Open Textbooks and Social Justice: Open Educational Practices to Address Economic, Cultural and Political Injustice at the University of Cape Town

Abstract

There is currently a clarion call to address social injustice in South African higher education (HE) in order to achieve greater equity in access. Within this context, current social injustices pertain to financial exclusion as well as epistemic marginalisation and are embodied in the predominance of expensive textbooks which are authored in the Global North, meaning that they are unaffordable for many students and do not represent local realities. This paper provides evidence from the Digital Open Textbooks for Development (DOT4D) project at the University of Cape Town (UCT), on the potential of open textbooks to address social injustice in South African HE and the practices utilised by UCT staff to address these challenges. The paper uses Nancy Fraser's (2005) trivalent lens to examine inequality, specifically as relates to the following dimensions: economic (maldistribution of resources); cultural (misrecognition of culture and identities); and political (misrepresentation or exclusion of voice). This enables the authors to critically analyse the UCT context and the extent to which open textbook production as well as open education practices within the classroom promote social justice through "parity of participation". The findings presented demonstrate that open textbooks have the potential to disrupt histories of exclusion in South African HE institutions by addressing issues of cost and marginalisation through the creation of affordable, contextually-relevant learning resources. In addition to this, they provide affordances which enable lecturers to change the way they teach, include student voices and create innovative pedagogical strategies.

Active teachers’ perceptions on the most suitable resources for teaching history

“…The many studies developed from the didactics of the social sciences have determined that the textbook is the most used resource in Compulsory Secondary Education, followed by Primary Education (Gómez et al, 2015;Miralles, 2016, 2017). Similarly, the work of Sáiz (2011) determines that the teaching of history privileges an idea of hegemonic and traditionalist history, where the use of the textbook continues to prevail as the principal teaching resource, in line with the indications of Valls (1999), Valls and López-Facal (2011), Cox et al (2020), and Pei-Fen (2020).…”

Potential ethical problems in the creation of open educational resources through virtual spaces in academia

“…Nevertheless, different academics and institutions manage the peer-review process differently. If the emphasis on peer review is not considered in the creation and distribution of OER, that will fail social justice ( Cox et al., 2020 ). Firstly, it is necessary for practitioners and researchers to further dismantle some of the structural inequities that OER may reproduce by asking the following questions: “ who creates OER ?…”

Open educational resources: expanding equity or reflecting and furthering inequities?

“…Hilton’s ( 2016 ) synthesis focuses on efficacy and perceptions, overlooking issues of equity beyond economic maldistribution (c.f. Cox et al 2020 ). A critical and equity-seeking adoption and examination of OER materials is necessary in order for practitioners and researchers to further dismantle some of the structural inequities that OER may reproduce.…”