Résumés
Abstract
The definition of openness influenced the sustainability of business models of Open Education (OE). Yet, whether openness is defined as the free (re)usage of resources, or the free entry in courses, there always is a discussion on who pays for the resources used in these offerings. The free offering of courses or materials raises the question if OE can be maintained independent of large government subsidies. This article analyzes four cases that each have a different approach to OE and (financial) survival. The aim of this study is to determine the most efficient conditions for a sustainable OE business model. Instead of using different earning models, this research concentrates on the different aspects of unbundling (costs, income, and financiers), arguing that an adjusted Business Model Canvas can be used to analyze the not-for-profit organizations in higher education institutions (HEIs). The cases are OpenupEd, FemTechNet, MERLOT, and Lumen Learning. Openness plays different roles in the business models of the different organizations. For OpenupEd and MERLOT, openness of the materials offered to students and teachers (MOOCs, OER) is essential. For FemTechNet, openness is part of the need to collaborate and share within their community. Commercial organizations, such as Lumen Learning, use free materials to teach educational organizations to use these materials for their own courses. All four organizations use different key activities and key resources (for example, management competencies, social skills, or design and teaching skills) for their continuity. Yet, despite the differences between the case-organizations, community building is important in all cases. Either because producers and users of Open Education become identical, because standardization does decrease costs and increases findability and quality, or because they can bridge the difference between supply and competences necessary for usage of Open Education.
Keywords:
- open education,
- MOOCs,
- DOCCs,
- business models,
- collaboration,
- OpenupEd,
- MERLOT,
- FemTechNet,
- Lumen Learning,
- sustainability
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Burd, E., Smith, S. & Reisman, S. (2015). Exploring business models for MOOCs in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 40(1), 37-49. doi: 10.1007/s10755-014-9297-0
- Cengage Learning. (2016). Open educational resources (OER) and the evolving higher education landscape. White Paper. Retrieved from http://assets.cengage.com/pdf/wp_oer-evolving-higher-ed-landscape.pdf
- Christensen, C., Johnson C., & Horn M. (2010). Disrupting class. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., Caldera, L., & Soares L. (2011). Disrupting college: How disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(2), 267-269. doi: 10.1007/s11423-009-9113-1
- Cormier, D. (2008). The CCK08 MOOC - Connectivism course, 1/4 way [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://davecormier.com/edblog/2008/10/02/the-cck08-mooc-connectivism-course-14-way/
- Czerniewicz, L., Deacon, A., Glover, M., & Walji, S. (2017). MOOC - making and open educational practices. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 81-97. doi: 10.1007/s12528-016-9128-7
- De Langen, F. (2008). Business cases in an electronic environment: Lessons for e-education? (Working paper no. GE 08-01), Heerlen: Open University.
- De Langen, F. (2011). There is no business model for open educational resources: A business model approach. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 26(3), 209-222. doi: 10.1080/02680513.2011.611683
- Dhanarajan, G., & Abeywardena I. S. (2013). Higher education and open educational resources in Asia: An overview. In G. Dhanarajan & D. Porter (Eds.), Open educational resources: An Asian perspective (pp. 3-18). Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11599/23
- FemTechNet. (2013). Transforming higher education with distributed open collaborative courses (DOCCs): Feminist pedagogies and networked learning [White paper]. Retrieved from http://FemTechNet.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/FemTechNetWhitePaperSept30_2013.pdf
- Hanley, G. (2013). MOOCs, MERLOT, and open educational services. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), pp. 1-2. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/hanley_message_0613.pdf
- Hollands, F. M., & Tirthali, D. (2014). MOOCs: Expectations and reality. Full report. Retrieved from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/583b86882e69cfc61c6c26dc/t/58f6698fc534a5c049f8994c/1492543890763/MOOCs_Expectations_and_Reality.pdf
- Jansen, D., & Goes-Daniels, M. (2016). Comparing institutional MOOC strategies. Status report based on a mapping survey conducted in October - December 2015. EADTU - HOME project. Retrieved from http://eadtu.eu/images/publicaties/Comparing_Institutional_MOOC_strategies.pdf
