Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
L’Emuelle Moody
Liberty University
EDUC 696
Abstract
Proprietary technologies currently control the technology aspect in most private, public,
and higher education institutions. These technologies, typically software, are created by an
organization or an individual that has complete control over a secret source code, patent, or
formula used in the technology’s creation and do not allow for any form of modification by
outsiders. That form of control does should not have a place in education because twenty-first
century school districts that rely on technology to support differentiation used in learner-centered
instruction must be able to improve their technologies and customize it fully to meet the needs of
their learners at all times. Sharing to benefit all is Biblical and stated in Proverbs chapter eleven,
verses twenty-four through twenty-five that states “One person gives freely, yet gains even more;
another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty. A generous person will prosper; whoever
refreshes others will be refreshed.” Unlike proprietary technologies, Free and open source
technologies allow for sharing and improvement of technologies for the benefit of the society.
This research study justifies the integration of free and open source technologies in all
educational institutions and the use of a one-stop resource website for free and open source
technologies.
Keywords: (free and open source, proprietary software, Linux kernel, FOSS, GNU, source code)
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 3
The purpose of my study will be to ascertain the significance of integrating free and open
source technologies into schools. This research will be used to justify the use of free and open
source technology and in conjunction with creating a free and open source information and
resource website for schools. Sharing and giving through mediums such as free and open source
technology is justified by Biblical means and again reflected in first Timothy chapter six, verses
seventeen through nineteen that says, “Command those who are rich in this present world not to
be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in
God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do
good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they
will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they
Customizable, free and open source technology can be used to support learner-centered
differentiated instruction that allows for instruction of all students regardless of their special
need, race, gender, or socio-economic status. The Great Commission calls for Christian teachers
to reach all students, including the diverse, special needs, and struggling learners doing, and
doing everything possible to help them become better equipped to impact the world for Jesus
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) and SourceForge (as cited by Thankachan &
Moore, 2017) stated that the term Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) arises from the
conjunction of two organizations, Free Software Foundation (FSF) and Open Source Initiative
(OSI), where FSF takes a value stand on software development and distribution, while OSI
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 4
promotes the economic and practical side of Open Source Software certifying its software to
guarantee the right to modify, distribute, and use the software freely (p. 187). The Source
Initiative (as cited by Zoetewey, 2013) defined open source software technology as software that
has open access to its source code, no-cost distribution, and able to be somewhat freely modified
unlike proprietary technologies (p. 324). Free and open source are blended together because
nearly all free software is open source, and nearly all open source software is free according the
Free Software Foundation (Zoetewey, 2013, p. 324). These technologies may also be referred to
as Open Source Software (OSS), Free Software, Libre Software, or Free/Libre/Open Source
commercial technologies in which the source code remains secret property of its owner, but the
technology can be purchased, leased, or licensed from its vendor/developer (What is Proprietary
Software?, 2018, para. 1-2). Anyone that purchases proprietary technology must comply with an
end-user license agreement or terms of service agreement typically stating that the purchaser is
only using the proprietary software for what it is intended for and will not modify or re-distribute
outside of the agreement terms or risk being sued by its vendor/developer, or creator (What is
Proprietary Software?, 2018, para. 2). Customization of proprietary software is limited to what
its vendor/developer, or creator allows that eventually can become a problem when educational
Proverbs chapter twenty-two, verse six says “Start children off on the way they should
go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it.” To prepare modern learners to
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 5
function in this twenty-first century digital workforce, instructional staff on all levels of
education must teach students skills that they will not turn away from including creativity,
institutions at all levels are content experts of the subjects they teach, and the integration of
technologies are used to support and customize learning by making instruction more efficient,
motivating through engagement, and relating material being learned to the learners’ previous
experiences to make it more meaningful and lasting (Hamilton, 2015, p. 3). Graham (2009)
stated that “information and events must be connected to the students’ lives and experience if
they are to be meaningful and to impact their behavior” (p. 175). Hamilton (2015) suggested that
students have the right to use technology in every classroom, all the time because research has
found that students comprehend content at more long-lasting levels when technology is
integrated into their lessons (p. 6-7). Free and open source technologies provide opportunities
for all students to use technologies that can be customized to their learning style in every
classroom all the time where proprietary technologies cannot always do the same because of
their copyrights and user agreements. God gave humans, especially teachers, the responsibility
to exercise control over the world around them and to creatively and rationally develop its
potential and not to be slaves to a curriculum guide, teacher manual, or even proprietary
technologies (Graham, 2009, p. 111). Most teachers use a modern constructivist learner-centered
approach to instruction where the students are active participants in acquiring knowledge, social
interactions, and relating new information to their previous experiences while the teacher
facilitates instruction by providing appropriate materials that may include free and open source
technology, and guiding students through their differentiated activities (Hamilton, 2015, p. 9-11).
