As a newcomer in this field I was surprised over how vast OER is and how it is connected to areas I didn´t think of. Some of these areas include politics, economy and the copy write law – all somehow some kind of background factor to open educational resources. But I also found it striking and wonderful that there are a lot of people who want to do something for society without political or economical reasons in first hand.
An interesting point sated was that the field of education is in a sense unique, that by contributing with knowledge there are no losers – but everybody can gain from it - David´s statement “…knowledge is inherently a non-rival good. In this view, knowledge is, indeed, a public good.”
As one new to the field of open sources, I started wondering about things as how reliable was the material? Is there someone controlling it or is everyone responsible? There are probably a lot of people wanting to do good, but don’t have as much knowledge as they should – or how about if someone deliberately wants to sabotage? On page 26 Tuomi defines tree levels of openness, who defines/or controls these specific levels? These are probably quite naïve questions and thoughts, but with no prior knowledge and experience…;)
Even so, without prior experience in this area, I still am amazed about how OER will transform the educational field, and how the individual probably becomes more and more responsible for one´s own learning processes and the continuation of learning. Learning isn’t something you do in restricted areas and forms, but a part of everyday life – therefore it is interesting to see how we relate to informal learning and how we can “show our informal knowledge” for example in applying for a job.
And last, Tuomis text (page5) “Cognitive technologies will be used to repair defects in learning styles and to compensate the effects of aging” was a mind opener. It seems like we still limit online learning to meet but a few learning styles - it will be interesting to see (or be a part of) this development.