Open and Flexible Learning debate

The times higher article sums up things nicely - I think it would be foolish of Universities to assume they can bank on a captive market any more. That might work for the elite (where there are strong social factors at work i.e. rich people) but for the mass of universities the future looks a lot more uncertain than it did a few years ago - especially in the UK where austerity looks like lasting a very long time indeed.

When the OU started many years ago the established universities looked down their noses at it - now an OU degree carries a higher premium than many 'proper' university degrees. Here are some questions about how a free (or nearly free) 'open commons' of educational resources and services might impact on an institution like the UAL:

What are the implications of the commons for students, teachers, institutions and society? If the commons are characterised by an economy of ‘plenty’ and open access, what is the future for an educational and cultural economy based on scarcity and restricted access?

How might the growth of the commons change the roles of; the creators of cultural artefacts, teachers, librarians, archivists, educationalists and technical staff etc.?

What kind of knowledge and skills are needed to navigate the Commons, both for individuals and institutions?

Engagement with the commons acts as a ‘lightening rod’ to raise debate about a broad range of issues such as; ownership, control, power and identity. How do we deal with this in our private and institutional roles?