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 6
In 2018 there are free and open source technologies that have been created as an
alternative to almost every major proprietary software available. The 2017 Horizon report
(GBL) which makes learning more motivating and engaging by integrating lessons into
competitive, intuitive games where students can compete against others or themselves allowing
for immediate feedback to the user (Freeman, Adams Becker, Cummins, Davis, & Hall
Giesinger, 2017, p. 7, and Lothian & Ryoo, 2013, p. 11). The game engines used in free and
open source games allow for the developer or even an education intuition’s IT staff in
collaboration with the developer to have complete access to all the game engine’s programming
source code and are free to modify the engine as needed which allows the game to be customized
to meet the learners needs (Lothian & Ryoo, 2013, p. 14). In a study conducted by Botana,
Abánades, & Escribano (2012) the found that integrating beneficial proprietary computer algebra
system (CAS) software for student use is very difficult because of its lack of availability and that
its free and open source counterpart, CAS Sage, as a real teaching alternative to proprietary CAS
state of the art computational capabilities (p. 734). Another benefit of free and open source
technology is its facilitation in the flipped classroom model which can provide higher order
exploration opportunities for students such as Zengin (2017) found during his research on the use
of Kahn Academy combined with FOSS technologies such as Maxima and GeoGebra that
allowed students to benefit from technology effectively while learning rigorous concepts with
higher levels of difficulty (p. 90). Outside of the obvious advantages in the classroom, free and
open source technologies benefit educational institutions by valuing transparency, rapid cycles of
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 7
testing, collaboration and sharing within communities explicitly oriented toward experimentation
and collective accumulation of knowledge (Santo, Ching, Peppler, & Hoadley, 2016, p. 280).
Romans chapter fifteen, verses one through two says “We who are strong have an
obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let each of us please
his neighbor for his good, to build him up.” Like anything in this fallen world, there are always
critics of anything that may be of positive benefit amongst brethren and so goes the same for free
and open source technologies. No technology, thing, or person is perfect in this world, but as
previous Bible verses said, “let each of us pleas his neighbor for his good, to build him up.”
Although disadvantages of free and open software are noted by critics, they do provide
opportunities for improvement through collaboration because they are free and open source.
Some disadvantages of free and open source technologies discussed in the referenced journal
articles are lack of trained IT support, resistance to change by older instructional staff, lack of
broadband infrastructure when used in poor communities, less overall features compared to
proprietary software, pirated proprietary software, and tensions among the shared community of
developers.
Thankachan & Moore (2017) stated that the lack of free and open source trained IT
coordinators/administration and using them in to train other instructional staff, thus increasing
their technology self-efficacy with free and open source software and giving them the ability to
train a school community of staff along with training at other schools in the community (p. 192).
Providing adequate training to older staff can build their confidence with free and open source
technologies and motivate them to be more supportive and less resistant to the change. The lack
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 8
of broadband infrastructure in poor communities can be resolved by funding for upgraded latest
generation broadband services through funding from government resources and/or private
charities. Thankachan & Moore (2017) found in their research study involving the integration of
free and open source software in Kerala, India that broadband infrastructure problem was solved
by support from the government-managed telephone company BSNL that agreed to provide
wireless broadband connectivity to all government schools, support from the national e-
governance plan (NeGP) via use of their government’s Wide Area Network (KSWAN), and
support from the EDUSAT, or educational satellite that provided a broadband network to all
Unfortunately, free and open source software may not have all the features that closed
source technologies have, but this problem can be resolved with hard work and collaborative
efforts of the free and open source community developers. Pirated proprietary technology
directly affects the use of free and open source technologies because of the corrupt legal system
in poorer countries that are tied up with litigation along with unethical practices of secular
education systems that allow for use of pirated proprietary software, thus causing educational
systems to turn away from using free and open source software. The last disadvantage is
tensions among the shared community of free and open source technology developers. Lothian
& Ryoo (2013) said that open source software is often community-driven which in turn
development community and should be familiar with how the community is organized (p.
