[WikiEducator] Re: Active interest in our Strategy -- WE welcome your inputs!
What! Someone is interested in my patent? Thanks so much. The principle is very definite = classify the (national and global) Communities Of Practice, using a well entrenched bibliographic classification system. Dewey is the most obvious, primarily as OCLC, as its owners, have lots of threads throughout the library world and beyond. E.g.They have(?) a relationship with Google. If you have a google taskbar, they used to have a thing called 'questionpoint' as one of the dropdown search engines. It disappeared a late last year but it's still going. Their user groups = World Bank's COP's. http://wiki.questionpoint.org/User+Groups It might be easier to just point you at a little group of network guys so you can see it how the patent would be implemented. You might know questnet. It's an annual get together of aarnet guys and their national global peers in this part of the world. These are the unis who run it. http://www.questnet.edu.au/confluence/display/qn/About I'd like to point you at a page from their recent conference, which you can't see because they closed it down last week. They were streaming live and shortly after, offering the recordings (AT THE SAME LINK, ON THE SAME PAGE). So it enabled me to point both the (real time) engineers and librarians at the same page and ask, if we classified the questnet domain as (my deepthroat at the NLA suggested) www.607.940.edu.au, could we use it as both the TV station number and the place where the archive for this COP could be kept/constructed. Same idea as scivee (I'll point you at this article there and leave you to get a feel for what they're doing in the scivee domain. http://www.scivee.tv/node/4988/talks/16 ) That's it. Nothing really changes, so far as processes or (internal domain) architecture are concerned. It leaves each community to their preferred tools and approaches. But it gets the hubs revolving around 1 COP in each country, and opens the way for the real time network engineers to do their linking/resource balancing between COP's in each country. A simple reclassification of a DNS name changes the perspective for the two professions = one pushing, the other pulling. But they don't like talking to one another do they? Regards and thanks, simon On Jul 30, 5:18 pm, Chris Harvey gnuch...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Simon, I was wondering if you could explain your patent, wasn't it something like the dewey system but using domain names or something like that? Warm Regards Chris Harvey On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 4:22 PM, simonfj simo...@cols.com.au wrote: Always good to touch base :-) ALLways= Responses in text below. Thanks Simon -- have you been pointing folk to the most recent page being used for strategy development of the OER Foundation? See: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Strategy (I saw in earlier emails that you were pointing to the Logic Model of the Hewlett foundation bid -- just checking ;-) ) No, you're right. The main message (I was making to them) was Towards_open_participatory_learning_environments and the comparison between producer/consumer models and commons based peer production, so yes I was pointing at the earlier page. = http://www.wikieducator.org/Funding_proposals/Towards_open_participat... Encourage your networks to provide feedback here: Geez mate. They're bureaucrats. And you've told me about the world bank ones. http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator_talk:OER_Foundation/Strategy The OER Foundation (OERF) subscribes to open philanthropy -- I'm encouraging very wide feedback. We need to get this right. Collaboration among OER initiatives is a strategic priority for the OERF -- it doesn't really matter where OER is hosted -- more important to facilitate a network of collaboration. OK. The main message I'll try and make is this. We have a gap between the creatives and the infrastructure guys, MIT seems to have the same perspective, probably because they have an akamai perspective (and percentage from it). http://wiki.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?title=A_Call_for_Papers:_OCWC... The infrastructure is already there. Its called an NREN in every country. The creatives, like wikix and moodlexxx, only consider the top layer; http only usually. And they don't often consider the real time between networks. Skype, a closed voip global, costs zero. It's good enough. The telcos build for institutions (sometimes globally) and individuals (usually locally). Global COP's, forget it! If you watch some of those questnet videos, especialy people like sami from the finish one, you'll see the common failings in each country. The networks revolve around institutions. As a start -- we will be working on building a technical bridge between Connexions and the MW platform. That's good. Sorting the info so one domain complements another. It's a bit like wikipedia signing an MOU to take 100k images
[WikiEducator] Re: Active interest in our Strategy -- WE welcome your inputs!
