Category Archives: OpEd

OpEd

Trump and Associates – Major Crimes and Misdemeanors

Pre-Presidency Lawsuits (Business and Personal)

  1. Trump University Lawsuits (2013–2016):
    • Nature: Trump faced several civil fraud lawsuits related to Trump University, where plaintiffs claimed they were misled into paying for real estate seminars that did not deliver on promised content.
    • Outcome: Trump settled the lawsuits in 2016 for $25 million, without admitting any wrongdoing​(
  2. Housing Discrimination Lawsuit (1973):
    • Nature: The U.S. Department of Justice sued Trump Management Corporation, alleging racial discrimination against Black renters.
    • Outcome: Trump agreed to a settlement in 1975, which required his company to comply with anti-discrimination policies but did not include an admission of guilt​(
  3. New York Attorney General Civil Lawsuit (1983):
    • Nature: The New York attorney general sued Trump for violating real estate broker regulations during a property sale.
    • Outcome: Trump settled the case out of court by paying $250,000​(
  4. Casino Violations (1991, 2000):
    • Nature: Trump’s casinos faced fines for violating anti-money laundering rules and other gaming regulations.
    • Outcome: In 2015, Trump’s casinos paid a $10 million fine for failing to report suspicious activity adequately​(
  5. Defamation Lawsuits by Women (2017–2023):
    • Nature: Several women, including journalist E. Jean Carroll, sued Trump for defamation after he denied sexual misconduct allegations.
    • Outcome: Trump was found liable for defamation and battery in the E. Jean Carroll case in 2023, and he was ordered to pay $5 million in damages. Other lawsuits are either ongoing or were dismissed​(

Presidency-Related Lawsuits

  1. Emoluments Clause Lawsuits (2017):
    • Nature: These lawsuits claimed Trump violated the U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses by profiting from foreign and state governments while serving as president.
    • Outcome: Several of the lawsuits were dismissed, and the U.S. Supreme Court threw out remaining cases after Trump left office in 2021​(
  2. Trump Foundation Lawsuit (2018):
    • Nature: The New York attorney general sued Trump and his children, alleging misuse of the Trump Foundation for personal and political purposes.
    • Outcome: Trump agreed to shut down the foundation and pay $2 million to charity as part of a settlement​(
  3. Michael Cohen Hush Money Case (2019):
    • Nature: Investigations involved Trump’s direction and reimbursement of hush money payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign.
    • Outcome: Trump was not personally charged, but his former lawyer Michael Cohen was sentenced to prison​(
  4. Capitol Riot Lawsuits (2021):
    • Nature: Trump was sued by members of Congress and Capitol police officers for allegedly inciting the January 6 Capitol riot.
    • Outcome: These lawsuits are still pending in the courts​(

Post-Presidency Lawsuits

  1. New York Civil Fraud Lawsuit (2022):
    • Nature: The New York attorney general filed a lawsuit accusing Trump and the Trump Organization of inflating the value of assets to obtain loans and insurance benefits.
    • Outcome: As of 2023, the lawsuit is still ongoing, with the potential for significant fines and penalties​(
  2. Classified Documents Case (2023):
    • Nature: Trump is facing federal charges for mishandling classified documents after leaving office and obstructing efforts to retrieve them.
    • Outcome: Trump has been indicted, and the case is ongoing​(

Summary of Outcomes:

  • Settlements: Trump has settled many civil cases, including high-profile lawsuits like Trump University and the Trump Foundation, without admitting wrongdoing.
  • Dismissals: Several lawsuits, particularly those related to the Emoluments Clause, were dismissed following the end of his presidency.
  • Ongoing Cases: There are several pending lawsuits, including civil fraud cases in New York and lawsuits stemming from the January 6 Capitol riot.
  • Criminal Charges: Trump faces criminal charges related to the classified documents case and investigations into his post-election activities.

By examining Trump’s long legal history, it’s clear that his involvement in lawsuits has spanned decades and encompasses both personal business matters and political controversies.