15). Without proper communication channels in the free and open source community,
In reference to the high cost of proprietary software, Hoe (as cited by Thankachan &
Moore, 2017) suggested a solution to high software costs would be to use free and open source
software (FOSS) because the technologies have a fundamental freedom of being able to use,
distribute, modify, and redistribute the modifications made to software without licensing fees and
with source code (p. 187). Mathew chapter twenty-one, verse six says “For where your treasure
is, there your heart will be also.” Using schools’ financial resources strictly for purchase of
proprietary software licenses can be very costly and put strain on the school community,
especially if it is already economically disadvantaged. Free and open source technology allows
for educational institutions to keep their money for other school community culture building
projects like the what Willis (as cited by Van Brummelen, 2009) described when he said that
“students (need) to do more than ladle out soup to the homeless or pick up trash, they (need to)
apply what they’ve learned in the classroom, develop leadership and communication skills,
become more caring and responsible citizens while helping community needs in the process” (p.
239). The possible financial disadvantage of using free and open source software could be its
cost of initial implementation in entire school districts. This could be costly in a sense because
the school district may have to pay an outside contractor to distribute the technology throughout
the educational institution and/or train all staff where as this support along with all applicable
warranties are included with the high cost of proprietary technologies. But, there are solutions to
the IT support and training issues of free and open source software as addressed in the former
section.
Mark ten, verse fourteen says “When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to
them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of
God belongs to such as these.” For teachers to follow Jesus’s instruction, we must reach
all students and can do so through differentiation. Van Brummelen (2009) suggested that
varying the type and complexity of activities, challenging more able students, preventing
frustration in weak students and giving all students opportunities to use and display their
personal strengths because not all students think, learn, solve, and create in the same way
or at the same rate (p. 219). Integration of technology to support differentiation so that
students acquire necessary twenty-first century skills is absolutely necessary. The issue
arises when school systems have to make a choice between purchasing costly proprietary
such as free and open source technology. The research in this paper justifies the use of a
one-stop, free and open source technology website for school instructional personnel.
This is a subscription free website can be used to provide background information on free
and open source technology, online resources linked directly to FOSS online websites or
downloads, tutorials on how to use various FOSS technologies, and the ability to make
References
Botana, F., Abánades, M. A., & Escribano, J. (2012). Using a free open source software to teach
doi:10.1002/cae.21565
Freeman, A., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., & Hall Giesinger, C. (2017).
NMC/CoSN horizon report: 2017 K–12 edition (pp. 1-58, Rep.). Austin, TX: The New
Media Consortium.
Graham, D. L. (2009). Teaching redemptively: Bringing grace and truth into your classroom
Hamilton, B. (2015). Integrating technology in the classroom: tools to meet the needs of every
Lothian, J., & Ryoo, J. (2013). Critical factors and resources in developing a game-based
learning (GBL) environment using free and open source software (FOSS). International
Santo, R., Ching, D., Peppler, K., & Hoadley, C. (2016). Working in the Open: Lessons from
open source on building innovation networks in education. On the Horizon, 24(3), 280-
295. doi:10.1108/oth-05-2016-0025
Sheninger, E., & Zhao, Y. (2014). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times.
Thankachan, B., & Moore, D. R. (2017). Challenges of implementing free and open source
software (FOSS): Evidence from the Indian educational setting. The International Review
FREE AND OPEN SOURCE 12
doi:10.19173/irrodl.v18i6.2781
Van Brummelen, H. (2009). Walking with god in the classroom: Christian approaches to
learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Colorado Springs, CO: Purposeful Design Publications.
What is Proprietary Software? - Definition from Techopedia. (2018). Retrieved April 22, 2018,
from https://www.techopedia.com/definition/4333/proprietary-software
Zengin, Y. (2017). Investigating the use of the Khan Academy and mathematics software with a
Zoetewey, M. W. (2013). The Rhetoric of Free: Open Source Software and Technical