Leigh, Peter, Hope you don't mind me piping in. Just reading the conversation. "So say all of us". You mentioned 'utility computing', which is a banner that might grow legs if only wikieducator's (for one) global groups might act as the hub for funding rather than your individual institutions. I guess the hardest thing to believe for people who mostly work in institutions is believing research AND development should be funded through their institutions.
If you read what major donors like HP are saying, they're struggling to find ways that encourage the silos to collaborate. All the millions flow out, and the only effect, especially in the Open Education Resources Space, is the constant repetition of "me too" course materials, marketed by babies, to a world overloaded with information. http://www.hewlett.org/Programs/Education/OER/OpenContent/Hewlett+OER+Report.htm The institutions will not change their habits, primarily because they have people like you in them. If you were to walk out the door and say, thanks very much but I can do a lot more with my global mates, do you think things might change a bit faster? So never believe THEY are going to change. They, and their routines, will become more or less relevant as time goes on. That''s always been the way of institutions. (I mean routines, not just architecture) So you can talk forever about your frustrations with them or you can start working on a grant for funding, and what you would do with the pennies. And if you are successful in achieving some goal, you'll probably get more funding. That's just the way of the real world. In the meantime, all we can do is talk and talk and talk and........... BTW Leigh, remember that silo called edna? They've just started a thing called me.edu.au. I don't think they've realized that they've started a learning account for all Aussies. But now they've let the cat out of the bag, they can't put it back. Now if only i knew some people who had the same type of account in different countries. They might get the NREN's engineers to begin aligning their pipes to suit their global groups rather than their National institutions. In the meantime, we'll just have to talk here, with our heads in a cloud. On Apr 22, 2:13 pm, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 > > ... > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
