With assistance from my colleagues at UTS Library and the commenters on the first part of this post, here is a listing of the implications for libraries of recent trends in open online education (such as MOOCs). These implications vary depending on whether the University is providing MOOCs or seeking to utilise the content available on them. I have tried below to account for the implications covering both of these situations.

If MOOCs (and the like) are seen as another form of scholarly publishing, it makes sense for libraries to push for Open Access as the default standard for MOOC course materials. Protecting and extending Open Access policies and initiatives that facilitate open online education through enhanced access to Open Educational Resources will provide a far better and more accessible future for all than one in which another form of “open access” is available for a fee. (This can already be seen in the publishers using “Gold Open Access” models that are facilitated via Article/Author Processing Charges levied instead of subscription fees.) This issue is covered very well in this recent post by Timothy Vollmer http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/34852

Discoverability of MOOC courses is mainly the problem of the course provider, but to date this seems not to be a problem if we look at the large numbers enrolling in some courses. Some MOOC directories already exist and some of these include rankings. It should be noted that MOOC resources are often behind registration/password walls. Lecturers seeking advice on MOOCs can always consult Librarians at their institutions for help in collaboration in finding resources for a course as is currently the case.

Equitable access for all users should be the ethical obligation and should be design in at the outset for all MOOC courses. Research shows that retroactively making material accessible is much more difficult, expensive, time consuming and a job that usually falls to libraries.

This primarily involves access to our existing online resources and the physical collections of the library which are governed by existing access guidelines and policies. It also involves the copyright clearance and management of course materials. It is already believed that fair-use exemptions will not hold for open courses in the US. The terms and conditions applying to many existing MOOCs also indicate that not all MOOCs should be assumed to be “Open”, so their free re-use cannot always be assumed.

If an institution were to offer a MOOC-type course what library involvement and support is envisaged? Our enquiries indicate limited involvement by libraries in other Australian universities providing MOOCs. Librarians should be able to work with academics to develop the courses and advise on the inclusion of appropriate scholarly resources. Librarians may need to engage more with and within these new online environments and learn the skills to create, mash, present and market content in aid of promoting the expertise and knowledge within the institution. Libraries will need to consider how to embed information literacy into “flipped” learning models, but to some extent we are already using this model with our current forms of IL being more hands-on and interactive (less lecture style).

If support is to be offered for remote courses and a massive extension of the hours is involved are collaborative arrangements between participating institutions the answer here (e.g. the Australian and NZ public libraries collaborating in virtual reference services)?

If MOOCs do lead to a major change in the delivery of a lot of higher education, it could mean that libraries need to offer more online services in terms of training, resources and digitisation of collections (where possible) – for remote and online users.

If an institution offers a MOOC course, to what extent (if any) are those enrolled in that course to be considered the same as currently enrolled university students and afforded access to the same library resources that those students pay fees for? I doubt that this will happen to any great extent.

This seems already to be happening and libraries can offer useful advice re vendors and in negotiating with publishers for content and licenses. Publishers may also start to offer new products such as e-texts that are aimed specifically at the mass MOOC market and library staff will most likely be the best to deal with and provide this form of content to support MOOC courses.  Examples so far indicate that publishers see e-texts as revenue-saving at least or a money making opportunity at most so the issue is who pays?  For a free MOOC, they would target individuals directly rather than the university but students of a fee-paying MOOC would expect them gratis.

If some of the commentators are correct in predicting that MOOCs are likely to be the first disruptive step that changes the provision of education, then the most thoughtful and helpful initiatives are likely to be found in new forms of collaboration. Libraries have a long background in this field, nationally, internationally and across all kinds of other boundaries and we can probably build on some already existing collaborative arrangements.

One major need if higher education moves in this direction is a need for well designed and dedicated online collaboration spaces where people can easily connect with each other beyond a classroom, learning commons or a formal LMS as they exist. Maybe this kind of platform should be built into the MOOC itself?

There are some technology support issues that MOOCs raise because of their massive scale. These issues mostly concern those in institutions who provide and maintain the LMS, but the Library may also have a role to play in providing the sophisticated, extended, remote and scalable support and systems that will be required to support our initiatives. Scalability, but also reliability are major requirements. Integration of some of our online services and resources (where allowed and feasible) into MOOC platforms is another technical consideration.

This is a competitive advantage to the University and also to its enrolled students. Those enrolling in MOOCs without being enrolled in a university will have little or no access to the wide variety of reading, reference and other special collections available from institutional libraries, beyond the course materials provided.

In addition, some libraries (like ours) are busy expanding cultural services and experiences with things like events, exhibitions, performances and art works in the Library. Should these also be offered online? The generation currently attending university is said to value experiences, so perhaps those experiences are another advantage of the campus-based university?

The trend now is for everything going online, but also there is an even greater trend of mobile devices outselling traditional PCs. Not only will MOOCs need to consider this, but libraries in general must do the same.

Lastly, and more generally than specifically about libraries, a major issue is the amount of time and resources we invest into MOOCs and this depends on the institution’s objectives. If the courses do not account for credit, should we be focusing more on our degree/paying/enrolled students. The priority and resourcing to be allocated for the support MOOCs needs to be determined at each institution.

