In our institution, we provide access...

This means:

Terminals = NZ$2000 x 100s
Support perosonel = $40 000 per year x 6
Internet provision = 10s of 1000s per year
Software on terminals = $700 x 100s
Maitenance = $500 per terminal per year (includes depreciation)
Periphials = $500 - $1000 per terminal per year
Servers = $15 000
Website = Team of 4 @ at least $40 000 each per year
Server software = 10's $1000
Staff training = $100 000 per year

should I go on?

ICT is far from cheap, and is probably the single most expensive cost.
Rethinking the way we do all these things - such as FOSS, $500 laptops,
Wireless etc etc.. could save huge money
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Leigh,
>
> I am curious why you think it is mostly about rethinking ICT budgets?
> At present the internet is pretty much a free and shared service
> available to all education. Once you have access, there isn't that
> much you cannot do for free on the web. I'll go back to the beginning
> of this thread and re-state, I believe it has more to do with
> rethinking assessment (or support) and accreditation, and making these
> two open... Are you suggesting the ICT budgets be moved out of the
> institutions hands and put elsewhere (funding access, or further
> funding the internet as a global shared service)?
>
> Peter
>
> On Apr 17, 1:37 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Free as in cost is something I'm interested in. Indulge me on the
> following:
> >
> > Music will survive long after its institutions die
> > Journalism will survive long after its institutions die
> > Education will survive long after its institutions die
> >
> > (Inspired by a recent post by George Siemens)
> >
> > Granted, there will be a lot of loses, but with that impending doom as a
> > possible future for educational institutions, it is interesting to
> imagine
> > how education might be post apocalypse?
> >
> > Recently, I have been looking at student debt in New Zealand, their
> costs of
> > living, the sacrifices they have to make to get an education.. and then
> the
> > cost to institutions for offering the education services. I'm convinced
> that
> > we could get the cost way way down, to a point where it could be
> conceivably
> > free - so long as there is about 60% public funding behind current
> education
> > services, as it seems there is in NZ. And that's without changing much
> in
> > the way of education practice - most of it comes from rethinking ICT
> > budgets.. we in this thread are only skimming the surface of what the
> future
> > may look like...
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:31 PM, vmensah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > so it will not be called free in terms of cost, but "free" in terms of
> > > access to materials.
> >
> > > On Mar 26, 10:47 pm, "David Wiley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Peter,
> >
> > > > The content will be open to everyone, but enrollment in the school
> > > > will be restricted to those in the state of Utah (since the state
> govt
> > > > pays the bills).
> >
> > > > D
> >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > >  David,
> >
> > > > >  This is great to read. What an amazing step to put all this
> forward
> > > as
> > > > >  an OER Highschool. You say it will be free to students in Utah,
> will
> > > > >  students outside of Utah still have access? Or will all this just
> be
> > > > >  "open" within the state of Utah? And therefore be used to prove
> out
> > > > >  the model...
> >
> > > > >  There is one thing that jumps out at me from within this
> discussion
> > > > >  thread. Are we mis-using the word "Education" within OER. As we
> seem
> > > > >  to have agreement that Education is the whole, where learning is
> what
> > > > >  you do with the resources. Education includes the assessment,
> > > > >  accreditation, etc. that the educational institutions provide.
> > > > >  Shouldn't we really be calling these materials Open Learning
> > > Resources
> > > > >  (OLR). My point being (in the context of this Bissell article;
> >
> > >http://learn.creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bissellbo.
> ..
> > > > >  Don't we require Open Access Assessment and Open Access
> Accrediation
> > > > >  before we can achieve OER? Because this then makes free the whole
> of
> > > > >  Education. Wikipedia and Open Source have nothing restraining
> their
> > > > >  domain toward openness. OER has a huge restraint in that
> Assessment
> > > > >  and Accreditation are still closed. As we stumble toward OER
> don't we
> > > > >  need to wrestle it (assessment, accreditaion) away from the
> > > > >  institutions (like MIT, UNESCO, OU, etc) and also make it open
> and
> > > > >  free? And not until we have wrestled it away, OERs success will
> be
> > > > >  restrained. I wonder what Paulo Friere would have to say about
> the
> > > > >  institutions still controlling the Assessment and Accreditation?
> >
> > > > >  I look forward to your reply(ies)...
> >
> > > > >  P
> >
> > > > >  On Mar 26, 8:40 am, "David Wiley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >  > Simon and Leigh,
> >
> > > > >  > We haven't been talking about it much, because we're still one
> step
> > > in
> > > > >  > the approval process away, but for a year now we've been
> working on
> > > > >  > establishing the Open High School of Utah - a publicly funded
> (and
> > > > >  > therefore free as in beer to students in the state of Utah)
> > > completely
> > > > >  > online high school that uses OERs exclusively throughout the
> entire
> > > > >  > curriculum. The final approval should be given this May for a
> Fall
> > > > >  > 2009 opening in which we'll admit a class of 9th graders,
> meaning
> > > that
> > > > >  > we'll have 15 months or so to put together the entire 9th grade
> > > > >  > curriculum's worth of OERs built out to stand-alone quality
> (i.e.,
> > > not
> > > > >  > OERs to supplement textbooks, OERs as the primary content for
> the
> > > high
> > > > >  > school). Then in 2010 we'll do 9th and 10th grade, etc., until
> in
> > > 2012
> > > > >  > we're running all four years of high school.
> >
> > > > >  > All the materials will be freely available, as will our charter
> > > > >  > document, as will all the technology we will use to run the
> school.
> > > We
