Audrey Watter’s Second Breakfast, Rebecca Solnit’s Meditations in an Emergency, Carole Cadwalladr’s How to survive the Broligarchy, and Helen Beetham’s imperfect offerings for keeping me sane, more or less. All inspiring women with fearless voices speaking truth to power.

I’ve also been enthralled by the Manchester Mill’s tenacious investigative journalism that led to the suspension of two member’s of the University of Greater Manchester’s senior leadership team, including the vice chancellor, and the subsequent police enquiry into “allegations of financial irregularity“. As a former (brief) employee of the University of Greater Manchester, when it was better known as the University of Bolton, I’ll be watching with interest to see how this investigation develops.

I’ve been making a rather half-hearted attempt at following the progress of the government’s questionable Data (Use and Access) Bill, particularly as it relates to AI and copyright, but I haven’t got the brain or will power to write about that right now.

In the meantime, I’ll hopefully be able to follow some of the OER25 Conference online and I’ll be with everyone in spirit, if not in person, this year.

Copyright and Cartoon Mice – Gen AI Images and the Public Domain

Posted on March 13, 2025 by admin

(This post was previously published on the Open.Ed Blog.)

With many image and media applications now integrating AI tools, it’s easier than ever to generate all kinds of eye-catching graphical content for your presentations, blog posts, teaching materials, and publications. Want a picture of a cartoon mouse to liven up your slides? No problem! Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, DALL-E, or Media Magic can create one for you. And if your AI generated rodent happens to bear a striking resemblance to another well known cartoon mouse, well that’s just a coincidence, no?

Copyright and AI

The relationship between ownership, copyright and AI is still highly contested both in terms of the works ingested by the data models driving these tools, and also the content they generate. Many of these data models ingest content that has been scraped from the web, with scant regard for intellectual property, copyright and ownership. Whether this constitutes legal use of protected works is a moot point. Creative Commons position is that “training generative AI constitutes fair use under current U.S. law”. Not everyone agrees; several artists and media organisations are attempting to sue various AI companies that they claim have used their creative works without their consent. Creative Commons believe that preference signals could offer a way to enable creators to indicate how their works can be used above and beyond the terms of the licence, and are exploring the practicalities of this approach (Preference signals for AI training.) It remains to be seen whether this is likely to be an effective solution to an intractable problem.

The European Union have taken a slightly different approach to copyright and AI with their EU Artificial Intelligence Act. Broadly speaking, the Act permits GenAI providers to use copyright content to train data models under the terms of the text and data mining exceptions of the existing Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive). However, rights holders are able to reserve their rights to prevent their content from being used for text and data mining and training genAI. Furthermore, providers must keep detailed records and provide a public summary of the content used to train their data models. In short, it’s a compromise; Gen AI models can scrape the web, but they must keep a public record of all the content they use, and they must allow copyright holders to opt out. How this will work in practice, remains to be seen.

The UK is one step behind the EU, the government is undertaking an open consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, which appears to be broadly following the EU’s approach.

Copyright of AI Generated Content

Then there’s the issue of who owns the copyright of AI generated content. One common assumption is that AI generated images are not subject to copyright because they are not creative works produced by humans. Creative Commons perspective is that “creative works produced with the assistance of generative AI tools should only be eligible for protection where they contain a significant enough degree of human creative input to justify protection.” (This is not a bicycle: Human creativity and generative AI.) The problems start when AI tools generate images that are almost indistinguishable from the content they have ingested. Take that AI generated cartoon mouse for example. The reason it’s so similar to Disney’s famous, and famously copyright mouse is that the AI data models are likely to have scraped millions of images of Mickey Mouse from the web, with little regard for Disney’s intellectual property. Rights holders may be able to argue that an AI generated image infringes their copyright on the basis of substantial similarity (The complex world of style, copyright, and generative AI.) This represents a risk which AI application developers are keen to shift on to their users. It’s not uncommon for AI applications to explicitly make no copyright claim over the images generated by their tools. For example with regards to the copyright of AI generated images, Canva states:

“The treatment of AI-generated images and other works under copyright law is an open question and the answer may vary depending on what country you live in.

For now, Canva does not make any copyright claim over the images you create with our free AI image generator app. As between you and Canva, you own the images you create with Text to Image (subject to you following our terms), and you give us the right to host them on our platform and to use them for marketing our products.”

So if Disney does happen to spot your AI generated cartoon mouse and decides to sue, it’s you, or your employer, that’s going to be liable, not the tool you used to generate the image.

OER Service Guidance

The University of Edinburgh’s OER Service currently provides the following advice and guidance on using AI generated images:

OER Service advice on gen AI images: Questions to consider: Does the Generative AI provider confirm that the data used to train the model has been legally accessed or licensed? 2. Will the provider own any rights over the creations? Don't use AI Generated images unless they confirm that the images being generated come from an ethically-trained model which respects copyright and creators.

We also recommend consulting the University of Edinburgh’s Generative AI Guidance for Staff.

Public Domain Images

A more ethical, and environmentally friendly, alternative to using AI generated images is to use public domain images, of which there are millions, with more entering the commons every year. Public domain works, are creative works that are no longer under copyright protection because copyright has expired and they have entered the public domain, or they have been dedicated to the public domain by creators who choose to give up their copyright. This means that they can be used free of charge, by anyone, for any purpose, without any restrictions whatsoever. You don’t even have to provide attribution to the creator, though we always recommend that you do.

There are many fabulous sources of easily discoverable public domain images on the web, including:

Public Domain Day is celebrated on the 1st of January each year. In many countries, this is the day that copyright expires on creative works, and they become part of the public domain. This year, on Public Domain Day, the Public Domain Review launched a new interface to their Image Archive to enable users to search and explore their collections.

