After reading the first chapter of “A guide to making open textbooks with students.”（Mays, E. (Ed.). 2017）, I agree with many of the authors’ ideas and I think many of them should be implemented.
There are many parallels between “open” and “distributed” learning, especially in “asynchronous” learning. As we completed the Digital Equity and Perspectives Pod projects, we found that many of the barriers to learning for students in many cases had nearly the same impact on “distributed asynchronous” and “open” learning. I think this has to do with the fact that they both use a lot of online platforms or technologies in their instruction. However, there are many differences in the online platforms they use. One of the most obvious differences is that the online platform for “distributed” learning is usually controlled by the instructor, who plays the role of supervisor. This is like an instructor creating or controlling a website that students can view, use, or comment on, but cannot change the information on the site. The difference is that the online platform used for “open” learning is controlled by both the student and the instructor. Just like the “Word press” we use, students and teachers each create their own websites and can modify the information on their own websites. In the article, the authors also explain that “learning management systems (Canvas, Moodle, Blackboard, etc.) generally lock students into a closed It perpetuates a surveillance model of education in which the instructor is able to consider metrics that are not available to students; and it presupposes that all student work is disposable (because all assignments are imported into a new course in the next semester shell are removed when a new course is introduced the following semester)” (Mays, E. (Ed.), (2017)).

The platforms, materials, or online technologies that students use for “open” learning are collectively referred to as Open Educational Resources (OREs), and OREs are an important element of “open pedagogy.” As an educational resource, OREs offer students more freedom than other educational resources, but they are also cheap, if not free, to use. The author explains this in his article as well; he suggests that many textbooks, especially college textbooks, are so expensive that many college students are unable to complete assigned readings because they cannot afford them (Mays, E. (Ed.), (2017)). As a college student, I empathize with this; in the required courses I have experienced, many of the textbooks required for the courses cost around $100 and some exceed that price. The reason why OERs are so cheap is to fulfill the proposition that “higher education should be equally accessible to all”; and this proposition is one of the most important goals and ideas of OERs. In my opinion, the promotion of this proposition will give help to many students, and students will not have to worry about the high price of textbooks. While tuition may still be a large number, the dramatic reduction in textbook prices has been enough to alleviate the financial strain faced by most students. It is safe to say that the advent of OER has provided a pathway to success for many students who are facing financial pressures.

Not only that, but in my opinion, if the OER proposition does gain widespread popularity, it will inevitably change the current form of education, and OER will likely become the most common teaching method. So the potential of OER is undoubtedly very great, but it still needs more exploration and practice.

Reference:

Mays, E. (Ed.). (2017). A guide to making open textbooks with students. Rebus Community.  Chapter 1: Open Pedagogy : https://press.rebus.community/makingopentextbookswithstudents/chapter/open-pedagogy/