Dear Dr.Wayne, I think the ambit of consensus is so broad so that it can include consensus to ‘do not edit’ :) such and such thing….by such and such members….on such and such occasions etc etc Of course it has to deal with editing guidelines and Policy for page protection also
I am not challenging the cause to be got protected, but thinking about the right documentation for the same. On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Wayne Mackintosh < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Anil, > > I think you're very right about consensus on resources where there is an > intent to collaborate on the development of a "universal" resource which > would be applicable in a wide variety of contexts. > > However, consider for example a Ugandan teacher who is developing an OER on > Ugandan history for a Year 10 Class in accordance with the Ugandan national > curriculum. For instance, lets say a New Zealand teacher discovers this > resource for possible use in a social studies lesson on East Africa under > the New Zealand curriculum. Obviously the New Zealand curriculum > requirements will be different regarding emphasis, year level and learning > objectives. I don't think that it would be fair on the Ugandan teacher for > the New Zealand teacher to edit and change the resource. > > In this example -- I don't think that we are delaing with a collaboration > VS protection issue. The Ugandan teacher would like to make his/her teaching > materials avialble for adaptation and reuse in other contexts, but would not > want teachers from other countries to alter the teaching materials in ways > that it may not align with their national curriculum. (If you see what I > mean.) > > I'm thinking here of ways to best communicate the intentions of the > resource creator. Its not protected becuase the content is freely available > to be copied and modified for use in another learning situation. > > On the other hand -- resources which are intended for univeral use (and > ultimately part of an International Qualifications Framework) would need to > focus and support WikiEducator's evolving consensus processes. > > Does this make sense? > > Cheers > Wayne > > > > > > > > 2009/10/20 aprasad <[email protected]> > >> Dear Dr. Wayne and other friends, >> >> It is Collaboration Vs Protection; we need to fine tune >> http://www.wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:Consensus >> >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Wayne Mackintosh < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Everyone, >>> >>> WE is a unique educational wiki project in many respects. We are >>> different, for example, from Wikipedia in the sense that our collaboration >>> is not focused on developing an objective encyclopedia entry resulting from >>> the micro-contributions of a large number of editors. At the same time, we >>> benefit from the advantages associated with mass collaboration, for example >>> shared training materials. >>> >>> Moreover, WE has organised itself as a community of educators working on >>> a wide range of different OER artifacts, for example: open textbooks, OER >>> courses for online teaching, learning activities based on external >>> resources, lessons, articles and research papers, handouts, glossary >>> projects for use as a reference resource, the establishment of project or >>> community nodes, the development of funding proposals as free content etc. >>> Other wiki projects within the OER landscape have organised themselves >>> around the nature of the objects being produced, for instance: Encyclopedia >>> articles in the case of Wikipedia <http://www.en.wikipedia.org/> or >>> books in the case of Wikibooks <http://www.en.wikibooks.org/> . >>> >>> Therefore we need to think creatively about how our community develops >>> procedures to support the attainment of our individual and collective aims, >>> while respecting the intent of the original creators. For example: >>> >>> >>> - There are institutions which develop courses on WikiEducator which >>> are not intended for collaborative authoring due to local curriculum >>> requirements. >>> - There are individuals who develop materials on WikiEducator which >>> they would like to make available for others to create derivative works, >>> but >>> would prefer not to have other educators edit their materials. >>> - There are many projects in WikiEducator which are seeking wide >>> collaboration and contributions from the community. >>> >>> So the question is: How do we support and respect educator contributions >>> in WE given the different intentions of our individual contributions? >>> >>> Valerie has alerted my attention to this important topic (see: >>> http://wikieducator.org/Thread:Ownership,_status,_granularity_and_category_(3)<http://wikieducator.org/Thread:Ownership,_status,_granularity_and_category_%283%29>) >>> -- Thanks Valerie. So what is the best way to signify intent and >>> "ownership" of OER materials in WikiEducator. How do we communicate and >>> respect a contributor's intention where they do not want collaborative >>> authoring and participation on their OER resources? If an educator finds a >>> valuable resource they want to use and improve -- can they edit and change >>> the resource without creating problems for the original authors resulting >>> from their modifications? >>> >>> Clearly we need a mechanism to visually communicate the intent of the >>> creator to prospective editors. We need a messaging system which says, for >>> instance: >>> >>> >>> - I need help and welcome WikiEducators to collaborate, edit and >>> improve this resource, or >>> - I have no problems if you copy this resource and modify for your >>> own purposes -- but will appreciate if you don't make changes because I'm >>> using this in my course, or >>> - I don't mind editorial improvements but don't want editors to make >>> substantive changes to my OER --- suggestions and comments are welcome on >>> the corresponding talk page. >>> >>> It seems to me that we need a template or content infobox which clearly >>> communicates the intent of the original OER creator in terms of >>> "permissible" contributions and/or restrictions with regard to community >>> edits. >>> >>> Thoughts? Are there any other intents than those listed above? >>> >>> You gotta love the WikiEducator project -- we're figuring out solutions >>> that work for education. We're pioneering the future that has already >>> happened :-). >>> >>> Cheers >>> Wayne >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Warm regards >> >> Anil >> >> > > > -- > 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 > > > > -- Warm regards Anil --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
