Open Educational Practices: Equity, Achievement, and Pedagogical Innovation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open Education practices (OEP) have emerged as a transformational force in higher education. Whereas, higher education promises to be an instrument for economic and social mobility, in reality our institutions reinforce existing inequalities: Achievement, engagement, and persistence are closely tied to affordability. Our claim to be student-centered is likewise hypocritical as faculty pressures, accreditation requirements, and budgetary constraints influence or dictate the structure and content of learning experiences. \n \nOpen Educational practices support teaching, learning, and publication in an increasingly diverse faculty and student body. OEP encompass the creation, adaptation, and adoption of open educational resources, open course development, and even the design of renewable, real-world assignments where students are empowered as co-creators of knowledge. These practices leverage learning beyond socio-economic disparities and put engaged, active student (and faculty) learning at the center. These practices champion academic freedom, pedagogical innovation, applied approaches, and innovation. OEP represents learner-centered and learning-together approaches to education that radically enhance both agency and access. \n \nThis presentation draws on a diverse set of examples to make a case for why the shift away from traditional (closed) practices is not only desirable but also inevitable, and how OEP support the modern university’s mission by serving academic achievement, faculty and student engagement, diversity & inclusion, pedagogical innovation, and the university’s Land-grant mission. \n \nThis event was part of Virginia Tech’s Open Education Week 2018 Symposium. \n \nPresenter: Dr. Rajiv Jhangiani <a href="https://thatpsychprof.com/about">https://thatpsychprof.com/about</a> \n \nRajiv Jhangiani is Special Advisor to the Provost and a faculty member in the Psychology Department at Kwantlen Polytechnic University, British Columbia. He earned his Ph.D. in Social & Personality Psychology in 2009 from the University of British Columbia and has published articles and chapters in political psychology, the scholarship of teaching & learning, and open educational practices. The most recent of his two books is Open: The philosophy and practices that are revolutionizing education and science published in 2017. He is also the author of two open textbooks and editor of a third in psychology. \n \nDr. Jhangiani also serves as an Ambassador for the Center for Open Science in Charlottesville, VA, Senior Open Education Research & Advocacy Fellow with BCcampus, British Columbia, and is an Associate Editor of Psychology Learning and Teaching. He previously served as an OER Research Fellow with the Open Education Group, a Faculty Fellow with the BC Open Textbook Project, a Faculty Workshop Facilitator with the Open Textbook Network, and the Associate Editor of NOBA Psychology. \n \nHe is a well known and highly regarded expert, dynamic speaker, consultant and strong advocate of diversity and inclusion in academics, open educational practices, and the scholarship of teaching and learning across Canada and the United States.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it