Public Domain Image Archive

And if you do happen to be looking for a cartoon mouse to use in your slides you’ll find one in the public domain that you can use with no restrictions or risk of copyright infringement, either for you or your employer. The original version of Mickey Mouse from the 1928 cartoon Steamboat Willie entered the public domain in 2024.

Black and white image of Mickey Mouse from the 1928 cartoon Steamboat Willie.

Mickey Mouse by Walt Disney, public domain image from the 1928 cartoon Steamboat Willie.

For those about to blog

Posted on February 17, 2025 by admin

Abstract image of female figure with laptop.

“Seated Woman Blogging, after Albert Reuss” by Mike Licht, CC BY 2.0 on Flickr.

I was supposed to be running a workshop on blogging for my Digital Skills, Design and Training colleagues this week. For various reasons, that won’t be happening but I wanted to collate some of the links I’d planned to share so I don’t loose them and in case they’re useful for others.

As the social media landscape has become more and more toxic and fragmented, people are increasingly seeking other channels to share their ideas and practice, connect with their peers, and build community. As a result, there’s been a welcome resurgence in blogging, newsletters and small-scale podcasting over the last year or so. These forms of communication are less tied to specific social media platforms, giving creators more control over their work and who they share it with. At times like these it’s been really encouraging to see familiar communities and independent voices reemerging across the web. So if you’re new to blogging, or if you just need a boost to get started again, here’s some resources that might help.

Reclaim Hosting Blogging Community of Practice. An informal community of practice for academic bloggers.

“Now, we believe academic blogging is not just for the holidays or indeed the odd conference, but for life (#4life), and that is why we are setting out to support a new community of practice for all education bloggers out there looking for a bit of support and motivation along the way.”

The community has a Discord server that aims to:

share blogging tips and inspiration via the channel;
collate open resources and contribute our own;
organise monthly live sessions with guest presenters;
encourage everyone to share blog posts, what works for their blogging practice or what is stopping them from blogging.

(Blogging) Challenge Accepted by Maren Deepwell. A lovely post by Maren about what inspires her to blog.

You should get a blog by Hugh Rundel. A brilliant post that answers almost every conceivable question you could ask about blogging. `

CPD Webinar Series 2025: Thinking about blogging? 22 April 12.30 – 13.30. This webinar, led by members of the #altc blog team, will provide some practical guidance on getting started with blogging.

Blogging About Blogging by Alan Levine. Many wise words about blogging from one of the best bloggers out there.

From the archives

Have No Fear: Learning to love your blog. I wrote this blog post years ago to address some of the common fears and anxieties about blogging. It was quite popular at the time and I think it’s still really useful.

Blogging to Build your Professional Profile. These are the resources for an old digital skills workshop I used to run on academic blogging. All the links are way out of date but some of the content, particularly around benefits of blogging, privacy, openness and licensing, and writing for blogs, is still pretty relevant.

And lastly…

I want to finish with this lovely quote from Alan Levine, which perfectly captures what I think is so important about blogging.

“…it’s the writing out loud that makes me feel best, the part of the process before I click “Publish”, not what happens after. Anything after is a bonus.”

~ I [still] blog therefore I [still] am by Alan Levine.

2024 End of Year Reflection

Posted on January 24, 2025 by admin

It’s become a bit of a tradition for me to share an end of year reflection in January, I always intend to do this in December, but it never happens, so January it is. I’ve been in two minds whether to write one this year though because 2024 did not go as expected.

View from the ward

At the beginning of the year I woke up one morning and couldn’t feel my hands properly. That was the start of the rapid onset of a bewildering and debilitating range of symptoms. After numerous scans, tests, and two hospital admissions, I was eventually diagnosed with a rare autoimmune disease. It’s not curable, but it is treatable, with a lot of medication and mixed success. I’ve been lucky to be more or less fit and healthy for most of my life, so to suddenly lose the ability to do so many things that I previously took for granted has been challenging to say the least. I can no longer dance, sew, or wear my fancy shoes, writing is a challenge, walking is slooooow some days, and traveling any distance without assistance is difficult. Having to slow down has forced me to recenter and I’m still trying to figure out what life will be like from this point on, who I’ll be when I can no longer do so many of the things that make me who I am. There’s very little data about how this condition is likely to progress, hopefully things will improve once we get the medication right, but who knows? I’m just trying to take it as it comes.

Despite all of the above, I’m still working with the OER Service at the University of Edinburgh. I’m immensely grateful to my colleagues for their support, and to my managers who have put adjustments in place to enable me to keep working from home. I really miss going over to the office in Edinburgh, but the four hour round trip is beyond me for the time being. I never thought I’d miss that Scotrail commute but here we are.

OER24 Conference

MTU Cork

At the beginning of the year, before things took a turn for the worse, I went to the OER24 Conference in Cork with our OER Service intern Mayu Ishimoto, to present a paper on Empowering Student Engagement with Open Education. It was great to be there with Mayu and there was a lot of interest in her experience as a student working with the OER Service. The highlight of the conference for me was undoubtedly Catherine Cronin and Laura Czerniewicz’s inspiring keynote, The future isn’t what it used to be: Open education at the crossroads, which explored their own lives and experiences as open educators and the possibilities generated by their profound and timely Higher Education for Good. You can read my reflection on the the conference here OER24: Gathering Courage. Also! MTU has some really interesting architecture.

Their Finest Hour

Their Finest Hour project came to an end in June with the launch of the University of Oxford’s online archive of 25,000 new stories and artefacts from the Second World War, all of which have been shared under open licence. I’m very proud that our Edinburgh collection day gathered and contributed 50 stories and many hundreds of photographs, thanks to the incredible work of project intern Eden Swimer. You can read Eden’s thoughtful reflection on his internship here Reflections on ‘Their Finest Hour’. I nominated Eden for an ISG Recognition Award in September and was delighted that he won the award for Student Staff Member of the Year.

