David WOW! I'd like to join Peter in echoing our congratulations. This is a landmark milestone for the free knowledge community.
The WE community will help in every way we can in collaborating on the development of free content for this initiative. Well done Dave --- still leading the pack hey! Cheers Wayne On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 10:42 -0600, David Wiley wrote: > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
