Our application to create a new public, online high school based on
OERs has been approved!

http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/499

Now the real work begins...

D

On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 4:01 PM, simonfj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Leigh,
>
> Sorry this has taken so long. A lot going on at present.
>
> Re the blog. What would I want want with a blog when people like you
> say everything so much better than me?
>
> You know i inhabit lots of forums like this one - some inside
> institutions, some (like this) on the border, some which represent the
> new (global) institutions like sitepoint. The nearest thing to a blog
> = http://me.edu.au/p/Simonfj
>
> It's not much but you know it's constructed by education.au, and
> they're starting to see that me.edu.au could also be an Aussie's
> lifelong learning account = an OpenID to other .edu and .gov.au
> domains.
>
> Like most institutions, the edna guys have a problem separating
> eteaching from elearning. 
> http://www.groups.edna.edu.au/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=25285#78420
> But there getting there. Conflation is such a wonderful description
> isn't it?
>
> You might want to keep tabs on Moodle's Social lounge.
> http://moodle.org/mod/forum/view.php?id=6801
> And compare it to what Wayne''s doing and the (unreported) Tectonic
> Shift between wiki stuff.
>
> We seem to be at the stage now where there's starting to be some focus
> on the Real Time Communications stuff. The 'web 2.0' focus is tiring
> now = so many domains producing so many "me too" courses/information.
> But the driving factor is that the National telcos have squeezed the
> lemon dry (with VoIP, etc) and Skype has attuned global communities to
> just how much they are ripped off. So all those skills you've picked
> up by working with it should prove to be useful as its Open versions
> grow legs.
>
> I can't push this (my lady is sooo ill, so i can't get out) but i do
> have a patent which should be useful as the geeks start focusing on
> this little challenge. 
> http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1172
>
> In the meantime, thanks for all your stuff and others around this
> space (Wayne). It keep sane to see so much creativity and common sense
> in the one place.
> Here's one other. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/66
> regards,
> http://me.edu.au/p/Simonfj
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 26, 7:15 am, "Leigh Blackall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well said Simon. Do you keep a blog I'm not aware of? I'd like to be
>> following this type of advice and insight.
>>
>> Regarding very slight change all too slowly...
>>
>> The thing I am seeing more and more of in the institutions and the people
>> like me that have been in them for far too long, is the adoption of the
>> rhetoric but not the action.
>>
>> I am seeing many projects get funded based on their 'participatory' models,
>> their openness, their 'action' research. But in reality they don't have
>> anything near participation or openness, and as a result very little action
>> to then research.
>>
>> Simple things like, a fella in charge of a project organising a public
>> seminar to launch the project, in which 3 other fellas position themselves
>> centre stage and proceed to TELL everyone what they have planned. Typically,
>> they have not organised any back channel, their feedback loop (if they have
>> one) involves sending an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] that gets no reply. And 
>> at
>> the end of the seminar people walk out feeling ripped off that they missed
>> their fav TV show to attend it and NOT participate.
>>
>> I'm sure this is the way it has always been, but today it is even worse
>> because we have all the lobby and research that says participation and
>> oppenness is the way, and the government and funding bodies are positioning
>> their criteria for this, but the measures and accountability for
>> participation and oppeness are not in place. As a result, millions of $ are
>> being awarded to some projects for people who are simply good at wearing
>> rhetoric without really changing their action. Their reports end up the same
>> camelion output.
>>
>> I hope all this ranting is trikiing a chord your end, because I am seeing it
>> more and more, and it is concerning me a great deal.
>>
>> So, your suggestion to get the grant and do it 'ourselves'. Would we do it
>> any better? Given that to get the grant we have to adopt both theirs and our
>> rhetoric AND be accountable to that? The projects I am a part of that have
>> that accountability involve so many compromises that its easy to lose sight
>> of what you were trying to do in the first place.
>>
>> How can we obtain resources and retain the freedom to act and react quickly
>> and spontaneously like we have done so all along? Is this what the US
>> ideology of free markets and corporatism is trying to tell us? This self
>> organising principle based on a very simple funding arrangement of user pays
>> and demand...
>>
>> I'm starting to wonder off and become incoherent (if I'm not totally that
>> way already).
>>
>> In short, it seems that we ARE doing it already, and each of us individually
>> dragging our institutional blobs and resources along with us. I have managed
>> to position my job and its performance indicators so that my work with
>> Wikieducator can be sustained. So in that way, the institution I am working
>> in is changing, and I have the freedom to act and react in that new
>> framework. When I started, they would have had me work in their LMS. So if
>> we can get enough people doing that (positioning their job into this Wikied
>> utility web service), we might start seeing more sustained resources into
>> Wikieducator's participatory and open model, and the individual freedoms
>> with that. At the moment, I suspect that most people are simply dabbling in
>> Wikieducator and are doing so outside their job description and performance
>> indicators.
>>
>> So either things like WIkieducaor continue on that path and be patient, CoL
>> and other facilitators doing what they can to promote and develop it. And/or
>> we find a way that will suddenly tip the balance in a Google/Youtube kind of
>> way that involves us getting a large amount of money and working outside our
>> institutions with a very to subverting them...
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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