A tool, not a cure
Calling something a tool against unequal schooling is a modest claim, and it is the one this article defends. Schooling is unequal in many ways: some pupils attend well-funded schools with experienced teachers and plentiful books, while others do not. Open education cannot erase these differences. The question worth asking is what role it can reasonably play in the work of building fairer education, alongside funding reform, teacher support and changes in the wider economy.
What a fairer system might look like
People define fairer education differently, but several elements recur in discussions:
- Every child has the basic materials needed to learn.
- Teaching quality does not depend heavily on where a child lives.
- Students who need extra help receive it.
- The curriculum reflects, and respects, the communities it serves.
- Qualifications are open to people whatever their starting point.
Open education speaks to some of these more directly than to others.
Where open education contributes
Basic materials. Where schools cannot afford enough textbooks, openly licensed ones can fill gaps, since they can be copied and printed without paying royalties. This is one of the more concrete and defensible contributions, though copying and printing still cost something, and the quality of the material matters.
Teacher resources. Teachers in isolated or under-resourced schools can draw on shared lesson plans and exercises. This can reduce preparation time and bring in ideas they might not otherwise meet. The benefit is largest when teachers are also trained and given time to adapt what they find.
Local adaptation. Open licenses allow materials to be translated and rewritten to fit local languages, curricula and contexts. This responds to a common criticism of imported educational content, which may assume foreign settings.
Second chances for older learners. Adults who left school early can use open materials to revisit subjects, prepare for equivalency exams or build confidence. This broadens the idea of schooling beyond childhood.
Transparency. Because open materials can be inspected, communities and parents can see what is being taught, and can propose changes. That visibility is not common with closed products.
Where it does not reach
Unequal schooling is driven by factors that open materials do not touch.
- Funding. A school’s budget determines staffing, buildings, class sizes and support services. Free textbooks leave most of that unchanged.
- Teachers. Recruiting and keeping skilled teachers in difficult schools is a major challenge, and materials do not teach by themselves.
- Home circumstances. Poverty, health and instability affect learning whatever is in the school bag.
- Infrastructure. Electricity and connectivity are prerequisites for digital resources in some places.
For these reasons, honest advocates of open education describe it as complementary to other reforms.
Criticisms worth taking seriously
Substitution risk. If open materials are presented as a cheap alternative to proper funding, they could be used to justify cutting budgets, and the pupils in the poorest schools might end up with less. Whether this happens depends on political choices.
Uneven uptake. Optional resources are often used first by the students and schools best placed to benefit, which may widen gaps. Resources built into teaching have a better chance of reaching those who need them.
Hidden labor. Selecting, checking and adapting open materials takes teacher time, which is scarce, especially in under-resourced settings.
Quality and fit. Open materials vary in accuracy, and some do not match local curricula or exams. Poorly chosen materials can waste effort.
Whose perspective. Open materials may carry the assumptions of the people who produce them, and groups with fewer opportunities to publish may be underrepresented.
Limited evidence. Studies on open textbooks and similar resources report mixed findings, and many cannot separate the effect of the resource from other differences between users. Claims of large gains in fairness are therefore not well supported.
A sensible way to use open education
Given the above, the following principles seem reasonable for a school, district or community that wants to use open education in the interest of fairness:
- Treat it as an addition to adequate funding and staffing, not a replacement.
- Put resources into the hands of those who need them, with teaching built around them, rather than leaving them as optional extras.
- Support teachers with time and training to adapt materials.
- Involve local communities in deciding what is taught and in what language.
- Measure who uses the materials and whether results change, and be ready to adjust.
- Plan for the cost of keeping materials current.
The overall picture
Open education can contribute to a fairer system by lowering material costs, spreading teacher resources and permitting local adaptation. It is not a substitute for funding, trained teachers and attention to children’s circumstances, and its effects are uncertain and uneven. For anyone thinking about the topic, the useful stance is to ask what a specific open program changes for specific students, and to stay open to evidence that it changes less, or more, than expected.