I had been asked to facilitate a session on quality assurance in OER release, which meant I was able to talk about a lot of UKOER work where projects allowed students and end-users input into the design and delivery of resources. I was keen to emphasise that our experience had been that projects had been largely keener to use existing quality processes, for instance
*Existing institutional processes around teaching quality assurance, where resources are used in formal teaching before being released.
*Existing web-copy processes, where resources are included on institutional websites
*Peer-review (either formally for research-based resources, or informally where resources are published on blogs or social media.)
*Authorial reflections and review – where academics and content creators use the occasion of open release to critically reflect and improve on their resources.
*And assessed work, where materials are created by students and assessed for academic credit.
There are different quality requirements for different models of OER release – for instance a project aiming to change cultures and promote open academic practice would need a very different approach to a project where content is commissioned and then released openly. Part of quality (and monitoring, and dissemination…) plans depend on why we are releasing material in the first place.