__________________________________________________________________________

Several of Donald Trump’s advisors and staff members were charged with crimes before, during, and after his presidency.

Is the character of the people you choose as friends, associates, advisors, and partners an indicator of your core character traits?  Some of the people Trump chose to be is advisors and associates were busted for violating campaign finance laws, lying to the FBI, and witness tampering.

As of now, there have been no major reports of Kamala Harris’ advisors or staff members being charged with crimes throughout her political career, which has spanned roles as District Attorney of San Francisco, Attorney General of California, U.S. Senator, and now Vice President of the United States.

Kamala Harris has generally maintained a team without significant legal controversies. However, like any political figure, her staff has faced scrutiny on certain policy decisions or management practices, but none of this has resulted in criminal charges.

Trumps Associates Who Needed His Presidential Pardon.

  1. Michael Flynn (National Security Advisor):
    • Charged with lying to the FBI about his communications with Russia before Trump took office.
    • Outcome: Pleaded guilty in 2017 but was later pardoned by Trump in 2020.
  2. Paul Manafort (Campaign Chairman):
    • Charged with a range of offenses, including tax fraud, bank fraud, and failure to register as a foreign agent. His charges were largely related to his consulting work for pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians before his time on Trump’s campaign.
    • Outcome: Convicted in 2018 and sentenced to prison. Trump later commuted his sentence in 2020.
  3. Rick Gates (Deputy Campaign Chairman):
    • Charged with conspiracy against the U.S. and lying to the FBI. His charges were tied to his work with Manafort in Ukraine.
    • Outcome: Pleaded guilty in 2018 and cooperated with investigators. He was sentenced to probation.
  4. George Papadopoulos (Campaign Foreign Policy Advisor):
    • Charged with lying to the FBI about contacts with individuals linked to Russia during the campaign.
    • Outcome: Pleaded guilty in 2017 and served 12 days in prison.
  5. Michael Cohen (Personal Attorney):
    • Charged with tax evasion, bank fraud, and campaign finance violations related to hush-money payments made to women alleging affairs with Trump.
    • Outcome: Pleaded guilty in 2018 and was sentenced to 3 years in prison.
  6. Roger Stone (Political Advisor):
    • Charged with witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and making false statements during investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
    • Outcome: Convicted in 2019, but Trump commuted his sentence in 2020.
  7. Steve Bannon (Chief Strategist):
    • Charged with fraud in 2020 for his role in the “We Build the Wall” fundraising campaign, accused of siphoning off donations.
    • Outcome: Trump pardoned him in 2021 before the case went to trial.

Post-Presidency:

  1. Allen Weisselberg (Trump Organization CFO):
    • Charged in 2021 with tax fraud and other financial crimes in connection with benefits he received while working at the Trump Organization.
    • Outcome: He pleaded guilty in 2022 and agreed to testify against the Trump Organization.

Summary:

Several of Trump’s advisors and associates were charged with various crimes, some of which were unrelated to their time working for Trump but emerged during investigations tied to his campaign or presidency. These charges often stemmed from financial crimes, lying to federal investigators, or issues connected to foreign relations, and many resulted in convictions or guilty pleas. Some of those individuals received pardons or commutations from Trump during or after his presidency.

Sources:

As of now, Kamala Harris has not been the subject of any criminal charges or significant civil lawsuits during her political career. Harris has held various positions, including District Attorney of San Francisco, Attorney General of California, U.S. Senator, and Vice President of the United States, and while she has been involved in controversial decisions or policies, there have been no personal legal actions taken against her in the form of criminal charges or civil lawsuits.

However, her actions as Attorney General of California have occasionally drawn criticism, particularly on issues such as:

  • Criminal justice reform: Some criticized Harris for defending controversial policies related to prison labor, her handling of police misconduct cases, and opposing early release programs for inmates. These criticisms, however, did not result in legal action against her​(
    Settlements with corporations: As Attorney General, Harris reached several significant settlements, such as the $1.1 billion mortgage settlement with banks over the foreclosure crisis​(

    Accident Data Center

    ), but these were part of her official duties and not personal lawsuits.

