Opening Up About OPENNESS…
--
“The ‘spirit of open’ is increasingly a motivating force within global education and necessarily involves maximising access to the knowledge society” — Perryman & Coughlan (2013).
I think it goes without saying that our world has, and is becoming, increasingly more digital. The Internet alone has largely contributed to the technological advancements that we consider normal aspects of our reality. What did we do before the birth of Google? How could we have obtained instant navigational routes? How could we have bought a new dress with the ease of a click of a button after 5pm when the shops were closed? We survived. But since the development of the Internet, and now WIFI even more so, we have adopted a new, and normalised, sense of accessibility when it comes to doing, viewing, and most importantly, learning. Though to what extent?
As well as Anonymity and Affordability, Accessibility is one of the three components of the Triple A — a concept Cooper referred to back in 1998 regarding particular factors that help make the Internet such a powerful force. For instance, the ease in which we can obtain knowledge is incredible — but only if you have access. And does everyone have access to the same knowledge-providing platforms? No. Should they? Yep.
So why isn’t this a world-wide rule yet?
As my friend, Donna, mentioned in her recent blogpost Why are all the Twitterbots White?, “the sad reality is, the internet is plagued with structural racism”. While there are other factors like capitalism/consumerism that are other obvious reasons for why we pay for knowledge, structural racism is important to consider as it is “the normalised and legitimised range of policies, practices, and attitudes that routinely produce cumulative and chronic adverse outcomes for people of colour”. So, when it comes to gaining knowledge, research findings are normally only available to those who can afford to read them. Those who often come from Western background… Those who produce most of the knowledge in the first place.
To combat this, we need to start with opening up knowledge databases for everyone. Providing every individual with the same access to knowledge will allow for, as Cooper and Condie argue in regards to social science research in particular, “an ‘unfinalised’ approach” that can be achieved by “making more space for a wider range of perspectives, writing styles, and authors”. Not only will this provide the rest of the world the knowledge that we Westerners may have, but we too can benefit from this. We will gain insight into the multiplicity of perspectives, voices, and knowledge within our world.
Who are we to restrict someone from gaining or producing knowledge just because it may be different to our own experience?
