Hi Simon, In responses in text below ...
2009/6/8 simonfj <[email protected]> > > > > Would be great if you could join our WG to set up WG policies and > procedures > > so that we can tackle our communication challenges using our WG polcies > (to > > be drafted). This is a little confusing -- but hope that you get the > drift > > :-). > > Wayne, You know I can't leave. But please, must WE be bureaucrats? > I'm old, but I still want some fun. WE're planning on having lots of fun @ the OER Foundation / WikiEducator --- Open Philanthropy doesn't work with traditional hierarchies ;-) --- Still lots to learn about how self organisation will inform organisational relationships etc, but our system is open and will evolve accordingly. > > I'm trying very hard to understand what kind of tools different > communities prefer, can afford, or are willing to share, or share in > the building. > So when someone mentions one brand, like ning, (peter, nellie, pat, > etc) it has me rummaging through a bunch of domains, seeing which > combination of widgits is up to which stage of development today. e.g. > http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/Directory/Tools/social2.html > Me too --- I'm not sure what tools are going to be the answer, but suspect that we will see multiple tools and approaches emerging. Being an optimist -- I'd like to see WikiEducator and the OER Foundation encouraging multiple tools and multiple scenarios that are going to work in supporting the OER community. There was life before wikis and no doubt there will be life after wikis-- and strategically we need to be prepared for changing futures. > > At the same time you've given me hope because you're on the advisory > for both WE and WMF. So encouraging the development of WG's tools, > which might federate across those two domains (as well as connexions, > OCWC domains, etc) is the challenge isn't it? Every domain, > unfortunately) puts "'their" community of groups at the top of "their" > tree. > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Federation#Federation_plan_for_Wikimedia The vision of the OER Foundation is to foster the development of sustainable OER ecosystems. Of necessity this will mean improving collaboration and networking among the various OER silos including OCWC, WMF projects, WikiEducator, Connexions etc. > > > What is needed in the first instance is for both advisory boards to > agree on a place (in whatever domain) to share groups with a common > interest. If we get this principle agreed then we can look at their > preferred abd very diverse) flavour of I and CT E.g. If you want to > have a play with having one phone number for our global group to talk, > you might play with this. http://www.gizmoconference.com/ . Which goes > to show, a "common place" needn't be defined by a domain name. (NB, > gizmo is an OPEN network, unlike Skype) I stopped using Gizmo a while ago after I couldn't find anyone on the Gizmo network to speak to -- Look's like I should install the Gizmo client again -- at least I now have someone I can call :-). > > > I have been busy with your "towards a learning institution" doc, > making notes > > http://www.wikieducator.org/Talk:Funding_proposals/Towards_open_participatory_learning_environments:_Open_textbooks,_educator_training#lqt_thread_9405 > and practicing. > http://www.wikieducator.org/Practice:Towards_a_new_Institution_of_Learning#Adding_value_to_OER_infrastructure > Saw your post on the talk page -- thanks. I'm working over here on developing the draft strategy documents for the OER Foundation (which are using relevant bits of the Hewlett bid text above) : http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Strategy. Still lots of work to do -- comments and contributions always welcome :-) > > If anyone has another "logic model", please link to it from the > disussion page. I really have a passion for such things. > > I'm hoping we can at least see about adding education.au's name to > otago's, immediamum. This community are insearch of the obvious, like > us, and linking with them (got a handy MOU?) might help you out of an > Otago reductionism. > http://me.edu.au/b/marktf/entry/edna_futures_discussion_paper The OER Foundation is an open independent non-profit -- in the spirit of open philanthropy lets draft the MOU as an open document :-). > > > One key, if you want to drop it on the business managers over there, > is using KAREN to tap into akamai, and have them host NZ's unis OER > stuff. > We might look at doing some (higher bandwidth) stuff across the ditch, > both in real time and otherwise. At least that's going to be a > dicussion with marktf from education.au on thursday. Yip -- I'm hoping to have a chat with the CE of KAREN (end of this week) if all goes well. At the very least we'd like to see OER content