In summary, while Kamala Harris has faced political and public scrutiny for her policy positions, there have been no civil lawsuits or criminal charges levied against her personally throughout her career.

OpEd

Harris v. Trump – Living (any of?) the Christian Principles?

What are “The Seven Deadly Sins”

The Seven Deadly Sins, also known as the Capital Vices, are a classification of vices in Christian teachings that are considered to be the root of other sins. These sins are often thought to lead to spiritual death if not confessed or repented. The seven deadly sins are:

  1. Pride: An inflated sense of one’s own status or accomplishments, often leading to arrogance and disdain for others.
  2. Greed: An excessive desire for material wealth or gain, at the expense of others or one’s ethics.
  3. Wrath: Extreme anger or hatred that leads to destructive actions, vengeance, or harm to others.
  4. Envy: Jealousy or a desire for what others possess, whether it’s their status, abilities, or possessions.
  5. Lust: An intense, uncontrollable desire, often for sexual pleasure, that can lead to immoral actions.
  6. Gluttony: Over-indulgence, especially related to food or drink, but also applicable to other forms of excess.
  7. Sloth: Laziness or the failure to act and use one’s abilities, particularly in matters of personal responsibility or spiritual growth.

These sins were popularized in medieval Christian doctrine and remain a common reference in literature, art, and religious teachings.

What are “The Ten Commandments”

The Ten Commandments are a set of ethical guidelines found in the Bible, given by God to Moses on Mount Sinai. They are foundational to both Jewish and Christian traditions. Below is a summary of the Ten Commandments as found in the book of Exodus 20:2–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21:

  1. You shall have no other gods before Me: Worship only God and no other deities.
  2. You shall not make for yourself an idol: Avoid the worship of idols or images.
  3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain: Use God’s name with reverence.
  4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy: Set aside the Sabbath (seventh) day for rest and worship.
  5. Honor your father and your mother: Show respect and care for your parents.
  6. You shall not murder: Respect the sanctity of life; do not kill.
  7. You shall not commit adultery: Maintain faithfulness in marriage.
  8. You shall not steal: Do not take what doesn’t belong to you.
  9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor: Avoid lying or giving false testimony.
  10. You shall not covet: Do not desire what belongs to others (their spouse, possessions, etc.).

These commandments serve as moral principles guiding behavior, relationships, and worship. They are referenced in both Jewish law and Christian teachings.

Evaluating Donald Trump in Terms of Christian Values

Evaluating a public figure like Donald Trump in terms of the Seven Deadly Sins and the Ten Commandments involves subjective interpretation and may vary depending on one’s personal or political perspective. I will provide a neutral summary of behaviors and actions that some critics and supporters may associate with these moral principles.

Trump v. Seven Deadly Sins

  1. Pride:
    • Supporters might view Trump’s confidence as strong leadership.
    • Critics often argue that Trump displays excessive pride or arrogance, particularly through his frequent boasting about personal achievements and downplaying of errors or failures.
  2. Greed:
    • Critics point to Trump’s business history, including bankruptcies and accusations of exploiting financial loopholes, as signs of greed.
    • Supporters could argue that Trump’s wealth demonstrates business acumen and success, not necessarily greed.
  3. Wrath:
    • Trump’s aggressive rhetoric, particularly on social media (e.g., Twitter), has been interpreted by some as a sign of wrath. His public feuds with political opponents and media outlets could be seen as retaliatory.
    • Others argue that his assertiveness reflects strength, not uncontrolled anger.
  4. Envy:
    • While there’s little direct evidence of envy, some have speculated that Trump’s frequent comparison with other political leaders (such as Barack Obama) could reflect this sin.
  5. Lust:
    • Trump has been involved in multiple scandals and lawsuits regarding sexual misconduct, which could be viewed as linked to lust.
    • Supporters may argue that these allegations are exaggerated or politically motivated.
  6. Gluttony:
    • There’s no significant evidence to suggest Trump indulges in gluttony in the traditional sense (i.e., overconsumption of food or drink).
  7. Sloth:
    • Some critics have accused Trump of spending significant time on leisure activities (such as golf), especially during his presidency.
    • Supporters counter that even while playing golf, Trump remained actively engaged in political affairs.

