Vriendelijke groeten Jaap You are very right -- in the case of most schools, national copyright law assigns copyright to the school, and not the teacher. However, in tertiary education this can be different, depending on institutional intellectual property policies and/or something called "academic exception" -- which many countries adhere to.
>From a publishers perspective I'm keen to here your thoughts around publishing models based on OER content, see for example: http://wikieducator.org/WikiPublishing How do we foster and promote partnerships with the publishing industry around just-in-time printing and distribution of OER texts? Cheers Wayne **<http://www.google.co.nz/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:official&hs=PSo&ei=aYYAS-fzHJCEswOl4ZGICw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQBSgA&q=vriendelijke+groeten&spell=1> 2009/11/16 Jaapb <[email protected]> > > One remark from a publisher from the Netherlands. If someone is > working with a contact for a school (or any boss), in that contract > should be an agreement about copyrights. Most institutions do own the > rights of the texts of their workers if the workers write in working > hours. So the rights (copy rights) of a teacher 's text he made for > the school are the property of the school. That is what he is paid > for. So if MIT has problems, they don't have good lawyers and > contracts. > Jaap Bosman > > On Nov 15, 10:14 pm, Wayne Mackintosh <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Steve, and others > > > > Great thread and very timely discussion :-). In many respects, this is > the > > *raison* *d'**être* of the OER Foundation --- an independent organisation > > that provides leadership, networking and support for educators and > > educational institutions in fostering the development of a sustainable > OER > > ecosystem. Our mission in life is to build a sustainable OER ecosystem > -- > > one which is self-sustaining and results in real cost savings and > efficiency > > gains for education institutions. > > > > A few (rather long winded) reflections: > > > > I'm not surprised at the cost of an MIT OpenCourseware offering --- very > > much a standardised mass production model which is not succeeding in > > leveraging the potential of peer production systems. I wouldn't be > surprised > > if these costs are significantly underestimated from the perspective of > the > > attribution of fixed cost associated with the face-of-face, research-led > > teaching model of MITs operations. To what extent have the fixed costs > and > > overhead of the MIT model been attributed to the costing of an > > OpenCourseware course? > > > > I wonder whether MIT would have moved into the OpenCourseware arena in > the > > absence of the millions of dollars invested, for example by the Hewlett > > Foundation? Here we must commend the foresight of the Hewlett foundation > in > > targeting a high profile institution and investing real dollars in moving > > this agenda forward in a substantive way. Everyone in higher education > knows > > about MIT OpenCourseware and the marketing impact of getting the notion > of > > open content into the sector should not be underestimated. Sadly MIT > > OpenCourseware uses a restrictive content license and content is stored > in > > formats which does not facilitate easy remix :-(. > > > > For those of us with a background in the open distance learning model > > (distance education) --- we would not attribute MIT OpenCourseware as a > > model of pedagogical innovation. MIT OpenCourseware is more akin to the > > digitisation of lecture notes and lectures than we'll designed > independent > > learning packages. Moreover, the cost of developing high quality learning > > materials using a team approach for design and development is > significantly > > higher than the costs cited by MIT OpenCourseware. > > > > OERs are a low-cost alternative to high content development costs. This > is > > not rocket science -- sharing the cost associated with developing high > > quality teaching materials among ten institutions is considerably cheaper > > than one institution doing this alone. What is need is a shift from the > > producer ==> consumer model where one institution tries to develop an OER > > course, that is a shift away from the mass-standardisation model. > > > > We need to think about sustainable OER in terms of the mass-customisation > > model, that is using flexible and agile design and development systems > that > > are able to produce customised learning packages for individual > institutions > > at costs which are lower than the traditional mass-standardisation model. > > Their is an extensive experience from industry in mass customisation > > approaches, yet education has been slow in refining the model for our > > benefits. > > > > OER combined with mass-peer collaboration provides fertile ground for > > implementing mass-customisation models for designing and developing > > high-quality courses, with added advantage for individual institutions to > > brand and customise the content (we permit derivative works :-) ) and to > > extend the diversity of their curriculum for courses with historically > low > > enrolments (long tail economics.) > > > > The OER Foundation has costed this model, assuming 40 tertiary education > > institutions signing up for a "gold membership" status (USD$5000 -- > > significantly lower than the cost of an MIT OCW course ) we are able to > > reinvest back 80% of membership fees into paying academics to develop > OER. > > Similarly, we calculate that individual organisations receive $14700 > dollars > > worth of "benefits" for an outlay of $5000. That's pretty good math -- > > especially since these contributions represent an investment in the > social > > good of education :-) > > > > Links: > > > > Operational business model: > > > > http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Operational_plan > > > > Institutional Membership Categories: > > > > http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:OER_Foundation/Membership_catego... > > > > Something to think about -- WE can make the future happen! > > > > Cheers > > Wayne > > > > 2009/11/16 Steve Foerster <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting article in the Guardian about OERs: > > > > >http://tinyurl.com/yhf44oj > > > > > What got me was the part near the end where it's talking about MIT's > > > OpenCourseWare project and says, "But it costs the university between > > > $10,000 and $15,000 to put the material from each course online because > > > the materials have to be properly licensed and formatted." > > > > > I'm sorry, what? I'm racking my brain trying to figure out how they > > > could possibly spend fifteen grand just getting course materials from a > > > professor's PC to their web server. I mean, yes, they package things > as > > > zip files and everything, but fifteen grand?! The only thing I can > > > think of is that they have to buy these materials from their own > faculty > > > members, is that the case? > > > > > (By contrast, imagine what WE could do with thirty million dollars!) > > > > > -=Steve=- > > > > > -- > > > Stephen H. Foerster > > >http://hiresteve.com > > >http://hiresteve.com/blog > > >http://wikieducator.org/steve > > > > -- > > 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 > > > -- 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] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
