Working in the Open: lessons from open source on building innovation networks in education

Purpose This article makes the case that the education community can learn from professional learning and innovation practices, collectively called “Working in the Open” (or “Working Open”), that have roots in the free/open source software (F/OSS) movement. These practices focus on values of transparency, collaboration and sharing within communities of experimentation. This paper aims to argues that Working Open offers a compelling approach to fostering distributed educational professional networks that focus on co-constructing new projects and best practices. Design/methodology/approach Insights presented here are based on three sources: expert perspectives on open source work practices gleaned through interviews and blog posts, a qualitative case analysis of a collaborative project enacted by a group of informal learning organizations within the Hive NYC Learning Network, a community of over 70 youth-facing organizations in New York City, as well as an overview of that network’s participation structures, and, finally, knowledge-building activities and discussions held within the Hive NYC community about the topic in situ. From these sources, the authors derived general principles to guide open work approaches. Findings The authors identify five practices deemed as central to Working Open: public storytelling and context setting, enabling community contribution, rapid prototyping “in the wild”, public reflection and documentation and, lastly, creating remixable work products. The authors describe these practices, show how they are enacted in situ, outline ways that Hive NYC stewards promote a Working Open organizational ecosystem and conclude with recommendations for utilizing a Working Open approach. Originality/value Drawing from the F/OSS movement, this article builds on standard practices of professional learning communities to provide an approach that focuses on pushing forward innovation and changes in practice as opposed to solely sharing reflections or observing practices.

[1]  Z. Popovic,et al.  Increased Diels-Alderase activity through backbone remodeling guided by Foldit players , 2012, Nature Biotechnology.

[2]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .

[3]  Dr. Jan Hylén Open Educational Resources: Opportunities and Challenges , 2008 .

[4]  E. G. Coleman,et al.  Coding Freedom: The Ethics and Aesthetics of Hacking , 2012 .

[5]  Ann Lieberman,et al.  Inside the National Writing Project: Connecting Network Learning and Classroom Teaching , 2002 .

[6]  Georg von Krogh,et al.  Open Source Software and the "Private-Collective" Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[7]  Yochai Benkler,et al.  Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm , 2001, ArXiv.

[8]  Christopher Kelty,et al.  Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software , 2008 .

[9]  Dan Gillmor,et al.  We the media - grassroots journalism by the people, for the people , 2006 .

[10]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  Defining, Understanding, and Supporting Open Collaboration , 2013 .

[11]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[12]  E. Hippel Innovation by User Communities: Learning From Open-Source Software , 2001 .

[13]  Mikko Mustonen,et al.  Copyleft - the economics of Linux and other open source software , 2003, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[14]  Y. Benkler,et al.  The Wealth of Networks , 2008 .

[15]  Daniel E. Atkins and John Seely Brown and Allen L. Hammond,et al.  A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities , 2007 .

[16]  David P. Anderson,et al.  SETI@home: an experiment in public-resource computing , 2002, CACM.

[17]  Thomas Vogt,et al.  Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science , 2012 .