for universities, so the role of libraries in the digital age is also under examination. The OSU library, in collaboration with their own university press, is working with academics to create open textbooks for undergraduates (OSU 2014). This is mainly aimed at addressing the issue of cost for students, but it also enhances the university’s reputation, as these books are open to all, and increases student satisfaction, as the material can be adapted to suit the changing needs of curriculum. University libraries are perfectly positioned to perform this function with all the requisite skills and resources, and it arguably offers a better return on investment than procuring access to journals which are read by only a small group of researchers.
All of these forms of openness are relatively easy to realise and aim at simply exposing the good practice within universities. In a digital, networked age, erecting boundaries around the institution is harmful because it speaks of isolation.
A related issue is the suitability of the learning experience in the world the graduate will encounter when they leave education. It is a frequent complaint that graduates are not suitably equipped with the skills they need for employment (e. g. Levy 2013). It’s possible that this claim is ill-founded and rather it is that employers may not be equipped to deal with the modern skill set their graduates possess. However, if there is validity in it, then open practice again provides a partial solution. To revisit one of the objections of Groom and Lamb, the LMS, and indeed the university physical environment, is one that is largely unlike any other. Too often assessment and coursework focuses on artificial tasks or contrived examples. Open practice allows students to engage in the type of tasks and develop the type of skills they may need in any type of employment, without reducing a university education to merely vocational training. For instance, establishing an online
