Open Praxis is a peer-reviewed open access scholarly journal focusing on research and innovation in open, distance, and flexible education. It is published by International Council for Open and Distance Education - ICDE Web of Science (ESCI) Impact Factor for 2023 is 0,9; ranked 457 out of 759 in Education and Educational Sciences in Q3. Scopus Cite Score is 3.5; ranked 453 out of 1543 in Education category in Q2 and 72 out of 2801 in Library and Information Sciences category in Q2. Facts and Figures: 2024 article acceptance rate is 33%, rejection rate is 67% (13% desk rejections - 54% rejections after review). While the number of days for acceptance is 44, the number of days for rejection is 16.

This study examined how the role of digitalization is framed in the strategic development plans of 75 top universities in China. Findings show that digitalization as perceived by these universities features instrumentality (e-campus construction and application) and modernization (sustaining and efficiency innovations in teaching and learning), a situation also seen in other countries. On the other hand, there seems to be not enough incentive for them to use digital technologies to serve a wider community and to build technology-enhanced research capacity. There is also scanty evidence of open, flexible, distributed, and disaggregated learning encouraged in these plans. Finally, unique to Chinese higher education institutions are the goals of building a positive online ethos and developing political and ideological education via digital means. Influence of national policies and strategies on institutional digital strategies is also discussed.

Interaction is a recurrent theme in the literature on distance education. Much of the research along these lines is dedicated to reciprocal interpersonal interaction, that is, learner–learner and learner–instructor interaction. But there is far less research interest in learner–content interaction despite its fundamental and critical role in ensuring the effectiveness of the distance learning experience and education more generally. This article reflects on the interrelationship and interplay between learner–content, learner–instructor and learner–learner interactions by drawing on the three-types-of-interaction framework, equivalency theorem and other interaction research literature. It concludes by calling for more effort to be made to understand how distance learners study course materials or content, arguing that distance learning course materials may not be able to cater for distance learners and achieve their intended learning outcomes unless their design and production are informed by empirical research on learner–content interaction.

This reflection focuses on the position of distance education in today’s global higher education. Firstly, it identifies three types of convergence of distance and campus-based education – dual mode, add-on/blended, and full convergence – arguing that the last type has yet to be fully realized due to the complexities involved. It then critiques the interplay between the two, concluding that despite being influenced by campus-based instructional delivery in its early days, distance education is now influencing campus-based education. Implications of convergence are also discussed. Arguably, distance education universities should be proud of the increasing presence of distance education in campus-based universities and have confidence in maintaining their advantages. As for campus-based universities, a systems approach is needed if they intend to take advantage of this ‘unorthodox’ mode of education. Finally, it is suggested that both campus-based education and distance education are at the center of higher education because they are now equally conventional.

Why is Openness in Education important, and why is it critically needed at this moment? As manifested in our guiding question, the significance of Openness in Education and its immediate necessity form the heart of this collaborative editorial piece. This rather straightforward, yet nuanced query has sparked this collective endeavour by using individual testimonies, which may also be taken as living narratives, to reveal the value of Openness in Education as a praxis. Such testimonies serve as rich, personal narratives, critical introspections, and experience-based accounts that function as sources of data. The data gleaned from these narratives points to the understanding of Openness in Education as a complex, multilayered concept intricately woven into an array of values. These range from aspects such as sharing, access, flexibility, affordability, enlightenment, barrier-removal, empowerment, care, individual agency, trust, innovation, sustainability, collaboration, co-creation, social justice, equity, transparency, inclusivity, decolonization, democratisation, participation, liberty, and respect for diversity. This editorial, as a product of collective endeavour, invites its readers to independently engage with individual narratives, fostering the creation of unique interpretations. This call stems from the distinctive character of each narrative as they voice individual researchers’ perspectives from around the globe, articulating their insights within their unique situational contexts.