This is really a plea for advice or debate. I’d like to read your ideas, thoughts, suggestions, questions and comments. (There hasn’t been much over the last few days, so I’m adding a bit more content now just in case you feel you need more from me up front.) I’ve also posted this here http://informationonline2013.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/the-implications-for-libraries-of-recent-global-trends-in-open-online-education/ 

As one of the references below notes, there is increased pressure on us all to develop a cohesive strategy to address this major global trend that you really could not have missed unless you’ve been sitting under a rock near a log all year. We’ve recently been asked about the main issues, considerations and questions for libraries of the major trend towards the provision of open online education.  I think it is an important issue for all of us to understand more deeply, but it is of particular importance to academic libraries. I’m afraid that I don’t have a lot of answers, just some questions and a few thoughts.

I’ve recently read a number of posts that are starting to do some more analysis over what was earlier in the year a bit of an excited blog fest of news items.

Here are just a few articles that I think have been noteworthy of late:

Clay Shirky addressing Educause 2012 – The Real Revolution is Opennness http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/the-real-revolution-is-openness-clay-shirky-tells-tech-leaders/40894 In his address Clay seemed to be encouraging us to understand that openness is the real key to changing online education. He gives some excellent examples of the benefits, sometimes unexpected, from online sharing. I too think there is a lot in online altruism and collaboration. It isn’t and should not just be about marketing.

Everybody wants to MOOC the World http://mfeldstein.com/everybody-wants-to-mooc-the-world/ This post is by Michael Feldstein and he talks about the response by Learning Management System (LMS) providers to the new MOOC platforms. He raises the real issue of long term sustainability (for content providers) and he also questions whether there really has been a great deal of innovation and experimentation in the pedagogy from the “xMOOCs” (Coursera/Udacity/edX). He says that innovation in pedagogy has come from the connectivist MOOCs (or cMOOCs – see http://www.connectivistmoocs.org/what-is-a-connectivist-mooc/). Phil Hill is a colleague of Michael on the e-Literate blog and on 9 November he posted this article that looks at the overlap between the LMS and MOOC markets http://mfeldstein.com/canvas-network-are-the-lms-and-mooc-markets-colliding/  His post illustrates the influence they are already having on each other.

Radical Openness – The End of Education As We Know It http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/radical-openness/the-end-of-education-as-we-know-it.html This article is a bit of a review of the major new open online educational offerings, but it really focusses more on the numbers and the Massive side of MOOCs rather than the availability of Open Educational Resources (OER). I think that really is the key: they are Massive, but not really so open. Here is an article from 9 November that explains how Coursera bans reuse of its content (even by non-profits), illustrating why they are not so open http://hapgood.us/2012/11/09/coursera-praises-mooc-wrapping-as-they-attempt-to-ban-it/ Here is a useful guide to finding open content online from Edudemic http://edudemic.com/2012/11/how-to-find-the-best-open-course-materials/ There is also Stephen Downes’ Open Online Course Directory http://www.mooc.ca/courses.htm Even more on OER can be read in: Extending the Territory: From Open Educational Resources to Open Educational Practices http://journals.akoaotearoa.ac.nz/index.php/JOFDL/article/viewFile/64/46 and this very detailed OECD report on OER http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/38654317.pdf that outlines the cost, technical, Copyright, licensing and policy challenges that must be faced (thanks Amani!).

Hangingtogether.org – The Flipped Library http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2277 This post deals with MOOCs in light of the flipped classroom concept and quotes Betsy Wilson, Dean of Libraries at the University of Washington as saying that libraries are already “flipped”. See also Answers to the Biggest Questions About Flipped Classrooms in Edudemic (which explains some of the above) http://edudemic.com/2012/11/flipped-classrooms/

Nicholas Carr in the MIT Technology Review – The Crisis in Higher Education http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/429376/the-crisis-in-higher-education/ This is yet another review of the MOOC environment as we know it. Nicholas touches on the sophisticated technical challenges for the future and also recognises the challenges in passing on the “soft skills” that no machine can simulate. I also liked this recent article by D’Arcy Norman who questions the hype that says MOOCs are the most important innovation in educational technology over the last two hundred years http://darcynorman.net/2012/11/10/on-moocs-as-the-most-important-education-technology-in-the-last-200-years/ (I agree that things like the PC, the internet, other software and tools might be further up the list.)

Why are we freaking out about all of this? (by Genevieve Bell – I’ve previously posted here about this short article, but her three rules also apply to this issue because Open Online Education changes our relationship to time, space and each other. ) – http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/11/st_opinion/

My helpful colleagues at UTS Library have alerted me to these useful resources over the course of the last week or so:

Here are a few of the thoughts swimming around in my head at present (in no particular order & updated in light of some comments offered by a colleague – Stephen Gates):

Again, I know that I don’t seem to have many answers, but I think these issues require a great deal more thought and more minds with varied backgrounds applied to them if we are to build a clearer picture, so please, just let me know what you think.