sites whitelisted as educational sites on KAREN to enjoy some of the bandwidth benefits. > > > regards, simon > > > > > > > > > > > I have suggested to Brianna (in the Oz wikipedia chapter) that we > > > might also try to link up between BA and other spots around the globe > > > for Wikimania this year. It's probably a good time as many ISPs and > > > NREN's are trying to get their Quality of Service up, so they can > > > start kicking telcos' toll charges out of the way. NB There are about > > > 20,000 global students at my alma mater ( > > >http://sae.edu/en-gb/news_overview/726/News > > > ) who are just starting to use this kind of tool. > > > > > > http://www.hobnox.com/index.1018.en.html?blg[project_handle]=livetool-project<http://www.hobnox.com/index.1018.en.html?blg%5Bproject_handle%5D=livetool-project> > <http://www.hobnox.com/index.1018.en.html?blg%5Bproject_handle%5D=live...> > > > They could use a mature community like WE to get their chops up. > > > > > Their community's toolkit isn't very good, (it's newish) but they can > > > move fast, especially if you can spaek german. > > > > > Lastly, this may be of some use.http://www.internet2.edu/wg/ > > > regards, simon > > > > > On May 31, 2:22 pm, Wayne Mackintosh <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone -- > > > > > > The concept of instituting work groups in WE has been around for some > > > time, > > > > as suggested, for example by User:Leutha, User:Kakamora and others. > > > > However, we don't have processes or guidelines to assist > WikiEducator's > > > in > > > > forming groups that will contribute towards the collective objective > of > > > > improving how we work. > > > > > > When WikiEducator was much smaller -- it was relatively easy to post > a > > > > query, idea or suggestion on the main list and take a collective > > > decision. > > > > With considerable growth since January 2008 our project needs are > growing > > > > rapidly and I wonder whether WE should consider formalising a work > group > > > > approach? > > > > > > In other words, should we set up a work group to develop guidelines > on > > > > implementing work groups to be tabled at the first WCC meeting? > > > > > > We already have a few work groups that have formed organically. > > > > > > *Existing work groups: > > > > * > > > > > > - A usability work group iniated by User:Kakamora -- good ideas > and > > > > intentions, but hasn't gone further (see: > > > > http://www.wikieducator.org/Usability_Working_Group) > > > > - A work group to talk about Learning Design (Pedagogical > templates) > > > -- > > > > (see:http://www.wikieducator.org/Workgroup:Learning_design) > > > > - Another work group is looking at the development of an OER > Policy > > > > Briefing intended to assist with advocacy of OER among policy > makers > > > -- > > > > (see:http://wikieducator.org/OER_Brief_for_policy_makers) > > > > > > Are there any other "workgroups" which I may have missed? Peter > wouldn't > > > > the volunteer group who have signed up for helping out on the Quality > > > > Assurance and Review framework also constitute a workgroup of sorts? > > > (See: > http://www.wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:Quality_Assurance_and_Review > > > ). > > > > > > Recent posts on the list by Nellie, Ben, Peter, Brent, Randy and > Patricia > > > on > > > > the topic of communication alternatives in WE, ning.com etc suggest > that > > > the > > > > work group model is possibly a good vehicle for researching these > kinds > > > of > > > > questions and proposing alternatives for consideration. > > > > > > Two questions: > > > > > > 1. Should WE implement a work group approach? > > > > 2. If so, should we initiate a work group to develop a draft set > of > > > > guidelines on work groups, utimately leading to a policy on work > > > groups for > > > > consideration by the WCC for approval. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > Wayne > > > > > > -- > > > > Wayne Mackintosh, Ph.D. > > > > Director, > > > > International Centre for Open Education, > > > > Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand. > > > > Founder and Community Council Member, Wikieducator, > www.wikieducator.org > > > > -- > > Wayne Mackintosh, Ph.D. > > Director, > > International Centre for Open Education, > > Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand. > > Founder and Community Council Member, Wikieducator,www.wikieducator.org > > > -- Wayne Mackintosh, Ph.D. Director, International Centre for Open Education, Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand. Board of Directors, OER Foundation. Founder and Community Council Member, Wikieducator, www.wikieducator.org Mobile +64 21 2436 380 Skype: WGMNZ1 Twitter: OERFoundation, Mackiwg --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
