Hi Alex,

Good suggestions and thoughts in your post. Thanks for this - much
appreciated.

Yeah -- we'll need to think carefully about quality and how this should
unfold as a process within community and user-generated texts. We've
made a humble start with WE's QA and review project, see:

http://www.wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:Quality_Assurance_and_Review

and

http://www.wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:Quality_Assurance_Framework/Featured_Works

Technically -- it should be possible to assign more traditional peer
review rights for openly authored content. For example, Publisher X or
Institution Y may assign peer reviewers for a predetermined collection
in WikiEducator.  The published version would be based on the version
that is peer reviewed by those assigned. 

Personally I don't see these "newer" methods replacing authentic texts
--- In many disciplines there is a canon that learners must engage with.
You can't study Victorian literature without reading the corresponding
cannon. Similarly as you point out -- learning about post-structuralist
and post-modern philosophy requires an understanding of
enlightenment.   

Good point about form versus content --- however in my earlier post I
refered to the convergence of Distance Education pedagogy and
face-to-face pedagogy in the "text" -- here we see a diffusion of form
and content, where many pedagogical elements (form) are
diffused/embedded in the content. 

Working in the developing world,  I too am very concerned about global
student access to 24/7 connectivity.  At the same time I think WE can do
a lot to address this challenge. For example -- where text's included
rich media (eg audio or video), we could customise the pdf export
feature to generate an ISO CDROM image of the rich media and
automatically reference the activity properly in the text. For example:
Video Activity 1: View video XX on your CDROM and consider the questions
which follow .....

Costs of printing versus the size of the print run are an important
issue, particularly when offset printing approaches are used. However,
there have been significant advances in industrial scale digital
printing where on reasonably sized print runs in the region of 2000 ---
3000 it is in fact cheaper to produce using digital print technologies
than standard offset printing using good old ink and plates.  The power
of digital printing is that the marginal cost for one copy is the same
as a print run of 1500.  Thinking back to my days when I was responsible
for the Central Planning Unit at the University of South Africa, which
at the time operated the largest printing press in the Southern
Hemisphere -- the majority of courses had print runs lower than the
economic break even for offset printing, not too mention the challenges
of storage. 

The neat thing with this emerging wiki model -- is that the final print
technology can be determined by the size of the print run. So we can
utilise both digital and offset printing approaches.

Thanks again Alex -- this is very useful input.

Cheers
Wayne  




On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 23:45 +0100, Alex P. Real wrote:
> Hi Maria,
> 
>  
> 
> I agree on the limitations of traditional textbooks, but I can’t help
> wondering about quality criteria within user-generated contents.
> Where’s the balance and who/how decides about it? I may appear “dated”
> but have some causes for concern:
> 
> 1.      I’ve recently started developing OER and some materials are
> real crap despite how rich in media they can be.
> 
> 2.      Not everything  is online. May seem idiotic but I’m having
> trouble to find materials by seminal authors (Sociology,
> Anthropology).
> 
> 3.      Not every student has the appropriate background to decide on
> his/her study materials or priorities. You can’t understand
> post-modern theories without reading some “old bores”. 
> 
> 4.      Mistaking form with content, does pretty mean good? Same way
> “old school” may argue pretty can´t be good.
> 
> 5.      Not every student has access to a PC and Internet access or
> enough bandwidth to stream videos. And, again, depending on the
> subject audio/video can be more demanding than reading, so not
> necessarily ideal for everything. 
> 
>  
> 
> Print on demand is great if No. needed are low or you really  reduce
> costs printing locally, otherwise it can be more expensive than
> traditional printing. PDF of course provides access, nice stepping
> stone.  
> 
>  
> 
> Sorry if blunt, this is giving me some hard time. Right now I don’t
> even care for centralization (lol), if it’s good there’s always
> mashups. 
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>  
> 
> Alex
> 
>  
> 
> 
> De:[email protected]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de Maria Droujkova
> Enviado el: miércoles, 03 de diciembre de 2008 21:39
> Para: [email protected]
> Asunto: [WikiEducator] Re: Building a sustainable WE OER Textbook
> initiative
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> I'd like to ask a naive question: why use the "genre" of textbook at
> all? Isn't the very genre a bit... outdated? 
> 
> A definition from Wikipedia: "A textbook is a manual of instruction or
> a standard book in any branch of study. They are produced according to
> the demand of educational institutions."
> 
> A standard implies something long-term (permanent?), constant, closed.
> The demands are also centralized. 
> 
> Do textbooks allow per-student customization, semi-automated in smart
> social ways (at least as well as Amazon does for book
> recommendations)? Daily or hourly, dynamic changes of content based on
> who creates what in the world? User-generated content in general?
> Interactivity? Sound and video? No and no and no. And the question is,
> if we get "all that" from other places, what is the place of a
> textbook, then - if any?
> 
> I see two somewhat modern parts in Wayne's list of generic questions:
> peer collaboration and print-on-demand. 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> MariaD
> 
> Make math your own, to make your own math.
> 
> naturalmath.com: a sketch of a social math site
> groups.google.com/group/naturalmath: a mailing list about math maker
> activities
> groups.google.com/group/multiplicationstudy the family multiplication
> study 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org
To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to