I don't see why people would be less likely to adopt OERs just because OERs are associated with the textbook format. While a lot has been happening to blend and flip courses, the textbook is still the single most important ER there is. And today textbooks aren't just textbooks anymore: they come with a website, with instructor resources (test banks, discussion questions, etc.), etc. There's no reason open textbooks couldn't also have all these ancilliary resources and more. So one strategy might be to encourage OTB authors to think about all of these things: set up an accompanying website, provide example syllabi, exam questions, discussion questions, fora for instructors using the text to share experiences and feedback. A more pressing worry about OTBs is the "stigma" they still have: they're "just" free e-books, without the imprimatur of a major publisher, not refereed, perhaps only provided in a shoddy xeroxed format if provided in hardcopy at all. http://open.bccampus.ca/ is already providing the refereeing for texts included in their catalog, and you can buy print copies (although I don't know how/where they're produced and what the quality is). But one main advantage of OTBs is that you can adapt/revise/remix them, and then you're again on your own.

It also makes me crazy that when people critique the quality of OTB's (sometimes thoughtfully and other times in a really misinformed way), they don't offer corollary critiques of the traditional textbook market or of academic publishing in general. There are plenty of ways in which traditional peer review is broken, and ways in which the traditional publishing industry works against not only access but quality as well. I wish there were more of a willingness to cast a critical eye across the whole publishing landscape.

Good point. I have to admit to not quite getting the concern about quality vis a vis OER and open textbooks. I guess the idea that having a textbook accepted by a "major" publisher is somehow an imprimatur of quality, but why/how? The criteria for acceptance by a major publisher seems to be what will sell, of course. So then, I suppose the thought is that it won't sell, won't be accepted for use by other academics if it isn't of high quality. But there are a whole host of reasons why textbooks are adopted or not, including cost (one thing I pay significant attention to), fit with a particular course content, ancillary materials, and more. OTB can fit these criteria well: no cost, adaptable, and, if ancillary materials can be created then they can fulfill this requirement too.

I think having faculty reviews of OTB can help, though ultimately it comes down, in my opinion, to one's own judgement of quality when reading the textbook. Even if it's put out by a major publisher, one has to still read it and decide for oneself on its quality. Same with OTB.

I like the point that Brian Lamb makes in one of the videos that maybe because we are using the word "textbook", it removes a conceptual barrier for some faculty. You don;t have to explain what a textbook is, whereas you often have to explain to those new what and Open Educational Resource is. And I think you are bang on with the idea that a textbook is still the primary educational resource many faculty use, and that what we call a textbook is changing these days.

Perhaps we can begin by thinking in terms of of the current ER selections used by Teachers-Professors and re-frame the question, taking the perspective of those who have created the materials, asking - What do you think are the best two or three strategies for educational resources to use in encouraging their
adoption?

I think that a problem is that instructors learned out of textbooks, and sometimes think that is the only way to teach their students. It is like the old Sage on the Stage problem that slowed adoption of Active Learning. We have to realize that our students are not children of the 60s, but of the 90s and later, and they learn differently.

I agree with your statement. Many of us instructors like to do things the way we were taught. We also don't like to be out of our comfort zone because that would require re learning and efforts that we may not have anticipated.

[textbooks are considered an antiquated format, almost taboo to champion in the 21st century] -- This position and these comment are a great start to this discussion and it's an important topic, so others will add __ I just read this article and made the connection here for related perspectives of Tony Bates in "Seeking the unique pedagogical characteristics of text and print" _ http://www.tonybates.ca/201... _ "
Tony Bates
"This is the first of several posts on the unique characteristics of
different media, for my open textbook, Teaching in a Digital Age. I’m
starting with text, because it is – or perhaps more accurately, has been
– fundamental to the development of academic knowledge. However,
writing about its unique pedagogical features is rather like asking a
fish to describe water. We are so immersed in text in academia that it
is hard to imagine studying without texts to read and learn from."

__DESIGN: suggest Seeking Q&A with Design Leaders _ Understanding Design in the Creative Print Examples Collected in a Gallery of Book Pages and Spreads _ Discuss Open Design of Personalized Teachers' Editions - Digital Portfolios and Portals _

I'm particularly curious about the last part of the discussion prompt: how to encourage OER and OTB adoption. Awareness of their existence is a necessary, but not sufficient step. I think it would help if one can direct people to specific resources in the specific areas they teach in, whereas I have tended in the past to just say--hey, look at these repositories. Also, showing best practices for use, specific case examples of how OER and OTB have been used could help spark ideas of how others might use them.