Always good to touch base :-) ALLways= Responses in text below. Thanks Simon -- have you been pointing folk to the most recent page being used for strategy development of the OER Foundation? See: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Strategy (I saw in earlier emails that you were pointing to the Logic Model of the Hewlett foundation bid -- just checking ;-) ) No, you're right. The main message (I was making to them) was Towards_open_participatory_learning_environments and the comparison between producer/consumer models and commons based peer production, so yes I was pointing at the earlier page. = http://www.wikieducator.org/Funding_proposals/Towards_open_participatory_learning_environments:_Open_textbooks,_educator_training#Improving_collaboration_and_content_interoperability_between_mainstream_OER_projects Encourage your networks to provide feedback here: Geez mate. They're bureaucrats. And you've told me about the world bank ones. http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator_talk:OER_Foundation/Strategy The OER Foundation (OERF) subscribes to open philanthropy -- I'm encouraging very wide feedback. We need to get this right. Collaboration among OER initiatives is a strategic priority for the OERF -- it doesn't really matter where OER is hosted -- more important to facilitate a network of collaboration. OK. The main message I'll try and make is this. We have a gap between the creatives and the infrastructure guys, MIT seems to have the same perspective, probably because they have an akamai perspective (and percentage from it). http://wiki.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?title=A_Call_for_Papers:_OCWC_Global_2009_-_Content%2C_Infrastructure%2C_and_Creativity The infrastructure is already there. Its called an NREN in every country. The creatives, like wikix and moodlexxx, only consider the top layer; http only usually. And they don't often consider the real time between networks. Skype, a closed voip global, costs zero. It's good enough. The telcos build for institutions (sometimes globally) and individuals (usually locally). Global COP's, forget it! If you watch some of those questnet videos, especialy people like sami from the finish one, you'll see the common failings in each country. The networks revolve around institutions. As a start -- we will be working on building a technical bridge between Connexions and the MW platform. That's good. Sorting the info so one domain complements another. It's a bit like wikipedia signing an MOU to take 100k images from the german archivists into the wiki commons. So we duplicate (again), Meanwhile the infrstructure guys say Once we make some sense of how best to manage the archiving process we’ll see who else is able to host our data. http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/07/were-adding-an-off-site-archive-for-commons-and-the-xml-snapshots/ and the duplication goes on, and on. And the poor (national) librarians wonder what these upstarts are doing. I guess you know that WMF abcom are trying to get a process happening where ideas can be developed into concepts and then into projects. They've created a bit of a stir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Advisory_Council_on_Proje... Yip --- You may also be interested in the approach WE is taking for the establishement of community-wide projects. We're currently working on a policy for Workgroups which hopefully cater for more flexible approaches, see: http://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:WikiEducator_Workgroups/Guidelines That's nice, WE is probably the best at making these things explicit. If the moodlers (like OCWC) of the world were as good, we'd probably find a common language and approach. I take it you realize the (WE, WMF, Moodle) advisory board is just another workgroup? They could use some decent guidelines. You will also know that WMF will be comencing with an open strategy development process -- impressive project. I was over at WMF headquarters 2 weeks ago in my capacity as advisory board member helping the team to think through the process. Gosh, I wish we could see these kinds of conversations. Sounds like a cable channel to me. You spoken to the guys at researchchannel? It woud certainly alleviate their boring lectures. In the meantime, how about streaming them? Ted (turner) would probably stump the pennies, but Internet2 already have their commons, which, according to some of the guys, they'd like to share. My interest is, so far as the OER stuff is concerned, and that includes OCWC members, is how you might be acting as a catalyst here, or see wikieducator acting as a catalyst. I keep reading the doc, especially the (so called) paradox between teaching and learning, and just coming to a mental block. Which leads me to think that you're still looking at the Hewlett bid document -- which was very specific to some of the technical/pedagogical aspects of reuse. Either OER's are designed for one or the other.
[WikiEducator] Re: Active interest in our Strategy -- WE welcome your inputs!
