Online digital platforms can increase access to educational opportunities for marginalised students, authors and communities, but digital platform design can further marginalise Indigenous knowledge because such platforms are structured according to western epistemological assumptions. They do not accommodate for Indigenous or alternative knowledge frameworks. In addition, the premium placed on openness by certain platforms and licenses contradicts the approaches preferred by Indigenous knowledge authorities who tie the sharing of some types of knowledge to the identity and authority level of the intended audience. Knowledge in this context is not understood as discrete units of information that can be abstracted from their communities, easily shared on public platforms, but rather as sensitive materials that can only be shared by recognized knowledge authorities for specific purposes. The processes by which Indigenous knowledge authorities engage with knowledge sharing on digital platforms comprise a complex landscape in which social justice concerns come into play. This paper discusses how, within institutional design contexts, open educational practice (OEP) by Northern Australian Indigenous authors can enable different forms of social justice and work incrementally towards achieving greater recognition of Indigenous intellectual sovereign acts with due respect to the wider significance of Indigenous Sovereignty (Rigney 2001). It examines three sets of Indigenous open resources to gauge the extent to which open digital platforms allow for the expression of Indigenous knowledge authority, one necessary feature for achieving social justice in the Australian context. It examines the resources using Fraser’s social justice framework (2005) as modelled by Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotters’ (2018) and Lambert’s (2018) approach to educational resources, and how design decisions can result in greater justice in knowledge affirmation and transformation but originate in offline decision making.

中文翻译：

---

开放和数字平台上的土著作者身份：社会公正程序和潜力

在线数字平台可以增加边缘化学生，作者和社区获得教育机会的机会，但是数字平台设计可以进一步边缘化土著知识，因为此类平台是根据西方认识论假设构造的。它们不适合土著或替代知识框架。此外，某些平台和许可证对开放性的重视与土著知识权威机构所偏爱的方法相冲突，后者将某些类型的知识共享与目标受众的身份和权威级别联系在一起。在这种情况下，知识不能理解为可以从其社区中抽象出来，可以在公共平台上轻松共享的离散信息单元，而是作为敏感材料，只能由公认的知识主管部门出于特定目的共享。土著知识主管部门与数字平台上的知识共享进行互动的过程构成了一个复杂的格局，社会正义问题在其中发挥了作用。本文讨论了在制度设计的背景下，北澳大利亚州土著作者的开放式教育实践（OEP）如何能够实现不同形式的社会正义，并在尊重土著主权的更广泛意义的同时，逐步努力实现对土著智力主权行为的更大认可（Rigney 2001）。它研究了三套土著开放资源，以评估开放数字平台在多大程度上可以表达土著知识权威，在澳大利亚背景下实现社会公正的一项必要特征。它使用Hosgkinson-Williams和Trotters（2018）和Lambert（2018）的教育资源模型模拟的弗雷泽（Fraser）社会正义框架（2005）来检查资源，以及设计决策如何在知识的肯定和转化中产生更大的正义。在离线决策中。