Learning Analytics

A fair chunk of my time last year was taken up with setting up and acting as business lead for a new learning analytics project. As part of the university’s VLE Excellence programme, the project aims to identify the learning analytics data available in Learn and other centrally supported learning technology applications, and enable staff and students to access and use it to support their teaching and learning. It’s a long time since I’ve been involved in anything related to learning analytics so it’s been interesting to get my head back into this space again, particularly as the project is focused on empowering staff and students to access their own learning analytics data..

EDE to DSDT

In October we had a small restructuring at work and my team moved from Educational Design and Engagement (EDE) into a new section, Digital Skills, Design and Training (DSDT). I’ve really enjoyed working in EDE over the last 5 years, and we’ll continue working closely with many of the services there, but I’m also excited about the opportunities the new section will bring. I’m particularly looking forward to working with our Wikimedian in Residence again and exploring new open textbook projects with our Graphic Design Team.

AI and the Commons

I’ve been dipping my toes back into the murky waters of ethics, AI and the commons and have written a couple of blog posts on the ethics of AI in relation to OER and contested museum collections.

All the other stuff…

Because my health has been so ropey, I’ve had to step back, hopefully temporarily, from most of the additional voluntary work I do, including assessing CMALT, sitting on award panels, contributing to City University of London’s MSc in Digital Literacies and Open Practice, and attending policy events. I really miss the connections these activities used to bring so I’ve been trying to focus more on reconnecting through social media networks….

…which has been “interesting” given the hellscape of most social media platforms these days. I’ve barely used facebook for over a decade, though I still have an account there, primarily for finding last cats (long story). Twitter was always my main social media channel, I’ve had an account there since 2007, and it’s where I found my open education community. Seeing twitter degenerate into a fascist quagmire has made me so angry, however it was still a wrench to leave. In March we mothballed the femedtech account, I stepped back from my own account later in the year, before finally deleting it. This was one of my last retweets. It seems fitting.

I’ve been slowly migrating to Bluesky and Mastodon over the course of the year and it’s been great to start building new and old communities there. I like the different pace of the two platforms. Bluesky feels like the place to keep up to date with news and events, while Mastodon provides space for slower, quieter, thoughtful conversations.

This enforced slowing down, together with the changing social media landscape, has also prompted me to start blogging again. I hadn’t abandoned this blog completely but I’d definitely got out of the habit of writing here regularly. It’s been good to take the time to think and reflect again, and to try and express some of that reflection in words. At the end of the year I wrote a post about Slowing Down which really seemed to strike a chord with people. Across all these different spaces, it feels like little dormant shoots of community are reemerging. We need these human connections now more than ever.

Beginnings and Endings

On a personal level September was a month of beginnings and endings. My daughter went off to university and it’s been great to see her stretch her wings and find her people. It’s also been illuminating to see the university’s systems from the student side.

In September we had to say goodbye to our beloved cat Josh. He was magnificent, and he was my best boy, despite his habit of going round the neighbourhood scrounging for food and pretending to be a stray. He turned up twice on a local lost cats facebook group. The shame. I miss him terribly.

Josh 2014 – 2024

I also had to say goodbye to our family home in Carriegreich on the Isle of Harris. This was my grandparents and then my father’s home and I spent a lot of time here during my childhood. This is where I learned how to cast a line, set an (illegal) net and row a boat, collect the eggs and feed the sheep, tell a guillemot from a razorbill, pick up Russian klondykers on the ancient shortwave radio, and keep an eye out for the grey fishery protection vessels sliding out of the mist. It’s where I spent hours wandering over the croft and the shore lost in other worlds. I very rarely remember dreams, but I still dream about this house and this shore. We had hoped to visit the house one last time, but sadly that wasn’t possible because Josh was so unwell. We said goodbye to Josh and to Carriegreich within the week.

Carriegreich

To try and make some sense of where I am now, I’ve been re-reading Ursula Le Guin’s Tehanu. It’s always been one of my favourite Le Guin books, I love the writing and the pacing and the fact that it centres the experiences of an older woman finding her place and her power in a changing world through the different phases of her life.

“Tenar sighed. There was nothing she could do, but there was always the next thing to be done.”

I’m not sure what I’ll be doing next, but I am sure there will always be something to be done.

Slowing Down

Posted on December 18, 2024 by admin

I’ve been thinking a lot about slowness and refusal; in technology, in practice, in life more generally.

Slowness and refusal was the focus of an Edinburgh Futures Institute Contested Computing event earlier this month on Imagining Feminist Technofutures, with Sharon Webb, Usha Raman, Mar Hicks, and Aisha Sobey. In a wide ranging discussion that questioned the dominance of techno-solutionism, the biases and inequalities that are encoded in technology, and the role of education in countering these historical structures of dominance, the panel touched on feminist refusal and the importance of “slowing down” development cycles in order to hold tech companies to account and give corrective measures and ways of refusal a chance to thrive. Slowing down can be seen as a form of progressive innovation, a way to offer resistance, and academia is a space where this can be brought to life.

(I couldn’t help thinking about my own domain of open education where there has always been a tendency to privilege techno-solutionism as the height of innovation. Going right back to the early days of learning objects, there has been a tension between those who take a programmatic, content-centric view of open education, and those who focus more on the affordances of open practice. Proselytising about the transformative potential of generative AI education is just the latest incarnation of this dichotomy.)

Recognising the value of refusal brought to mind a point Helen Beetham made in her ALT Winter Summit keynote last December, which I’m still thinking about, slowly.

Helen called for universities to share their research and experience of AI openly, rather than building their own walled gardens, as this is just another source of inequity. As educators we hold a key ethical space. We have the ingenuity to build better relationships with this new technology, to create ecosystems of agency and care, and empower and support each other as colleagues.

Helen ended by calling for spaces of principled refusal within education. In the learning of any discipline there may need to be spaces of principled refusal, this is a privilege that education institutions can offer.