I would like to think that saving students money would be a big motivator, but I'm not sure it always is. So I tend to talk more about the adaptability of OER and OTB, the fact that one can revise them to suit one's own needs. I have been frustrated in the past with online text resources that won't allow me to excerpt bits and put them together into a reading for my students, but rather I have to say: read sections 1.1, 1.4-1.6, 2.3, 2.5...etc. That's just silly. Being able to excerpt texts, insert one's own narratives/lecture notes, cut out parts of videos, etc., is really important to me.

The idea that it might save one time might help too--if someone else has recorded a podcast introducing a topic in a useful way, you might just assign that to students and then use class time to go further into depth, to engage in applications or discussions of the topic, etc. That seems to me to be both time saving and pedagogically useful.

2 articles published this weekend by Chicago journalist Julie Wurth relate to this discussion about Textbook Strategies and tension between form factors __The first is _ "Open source textbooks provide many benefits" _ http://www.news-gazette.com... _ "The Association of American Publishers opposes legislation that would "subsidize" open-source texts to the exclusion of the textbooks and digital platforms that publishers produce, said David Anderson, the group's executive director of higher education. But he sees room for both in the future, similar to the software industry, which is a mixture of commercial and open-source material. The digital textbook platforms offered by publishers can be customized by professors who may want to include some open-source material, he noted. "It's not a question of either-or, it's both-and," he said. __
The Association of American Publishers was also the source for some of the information in the second article _ "Turning the page" _ http://www.news-gazette.com... __ "The publishing industry says it costs $500,000 to $3 million to develop a new textbook or revise an existing one — from the research, writing, editing and design to the production and distribution." the figures cited here aren't fact-checked but we know from experience there is a significant amount of time invested by a large team to create these textbooks.

If it costs that much to develop or revise a textbook, then perhaps the textbook publishers are going to price themselves out of the market. Editing does cost money, as does graphic arts and printing, but I wonder how much of this cost is simply in advertising and sales.

Great conversations and prompts that require further thought and investigation. In responding to the first part of this question I am always aware of the technology comfort level of our faculty and students. There is wisdom in creating infrastructures that are similar [and comfortable] and at the same time prompting and instigating forward change. For example, if an OT required you to 'flip' or tab through pages - it would resemble a 'book'. At the same time, building in hyperlinks for a glossary, URL links to relevant videos [such as modeled in this course structure] demonstrates the vast capacity that could be built into these resources.

Implementation of anything 'new' requires some purposeful thought around change management strategies and how we will bring new learners along in the adoption processes.

Hi Carla. Great topic to talk about - comfort with technology among faculty and students. We live in this transitional time as we move from analogue to digital, and I think those skeuomorphic design features are important elements to help with the transition as it makes it easier to understand the interface. At some point, I think those will be needed less and less (and, some might argue, those holdover metaphors may actually inhibit our ability to fully understand and exploit new technologies as we only transfer the ways in which we do things from the old tool to the new tool without understanding how new tools might change the way we do things), but for now, they are important to help people navigate the transition.

Very good point - thanks clintlalonde!

I think that open resources closely resembling textbook format might help widespread adoption. Many of the people who are teaching in higher education were taught by textbooks and have only taught using textbooks, so this would help negate or decrease the anxiety that might exist with adopting open resources on the web. I also think our students are used to the textbook format and this more traditional form of learning is something that students know how to use.
I think that emphasizing that open resources allows for academic freedom and to tailor make the content you want your students to discover would be an important "selling point" when encouraging adoption of OER resources. I also think the obvious pro of cost savings to the students is another selling point. Finally, I feel that if colleges were able to offer a training course or workshop that taught faculty what they needed to do or what resources were available to them adoption of OER would be more welcomed by faculty across disciplines.

I do not see a big concern if OERs are too closely associated with the textbook format. In fact, I think it would help their adoption. There may be printed textbooks that faculty feel contain good information and have a lay out that is “student friendly”. Faculty may not at first want to part company with them. However, the following strategies may help to promote the adoption of OERs. 1. Personally, I like the idea of getting instructors involved in the process as suggested by Nicole Finkbeiner, by recruiting and paying college faculty to review OERs. As a faculty member, I am concerned about the quality of educational resources and would welcome this opportunity. 2. If liberal licensing is available, faculty can pick and choose parts of a textbook that can be revised, reworked and tailor made for a specific course or course section. This also opens up the opportunity for creativity. 3. If some faculty are more
hesitant they can continue to rely on the printed textbook and at the same time experiment with using an OER by trying out a chapter or two from an open textbook.