Here are a few questions from hub administrators about how OER Commons' collection policy may impact them and their hubs, along with their answers. These questions came up during a series of information sessions in the summer of 2024, shortly after the collection policy was released.


You can find the text of the collection policy here.


TABLE OF CONTENTS


Yes, as best as we can. For Open Author resources, there is an “I confirm I’m allowed to share this” box that users have to check when they go to publish their resource. Let’s say though that a user adds an image to a resource that they don’t have permission to add, and we’re contacted by someone who says that the image is their intellectual property actually, and they didn’t give users permission to use it in their work. 


As a service provider on the internet, we have obligations under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to notify the author that someone is making a claim against their work and what the next steps can be. When we do that, we’ll also have done a little digging to determine if the image really is under copyright/does the person filing the claim really have rights to it so that we can give the user a little bit of added context, and recommend next steps. So far (since Peter has been at ISKME) we haven’t gotten a false copyright claim, so usually in our message to the Open Author resource we’ll also offer to try and replace the image in the resource with something comparable/openly licensed, which typically settles the issue. When that’s not possible, we’ll revise a resource to remove the copyrighted portion of material so that the rest remains available.


For course related materials (resources submitted from the internet), Peter or Chris review these after they’re submitted but before they’re published to make sure the terms of use match what was given. If they don’t, we’ll correct the resource’s metadata and publish it. If a resource is truly not open or doesn’t allow educational use, we’ll reject the submission with a boilerplate email that says the resource has been rejected due to copyright issues.



Some teachers assume that something they put on OER Commons (using Open Author) will stay there forever. How can teachers save things in case the resource gets deaccessioned, or get access to it after it’s no longer on OER Commons?

Here are a few options, in no particular order:

  • Users can create and save their works on their own computer and then import into OER Commons either from google drive or by copying and pasting from a Word document.

  • If a resource already exists on OER Commons, they can put its URL into the Wayback Machine which will periodically check it and save it forever (or as close to forever as we anyone can guarantee at this point).

  • If the resource has already been deaccessioned, fear not! We very rarely delete resources from OER Commons and instead prefer to deaccession them, which saves the resource’s content but hides it from the view of both the public and the user who published it. We can revert deaccessioned resources to a draft, which lets a user make changes and resubmit it for consideration.



If a user finds that their resource has been removed, what should they do?

Don’t panic! Anyone can submit a ticket to ask about it, including hub administrators. As mentioned above, when a resource is removed from the collection, we generally don’t delete it – we just make it unfindable. The resource’s content (if Open Author) and its metadata (if Open Author or course related material) is saved.  



Do hub partners get notified when something gets deaccessioned?

No, but whoever added the resource to OER Commons does.



What if my hub/organization already has a collection policy? 

For example, the WA Hub resource criteria is given to teachers who are interested in creating educational materials. That’s fine as long as your hub’s or organization’s collection policy doesn’t allow something that is prohibited in the OER Commons collection policy. In addition, your collection policy can be stricter than that of OER Commons! However, just note that ISKME staff don’t consult hub collection policies or criteria when evaluating a resource for inclusion on OER Commons. Hub admins can remove resources from their hub’s groups.



What if a course related material specifies “all rights reserved” on the resource itself, but when the text of its terms of use actually allow educational use? 

Users can mention this explicitly in the abstract so that Chris and Peter know to verify that and apply an alternate license. We can work on formalizing a process for this if there’s demand, but for now this is the best option.



Is there flexibility in adding resources that are “works in progress?” 

For example, student co-created resources and other resources that are the result of Open educational practices, and other resources that may not be copyedited or perfectly written.


Yes! Make sure that that is noted somewhere in the resource itself (e.g. “this anthology was written by the students of ENG103”) so that Chris and Peter have that additional context when reviewing the resource. In fact, Peter has started thinking about creating a collection on OER Commons specifically for resources like this. Reach out to him if you have any in mind or would like to learn more.



Regarding metadata for dual-enrollment resources: is it okay to include e.g. both high school and CC/lower division for resources aimed at college students but written at a high school or lower level?

Yes! It’s a similar case for “college success” resources that tend to be written for 1st or 2nd year college students – both grade bands can/may apply due to the overlap in skills or knowledge that these resources teach.



What if I have another question that isn't answered above?

Not a problem -- submit a ticket and we'll get back to you with an answer as soon as possible.