Page:The battle for open.pdf/203

192 open education finds itself in. On the positive side, there is evidence of a growing number of policies that are directly or indirectly related to open education. Open access policies are perhaps the most obvious of these, but these have been ­followed by policies regarding open data (i. e., that not only should ­publications ­arising from public funding be made openly available, but the experimental data should also) and open textbooks. This indicates a succession model, wherein once one element is open then it follows that others should be also (this is explored below). From this perspective, open policy looks like it might well be the next major breakthrough for the open education movement, and as such, it will mark a significant point in its transition into the mainstream.

However as Bacsich as well as Farrow and Frank-Bristow (2014) suggest, it is currently a very mixed area, with different types of policy, and at the OER level, often a lack of substantial policy. Often an OER project is undertaken by a specific project within a university, and once that funding finishes, the project ceases. Farrow and ­Frank-Bristow suggest that policy forms part of a formula that is often seen with successful OER projects, which requires a pilot study, funding, a champion and policy to achieve sustainability and substantial impact. Unless such a sustainable model is established with senior management commitment, many projects do not lead to an OER policy being adopted by the institution. Developing a policy that relates to OER is crucial for the longevity of such policies, but too often it is not expressed as an explicit goal, and thus the project rather fizzles out for want of a strategic direction. As open education moves into the next phase, policies should be seen as not only a driver for this, but also an aim; the explicit intention to establish such a policy should form part of an open education project.