During the Technofutures event, Sharon Webb asked “where is the feminist joy we can take from these things? How can we share our feminist practice and make community accessible?”

This is a question that Frances Bell, Guilia Forsythe, Lou Mycroft, Anne-Marie Scott and I tried to address in the chapter we contributed to Laura Czerniewicz and Catherine Cronin’s generative book Higher Education for Good. “HE4Good assemblages: FemEdTech Quilt of Care and Justice in Open Education” explores the creation of the FemEdTech quilt assemblage through a “slow ontology of feminist praxis”. Quilting, and other forms of communal making, have always provided a space for women to share their skill, labour and practice on their own terms outwith the strictures of capitalist society and institutions that seek to exploit and appropriate their labour. These are also a space that necessarily invite us to slow down. Contributors to the FemEdTech quilt were

“compelled by the process to decelerate, helping them to curate, to stitch, to draw, to write, and to think. We acknowledge the pressures of the time: being creative in neoliberal times is itself a form of resistance.
…
Resistance requires radical rest (rest for health, rest for hope). The slow ontology of the assemblage required waves and pauses which allowed space to think. This may be the most crucial resistance of all in an industrialised HE which fills every potential pause with compliance activity. Feminists create, feminists resist, and feminists celebrate difference.”

This is how we can share our feminist joy; by decelerating, by sharing our feminist practices and making our communities accessible, through networks like FemEdTech.

Of course it’s difficult to disentangle the process of sharing practice and building community from the technology, and particularly the social media, that mediates so much of our lives. The exodus of users from X to Bluesky at the end of the year promoted some interesting conversations on Mastodon about the role of different social media platforms. I particularly appreciated this conversation with Robin de Rosa and Kate Bowles about the ability of Mastodon to provide a space for “big thinking” and slowing down.

I’ve been forced to embrace slowness on a more personal level this year as a result of serious ongoing health issues. Its been a salutary reminder that although our practice is mediated by technology, it is still embodied and that ultimately it’s that embodiment that governs our ability to work, create, and contribute to our communities. I’m still trying to figure out what all this means on both a personal and professional level; how to make slowing down and refusal a conscious progressive act, and to find the joy in embracing radical rest for health and hope. Like the FemEdTech quilt and network, it’s a slow process of becoming.

Draft Dubai Declaration on OER

Posted on December 10, 2024 by admin

(This post previously appeared on the Open Scotland blog and on Open.Ed.)

3rd UNESCO World OER Congress: Open Solutions and AI for Inclusive Access to Knowledge

The 3rd UNESCO World OER Congress took place in Dubai last week. The previous two congresses, held in Paris in 2012, and Ljubljana in 2017, resulted in the Paris OER Declaration and the Ljubljana OER Action Plan, which was the forerunner of the 2019 UNESCO Recommendation on OER. The output of the 3rd OER Congress is the Draft Dubai Declaration on OER.

The theme of the Dubai congress was “Digital Public Goods: Open Solutions and AI for Inclusive Access to Knowledge”. Digital public goods (DPG) are defined by the UN’s Roadmap for Digital Cooperation, as

“open-source software, open data, open AI models, open standards and open content that adhere to privacy and other applicable laws and best practices, do no harm, and help attain the sustainable digital goals (SDGs)”.

In this context open education resources are regarded as digital public goods that “support the enrichment of the global knowledge commons”.

In addition to the Sustainable Development Goals, the UNESCO Recommendation on OER, and the Road Map for Digital Cooperation, the Dubai Declaration also references Commitment 7 of Our Common Agenda: to “Improve digital cooperation”.

Key themes of the Declaration are harnessing the opportunities afforded by emerging technologies such as AI and blockchain to create new OER, curate and index existing OER, translate OER, and “ensure the provenance, integrity, and lawful use of OER”.

The Declaration outlines Recommendations in five areas (paraphrased from the draft):

Capacity Building

Support professional development for educators, content creators and those working on Gen AI projects, on copyright (inc. exceptions and limitations) and open licensing, to understand challenges posed by emerging technologies and ensure sharing and collaboration that respect copyright laws.
Promote digital literacy for users and developers to engage in the responsible creation and use of emerging technologies for OER.
Develop technologies such as cryptographic signing, semantic interoperability, and machine learning to improve attribution and discoverability of OER. E.g. Embedding metadata into OER, identifier generation standards, author-identity credentials, time-stamping mechanisms and signing OER packages.
Prioritise digitally signed works for OER repositories, and their use in the training open AI models.
Implement strategies grounded in human rights that are open, accessible, multistakeholder and gender inclusive to ensure respect for user generated data, metadata, privacy and attend to ethical practices and respect copyright rules.

Policy

Policy environments should focus on the protection and verifiability of authorship of OER and other Digital Public Goods.
Open licensing should be incorporated into the Terms of Use of AI applications specifying that it is only to be used by humans to generate openly licensed content.
Support embedding licensing information of training content in the output generated by AI tools. When open licensed materials are used to train AI models, the resulting generated content should be made available under compatible open licenses, and attribution to the copyright owner(s) of the training materials should be reflected in the generated content.
Encourage and support research into next generation attribution systems to enable tracing the use and re-use of OER.

Ensuring inclusive and equitable access to quality OER

Support the development of AI-enabled OER that is accessible in low-bandwidth scenarios and designed to enhance the accessibility of vulnerable groups.
Include cryptographic signing into quality criteria for the production of OER. Emphasise the connection of signatures to real-world identity of authors – to create incentives for publication and counter misinformation.
Support the translation and contextualisation of OER with the participation of different user communities.
Encourage the engagement of diverse participants in communities of open practice.

