The increase in the cost of college textbooks together with the proliferation of digital content and devices has inspired the development of open textbooks, open educational resources that are free, openly licensed, and often peer-reviewed. Although several published studies have investigated the impact of open textbook adoption on educational outcomes, none have separated the effects of textbook openness and format and only two have taken place in Canada (Hendricks, Reinsberg, & Rieger, 2017; Jhangiani & Jhangiani, 2017). This study investigates the perceptions, use, and course performance of Canadian post-secondary students assigned a commercial or open textbook in either print or digital format. Results show that students using the print format of the open textbook perceive its quality to be superior to the commercial textbook. Moreover, students assigned an open textbook in either format perform either no differently from or better than those assigned a commercial textbook. These results are consistent with the existing literature and support the conclusion that the cost savings to students associated with the adoption of open textbooks do not come at the expense of resource quality or student performance. L’augmentation du coût des manuels universitaires ainsi que la prolifération du contenu numérique et des appareils électroniques ont inspiré le développement de manuels ouverts, des ressources éducationnelles qui sont gratuites, dont les licences d’exploitation sont ouvertes et qui sont souvent évalués par les pairs. Bien que plusieurs études publiées aient étudié l’impact de l’adoption de manuels ouverts sur les résultats éducationnels, aucune n’a séparé les effets du caractère ouvert des manuels et du format et seulement deux études ont été menées au Canada (Hendricks, Reinsberg & Rieger, 2017; Jhangiani & Jhangiani, 2017). Cette étude examine les perceptions, l’emploi et les résultats des étudiants dans des établissements d’enseignement supérieur canadiens à qui on avait assigné un manuel commercial ou un manuel ouvert en format imprimé ou numérique. Les résultats ont montré que les étudiants qui avaient utilisé le format imprimé du manuel ouvert avaient perçu que sa qualité était supérieure à celle du manuel commercial. De plus, les étudiants à qui on avait assigné un manuel ouvert dans l’un ou l’autre des formats avaient obtenu des résultats semblables à ceux des étudiants à qui on avait assigné un manuel commercial. Ces résultats concordent avec les publications existantes et confirment la conclusion que les économies de coûts pour les étudiants liées à l’adoption de manuels ouverts n’entraînent pas une dégradation de la qualité des ressources ni des résultats des étudiants.

OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter's (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser's model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.

No abstract

In light of the rising cost of attendance and student indebtedness, a national conversation has emerged regarding the value of a college degree and its ability to support the types of skills employers consider necessary or important for a graduate's long-term career success. We first discuss these skills along with national initiatives such as the Association of American Colleges and Universities' (AACU's) Liberal Education and America's Promise and Lumina Foundation's Degree Qualifications Profile that strive to reconceptualize an undergraduate education to emphasize the broad skills and knowledge one should acquire. Next, we review the APA Guidelines 2.0 and their overlap with these national initiatives with the emphasis on skill development. Finally, we make a series of recommendations as to how psychology faculty and departments can use these guidelines to develop a curriculum with an emphasis on skill development that optimizes student success in both the workplace and in graduate or professional school.

Most course assignments are “disposable” in the sense that they will only ever be seen by the instructor. Moreover, students often see little point in them and rarely revisit them. But what if we redesigned our course assignments to empower our students as creators of resources for the commons? Whether creating videos, editing wiki articles, or writing op eds, open pedagogy might be the best way for us to “give psychology away.”