Trump v. The Ten Commandments

  1. You shall have no other gods before Me:
    • Some critics argue that Trump’s focus on wealth and power suggests a greater allegiance to these than to spiritual or ethical principles.
  2. You shall not make for yourself an idol:
    • Critics may suggest that Trump’s self-promotion or emphasis on personal branding borders on self-idolization.
  3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain:
    • There have been instances where Trump’s religious sincerity has been questioned, such as his use of religious symbols or rhetoric for political gain.
  4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy:
    • There’s little public focus on whether Trump personally observes the Sabbath, though he has made efforts to appeal to religious communities.
  5. Honor your father and your mother:
    • Trump has publicly spoken highly of his parents, particularly his father, Fred Trump, suggesting adherence to this commandment.
  6. You shall not murder:
    • There are no direct accusations here, but critics argue his rhetoric and policies (e.g., immigration or foreign relations) have indirectly led to harm.
  7. You shall not commit adultery:
    • Trump has admitted to infidelity in the past, which directly conflicts with this commandment. His multiple marriages and relationships have been scrutinized by critics.
  8. You shall not steal:
    • While not accused of theft in the traditional sense, Trump has faced legal scrutiny over financial practices and business dealings.
  9. You shall not bear false witness:
    • Critics frequently accuse Trump of lying or making false statements, particularly in public and political contexts.
  10. You shall not covet:
    • Some may argue that Trump’s focus on wealth, power, and stature reflects covetousness.

In summary, how one interprets Donald Trump’s actions in light of the Seven Deadly Sins and Ten Commandments depends largely on personal or political beliefs. Critics emphasize what they see as moral failings, while supporters often focus on his accomplishments and leadership qualities. Both views highlight the complexity of evaluating any public figure against these traditional moral standards.

___________________________________________________________________________

Evaluating Kamala Harris in Terms of Christian Values

Evaluating Kamala Harris in terms of the Seven Deadly Sins and the Ten Commandments involves a mix of subjective interpretation and public perception. Here’s a neutral assessment based on both criticisms and support for her actions and public life.

Is Harris warding off the Seven Deadly Sins?

  1. Pride:
    • Supporters view Harris’s self-assurance and confidence as essential traits for a leader, particularly as a trailblazer, being the first female, Black, and South Asian Vice President.
    • Critics sometimes perceive her demeanor and ambitious rise in politics as signs of pride or overconfidence. For example, her public responses in debates and interviews are sometimes seen as dismissive.
  2. Greed:
    • There’s no significant accusation of greed against Harris in a financial sense, although some critics argue that her political ambition could be seen as a desire for power and influence. Supporters might counter that ambition isn’t the same as greed and is necessary for political leadership.
  3. Wrath:
    • Wrath is not a significant criticism aimed at Harris. However, in heated Senate hearings or debates, her direct questioning style has sometimes been described as aggressive. Supporters argue that this reflects strength rather than anger.
  4. Envy:
    • There are no substantial accusations of envy in Harris’s public life. Her career has largely focused on self-advancement rather than comparisons with others, though some critics might perceive certain political attacks as rooted in jealousy of others’ success.
  5. Lust:
    • There are no prominent accusations or scandals involving lust linked to Harris, making this sin irrelevant in public discourse about her.
  6. Gluttony:
    • There’s no public evidence suggesting Harris has issues with gluttony, in terms of overindulgence in material goods, food, or drink.
  7. Sloth:
    • Harris is widely regarded as hardworking, especially given her rise through various political roles—district attorney, state attorney general, senator, and now vice president. Sloth has not been a criticism associated with her.

