Incentivizing faculty for OER

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133320301117

This survey assessed the experiences of faculty who participated in a textbook affordability program at Rutgers University. The program provided incentive awards in exchange for replacing commercial textbooks with affordable course materials such as open educational resources (OER), self-developed course materials, course reserves, or library-licensed content.

indicate that even participating faculty vary greatly in their knowledge and use of OER and their interest in authoring open textbooks. Ultimately, these survey results indicate the lack of a “one size fits all” approach to incentivizing the adoption of affordable course materials, the use of OER, and the creation of new open resources.

Open Access

Reassembling Scholarly CommunicationsHistories, Infrastructures, and Global Politics of Open Access

https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/4933/Reassembling-Scholarly-CommunicationsHistories

Chapter 7. Peer Review: Readers in the Making of Scholarly Knowledge
David Pontille and Didier Torny

p. 120

If open science has become a motto, it encompasses two different visions for journal peer review. The first one, which includes open identities, takes place within the academic closet, where the dissemination of manuscripts is made possible by small discourse collectives that shape consensual facts.29 This vision is supported by the validation processes designed by Robert Boyle, one of the founders of the Royal Society, who thought that disputes about scientific facts needed a specific and limited “social space” in order to be solved.30 By contrast, following Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan conception of sovereignty, the second vision urges a multiplication of points of view. The disentanglement of peer evaluation cuts through the ability given to readers to comment on published articles, produce social media metrics through the sharing of documents, and observe the whole evaluation process of each manuscript.31 In this vision, scholarly communication relies on a plurality of instances that generate a continuous process of judgment. The first vision has been at the heart of the scientific article as a genre, and a key component of the scientific journal as the most important channel for scholarly communication.32

Chapter 13: Libraries, Museums, and Archives as Speculative Knowledge Infrastructure

OER generated revenue

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2020/02/20/oer-can-save-colleges-money-too

CRS to conquer the textbook business?

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2020/02/04/tophat-and-textbook-publishers/

Top Hat has challenged tangible goods for a long time now. Its first offering was a digital version of clickers to measure student responses in the classroom. In 2017, the company launched a marketplace for e-textbooks, working with authors and offering openly licensed content from the likes of OpenStax as well.

Last year, the company ceased sales of individual assessment tools to instead offer a bundle of its products. Students pay $48 for one year of Top Hat’s products. Interactive textbooks on Top Hat cost an average of $35.

My note: this will be a game changer in regard of the interactivity of textbooks.