Leigh, I'm not sure if you said ...jobs on the line... with tongue in cheek? but all the institutions I have worked for [colleges and universities (particularly recently)] have had problems filling IT positions. And when I consider global demand for experienced IT people I don't think job losses should be an issue. I think it's more conceptual and local competition between institutions. I just don't think the current crop of senior institutional management truly understand the concept of a national or regional shared service and the huge financial benefits it could provide. Well have to wait for a change of the senior management guard before we can make great headway...
On Apr 21, 5:57 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > it would be hey James.. there must be organisations out there that do that. > I heard that Apple Australia issue macs in a box to all their employees, and > then it is up to them to work out how to get them running and keep them > running. > > I think Utility web services with networked users and support is clearly the > way to go.. why is it taking IT units so long to catch on? Oh, I know.. jobs > on the line.. > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:05 AM, James Neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Perhaps uni's provide minimal baseline IT service. Students and staff > > then receive their proportion of IT budget to spend it how they see fit. > > That would fun to see. > > > Leigh Blackall wrote: > > > Yes, that's precisely what I am thinking. Utility internet services, > > wireless, and individually owned units. And then some. > > > Cost of ICTs is covered by institutional budgets, that are suplimented by > > government funding, as well as student fees... so indirectly the cost of > > ICTs affects student fees. > > > So, from a campaign perspective, one would have to be careful when > > lobbying and then over seeing such a cost reduction proposal, that it did > > indeed have a direct impact of student fees. A bit like global aid money.. > > we have to follow the trail all the way to the end to make sure it gets to > > those who need. > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:03 AM, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Leigh, > > > > Upon reading this reply I believe we have considerable alignment on > > > this issue. A few questions on this topic as I believe them imporatnt > > > to this conversation. > > > > 1) Someone pays for access somehow. To say your institution provides > > > access for free I would question this. Where is the cost for this > > > infrastructure covered? In student tuition fees? or internal to the > > > institutions budget? Or is it provided for free by national > > > infrastructure budgets? Other? > > > 2) No need to go on... But I wonder if NZ has an initiative to create > > > an academic shared service for much of this infrastructure. One thing > > > I have been advocating for is national (or provincial, as in Canada) > > > shared service for many of the items you have listed. Just imagine how > > > great it would be if there was a NZ national infrastructure for all > > > this. I could see at least six of these items moved into this national > > > infrastructure and the costs shared among all the institutions of > > > learning that consume it. (that would be great savings for each > > > institution) Just think of the competative advantage NZ institutions > > > could have in the global distance ed space if they pulled this off. So > > > much more money would be made available for the development of courses > > > not in dealing with infrastructure... > > > > Then make a deal with ASUS and give every student an Eee PC 900 with > > > very little (or maybe no) increase to tuition fees... > > > > Cheers, > > > > On Apr 18, 6:45 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 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., > > ... > > read more ยป --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
