OERlabs Openbook/Wanting to change higher education institutions (Design Principles)

Getting in the field

How many projects at universities aim to bring about concrete changes? This is an exciting question that probably cannot be answered with a "black-and-white" answer, because projects as well as universities and colleges are nuanced in their processes. In principle, one always finds freedom, independence and opportunities in the university environment (or in science). However, both sides (project vs. university system) have their own routines for action (project logic vs. administrative logic). In order to be able to bring about change at the desired level, it is first necessary to familiarise oneself with the existing processes. Now one could argue that not every university level is open and receptive to new projects or ideas and processes. When it comes to the administrative apparatus, one is probably confronted with difficulties at one point, be it filling out specific forms, communicating and planning projects or organising open work processes. On this level it cannot (or should not) be the claim to encourage the university to be more open, although this would make sense from the point of view of a digital and open project.

This acknowledgement is important, as changes at this level should not be triggered by the actions of a few project members, but by a common goal on the part of the whole organisation. Of course, this sounds very vague, because how do you communicate with the "whole organization"? As a project in the OERlabs we had the opportunity to initiate many thought and work processes and to roll them up anew or to confront people with other possibilities. Here the demand for change manifests itself on a basic level of an organization, because what effects would a concrete position paper and future concept of OERlabs on openness actually have on thought processes? It was much more important to hold in-depth discussions (or dialogues) with people and gradually introduce them to new routines of action. This work could also be described as a "grassroots" movement, since change is not brought about from one semester to the next, but rather in small steps, in certain institutes, in some seminars and with certain teachers and administrative staff.

Working the field

Previously, a small treasure map was sketched in which the way to the buried "open" drawer is not marked by a straight arrow, but by many small steps and leads past certain people who help you in your search, e.g. with their knowledge, or their (institutional) possibilities. However, a university has a very specific reaction to the demands of projects. First, the structural hurdle of the project duration has to be overcome, because as soon as a university realises that a project "only" has a duration of 12 to 18 months, i.e. 2 to 3 semesters, it is quickly put on the side, as it is difficult to reach a broad mass of university actors during this time, as well as to perform sustainable work. On the other hand, although the financing and the planning is quite concrete (e.g. through the project application or the funding line of the ministry), this planning must always be done according to the actual university requirements. This leads to the fact that a certain balancing act is necessary in order to do justice to both the project and the university structure.

This is the challenge as well as the solution of such a project. Every organisation consists of institutions, which in turn are always made up of individual people. Although it is clear that in all cases certain processes have established themselves in the organisation, in most cases these processes are ultimately supported by these individual people. The claim cannot therefore be to want to change the whole organisation at once, but to get into conversation with individual people and to change their thinking and working processes. Organizations cannot be forced to their luck, however humans can co-determine the direction of an organization by their attitude. Deep discussions, networking with people in similar (university) situations, open discussion occasions offer a special breeding ground for the further development of organisations.