Sustainability Models for OER

Support approaches IPR protection & OER development driven by the ROAM-X principles of human rights, openness, accessibility, and multi-stakeholder participation.
Promote sustainable environmental approaches for digital public goods to minimise energy consumption and reduce the carbon footprint, recognising when the use of AI-tools is not necessary or appropriate.
Practice participatory governance, active transparency, public reporting and regular audits for the complete OER ecosystem (including technological, legal, and pedagogical aspects) to build trust among stakeholders.
Prioritise public infrastructure and public-private partnerships, while also supporting private initiatives for OER using emerging technologies, that adhere to the principles of digital public goods and openness.

International cooperation

Promote human centered use of emerging technologies, including AI, for the implementation of the UNESCO Recommendation on OER
Engage with the open community and legal experts on open licensing and IP law to ensure that emerging technologies adhere to legal terms and address the demands of diverse stakeholders.
Develop ethical frameworks and new technologies to promote OER, including more effective identification of provenance and tracking using AI-based techniques.
Encourage OER repositories and content source to implement policies that prioritize digitally signed works, and define how they may be processed and used, including criteria for the training of AI models.
Develop AI platforms to create and OER adhering to the UNESCO Recommendation on OER.

A few thoughts

As with previous congresses, there were no representatives present from UK government ministries, education authorities, or institutions. While this is disappointing, we do hope that the new Declaration will prompt the education sector in Scotland to reconsider the benefits and affordances of open educational resources. It was the Paris OER Declaration that originally inspired the development of the Scottish Open Education Declaration, and Joe Wilson and I were fortunate to attend the 2nd World Congress in Ljubljana to represent Open Scotland. Though we had limited success persuading the Scottish Government of the benefits of supporting OER, the Scottish Open Education Declaration did prove to have some influence further from home, particularly in Morocco, where it informed the development of a similar initiative. I was pleased to see that Morocco were active participants in the Dubai Congress where they highlighted their “national OER and Open Science strategy that aims to modernise education and expand research accessibility, driven by strong engagement from educators.” (Latifa bint Mohammed inaugurates 3rd UNESCO World OER Congress in Dubai.)

I’m very encouraged that the Declaration highlights the importance of developing digital skills and copyright literacy to ensure everyone is able to understand the impact of AI and emerging technologies. Supporting digital skills development has always been one of the cornerstones of the University of Edinburgh’s OER Policy and OER Service. Our approach is to empower staff and students to develop the skills and confidence to make informed decisions about creating and using open educational resources and open licensed content.

I’m also pleased that the Declaration recognises the importance of supporting diverse communities of open practice, though I do feel that supporting open practice should underpin all the recommendations of the Declaration.

I’m a bit surprised by the prioritisaton of digital signatures and cryptographic technologies and I’m alarmed by the recommendation that signatures should connect to authors’ real-world identities. While this approach does have the potential to address issues relating to attribution and verification, and to combat misinformation, it’s also potentially ripe for abuse.

It’s interesting that embedding metadata in open content and tracking OER have reappeared. Both are great ideas, but neither are straightforward to implement. I know, I worked with educational metadata standards for many years, and also managed a programme of small OER tracking projects way back on 2010. Part of the problem is that open educational resources are such a diverse class of things and, by their very nature, they are scattered all over the internet. I can’t help feeling that many of these recommendations pre-suppose that OERs exist in curated repositories. While some do, the vast majority don’t, and never will. Semantic search services have long been seen as the key to enable cross searching and discovery of heterogenous resources distributed across the web, but I’m not sure how much progress has been made towards making this a reality.

While I’m not surprised that the Declaration focuses on the affordances and challenges of generative AI and emerging technologies, I am concerned that it rather glosses over the many problematic ethical issues, including algorithmic bias, exploitative and extractive labour practices, and environmental impact. The Declaration does reference the ROAM-X principles, sustainable environmental approaches and highlights the importance of recognising when the use of AI-tools is not necessary or appropriate, but I feel it could have gone a lot further. I would like to have seen some acknowledgement of the risks of rapidly embracing these new technologies, risks that is not evenly distributed across the globe, and to focus instead on human centred approaches to achieve the aims of the UNESCO Recommendation on OER and the Sustainable Development Goals.

Resources

Other Voices: The Living Museum, Dahomey, and the ethics of AI

Posted on November 4, 2024 by admin

I know it’s a crowded field, but I came across an AI / open data development recently that really made me stop and take a breath.

The Living Museum introduces itself as follows:

If the artifacts in museums could talk, what would you say to them? Would you ask about their origins, or what life was like back in their eras? Or would you simply listen to their stories?

Created by an independent developer, Jonathan Talmi, The Living Museum is an experimental AI interface that uses content from the BM’s open licensed digital collections database to enable users to curate personalised exhibits and “talk” to individual artefacts about their history and origins. The developer is unaffiliated with the British Museum and makes it clear that the data is used under the terms of the CC BY-NC-SA licence.

In an introductory blog post Talmi says

I hope this project demonstrates that technology like AI can increase immersion, thereby improving educational outcomes, without sacrificing authenticity or factuality.

The app was launched on the Museums Computer Group mailing list and twitter a couple of weeks ago and it was met with a generally favourable response. However there were some dissenting voices, from curators, art historians, and authors, who pointed out the problematic nature of imposing AI generated voices onto artefacts of deep spiritual and cultural significance, whose presence in the BM’s collections is hugely contested.

Others questioned the macabre ethics of foisting an artificial voice on actual human remains, such as the museum’s collection of mummies. I had a surreal conversation with the mummy of Cleopatra, who died in Thebes aged 17, during the reign of Trajan. It was a deeply unsettling experience.

This is where “authenticity and factuality” were both sacrificed…

The response actually acknowledges the disrespectful and ethically questionable nature of the whole project. My head was starting to melt at this point.

