"SEC. 124. None of the funds made available by this Act for the Department of Labor may be used to develop new courses, modules, learning materials, or projects in carrying out education or career job training grant programs unless the Secretary of Labor certifies, after a comprehensive market-based analysis, that such courses, modules, learning materials, or projects are not otherwise available for purchase or licensing in the marketplace or under development for students who require them to participate in such education or career job training grant programs."The key words here are "under development" and "available for purchase or licensing in the marketplace." In the case of the former, the legislation as written could have commercial publishers blocking the funding of OER alternatives as long as they claim that they have something "under development." Furthermore, in the case of "purchase or licensing," the Department of Labor may no longer be able to support educational resources that are available for free and are openly licensed -- the definition, of course, of OER. The Department of Labor has supported OER efforts in the past. Earlier this year, it, along with the Department of Education announced a new $2 billion fund to help create OER materials specifically aimed at the community college level. In the case of that particular grant program (PDF), the materials created had to be licensed as CC-BY. That license gives people the right to share and remix the content, as long as attribution to the author remains, but it does not preclude making commercial use of the work (although different Creative Commons licenses can stipulate that). As such, it's unclear then if the new Department of Labor rules are the result of a misunderstanding about how the CC-BY license would work or if it's part of a lobbying effort on the part of commercial publishers who want to stop the government's support of free and open educational content. The bill is headed to subcommittee next before it proceeds to committee and to the House for voting. The subcommittee members include: Denny Rehberg (R-Montana), Jerry Lewis (R-California), Rodney Alexander (R-Louisiana), Jack Kingston (R-Georgia), Kay Granger (R-Texas), Michael Simpson (R-Idaho), Jeff Flake (R-Arizona), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming), Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut), Nita Lowey (D-New York), Jesse Jackson Jr (D-Illinois), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-California), and Barbara Lee (D-California).
by Audrey Watters on 05 Oct, 2011
Audrey Watters is an education writer, a recovering academic, a serial dropout, a rabble-rouser, and some days, ed-tech's Kassandra.
- Ed-Tech's Monsters, September 3, 2014
- Against "Innovation", May 14, 2014
- Beneath the Cobblestones... A Domain of One's Own, April 25, 2014
- Student Data is the New Oil: MOOCs, Metaphor, and Money, October 17, 2013
- A Future With Only 10 Universities, October 15, 2013
- The Myth and Millennialism of "Disruptive Innovation", May 24, 2013
- Click Here to Save Education: Evgeny Morozov and Ed-Tech Solutionism, March 26, 2013
- The Real Reason I Dropped Out of a PhD Program, August 29, 2012
- "The Audrey Test": Or, What Should Every Techie Know About Education?, March 17, 2012
- Apple and the Digital Textbook Counter-Revolution, January 19, 2012
- Codecademy and the Future of (Not) Learning to Code, October 28, 2011
- The Wrath Against Khan: Why Some Educators Are Questioning Khan Academy, July 19, 2011
2013 Ed-Tech Trends
Previous Years' Trends
The comments on this blog have been closed. Have something to say in response to my writing? Feel free to chime in on other social media sites. Feel free to write your own blog.
NewsletterSubscribe to the Hack Education newsletter
Support Hack Education
This website is deliberately advertising-free. But the research and writing that I do here is my full-time work — again, deliberately so. If you find my writing interesting or insightful, please consider a donation.