[LIBRARYDIR] FW: Update on $5M Open Textbook Pilot & Call for Reviewers

[Boyoung Chae]

FYI.

From: cccoer-advisory at googlegroups.com <cccoer-advisory at googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Nicole Allen
Sent: Friday, August 3, 2018 10:43 AM
To: SPARC Libraries & OER Forum <liboer at sparcopen.org>; OER Comms <oer-comms at googlegroups.com>; CCCOER Advisory <cccoer-advisory at googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Update on $5M Open Textbook Pilot & Call for Reviewers

Hi everyone,

Following up with a few updates on the grant program:

Our allies in the Senate have just sent an oversight letter<https://sparcopen.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/20180802-FY18-Congress-Oversight-Letter.pdf> to the Department addressing some of our concerns in the call for proposals. While it is not possible to change the parts of the notice that we are unhappy about (the 30 day window, the limit to 3 grants, the emphasis on creation), it is possible to ask for clarity and push for better practices within the bounds of the notice. Specifically, the letter urges the Department to award the maximum number of grants (3), to ensure OER experts are well represented on the review panel, and to clarify that both "technology-based strategies" integrated with open textbooks and the open textbooks themselves will be subject to the same licensing rules.

Since Congress is pushing to have OER represented on the review panel, it is critically important that OER community members apply<https://community.lincs.ed.gov/bulletin/call-peer-reviewers-open-textbooks-pilot-program-deadline-8618> as peer reviewers by Monday August 6th. We need to make sure they have a large pool to draw from. If you are not applying for a grant, we strongly encourage you to send in your resume before COB Monday. Details here: https://community.lincs.ed.gov/bulletin/call-peer-reviewers-open-textbooks-pilot-program-deadline-8618

It is also important to continue sending in any questions you have to the Department<https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-16264/p-8>, which will help push them to issue a formal FAQ which may address some of the issues referenced by Congress.

Finally, I want to acknowledge the discussion on this thread. It's the nature of this kind of work that the policies we want aren't always the policies we get, and sometimes all we can do is make the most of it. The good news is that we have amazing allies in Congress, and will have the opportunity to provide more specific guidance if we succeed in renewing funding for future years. No matter what happens this year, this is a foot in the door, and we'll keep pushing!

Cheers,
Nicole




Nicole Starr Allen
SPARC<http://www.sparcopen.org/> | Director of Open Education
21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036 USA
+1 (202) 750-1637
nicole at sparcopen.org<mailto:nicole at sparcopen.org>
@txtbks<http://twitter.com/txtbks>

On Jul 30, 2018, at 09:45, Nicole Allen <nicole at sparcopen.org<mailto:nicole at sparcopen.org>> wrote:

Dear all,

The call for applications for the Open Textbook Pilot<https://sparcopen.org/our-work/open-textbooks-fy18/> was published in the Federal Register this morning. Applications are due August 29, and you can find the notice here: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/07/30/2018-16264/applications-for-new-awards-fund-for-the-improvement-of-postsecondary-education-open-textbooks-pilot

Overall, while we believe the program could have benefitted from input from the public and the OER community, the structure largely conforms to what we could expect. There is a focus on career and technical education (CTE) and associate degrees for high-demand fields, which fits with the Administration's higher education priorities. That's coupled with an emphasis on high-enrollment courses, especially in sequences or degree pathways, which generally follows the requirements set by Congress. However, the proof is still in the pudding about whether the Department will ultimately select grantees that maximize the program's potential to benefit students.

There's an article in Inside Higher Ed with more analysis here<https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2018/07/30/department-education-sets-september-date-one-three-oer-grants-5>, and below is a sample tweet for sharing the news:

. at usedgov<mailto:. at usedgov> issues call for applications for $5 million #highered Open Textbook Pilot funded by Congress. #OpenTextbooksFY18 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/07/30/2018-16264/applications-for-new-awards-fund-for-the-improvement-of-postsecondary-education-open-textbooks-pilot

The Department will award the $5 million in 1-3 large grants of $1.5-4.95 million each. Applications must be submitted as consortia of 3+ institutions plus relevant plus workforce/community partners. While we were hoping for a larger number of grants distributed more widely, the focus on consortia is in line with our recommendations, and the impact of several large projects could still be broadly felt.

