Wesley--heh, okay. Brian--I think Wesley's response sums it up nicely. We can (fairly) easily get the schools with FC chapters to devote some time into researching/grading their school, and conservatively we have 10 fairly popular, well known schools right there (with a lot of overlap with USNWR's top 10). Once we have criteria/our own schools graded, I think it wouldn't be too hard to expand from there. For example, you mentioned Michigan, which I know has an OCW program, and perhaps more—it's just a matter of digging a little or contacting the right people. Basically, we need 1) criteria/scale, 2) to grade ourselves, then 3) to grade others. I think this would be the most efficient.
-Adi On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Wesley Chen <[email protected]>wrote: > @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 > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
