@Parker: You're right about the overlap. @Adi: That's a great 3-step plan. @Kevin: 15 or so schools to start off with is plenty. Thanks for starting the wiki article. Let's set this thing on fire!
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Kevin Donovan <[email protected]>wrote: > Sorry that was unclear. I think Top 10 USNWR schools + 5 or so (likely with > SFC chapters) makes a lot of sense. For example, UMich doesn't fit either of > those, but surely deserves recognition for their great work with > open.umich.edu. > > I'm editing: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Open_University_Report_Cards to > get some thoughts down on this. > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Adi Kamdar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > 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