- Juhasz, A., & Balsamo A. (2012). An idea whose time is here: FemTechNet - A distributed online collaborative course (DOCC), Ada, (1). doi: 10.7264/N3MW2F2J
- Kelly, A. P., & Hess, F. M. (2013). Beyond retrofitting: Innovation in higher education. Washington, DC: Hudson Institute. Retrieved from http://www.hudson.org/content/researchattachments/attachment/1121/beyond_retrofitting-innovation_in_higher_ed_%28kelly-hess,_june_2013%29.pdf
- Lumen Learning. (2015). Lumen learning open business model canvas. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1l-kSBcCCupbBGOvxZkRy3hQkcnqZuLTmeFuMmlC3zwo/edit?pref=2&pli=1
- Online Course Report. (2016). State of the MOOC 2016: A year of massive landscape change for massive open online courses [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.onlinecoursereport.com/state-of-the-mooc-2016-a-year-of-massive-landscape-change-for-massive-open-online-courses/
- Marshall. S. (2012). Open education and systemic change. On the Horizon, 20(2), 110-116. doi: 10.1108/10748121211235769
- Mazoué, J. G. (2014). Beyond the MOOC model: Changing educational paradigms [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/11/beyond-the-mooc-model-changing-educational-paradigms
- McGreal, R., Miao F., & Mishra, S. (Eds.). (2016). Open educational resources: Policy, costs and transformation. Commonwealth of Learning, UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002443/244365e.pdf
- McGreal, R. (2018). A survey of OER implementations in 13 higher education institutions. Contact North/Contact Nord. Retrieved from https://oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/oerknowledgecloud.org/files/OER13paperJ16.pdf
- Mulder, F., & Janssen B. (2013). Open (het) onderwijs (Opening up eduction). In R. Jacobi, H. Jelgerhuis & N. van der Woert (Eds.), Trendrapport OER 2013: open online onderwijs breekt door (Trendrapport OER 2013: open online education breaks through; pp. 38-44), Utrecht. Retrieved from https://www.surf.nl/binaries/content/assets/surf/nl/kennisbank/2013/Trendrapport+OER+2013_NL_+DEF+07032013+%28HR%29.pdf
- Newbold, J., & Angrove W. (2017) Navigating the distance education landscape in 2017 and beyond. In L. Gómez Chova, A. Martínez & I. Torres (Eds.), INTED2017 proceedings (p. 971). Valencia: 11th International Technology, Education and Development Conference. doi: 10.21125/inted.2017.0382
- Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. New York: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00977_2.x
- Pappano, L. (2012, November 2). The year of the MOOC. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html
- Salisbury, A. D. (2014). Impacts of MOOCs on higher education [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blog.edx.org/impacts-moocs-higher-education
- Sanderse, J. (2014). The business model canvas of NGOs (Master's thesis, Open University). Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/6935967/The_business_model_canvas_of_NGOs_The_business_model_canvas_of_NGOs_door_Judith_Sanderse
- Sheets, R. G., & Crawford, S. (2012). Harnessing the power of information technology: Open business models in higher education. Educause Review, 47(2). Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/~/media/files/article-downloads/erm1222.pdf
- Sigalov, A., & Skuratov A. (2012). Educational portals and open educational resources in the Russian federation. Moscow, Russia: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://iite.unesco.org/pics/publications/en/files/3214704.pdf
- UNESCO. (2002, July 1-3). Forum on the impact of open courseware for higher education in developing countries (Final Report). Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001285/128515e.pdf
- UNESCO. (2012, June 20-22). The Paris OER declaration, world open educational resources (OER) congress. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/Events/English_Paris_OER_Declaration.pdf
- Wang, C. H., & Zhao, G. (2011). Open educational resources in the people's republic of China: Achievements, challenges and prospects for development. UNESCO. Retrieved from https://iite.unesco.org/pics/publications/en/files/3214700.pdf
- Wiley, D., & Green, C. (n.d.). Why openness in education? [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/pathways/chapter/reading-why-openness-in-education/
- Wiley, D., Green, C., & Soares, L. (2012). Dramatically bringing down the cost of education with OER: How open education resources unlock the door to free learning [Blog post]. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/news/2012/02/07/11167/dramatically-bringing-down-the-cost-of-education-with-oer/