Hey Simon, I was wondering if you could explain your patent, wasn't it something like the dewey system but using domain names or something like that? Warm Regards Chris Harvey On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 4:22 PM, simonfj simo...@cols.com.au wrote: Always good to touch base :-) ALLways= Responses in text below. Thanks Simon -- have you been pointing folk to the most recent page being used for strategy development of the OER Foundation? See: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Strategy (I saw in earlier emails that you were pointing to the Logic Model of the Hewlett foundation bid -- just checking ;-) ) No, you're right. The main message (I was making to them) was Towards_open_participatory_learning_environments and the comparison between producer/consumer models and commons based peer production, so yes I was pointing at the earlier page. = http://www.wikieducator.org/Funding_proposals/Towards_open_participatory_learning_environments:_Open_textbooks,_educator_training#Improving_collaboration_and_content_interoperability_between_mainstream_OER_projects Encourage your networks to provide feedback here: Geez mate. They're bureaucrats. And you've told me about the world bank ones. http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator_talk:OER_Foundation/Strategy The OER Foundation (OERF) subscribes to open philanthropy -- I'm encouraging very wide feedback. We need to get this right. Collaboration among OER initiatives is a strategic priority for the OERF -- it doesn't really matter where OER is hosted -- more important to facilitate a network of collaboration. OK. The main message I'll try and make is this. We have a gap between the creatives and the infrastructure guys, MIT seems to have the same perspective, probably because they have an akamai perspective (and percentage from it). http://wiki.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?title=A_Call_for_Papers:_OCWC_Global_2009_-_Content%2C_Infrastructure%2C_and_Creativity The infrastructure is already there. Its called an NREN in every country. The creatives, like wikix and moodlexxx, only consider the top layer; http only usually. And they don't often consider the real time between networks. Skype, a closed voip global, costs zero. It's good enough. The telcos build for institutions (sometimes globally) and individuals (usually locally). Global COP's, forget it! If you watch some of those questnet videos, especialy people like sami from the finish one, you'll see the common failings in each country. The networks revolve around institutions. As a start -- we will be working on building a technical bridge between Connexions and the MW platform. That's good. Sorting the info so one domain complements another. It's a bit like wikipedia signing an MOU to take 100k images from the german archivists into the wiki commons. So we duplicate (again), Meanwhile the infrstructure guys say Once we make some sense of how best to manage the archiving process we’ll see who else is able to host our data. http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/07/were-adding-an-off-site-archive-for-commons-and-the-xml-snapshots/ and the duplication goes on, and on. And the poor (national) librarians wonder what these upstarts are doing. I guess you know that WMF abcom are trying to get a process happening where ideas can be developed into concepts and then into projects. They've created a bit of a stir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Advisory_Council_on_Proje. .. Yip --- You may also be interested in the approach WE is taking for the establishement of community-wide projects. We're currently working on a policy for Workgroups which hopefully cater for more flexible approaches, see: http://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:WikiEducator_Workgroups/Guidelines That's nice, WE is probably the best at making these things explicit. If the moodlers (like OCWC) of the world were as good, we'd probably find a common language and approach. I take it you realize the (WE, WMF, Moodle) advisory board is just another workgroup? They could use some decent guidelines. You will also know that WMF will be comencing with an open strategy development process -- impressive project. I was over at WMF headquarters 2 weeks ago in my capacity as advisory board member helping the team to think through the process. Gosh, I wish we could see these kinds of conversations. Sounds like a cable channel to me. You spoken to the guys at researchchannel? It woud certainly alleviate their boring lectures. In the meantime, how about streaming them? Ted (turner) would probably stump the pennies, but Internet2 already have their commons, which, according to some of the guys, they'd like to share. My interest is, so far as the OER stuff is concerned, and that includes OCWC members, is how you might be acting as a catalyst here, or see wikieducator acting as a catalyst.
[WikiEducator] Re: Active interest in our Strategy -- WE welcome your inputs!
Wayne, I've been pointing quite a few (wiki moodle centric) people at the strategy doc, and asking them if they have something similar. My interest is in how, if they were to collaborate, and (scope and) share a few projects, we might get past the idea that a domain name is anything but a placeholder. I guess you know that WMF abcom are trying to get a process happening where ideas can be developed into concepts and then into projects. They've created a bit of a stir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Advisory_Council_on_Project_Development#Mission_and_Vision My interest is, so far as the OER stuff is concerned, and that includes OCWC members, is how you might be acting as a catalyst here, or see wikieducator acting as a catalyst. I keep reading the doc, especially the (so called) paradox between teaching and learning, and just coming to a mental block. Either OER's are designed for one or the other. It just can't be for both (that I can see). If they're for teaching then I'll stop bothering you. If they're for learning then we are trying to come up with modern digital libraries, whose 'commons' can be sucked into Communities of Practice (subject centric) domains, where they can be complemented with some Real Time tools. Can i point you at this conference of network engineers. http://qn2009vc.usq.edu.au/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=118 You'll find a few recordings of the live streams. The one from Mike Foley (from the world bank), as poor as it is, will be of interest. Lastly, you'll know that wikipedia.au have a conference on soon, and they've pulled quite a few reps from institutions. http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/GLAM/Attendee_mailouts I had hoped you would be there to meet the new WMF project manager. Regardless, stay well. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[WikiEducator] Re: Active interest in our Strategy -- WE welcome your inputs!