Is Harris Living by theTen Commandments?

  1. You shall have no other gods before Me:
    • There’s no indication that Harris has violated this commandment in terms of idolatry, though some religious critics may feel that her political positions (e.g., on abortion rights) conflict with their interpretations of religious principles.
  2. You shall not make for yourself an idol:
    • Harris has not been accused of creating idols, though her critics might argue that she places too much importance on political power. Supporters might argue she champions causes rather than self-promotion.
  3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain:
    • There are no public instances where Harris has been accused of using God’s name in vain or being irreverent toward religious values.
  4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy:
    • As a public figure, Harris does not openly discuss her observance of religious practices like the Sabbath, so it is difficult to assess her actions in relation to this commandment.
  5. Honor your father and your mother:
    • Harris has spoken fondly and respectfully of her parents, particularly her mother, whom she credits for much of her success. She appears to honor their memory publicly.
  6. You shall not murder:
    • While not personally involved in violence, Harris’s stance on issues such as abortion has led to criticism from religious conservatives who believe it conflicts with the spirit of this commandment. Supporters, on the other hand, argue that her stance supports reproductive rights and personal freedom.
  7. You shall not commit adultery:
    • There have been no accusations of adultery against Harris, and she is known for a stable marriage to her husband, Doug Emhoff.
  8. You shall not steal:
    • There are no allegations of theft or dishonesty involving Harris’s personal or professional life.
  9. You shall not bear false witness:
    • Critics have accused Harris of misrepresenting facts or shifting positions on key political issues, but her supporters argue that her positions have evolved based on changing contexts and public needs.
  10. You shall not covet:
    • There’s little evidence to suggest Harris has exhibited covetousness. Her critics tend to focus more on policy disagreements than on personal envy.

Summary

Supporters see Kamala Harris as a strong, hardworking leader who upholds many of the Ten Commandments and generally avoids the Seven Deadly Sins. Critics, on the other hand, focus on issues of pride and perceived ambition, and they may disagree with her political stances on moral grounds, such as her position on abortion.

Both interpretations depend on one’s political and moral perspective.

Evaluating Donald Trump in terms of the Fruits of the Holy Spirit

Evaluating Donald Trump in terms of the Fruits of the Holy Spirit is subjective, as it depends on one’s personal, political, and moral perspective. The Fruits of the Spirit, as listed in Galatians 5:22-23, are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Here is an analysis based on Trump’s public behavior, speeches, and policies:

1. Love (Selfless concern for others):

  • Critics argue that Trump often displays divisiveness in his rhetoric, especially when dealing with political opponents, marginalized communities, or foreign adversaries. His speeches and social media activity are frequently seen as lacking empathy.
  • Supporters might highlight Trump’s policies that they believe promoted national security and economic growth, claiming he acted out of love for his country and its people.

2. Joy (Deep-seated happiness in God):

  • Critics note that Trump rarely conveys a sense of personal joy in his demeanor, often focusing on grievances, criticisms, and conflicts with opponents or the media.
  • Supporters may point to his moments of celebration, such as during rallies, where he seems to connect with his base with enthusiasm and a sense of joy in their shared goals.

3. Peace (Harmony and reconciliation):

  • Critics argue that Trump’s leadership style fostered division both within the United States and internationally. His administration was marked by ongoing tensions with political opponents, media outlets, and international figures.
  • Supporters might highlight Trump’s role in diplomatic breakthroughs, such as his efforts to negotiate with North Korea, or his work to broker the Abraham Accords between Israel and several Arab nations.

4. Patience (Endurance and perseverance):

  • Critics often claim that Trump lacks patience, citing his frequent public outbursts, particularly on social media, and quick dismissal of people who disagree with him.
  • Supporters argue that Trump demonstrated perseverance in his relentless pursuit of policy changes, particularly in the face of what they consider unfair opposition from political adversaries and the media.

