Two kinds of cost
Learning has costs of two broad kinds. The first is the cost of content: books, courses, software licenses, and the permission to use and share them. The second is the cost of reaching that content: a device, a power supply, a data plan, and somewhere to use them. Open education is aimed squarely at the first kind. The digital divide, as it is usually understood, is largely about the second.
That difference explains most of what open education can and cannot do about the divide. It is a strong answer to one set of barriers and a partial answer, at best, to the other.
What open education answers well
Open educational resources are materials that can be used, and under their licenses often adapted and redistributed, without the usual fees or permissions. For the content side of the problem, this brings several clear benefits.
Lower cost of materials. Where a learner would otherwise buy a book or pay for access, a free alternative saves money. For families watching every expense, the saving on textbook costs can be meaningful, though it varies by country and level of study.
Permission to copy. Because licenses allow copying and sharing, materials can be stored, printed and handed on. That helps where a live connection is unreliable.
Permission to adapt. Teachers can shorten, translate or reformat material, for example turning a long video-based unit into a text handout.
No gatekeeping by payment. A learner does not need a card or an account tied to a purchase simply to start reading.
All of this is useful, and in some settings it is the main thing standing between a learner and the content they want.
What depends on device and data access
The answers above work only if the learner can open the material. This is where the second kind of cost returns.
Consider what is needed even for the simplest case, reading a free online textbook. A device must be available and working. It needs enough battery or mains power. It needs either a connection while reading, or a successful earlier download and enough storage. The learner needs to know how to find the file, open it and keep it safe. Failure at any step ends the process, and none of these steps is paid for by an open license.
For richer material, the requirements grow. Video needs more data and a faster line. Interactive exercises may need a recent browser. Assignments submitted online need a stable connection at the right moment. A learner using a shared or low-powered phone may be able to do some of this and not the rest.
The honest limits of free content
It is worth stating the limits plainly.
- Free content does not supply a device. A resource that costs nothing is still out of reach for a learner who has no way to open it.
- It does not supply data. Even a free file can be costly to download where data is billed by volume.
- It does not supply skills. Someone who does not yet feel comfortable using a computer will not necessarily find open materials easier than paid ones.
- It does not guarantee suitability. A resource may be free but written for a different level, language or curriculum.
- It does not remove the need for support. Learners often need a person to ask, and a license cannot provide one.
There is also a risk of overstating what is achieved. A repository holding thousands of free items is a real asset, but it does not show that any particular learner has benefitted.
Pairing open content with access measures
Because the two kinds of cost are different, the responses should be paired. Open materials work best alongside measures that deal with equipment and connection:
- Shared computers and quiet places to study, as in community learning hubs or school rooms.
- Lending schemes for devices.
- Offline copies of resources for places with weak connections.
- Support that builds core digital skills.
- Public programs on connectivity and affordability, which are usually a matter for governments and service providers, so check official sources for what exists locally.
Open education can make these measures cheaper to run. It is cheaper to fill a lent laptop with free materials than with items that need individual licenses, and it is easier to prepare an offline pack when the license permits copying. In that sense, open content lowers the cost of the access measures too.
Reading claims about the divide with care
Statements that open education “solves” the digital divide, or that it makes no difference, are both too simple. A more accurate picture is that open resources reduce one group of barriers, while the rest need other kinds of action. How much difference they make for a given learner depends on that learner’s circumstances, and the research on outcomes is mixed.
A balanced summary of the role
Open education’s role in addressing the divide can be described in three parts: it lowers the price of content, it makes content easier to share and adapt, and it makes access programs cheaper to run. What it does not do is provide devices, data or skills. Anyone planning to rely on open resources to reach people without those things should plan separately for them, and should check, with the learners themselves, whether the plan is working.