Hi Simon, Always good to touch base :-) Responses in text below. 2009/7/27 simonfj simo...@cols.com.au Wayne, I've been pointing quite a few (wiki moodle centric) people at the strategy doc, and asking them if they have something similar. My interest is in how, if they were to collaborate, and (scope and) share a few projects, we might get past the idea that a domain name is anything but a placeholder. Thanks Simon -- have you been pointing folk to the most recent page being used for strategy development of the OER Foundation? See: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Strategy (I saw in earlier emails that you were pointing to the Logic Model of the Hewlett foundation bid -- just checking ;-) ) Encourage your networks to provide feedback here: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator_talk:OER_Foundation/Strategy The OER Foundation (OERF) subscribes to open philanthropy -- I'm encouraging very wide feedback. We need to get this right. Collaboration among OER initiatives is a strategic priority for the OERF -- it doesn't really matter where OER is hosted -- more important to facilitate a network of collaboration. As a start -- we will be working on building a technical bridge between Connexions and the MW platform. I guess you know that WMF abcom are trying to get a process happening where ideas can be developed into concepts and then into projects. They've created a bit of a stir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Advisory_Council_on_Project_Development#Mission_and_Vision Yip --- You may also be interested in the approach WE is taking for the establishement of community-wide projects. We're currently working on a policy for Workgroups which hopefully cater for more flexible approaches, see: http://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:WikiEducator_Workgroups/Guidelines You will also know that WMF will be comencing with an open strategy development process -- impressive project. I was over at WMF headquarters 2 weeks ago in my capacity as advisory board member helping the team to think through the process. My interest is, so far as the OER stuff is concerned, and that includes OCWC members, is how you might be acting as a catalyst here, or see wikieducator acting as a catalyst. I keep reading the doc, especially the (so called) paradox between teaching and learning, and just coming to a mental block. Which leads me to think that you're still looking at the Hewlett bid document -- which was very specific to some of the technical/pedagogical aspects of reuse. Either OER's are designed for one or the other. It just can't be for both (that I can see). If they're for teaching then I'll stop bothering you. If they're for learning then we are trying to come up with modern digital libraries, whose 'commons' can be sucked into Communities of Practice (subject centric) domains, where they can be complemented with some Real Time tools. OER are for both teaching and learning. We can think about Communities of Practice for Teachers as well as learners. The interactions between teaching and learning are complex -- which also have major issues for the design and implementation of OER. As a teacher --, for example, I have yet to find someone elses lecture notes or learning objects useful for my own teaching -- because teaching is also dependant on teaching style. Hereing lies the differentiating feature of OER -- namely our rights to adapt and modify. Regarding the OER commons for learning -- would like to see ways in which we can make it easier for teaching mashups of artificacts in the commons. Granted -- this is not a trival problem, but over time we'll learn by doing :-). Can i point you at this conference of network engineers. http://qn2009vc.usq.edu.au/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=118 You'll find a few recordings of the live streams. The one from Mike Foley (from the world bank), as poor as it is, will be of interest. Yes I worked with Mike Foley many years ago at the World Bank. The GDLN was a dead horse before they started it -- We tried to advise them in the pre-design phases of the project, but in classic world bank style, no body listened. The Bank doesn't get the concept of open -- they are masters of pushing solutions down the throughts of countries around the world -- hopefully to get better uptake of national loans. Excuse my skepticism of Bank related projects -- I've seen too many failures ;-(. Lastly, you'll know that wikipedia.au have a conference on soon, and they've pulled quite a few reps from institutions. http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/GLAM/Attendee_mailouts I had hoped you would be there to meet the new WMF project manager. Regardless, stay well. GLAM will be a great event -- they asked me to come over, but just have too much on my plate at the moment. Cheers Wayne -- Wayne Mackintosh, Ph.D. Director, International Centre for Open Education, Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand. Board of Directors, OER Foundation.