5. Kindness (Gentleness and generosity to others):

  • Critics argue that Trump’s public persona and rhetoric lack kindness, especially toward those he views as adversaries. His language is often seen as harsh and confrontational.
  • Supporters may point to instances where Trump demonstrated kindness in more personal interactions, as well as to his administration’s policies that they believe benefitted specific communities, such as criminal justice reform efforts.

6. Goodness (Moral integrity):

  • Critics argue that Trump’s personal behavior, including his past scandals, financial dealings, and accusations of dishonesty, contradicts the Christian ideal of goodness.
  • Supporters might highlight policies they believe reflect goodness, such as pro-life stances, religious freedom protections, and efforts to strengthen the economy, which they believe improved the livelihoods of millions of Americans.

7. Faithfulness (Loyalty and trust in God and others):

  • Critics argue that Trump’s shifting political positions and treatment of former allies suggest a lack of faithfulness. His personal conduct, including infidelity, has also been a point of criticism.
  • Supporters point to his strong support of religious groups and faith-based initiatives, as well as his consistent stance on certain key issues, such as judicial appointments, which they see as evidence of his faithfulness to his promises.

8. Gentleness (Mildness of temper and humility):

  • Critics argue that Trump’s public demeanor, especially on social media, is often the opposite of gentleness, describing him as abrasive and confrontational.
  • Supporters may counter that Trump’s directness and assertiveness are necessary for leadership, viewing his approach as strength rather than a lack of gentleness.

9. Self-Control (Control over desires and impulses):

  • Critics highlight Trump’s frequent public outbursts, impulsive tweets, and his history of personal scandals as evidence of a lack of self-control.
  • Supporters may argue that, despite immense pressure from opposition, Trump demonstrated self-control in pursuing his policies and maintaining his political agenda despite ongoing criticism and investigations.

Conclusion:

Evaluating Donald Trump through the lens of the Fruits of the Holy Spirit is complex and highly influenced by individual perspectives. Critics tend to view his behavior as contrary to these virtues, while supporters might interpret his policies and leadership style as being rooted in concern for the country and its people. This evaluation depends greatly on one’s interpretation of his personal conduct, public policies, and overall leadership style.

[Analysis assisted with ChatGPT 4.0]

OpEd

Price List

The PDF versions are free to download.  For print, most of our books are $39.00 U.S. or less and sold through Amazon.com or Lulu.com

Hint: Use the subject search dropdown to check specific books of interest, or use the green HELP icon at the lower right (or maybe left) to write to us.

 

OpEd

Landing Page

Sorry, the original source server is no longer available. Please contact us (green help icon bottom right) if you are aware of the source.

-The editors.

Education, News & Research, OpEd

Why publish an open-access textbook [about educational psychology?]

Excerpted from “Educational Psychology” by Drs. Seifert and Sutton  (p. 8) ( CC BY)

(Red and bold added by Textbook Equity)

Why publish an open-access textbook about educational psychology?

Why publish an open-access textbook about educational psychology? I have taught educational psychology to future teachers for over 35 years, during which I used one or another of the major commercial textbooks written for this subject. In general I found all of the books well-written and thorough. But I also found problems:

(1) Though they differed in details, the major textbooks were surprisingly similar in overall coverage. This fact, coupled with their large overall size, made it hard to tailor any of the books to the particular interests or needs of individuals or groups of students. Too often, buying a textbook was like having to buy a huge Sunday newspaper when all you really want is to read one of its sections. In a similar way, commercial educational psychology textbooks usually told you more than you ever needed or wanted to know about the subject. As a format, the textbook did not allow for individualization.

(2) Educational psychology textbooks were always expensive, and over the years their costs rose faster than inflation, especially in the United States, where most of the books have been produced. Currently every major text about educational psychology sells for more than USD 100. At best this cost is a stress on students’ budgets. At worst it puts educational psychology textbooks beyond the reach of many. The problem of the cost is even more obvious when put in worldwide perspective; in some countries the cost of one textbook is roughly equivalent to the average annual income of its citizens.