There are other components that echo our recommendations<https://sparcopen.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/20180426-FY18-SPARC-Open-Textbooks-Letter-ED.pdf>, including the requirement to review existing OER materials before creating new ones, and an explicit allowance to use the funding for professional development of faculty an staff to expand the use of open textbooks (not just creation). The emphasis on developing open textbooks in a sequence or degree pathway is consistent with the common practice of developing z-degrees, and we are glad to see the Department explicitly acknowledge OER as a strategy to improve degree completion.

One area that we are pleased with is the strong open licensing language. Not only is the program subject to the Department of Education's open licensing rule<https://sparcopen.org/our-work/department-of-education-open-licensing-policy/>, but there is also stronger language requiring the equivalent of CC BY for all open textbooks developed under the program, which was one of the explicit requirements set by Congress.

The one part that caught our skeptical eye is the "competitive preference priority" for projects that integrate "technology-based" strategies such as adaptive technology and AI. While these kind of technologies can be beneficial, it is also an avenue commonly employed by traditional publishers to lock content down. While we are confident that the open licensing requirements will ensure the outputs of this program will be open, this is still a spot we will be watching closely.

Finally, we know that many of you will have technical questions about the grant application, and encourage you to reach out to the official contact Stacey Slijepcevic at stacey.slijepcevic at ed.gov<mailto:stacey.slijepcevic at ed.gov> to ask them. If there are points in the program that are unclear, it's important for the Department to hear from prospective grantees early on, so that they can issue clarifications or corrections that benefit us all.

Cheers,
Nicole



Nicole Starr Allen
SPARC<http://www.sparcopen.org/> | Director of Open Education
21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036 USA
+1 (202) 750-1637
nicole at sparcopen.org<mailto:nicole at sparcopen.org>
@txtbks<http://twitter.com/txtbks>


On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Nicole Allen <nicole at sparcopen.org<mailto:nicole at sparcopen.org>> wrote:
Dear OER colleagues,

I know many of you have been anxiously awaiting news on the $5 million Open Textbook Pilot<https://sparcopen.org/our-work/open-textbooks-fy18/> funded by the U.S. Congress earlier this year, so I'm writing with an update on where things stand. For the past three months, we have been in a holding pattern waiting for the Department of Education to move forward on implementation. At long last, we've finally gotten our first signal with a call for peer reviewers<https://community.lincs.ed.gov/bulletin/call-peer-reviewers-open-textbooks-pilot-program-deadline-8618> issued by the Department last week, and it's likely we'll see more very soon.

New America just published an excellent article with analysis on what to watch for as the program rolls out: https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/edcentral/what-look-department-begins-implementing-its-open-textbook-pilot/ (by Lindsey Tepe and Sabia Prescott)

For those of you interested and qualified to peer review for the program, we encourage you to consider signing up. Since there has not been an opportunity for the OER community to provide direct input on the program, having strong OER expertise among reviewers is important. Details are here<https://community.lincs.ed.gov/bulletin/call-peer-reviewers-open-textbooks-pilot-program-deadline-8618>, and the deadline is August 6th.

The Department is interested in peer reviewers from various backgrounds and professions including: administrators, college and university faculty, educational strategists and evaluators, grant makers, and others with expertise in adult and postsecondary education, open educational resources and practices, work-based learning, and career and technical education.

While we've worked hard to provide strong Congressional oversight, it's important to note that the program could end up taking many possible shapes and sizes. The good news is that both the licensing language and goal of student savings are clear, and we are also in a strong position to renew the funding<https://sparcopen.org/our-work/open-textbooks-fy19/> for Fiscal Year 2019 with more specific guidelines.

Finally, I want to note another important development on the policy front. Congress just approved a broad bill reauthorizing federal Career and Technical Education programs, which included provisions adding OER as an allowable use of funds<https://sparcopen.org/our-work/cte-reauthorization/> for improving state and local CTE programs. While relatively minor from a policy perspective, it's an important symbolic milestone toward embedding OER in our nation's education policy framework.

Cheers,
Nicole




Nicole Starr Allen
SPARC<http://www.sparcopen.org/> | Director of Open Education
21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036 USA
+1 (202) 750-1637
nicole at sparcopen.org<mailto:nicole at sparcopen.org>
@txtbks<http://twitter.com/txtbks>



--
If you have any questions, contact lizyata at oeconsortium.org<mailto:lizyata at oeconsortium.org>
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CCCOER Advisory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cccoer-advisory+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:cccoer-advisory+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to cccoer-advisory at googlegroups.com<mailto:cccoer-advisory at googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ctc.edu/pipermail/librarydir_lists.ctc.edu/attachments/20180811/98e611a1/attachment.html>