Pressing the question of repatriation prompts the voice to “step out of the artificial artifact persona”…

The whole experience was as surreal as it was disturbing

There was also criticism from some quarters that the developer had “exploited” the work of professional curators by using the British Museum’s data set without their explicit knowledge or permission. It’s important to note that the CC BY-NC-SA licence does explicitly allow anyone to use the British Museum’s data within the terms of the licence, however just because the license says you can, doesn’t necessarily mean you should. When it comes to reusing open content, the licence is not the only thing that should be taken into consideration. This is one of the key points raised by the Ethics of Open Sharing working group commissioned by Creative Commons in 2021, and led by Josie Fraser. The report of the working group acknowledges that not everything should be shared openly, and highlights issues relating to cultural appropriation:

Ethical open sharing may require working in partnership with individuals, communities and groups and ensuring their voices are heard and approaches respected. While in some cases openly sharing resources can help to promote cultural heritage and redress gaps in knowledge, in others it may be experienced as cultural insensitivity, disrespect or appropriation — for example, in relation to sacred objects or stories and funerary remains.

Something that both the British Museum and developers using its digital collections should perhaps consider.

By coincidence, the launch of The Living Museum coincided with the release of Mati Diop‘s film Dahomey, winner of the Berlin Film Festival’s Golden Bear award. Dahomey, also gives a voice to sacred cultural artefacts; a collection of looted treasures being repatriated from France to the former kingdom of Dahomey, in current day Benin. In Diop’s absorbing and hypnotic film the power figure of the Dahomeyan king Ghezo speaks in Fon, his voice disembodied and electronically modified.

In an interview with Radio 4’s Screenshoot (23:20), Diop spoke eloquently about “the violence of the absence of the artefacts from the African continent.”

“These artefacts are not objects, they have been objectified by the Western eye, by the colonial perspective, locked into different stages, art objects, ethnographic objects, even locked into beauty.”

“To me it was immediate to give back a voice to these artefacts because I felt that the film is what restitution is about, which is giving back a voice, which is giving back a narrative, a perspective. The film tries to embody the meaning of restitution.”

I was lucky enough to see Dahomey at the GFT accompanied by a conversation with Giovanna Vitelli, Head of Collections at The Hunterian, and Dr Christa Roodt and Andreas Giorgallis, University of Glasgow. The Hunterian is just one of a number of museums interrogating the harms perpetuated by their colonial legacy, through their Curating Discomfort intervention. The conversation touched on power, control and sacredness, with Vitelli noting

“Possession means power. We, the museums, hold the power, and control the power of language. The film speaks powerfully about voices we in the global north do not hear.”

I’ve written in the past about the importance of considering whose voices are included and excluded from open spaces and the creation and curation of open knowledge. On the surface it may appear that AI initiatives facilitated by the cultural commons, like The Living Museum, have the potential to bring collections to life and give a voice to marginalised subjects, however it’s important to question the authenticity of those voices. By imposing inauthentic AI generated voices on culturally sensitive artefacts there is a serious risk of perpetuating exploitative colonial legacies and racist ideology, rather than addressing harms and increasing knowledge equity. Something for us all to think about.

Open Education and AI: Proselytisers, prophets and poets.

Posted on October 23, 2024 by admin

I’ve been dipping my toes back into the debate about open education and AI over the last few weeks. I stepped back from this space earlier in the year both for personal reasons and because I was getting a bit dispirited by the signal to noise ratio. It’s still a very noisy space, more so if anything, but there are some weel-kent voices emerging that are hard to ignore.

David Wiley laid out his stall last month in the webinar Why Open Education Will Become Generative AI Education, and his views have been predictably polarising. There have already been several thoughtful response to David, which I can highly recommend reading:

Openness isn’t just about product ~ Martin Weller
Is Open Education becoming Gen-AI Education? ~ Robert Schuwer
The Soul of Open is In Danger ~ Heather M. Ross

I don’t want to repeat the very pertinent points that have already been made, but I do want to add my concerns about the staring point of David’s argument which is

“the primary goal of the open education movement has been to increase access to educational opportunities. The primary strategy for accomplishing this goal has been to increase access to educational materials. And the primary tactic for implementing this strategy has been to create and share OER.”
~ Why Generative AI Is More Effective at Increasing Access to Educational Opportunity than OER

This is certainly one view of the open education movement, (which is by no means a homogenous entity), but open education isn’t just about goals, strategies and tactics, there are other perspectives that need to be taken into consideration. I find this content centric view of open education a bit simplistic and reductive and I had hoped that we’d moved on from this by now. I would suggest that the primary purpose of open education is to improve knowledge equity, support social justice, and increase diversity and inclusion. While content and OER have an important role to play, the way to do this is by sharing open practice.

This slide in particular made me pause…

Leaving aside the use of the Two Concepts of Liberty, which is not unproblematic, I’m presuming “users” equates here to teachers and learners, which is a whole other topic of debate. It’s certainly true that open licences alone don’t grant the skills and expertise needed to engage in “high-demand revise and remix activities”, but I’m not sure anyone ever claimed they did? And yes GenAI could be a way to provide users with these skills, but at what cost? There’s little discussion here about the ethical issues of copyright theft, algorithmic bias, exploitation of labour, and the catastrophic environmental impact of AI. Surely a more responsible and sustainable way to gain these skills and expertise is to connect with other teachers and learners, other human beings, and by sharing our pedagogy and practice? While there’s a certain logic to David’s hypothesis, it doesn’t take into account the diversity of practice that can make open education so empowering.

Aside from the prediction that Generative AI Education will save / replace / supersede OER, I couldn’t help feeling that there is still an underlying assumption that OER = open textbooks. (This was also an issue I had with one of the keynotes at this year’s OER24 Conference) It shouldn’t need saying, but there are myriad kinds of open resources above and beyond open textbooks. What about student co-created OER for example? It’s through the process of creation, of gathering information, of developing digital and copyright literacy skills, of formulating knowledge and understanding, that learning takes place. The OER, the content created, is a valuable tangible output of that process, but it’s not the most important thing. If we ask GenAI to produce our OER, what happens to the process of learning by doing, creating and connecting with other human beings?

