Last week’s post that open education resources are a fantastic opportunity for the type of ‘systems’ reform we’re looking for in government has brought a robust national debate home. It opened a healthy, vigorous and dynamic dialogue between a national leader and a professor here in Washington.

In response to my first post, I was pleased that Shoreline Community College Professor Amy Kinsel, a 36th District constituent and higher education leader, took the time to write a thoughtful, engaging response.

Now David Wiley, a national leader in the open educational resources movement and someone whom I quoted at length in my original post, has published his own direct reply to Professor Kinsel’s rebuttal. It goes without saying that this is the sort of courageous honesty in our policy dialogue that we need in state government, and I offer my deepest thanks to both Kinsel and Wiley for engaging directly via this blog’s forum.

Why is this important?

Because it goes to the heart and soul of our value system about education. And it goes to the core of how we elect to spend huge sums of money in K-12 and higher education.

I so deeply appreciate the sense of engagement, the dialogue, the depth of discussion and the willingness of folks to raise the central question here in Washington: Should we embark upon a bold open educational resources policy here in our state in 2011? Should we take a close look at K-12 first and then reflect upon the implications for higher education?

And, of course: If taxpayers fund a project, doesn’t the public have some fundamental right to expect open access to that information?

Specifically, do you think Washington should join this cause? Is it now our time?

I’d like to engage in this dialogue together.

Interestingly, I happened to meet with Seattle Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson last week. She casually mentioned that one of the reasons the district wanted a supplemental levy from Seattle taxpayers was to fund new textbooks for students. I mentioned to her the importance of looking at open educational resources and she said she’d look into it. Given California’s lead in this area, and many other districts’ progress, I can’t help but think Seattle is ideally suited to embrace this endeavor. But why isnt’ our state a stronger leader in this area already? Why are we so far behind? Why are we failing to provide local school districts, as well as higher education as an institution, with a roadmap for how open educational resources can revolutionize both the quality and access to course material?

Higher education is different on some level and yet the larger systems challenges remain. If nothing, we need a robust approach to these challenging issues.

A vigorous open education resources strategy and execution plan could save us tens of millions of dollars. Let’s embrace the opportunity of this crisis. I intend to continue to explore this issue in great depth between now and the 2011 legislative session.

What’s your view? Will you engage with me?

Your partner in service,

Reuven.