A change in roles, not a replacement
When a course relies on one prescribed textbook and one teacher’s lectures, the roles are fairly clear. The teacher is the main source of content and the student’s job is to absorb it. Open education loosens that arrangement. If a wide range of freely usable material exists, the teacher is no longer the only gatekeeper of content, and the student is no longer limited to what was handed out.
It is easy to overstate this. Most classrooms still have a timetable, a syllabus and an exam. What changes is often a matter of emphasis, and it changes unevenly. This article describes the shifts that are most often discussed in the context of changing teaching practice, and notes where they remain more aspiration than reality.
Teachers: from lecturer toward guide
Selecting and curating. With more material available, an important part of the teacher’s work becomes choosing. Which explanation is clearest for this group? Which exercise is accurate? Which reading is at the right level? Curating is skilled work, and it can draw on a teacher’s knowledge of their students in a way that a fixed textbook cannot.
Adapting. Because open licenses allow editing, teachers can reshape materials to match their students’ language, experience and curriculum. This can make lessons feel less generic.
Facilitating. When content is accessible outside class, lesson time can be used for discussion, practice and feedback. The idea of the teacher as facilitator is popular in this context: someone who asks good questions, notices misunderstandings and helps students plan their learning. The flipped classroom is one concrete model of this.
Working with others. Openly shared material invites collaboration. Teachers who borrow from colleagues, and share back, often find their work becomes more visible. The topic of teacher collaboration is covered separately, but it is a recurring theme in how practice is changing.
Teaching information skills. If students can reach many sources, teachers spend more effort showing them how to judge those sources, which is a core part of information literacy.
Students: from consuming to contributing
More choice in how to study. Free, downloadable material means a student can read a second explanation when the first is confusing, return to a topic after the course ends or study at a different pace. This does not guarantee better study, but it widens the options.
Making things. In some courses, students edit, annotate or write materials that are shared with future classes. That moves them from reader to contributor. The approach is explored further in the discussion of open pedagogy.
Taking more responsibility. With more freedom comes more need for self-management. Students may need to plan their time, set goals and check their own understanding. Habits such as a regular study routine and metacognition skills matter more when no one is dictating each step.
Evaluating what they find. The wider the pool, the more important it is to ask who wrote something, when, and for what purpose. Students who skip this step may trust poor sources.
What may not change
Several things stay stable even in classrooms that embrace openness.
- Learners still need a knowledgeable person to explain difficult ideas and to give feedback.
- Assessment systems often remain traditional, and students will reasonably focus on what is assessed.
- Students who find self-directed study hard may struggle more, not less, if the structure is loosened too far.
- Many teachers have limited time. A new approach that adds to their workload may be dropped, however attractive it sounds.
It is also true that some of the shifts described here are not unique to open education. Teachers were facilitating and students were contributing long before open licenses existed. Open materials make some of these practices easier, rather than inventing them.
Hypothetical example
Consider an imagined secondary school science department, described only as an illustration. Previously, each teacher used the same printed text and set the same end-of-chapter questions. After agreeing to try openly licensed materials, the department shares a folder of adapted units. One teacher replaces a foreign example with a local one; another adds a short quiz; students are asked to flag unclear explanations. Over a year, the shared text improves, and lesson time shifts a little toward practical work.
In this imagined case, the change is modest. Nobody abandons the syllabus. But the teachers talk more about materials, and students see themselves as having some say in them. That kind of gradual change is probably more typical than dramatic transformation.
Cautions
Reports of change often come from enthusiastic early adopters, who may not represent the average classroom. Evidence on whether these shifts improve learning is mixed, and conditions differ widely between countries, subjects and age groups. Access also matters: where devices and connections are scarce, the shift toward online materials may not be possible, or may leave some students behind.
For teachers who want to make a start, a sensible approach is to pick one aspect, such as adapting a single unit or asking students to contribute a glossary, and watch what happens. For students, the corresponding step is to treat open material as a prompt to ask questions and compare sources, rather than as something to be consumed without thought.