This issue was touched on by Maren Deepwell and Audrey Watters in the most recent episode of Maren’s brilliant Leading Virtual Teams podcast. It’s been really inspiring to see Audrey re-enter the fray of education technology criticism. We need her clear incisive voice and fearless critique now more than ever.

Touching on the language we use to talk about AI, Audrey reminded us that “Human memory and computer memory are not the same thing.” And in her The Extra Mile newsletter she says:

“I do not believe that the machine is or can be “intelligent” in the way that a human can. I don’t think that generative AI and LLMs work the same way my mind does.”

This very much called to mind Helen Beetham’s thoughtful perspective on ethics and AI at the ALT Winter Summit last year where she said that “generative”, “intelligence”, and “artificial” are all deeply problematic concepts.

“Every definition is an abstraction made from an engineering perspective, while neglecting other aspects of human intelligence.”

Towards the end of the podcast, Maren and Audrey talked about the importance of the embodied nature of being and learning, how we tap into such a deep well of embodied knowledge when we learn. It’s unthinkable to outsource this to AI, for the simple reason that AI is stupid.

The embodied human nature of learning was also the theme of Marjorie Lotfi’s beautiful six-part poem, Interrogating Learning, commissioned by Edinburgh Futures Institute for the inaugural event of their Learning Curves Future of Education series. Marjorie weaves together the voices of displaced women and, I believe, speaks more deeply about what it means to learn than any disembodied “artificial intelligence” ever could.

What have you learned?

When asked this question how will a woman answer?

For a moment she’s back in her mother’s belly
a heart beating out a rush of cortisol
or a warm dream of sleep listening through a barrier of skin and blood
before even her own first breath.

And then the day she’s born
blinking at the bright of daylight, candle, bulb,
hearing the low buzz of electric
and the sudden clarity of a voice she knows already.
Learning it again.

There have been a thousand things to learn in every day I’ve been alive,
the woman thinks,
and I am 53 this year.

OER24: Gathering Courage

Posted on April 4, 2024 by admin

Hands of Hope, Cork, CC BY, Lorna M. Campbell

Last week the OER24 Conference took place at the Munster Technological University in Cork and I was privileged to go along with our OER Service intern Mayu Ishimoto.

The themes of this year’s conference were:

Open Education Landscape and Transformation
Equity and Inclusion in OER
Open Source and Scholarly Engagement
Ethical Dimensions of Generative AI and OER Creation
Innovative Pedagogies and Creative Education

The conference was chaired with inimitable style by MTU’s Gearóid Ó Súilleabháin and Tom Farrelly, the (in)famous Gasta Master.

The day before the conference I met up with a delegation of Dutch colleagues from a range of sectors and organisations for a round table workshop on knowledge equity and open pedagogies. In a wide ranging discussion we covered the value proposition and business case for open, the relationship between policy and practice, sustainability and open licensing, student engagement and co-creation, authentic assessment and the influence of AI. I led the knowledge equity theme and shared experiences and case studies from the University of Edinburgh. Many thanks to Leontien van Rossum from SURF for inviting me to participate.

A Cautionary Fairy Tale

The conference opened the following day with Rajiv Jhangiani’s keynote, “Betwixt fairy tales & dystopian futures – Writing the next chapter in open education“, a cautionary tale of a junior faulty member learning to navigating the treacherous path between commercial textbook publishers on the one hand and open textbooks on the other. It was a familiar tale to many North American colleagues, though perhaps less relatable to those of us from UK HE where the model of textbook use is rather different, OER expertise resides with learning technologists rather than librarians, OER tends to encompass a much broader range of resources than open textbooks, and open resources are as likely to be co-created by students as authored by staff. However Rajiv did make several point that were universal in their resonance. In particular, he pointed out that it’s perverse to use the moral high ground of academic integrity to defend remote proctoring systems that invade student privacy, and tools that claim to identify student use of AI, when these companies trample all over copyright and discriminate against ESL speakers. If we create course policies that are predicated on mistrust of students we have no right to criticise them for being disengaged. Rajiv also cautioned against using OER as a band aid to cover inequity in education; it might make us feel good but it distracts us from reality. Rajiv called for ethical approaches to education technology, encouraging us not to be distracted by fairy tales, but to engage with hope and solidarity while remaining firmly grounded in reality.

Rajiv Jhangiani, OER24, CC BY Lorna M. Campbell.

Ethical Dimensions of Generative AI and OER Creation

Generative AI (GAI) loomed large at the conference this year and I caught several presentations that attempted to explore the thorny relationship between openness and GAI.

UHI have taken a considered approach by developing policy, principles and staff and student facing guidance that emphasises ethical, creative, and environmentally aware use of generative AI. They are also endorsing a small set of tools that provide a range of functionality and stand up to scrutiny in terms of data security. These include MS Copilot, Claude, OpenAI ChatGPT, Perplexity, Satlas and Semantic Scholar. Keith Smyth, Dean of Learning & Teaching at UHI, outlined some of the challenges they are facing including AI and critical literacy, tensions around convenience and creation, and the relationship between GAI and open education. How does open education practice sit alongside generative AI? There are some similarities in terms of ethos; GAI repurposes, reuses, and remixes resources, but in a really selfish way. To address these ambiguities, UHI are developing further guidance on GAI and open education practice and will try to foster a culture that values and prioritises sharing and repurposing resources as OER.

Patricia Gibson gave an interesting talk about “Defending Truth in an Age of AI Generated Misinformation: Using the Wiki as a Pedagogical Device”. GAI doesn’t know about the truth, it is designed to generate the most most accurate response from the available data, if it doesn’t have sufficient data, it simply guesses or “hallucinates”. Patricia cautioned against letting machines flood our information channels with misinformation and untruth. Misinformation creates inaccuracy and unreliability and leads us to question what is truth. However awareness of GAI is also teaching us to question images and information we see online, enabling us to develop critical digital and AI literacy skills. Patricia went on to present a case study about Business students working collaboratively to develop wiki content, which echoed many of the findings of Edinburgh’s own Wikipedia in the curriculum initiatives. This enabled the students to co-create collaborative knowledge, develop skills in sourcing information, curate fact-checked information, engage in discussion and deliberation, and counter misinformation.

