@Adi: That totally wasn't a slight—just a slip of the mind haha. Yes, let's
make a page on the FC wiki to organize our thoughts?
@Brian: The schools I rattled off were just ones that have been relatively
active in the Free Culture
movement. They all have Free Culture chapters, more or less. You make
a great point about creating
viable comparisons: it would definitely be our aim to rate as many schools
as possible (and diversely, too), but getting info about Lewis & Clark for
ex. would be ostensibly harder, because there's no FC chapter/contacts there
(can anyone on this listserv correct me?). As Kevin said, starting out with
a small group of schools with which we're readily familiar will make it
easier to hone our methodology and approach.

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Brian Rowe <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am a little confused, are we looking for the top 10 open universities or
> are we rating the top 10 USWR schools on thier open status?
>
> If the latter we should also include at least 2 other schools that are in
> the 11-99 field, but might have better Open University scores, it would have
> much broader appeal and be more useful. If a student is attending a lower
> rated school it helps a lot to have a similarly rated school to point to as
> an example when trying to get ones own school to open up. Telling Seattle
> University that Yale, who is slightly better funded, is open is not as
> effective as telling them that Lewis and Clark which has the same budget is
> ahead of us on this issue.
>
> Here is one I would recommend including and one maybe:
> Michigan
> Lewis and Clark ? (their law school is great, I am not sure about their
> undergrad)
>
> -Brian
>
>
> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Brian Rowe
> Juris Doctorate
> Google Public Policy Fellow @ Public Knowledge
> (206) 335-8577 (Cell)
>
> Public Knowledge
> www.publicknowledge.org
>
> Access To Justice Technology Principles
> www.ATJWeb.org
>
> Freedom for IP
> www.FreedomforIP.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to