> > > > >  > hope to be a model of how OERs can revolutionize the practice
> and
> > > the
> > > > >  > funding of both learning AND education...
> >
> > > > >  > D
> >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Leigh Blackall <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >  > > Great post Simon, I enjoy your wit :)
> >
> > > > >  > > Maybe I should clarify what I say about "learning being free,
> > > education
> > > > >  > > still costs"
> >
> > > > >  > > I mean the same as you mean - learning is what people are
> always
> > > free to do,
> > > > >  > > and with todays enhanced capacity to access information and
> > > communication,
> > > > >  > > learning might be vastly improved.
> >
> > > > >  > > But what is education in all that? Well, to me education is
> the
> > > formality
> > > > >  > > that we agree is the extra, inflated, and fee driven bit.
> > > Education is the
> > > > >  > > bit of paper that says you have been learning...
> >
> > > > >  > > So I think we actually agree, but it may be that I'm being a
> bit
> > > too cynical
> > > > >  > > in my use of the work education.
> >
> > > > >  > > Here's a longer post I wrote on it if you're still troubled
> by my
> > > slogan.
> >
> > > > > > >  On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:52 PM, simonfj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > >  > > > On Mar 25, 2:05 pm, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >  > > > > Cormac, Leigh, Simon, Others...
> >
> > > > >  > > > > Thanks for the great feedback. I certainly hope some
> others
> > > jump in...
> >
> > > > >  > > > > Cormac,
> >
> > > > >  > > > > There is a body of work where the evaluation of a persons
> > > contribution
> > > > >  > > > > is evaluated via software; it's not so advanced that it
> can
> > > target a
> > > > >  > > > > single person and evaluate what they have done...
> probably
> > > one day
> > > > >  > > > > (soon), see these two
> > > > >  > > references;
> > >http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/projects/history_flow/http://www.s.
> ..
> >
> > > > >  > > > Ooo! I can't see it. But that's only because i never have.
> > > Evaluation
> > > > >  > > > to me, and I've had to employ graduates to do media jobs,
> > > always comes
> > > > >  > > > down to seeing of they, or their teachers, can do it. i.e.
> have
> > > > >  > > > institutions prepared the inexperienced for it?. Old
> > > industries, no
> > > > >  > > > problem. New industries, like the interactive media ones;
> > > rarely a
> > > > >  > > > clue.
> >
> > > > >  > > > Let me give you an illustration of a change going back 30
> > > years. Unis
> > > > >  > > > were trying to "teach" AV production stuff. Many didn't
> have a
> > > > >  > > > recording desk. Even fewer had relationships with bands or
> > > actors
> > > > >  > > > interested in recording. Even if some students did, they
> > > wouldn't be
> > > > >  > > > encouraged to bring those noisy long haired gits into a
> lovely
> > > clean
> > > > >  > > > studio.
> >
> > > > >  > > > So one dirty engineer in Sydney started offering courses in
> his
> > > > >  > > > studio, which now, though some unis in 49 countries, offers
> > > accredited
> > > > >  > > > courses.http://www.sae.edu/. But it wasn't until the unis
> were
> > > > >  > > > included in the Learning mix of enough working engineers
> that
> > > the
> > > > >  > > > accreditations were given. Until then, we usually just gave
> > > students a
> > > > >  > > > piece of paper, and for the more determined, helped them
> find
> > > them a
> > > > >  > > > job. Now a three month course has inflated to three years.
> >
> > > > >  > > > The thing i find fascinating - when watching new
> interactive &
> > > global
> > > > >  > > > media institutions, like Wikipedia, et al, get their
> Project
> > > Groups'
> > > > >  > > > Learning ground(s) together and professionalize good
> habits,
> > > while at
> > > > >  > > > the same time watching national Teaching institutions
> > > struggling to
> > > > >  > > > think outside their squares - is that nothing seems to have
> > > changed.
> >
> > > > >  > > > In the professionals' web space, you see the beginnings of
> > > global
> > > > >  > > > interactive environments, which are obviously self
> sustaining
> > > and
> > > > >  > > > appear to help people meet peers, get their heads around
> the
> > > things a
> > > > >  > > > good web designer needs to know and maybe get some (paid)
> > > experience.
> > > > >  > > >http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/Andthenyou look at unis' web
> > > sites/
> > > > >  > > > brochureware, ho! ho!  One obviously puts an emphasis on
> their
> > > > >  > > > members' communications, the other on the institution's
> > > information.
> > > > >  > > > i.e. communicating global GROUPS vs, National (.edu)
> NETWORKS.
> >
> > > > >  > > > As Cormac says, "you don't get a PhD, but you might be a
> damn
> > > sight
> >
> > > > >  > > > more eligible to get a job with a certain employer
> institution
> > > that is
> > > > >  > > > open-minded enough to recognise this particular work done".
> I
> > > don't
> > > > >  > > > think it's even a matter of them being open minded. It's
> more a
> > > matter
> > > > >  > > > that in the commercial world, one gets paid for results,
> and if
> > > you
> > > > >  > > > can point to something, like Liam can, who do you think
> will
> > > get the
> > > > >  > > > job?.This is very new ground.
> >
> > > > >  > > > I also think Leigh is quite right. "Through an
> international
> > > network
> >
> > > > >  > > > of teachers and assessors, we might see the cost of
> > > > >  > > > such processes and services greatly reduced!" But you have
> to
> > > have the
> > > > >  > > > "international network" first, and all we do have at the
> moment
> > > is a
> > > > >  > > > bunch of National .edu ones. Thankfully Web 2.0 Inc. are
> able
> > > to help
> > > > >  > > > fill the obvious gaps. But you got this wrong. "Learning is
> > > still
> > > > >  > > > free, education still costs".
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more ยป
> >
>


-- 
--
Leigh Blackall
+64(0)21736539
skype - leigh_blackall
SL - Leroy Goalpost
http://learnonline.wordpress.com

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"WikiEducator" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to