Interestingly, the Open Data Institute presented at the conference for what I think may be the first time. Tom Pieroni, ODI Learning Manager, spoke about a project to develop a GAI tutor for use on an Data Ethics Essentials course: Generative AI as an Assistant Tutor: Can responsible use of GenAI improve learning experiences and outcomes?

CC BY SA, Tom Pieroni, Open Data Institute

One of the things I found fascinating about this presentation was that while there was some evaluation of the pros and cons of using the GAI tutor, there was no discussion about the ethics of GAI itself. Perhaps that is part of the course content? One of the stated aims of the Assistant AI Tutor project is to “Explore AI as a method for personalising learning.” This struck me because earlier in the conference someone, sadly I forget who, had made the sage comment that all too often technology in general and AI an particular effectively remove the person from personalised learning.

Unfortunately I missed Javiera Atenas and Leo Havemann’s session on A data ethics and data justice approach for AI-Enabled OER, but I will definitely be dipping in to the slides and resources they shared.

Student Engagement and Co-Creation

Leo Havemann, Lorna M. Campbell, Mayu Ishimoto, Cárthach Ó Nuanáin, Hazel Farrell, OER24, CC0.

I was encouraged to hear a number of talks that highlighted the importance of enabling students to co-create open knowledge as this was one of the themes of the talk that OER Service intern Mayu Ishimoto and I gave on Empowering Student Engagement with Open Education. Our presentation explored the transformative potential of engaging students with open education through salaried internships, and how these roles empower students to go on to become radical digital citizens and knowledge activists. There was a lot of interest in Information Services Group’s programme of student employment and several delegates commented that it was particularly inspiring to hear Mayu talking about her own experience of working with the OER Service.

Open Education at the Crossroads

Laura Czerniewicz and Catherine Cronin opened the second day of the conference with an inspiring, affirming and inclusive keynote The Future isn’t what it used to be: Open Education at a Crossroads OER24 keynote resources. Catherine and Laura have the unique ability to be fearless and clear sighted in facing and naming the crises and inequalities that we face, while never losing faith in humanity, community and collective good. I can’t adequately summarise the profound breadth and depth of their talk here, instead I’d recommend that you watch to their keynote and read their accompanying essay. I do want to highlight a couple of points that really stood out for me though.

Laura pointed out that we live in an age of conflict, where the entire system of human rights are under threat. The early hope of the open internet is gone, a thousand flowers have not bloomed. Instead, the state and the market control the web, Big Tech is the connective tissue of society, and the dominant business model is extractive surveillance capitalism.

AI has caused a paradigmatic shift and there is an irony around AI and open licensing; by giving permission for re-use, we are giving permission for potential harms, e.g. facial recognition software being trained on open licensed images. Copyright is in turmoil as a result of AI and we need to remember that there is a difference between what is legal and what is ethical. We need to rethink what we mean by open practice when GAI is based on free extractive labour. Having written about the contested relationship of invisible labour and open education in the past, this last point really struck me.

HE for Good was written as an antidote to these challenges. Catherine & Laura drew together the threads of HE for Good towards a manifesto for higher education and open education, adding:

“When we meet and share our work openly and with humility we are able to inspire each other to address our collective challenges.”

CC BY NC, Catherine Cronin & Laura Czerniewicz, OER24

Change is possible they reminded us, and now is the time. We stand at a crossroads and we need all parts of the open education movement to work together to get us there. In the words of Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and current Chair of the Elders:

“Our best future can still lie ahead of us, but it is up to everyone to get us there.”

Catherine Cronin & Laura Czerniewicz, OER24, CC BY, Lorna M. Campbell.

The Splintering of Social Media

One theme that emerged during the conference is what Catherine and Laura referred to as the “splintering of social media”, with a number of presenters exploring the impact this has had on open education community and practice. This splintering has lead people to seek new channels to share their practice with some turning to the fediverse, podcasting and internet radio. Blogging didn’t seem to feature quite as prominently as a locus for sharing practice and community, but it was good to see Martin Weller still flying the flag for open ed blogging, and I’ve been really encouraged to see how many blog posts have been published reflecting on the conference.

Gasta!

The Gasta sessions, overseen by Gasta Master Tom Farelly, were as raucous and entertaining as ever. Every presenter earned their applause and their Gasta! beer mat. It seems a bit mean to single any out, but I can’t finish without mentioning Nick Baker’s Everyone’s Free..to use OEP, to the tune of Baz Luhrmann “Everybody’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)”, Alan Levine’s Federated, and Eamon Costello’s hilarious Love after the algorithm: AI and bad pedagogy police. Surely the first time an OER Conference has featured Jon Bon Jovi sharing his thoughts on the current state of the pedagogical landscape?!

Eamon Costello, Jon Bon Jovi, Tom Farrelly, Alan Levine, OER24, CC BY, Lorna M. Campbell

The closing of an OER Conference is always a bit of an emotional experience and this year more so than most. The conference ended with a heartfelt standing ovation for open education stalwart Martin Weller who is retiring and heading off for new adventures, and a fitting and very lovely impromptu verse of The Parting Glass by Tom. Tapadh leibh a h-uile duine agus chì sinn an ath-bhliadhna sibh!

Martin Weller, Tom Farrelly, Gearóid Ó Súilleabháin, CC BY, Lorna M. Campbell, OER24.

* The title of this blog post is taken from this lovely tweet by Laura Czerniewicz.

Open World

Lorna M Campbell