(3) In the competition to sell copies of educational psychology textbooks, authors and publishers have gradually added features that raise the cost of books without evidence of adding educational value. Educational psychology publishers in particular have increased the number of illustrations and photographs, switched to full-color editions, increased the complexity and number of study guides and ancillary publications, and created proprietary websites usable fully only by adopters of their particular books. These features have sometimes been attractive. My teaching experience suggests, however, that they also distract students from learning key ideas about educational psychology about as often as they help students to learn.

By publishing this textbook online with the Global Textbook Project, I have taken a step toward resolving these problems. Instructors and students can access as much or as little of the textbook as they really need and find useful. The cost of their doing is minimal. Pedagogical features are available, but are kept to a minimum and rendered in formats that can be accessed freely and easily by anyone connected to the Internet. In the future, revisions to the book will be relatively easy and prompt to make. These, I believe, are desirable outcomes for everyone! – Dr. Kelvin Seifert

News and Info, OpEd

Repost:"Giving it away for free: sharing really is caring in the open education movement"

Giving it away for free: sharing really is caring in the open education movement

By Ruth Jelley, La Trobe University and Christopher Scanlon, La Trobe University

The New York Times dubbed 2012 the year of the MOOC. And for many, the seemingly unstoppable rise of Massive Open Online Courses – courses which are offered for free by prestigious universities – is where the discussion about open education begins and ends.

But MOOCs are only the most visible part of a larger movement, one that is slowly but surely transforming the way we do education and think about educational products and services.

Welcome to the world of open educational resources (OER).

OERs include everything from peer-created and edited texts and ebooks to sound recordings and videos that are licensed for open use and re-use. Where publishers normally impose hefty fees (mainly paid for by students) for the use of their products and services, and impose restrictions on how content can be used, the ethos of the open educational resource movement is share and share alike.

OERs are created in open formats rather than those that are owned by large companies and distributed under open licence regimes such as Creative Commons.

Rather than locking users into a particular format or a particular publishing ecosystem, such as iTunesU, the OER movement encourages experimentation and reuse via the open web. More particularly, the OER movement seeks nothing less than a revolution in breaking down the barriers to sharing knowledge, especially those barriers that separate the developed and developing worlds.

It sounds good, but is OER pie-in-the-sky thinking? Why would anyone spend their valuable time developing content only to give it away? Surely only the most utopian optimist high on the fumes of the internet could imagine that OERs will have a life.

There are many reasons why the future is bright for open educational resources. The model of commercial publication of academic research, where publicly funded research is locked up and sold by commercial publishers, is increasingly coming under challenge. And it’s not just a motley collection of annoyed academics, either.

Research bodies in countries including Australia the US and the UK are insisting on open access to research as a condition of their funding. If widely adopted, developing open research resources won’t just be good practice. Increasingly it will be a requirement of funding.

For example, in October last year, the Australian Research Council announced that it was looking at mandating open access for scientific research that it funds.

Similarly, this year US Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren issued a memo to ensure that Federal agencies with more than US$100 million in research and development expenditures to make the results of federally funded research freely available to the public within one year of publication.

The move towards open access isn’t restricted to the education sector. The Australian Attorney-General has endorsed a recommendation that Australian government agencies license their Public Sector Information under a Creative Commons attribution licence.

While the flurry of activity around open access might seem new, OER isn’t new at all. It’s simply a new term for a set of practices and ideas that are as old as Socrates. What we now call “higher education” has for most of human history been based on a gift economy where intellectuals and those with intellectual training essentially gave away the fruits of their labour — or did so without expectation of gain.

That started to change in the latter half of the twentieth century when education and educational services and products came to be regarded as products, much like any other. Ever since, the costs of education have skyrocketed, putting quality education out of reach for all but the most privileged.

