Ahrash Bissell Interview Notes - July 20, 2009

Conducted with Erhardt Graeff via telephone on July 20, 2009

Interviewee

Ahrash Bissell
Executive Director, ccLearn
Email: ahrash [at] creativecommons [dot] org

Notes

This interview focuses on California's 2009 Free Digital Textbook Initiative

ccLearn is writing a grant proposal to fund a fellow to study the California's digital textbook efforts.

Ahrash contends that

• The argument of the cost of textbooks (budget problems/need "free" educational materials) is a poor one. This connects low-cost/free to open source content which has an inferior quality connotation.
• It's important to distance the OER movement from California's initiative because their goals do not represent the definition of OER that ccLearn espouses.

Need to better define what is or is not OER (ccLearn Goal)

• Draft helping people understand the constitution of what we call a textbook
• Analyzing a textbook shows there are all these underlying processes that are brought together and called a textbook
• Prior to the internet required ownership of all of these processes needed by one person and then distributed in a book format

content + review + editing + publication in various media

• What we don't want to do is lock in the old world model of single publisher book (not good for public understanding of OER)
• Pay good author to produce content but require that they release in open license
  • allows for non-profit and commercial organizations to take one aspects of the process and own it / create a market for it
• allow for component parts and materials are funded

For example: California goes through 6 steps of the process and another state can go through final 4 steps to tailor to that state's needs

• Working with only OER orgs is not sustainable for ccLearn
• Cost argument makes traditional publishers look like antagonists

Statements you can make that no one with disagree with:

• We believe that all learners should have access to materials that are accurate, up to date, and
• We are all in agreement here so what isn't happening here to make these things happen?

Creative Commons has been in dialogue with companies that would traditionally be seen as antagonistic

Language: free and digital are the only words that are used in California's “Free digital resources” initiative

• In the "bill" there is language regarding licensing requirements
• Originally, all mentioning of free licensing was removed by publishers

Weird things: new bill related to the initiative may mandate that none of the educational material can be sanctioned for the next two years for publishers wanting recoup expenses for textbook adoption processes

We know that Connexions and CK-12 have submitted materials for approval through the process set up by the bill; and they are likely to get their content improved.

The EM sought in this Bill is technically limited to supplementary material

If a publisher submits something that meets all of California's standards (it needs to go through the year-long review process) then you receive a mandate that classrooms use the content. Otherwise, it is supplementary failing meet ALL criteria and instead going through a lightweight process that is put on a "recommended" list--this where all free digital resources will go.

• CK-12 (submitted 8 of their textbooks) -- follow up with Neeru Kosla
• Connexions (submitted only one?) -- follow up with Joel Thierstein

Problem: What if you get a textbook approved that meets all criteria but doesn't get mandated? What discretion will they give to teachers to choose materials?

California collects all monies oriented for education at state-level and then re-distributes for equal resources at all districts All non-mandated curriculum/resources are often funded through grants and other individual funding mechanisms (fundraising)

• Ahrash: wouldn't be surprised if this would allow for greater independence at schools

There is very clear opportunity for partnerships with hardware companies to offer readers

Recommendation: Don't shunt the cost issue but rather say that we don't have as many things to pay for training and resources, i.e. let's be more efficient and effective

Potential Contacts

Hal Plotkin - involved with initiative from the beginning; now in Dept. of Education w/ Martha Cantor - been doing the Community College funding Bill, Martha Kanter - was one of the early discussants

Hewlett Foundation and other funders of OER initiatives

Recommended Contacts Hal Plotkin, Special Assistant, Office of the Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education was involved with the initiative in California from the beginning has been recently involved with the President Obama's American Graduation Initiative

Navigation

Back to Contacts for EM
Back to Educational Materials