Wesley, don't forget Yale! I think we should start brainstorming the list of criteria asap, either here or on the wiki.
-Adi On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Wesley Chen <[email protected]>wrote: > @Kevin: A Top 10 list would be a great start; that's already a basketful to > deal with! I think we already know what schools to look at first: Harvard, > MIT, NYU, Georgetown, USC, Swarthmore, etc. > @Christina: If we get this thing off the ground in time, we could get a lot > of exposure during college apps time through the usual channels: Slashdot, > Ars, digg, BB, etc. > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Christina Ducruet <[email protected]>wrote: > >> What an excellent suggestion. These are also high profile so our ratings >> could conceivably get viewed by a lot of people researching these schools. >> Anyone got great SEO skills? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Kevin Donovan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Just had a meeting with some people at Georgetown and bounced this idea >> off them. They really like it and think it would be a good way to enact >> change. >> >> One point they made: because we do not have the resources to do a large >> survey of schools, one professor with lots of political experience suggested >> we do a Top 10 Report as a beginning (researching and ranking US News' Top >> 10 Schools). I think this makes a lot of sense because it will still force >> us to define the methodology and give us experience with the research >> process, but it will not over-extend us. What's more, once we have this, it >> could serve as a point to justify some funding to do a larger survey. >> >> On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 3:39 PM, D Parker Phinney < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> definitely interested in helping with logistics, including both the >>> criteria for the report card, as well as any web programming or whatever >>> that needs to be done. after tuesday, school is out! >>> >>> Wesley Chen wrote: >>> > @Kevin: Right, determining the criteria and their point weight seems to >>> > be the hardest part. Each category, such as Open Access or Network >>> > Filtering ought to be broken down into smaller, simple questions like >>> > "has the university considered Open Access?" or "is the university in >>> > discussion about implementing OA?" The point is to make the overall >>> > grading criteria as granular as possible. Besides Y/N questions, I >>> can't >>> > think of another way to make a objective judgment—using a scale of 1-5 >>> > clearly isn't an option. So in any subcategory, a YES may yield any >>> > number of points. This grading system obviously will be finessed later. >>> > *I think assembling the criteria bank will be the toughest part.* >>> > >>> > *...@christina: Sure. Let's say that the overall criteria index is worth >>> > 50 points. You'd need at least 45 points for an "A"-range grade. >>> > However, we're running into the same problem of objectiveness if our >>> > definition of openness isn't based in numbers. So, openness might have >>> > to be defined by 10 or so Y/N questions. >>> > >>> > @Alex: Would appreciate that! >>> > >>> > Parker H and I already had a discussion about this recently. I think >>> > this project has a lot of potential, and I'm glad we're picking up >>> steam >>> > again. Anyone else who hasn't chimed in on this thread interested in >>> > forming a more formal committee to work on this? >>> > >>> > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Alex Kozak < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected] >>> > <mailto: <[email protected]>[email protected]>> wrote: >>> > >>> > ccLearn is starting up a project to create a database for >>> University >>> > copyright ownership policies in a Semantic MediaWiki format. I >>> > should be able to give you all more information about that soon so >>> > that you could use it and/or contribute to it, but it isn't quite >>> > ready yet. >>> > >>> > - Alex >>> > >>> > >>> > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Kevin Donovan <<[email protected]> >>> [email protected] >>> > <mailto: <[email protected]>[email protected]>> wrote: >>> > >>> > I really do like this idea and the idea of a stand-alone Open >>> > University Report site sounds great. >>> > >>> > My main concern (outside scalability) is the criteria by which >>> we >>> > judge. Ideally, it would be objective so we could cross index >>> > schools, >>> > but what would those be besides Y/N indicators? >>> > >>> > On 4/27/09, Wesley Chen < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected] >>> > <mailto: <[email protected]>[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> > > Parker: One of the kids you might remember meeting when I >>> was at >>> > > Dartmouth on Sat night worked on GreenReportCard.org a >>> little >>> > while back. >>> > > Looking at that site tonight has given me the idea that we >>> > should try to >>> > > create a similar score card with a set of standardized >>> > grading criteria >>> > > (e.g. administration, licensing, Open Access, etc.). >>> > > The way our wiki article is structured right now is clunky, >>> > and the >>> > > information is admittedly incomplete. How about creating a >>> > rundown for each >>> > > school similar to the way GRC does it? It's easier (and more >>> > fun) to read >>> > > and write, plus I think it would be far more appealing to >>> the >>> > non-FC crowd >>> > > comparing colleges or to those already attending but looking >>> > to identify >>> > > areas of improvement at their school. >>> > > >>> > > Do you think the report card portion of OU should spin off >>> > and become its >>> > > own project and web site? Baby steps first, of course, but I >>> > think moving in >>> > > that direction could have great potential. >>> > > >>> > > — W >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 8:31 PM, D Parker Phinney >>> > > < <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> > <mailto:<[email protected]> >>> [email protected]>>wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> so, some schools are ending for summer very soon. we still >>> > have a good >>> > >> 5 weeks here at dartmouth, and we plan on spending part of >>> > that time >>> > >> getting together our OU status report (once controversially >>> > referred to >>> > >> as a "report card") together. >>> > >> >>> > >> i encourage other chapters to try to do the same by the end >>> > of the >>> > >> school year. it would be great to get some kind of press >>> > release or >>> > >> blog post together early this summer showing where we are >>> > and what we've >>> > >> done. >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>> <http://wiki.freeculture.org/Open_University_individual_university_status_and_information> >>> http://wiki.freeculture.org/Open_University_individual_university_status_and_information >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> an incomplete report is better than a nonexistent one. >>> > >> >>> > >> -- >>> > >> D Parker Phinney >>> > >> madebyparker.com < <http://madebyparker.com> >>> http://madebyparker.com> >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > >> Discuss mailing list >>> > >> <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> > <mailto:<[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> >>> > >> <http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Sent from my mobile device >>> > >>> > Kevin Donovan >>> > Georgetown '11: SFS >>> > 630.849.8285 >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Discuss mailing list >>> > <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> > <mailto:<[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> >>> > <http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Alex Kozak >>> > <[email protected]>[email protected] <mailto:<[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> >>> > 916.225.2718 >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Discuss mailing list >>> > <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> > <mailto:<[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> >>> > <http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Discuss mailing list >>> > <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> > <http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> -- >>> D Parker Phinney >>> madebyparker.com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> <http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Kevin Donovan >> Georgetown '11: SFS >> 630.849.8285 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