The OER movement seeks to use the internet to reverse this trend. It’s about returning us to an intellectual culture that more closely resembles gift exchange.

Australian institutions have jumped on the open education bandwagon but not in a way that embraces these aspirations – we’re still looking at it as an education-as-service model. In doing so, we could be at risk of closing ourselves off from the real purpose of the open education movement.

Ruth Jelley is affiliated with the Open Education Working Group at La Trobe University and is employed by the Faculty of Business Economics and Law to investigate OER implementation.

Christopher Scanlon does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

The Conversation

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

News and Info, OpEd

How MOOCs are derailing Open Education: George Siemens ICDE World Conference keynote

icdelogo“A pioneer of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), George Siemens of Athabasca University, Canada, is one of the impressive list of keynote speakers confirmed for ICDE’s World Conference to be hosted by Tianjin Open University, China, 16-18 October 2013. Siemens contends that the most prominent MOOCs are failing the ideals of the Open Education movement.”

http://www.icde.org/How+MOOCs+are+derailing+Open+Education%3A+George+Siemens+ICDE+World+Conference+keynote.b7C_wJLMZ1.ips

News and Info, OpEd

Experiments in Open Education and Active Learning: A Report from the Celebration of Teaching

“I have long regarded scholarship as the noblest aspect of academia– the scholar’s tenacity in identifying, acknowledging, addressing and building on the intellectual contributions of others. I have not experienced the same profound sense of community among my colleagues in the education realm, however – I have largely been a lone wolf. Now there has been a profound shift in my mindset – I use and build on the educational production of others; I do it openly on public sites, of which I am proud rather than embarrassed; I contribute back, and my students see and learn from this practice of scholarly appreciation, and are even encouraged to contribute to it through their own content creation and sharing. This opportunity for “scholarship” in educational practice is what, as an educator and scholar, I find most exciting about this nascent and exploding online education movement. ” – Professor Doug Fisher, Vanderbilt University.

Experiments in Open Education and Active Learning: A Report from the Celebration of Teaching

OpEd, Research

Hurdles to Open Textbooks

runners jumping over hurdlesI am finding that the biggest impedance to open textbooks is not with instructors or supply, but college administrators, government administrators, and those who provide the money, including grant foundations.

Administrators’ primary job is to ensure the health, survival, and reputation of their institution. Their priority is to provide an education infrastructure that is capable of achieving the outcomes expected by formal and informal sources. They compete for funds and will avoid any activities, no matter how innovative, that will seem to risk the institution’s health, survival, and reputation. Those of us in the open textbook movement have so far failed to adequately demonstrate the low risk, the long-term value of open textbooks, and how to sustain them. For example, the loss of potential revenue from their bookstores alone is sufficient to continue with exclusivity agreements with traditional publishers. Besides, anyone providing open textbooks may be a “vaporware” organization. Traditional publishers have a solid longevity and reputation. Administrators are not risk takers.

Grant foundations’ primary job is to carry out their charter while complying with complex tax laws. Though many want innovation in both process and products, most of their money is given to status quo institutions, which makes sense since they must avoid any investments the IRS might consider as a “jeopardy investment.” They also fund projects that require approaches already established in some form. Foundations are not risk takers either.

The primary point is that the education industry and its supporting organizations are not constructed to innovate very quickly (i.e. within a generation.) What many are calling innovations is only innovative to the education industry. For those of us outside education we see the efforts and funding aimed at technological and pedagogical breakthroughs getting lost in organizational and institutional isolation and competitiveness. If they so desired all the heads of all the institutions could pull together their resources to quickly and efficiently provide open textbooks and ancillary resources.

My Solution? Demonstrate the commercial feasibility of open textbooks as a textbook competitor among the giants. Once the perceived risk is mitigated education institutions will adjust accordingly. Textbook prices will fall back into normal ranges. Economically, students and taxpayers will be much better off. And, naturally, the quality of textbooks will increase.