so it will not be called free in terms of cost, but "free" in terms of access to materials.
On Mar 26, 10:47 pm, "David Wiley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter, > > The content will be open to everyone, but enrollment in the school > will be restricted to those in the state of Utah (since the state govt > pays the bills). > > D > > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > David, > > > This is great to read. What an amazing step to put all this forward as > > an OER Highschool. You say it will be free to students in Utah, will > > students outside of Utah still have access? Or will all this just be > > "open" within the state of Utah? And therefore be used to prove out > > the model... > > > There is one thing that jumps out at me from within this discussion > > thread. Are we mis-using the word "Education" within OER. As we seem > > to have agreement that Education is the whole, where learning is what > > you do with the resources. Education includes the assessment, > > accreditation, etc. that the educational institutions provide. > > Shouldn't we really be calling these materials Open Learning Resources > > (OLR). My point being (in the context of this Bissell article; > > http://learn.creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bissellbo... > > Don't we require Open Access Assessment and Open Access Accrediation > > before we can achieve OER? Because this then makes free the whole of > > Education. Wikipedia and Open Source have nothing restraining their > > domain toward openness. OER has a huge restraint in that Assessment > > and Accreditation are still closed. As we stumble toward OER don't we > > need to wrestle it (assessment, accreditaion) away from the > > institutions (like MIT, UNESCO, OU, etc) and also make it open and > > free? And not until we have wrestled it away, OERs success will be > > restrained. I wonder what Paulo Friere would have to say about the > > institutions still controlling the Assessment and Accreditation? > > > I look forward to your reply(ies)... > > > P > > > On Mar 26, 8:40 am, "David Wiley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Simon and Leigh, > > > > We haven't been talking about it much, because we're still one step in > > > the approval process away, but for a year now we've been working on > > > establishing the Open High School of Utah - a publicly funded (and > > > therefore free as in beer to students in the state of Utah) completely > > > online high school that uses OERs exclusively throughout the entire > > > curriculum. The final approval should be given this May for a Fall > > > 2009 opening in which we'll admit a class of 9th graders, meaning that > > > we'll have 15 months or so to put together the entire 9th grade > > > curriculum's worth of OERs built out to stand-alone quality (i.e., not > > > OERs to supplement textbooks, OERs as the primary content for the high > > > school). Then in 2010 we'll do 9th and 10th grade, etc., until in 2012 > > > we're running all four years of high school. > > > > All the materials will be freely available, as will our charter > > > document, as will all the technology we will use to run the school. We > > > hope to be a model of how OERs can revolutionize the practice and the > > > funding of both learning AND education... > > > > D > > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Leigh Blackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Great post Simon, I enjoy your wit :) > > > > > Maybe I should clarify what I say about "learning being free, education > > > > still costs" > > > > > I mean the same as you mean - learning is what people are always free > > to do, > > > > and with todays enhanced capacity to access information and > > communication, > > > > learning might be vastly improved. > > > > > But what is education in all that? Well, to me education is the > > formality > > > > that we agree is the extra, inflated, and fee driven bit. Education is > > the > > > > bit of paper that says you have been learning... > > > > > So I think we actually agree, but it may be that I'm being a bit too > > cynical > > > > in my use of the work education. > > > > > Here's a longer post I wrote on it if you're still troubled by my > > slogan. > > > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:52 PM, simonfj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 25, 2:05 pm, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Cormac, Leigh, Simon, Others... > > > > > > > Thanks for the great feedback. I certainly hope some others jump > > in... > > > > > > > Cormac, > > > > > > > There is a body of work where the evaluation of a persons > > contribution > > > > > > is evaluated via software; it's not so advanced that it can target > > a > > > > > > single person and evaluate what they have done... probably one day > > > > > > (soon), see these two > > > > > > references;http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/projects/history_flow/http://www.s... > > > > > > Ooo! I can't see it. But that's only because i never have. Evaluation > > > > > to me, and I've had to employ graduates to do media jobs, always > > comes > > > > > down to seeing of they, or their teachers, can do it. i.e. have > > > > > institutions prepared the inexperienced for it?. Old industries, no > > > > > problem. New industries, like the interactive media ones; rarely a > > > > > clue. > > > > > > Let me give you an illustration of a change going back 30 years. Unis > > > > > were trying to "teach" AV production stuff. Many didn't have a > > > > > recording desk. Even fewer had relationships with bands or actors > > > > > interested in recording. Even if some students did, they wouldn't be > > > > > encouraged to bring those noisy long haired gits into a lovely clean > > > > > studio. > > > > > > So one dirty engineer in Sydney started offering courses in his > > > > > studio, which now, though some unis in 49 countries, offers > > accredited > > > > > courses.http://www.sae.edu/. But it wasn't until the unis were > > > > > included in the Learning mix of enough working engineers that the > > > > > accreditations were given. Until then, we usually just gave students > > a > > > > > piece of paper, and for the more determined, helped them find them a > > > > > job. Now a three month course has inflated to three years. > > > > > > The thing i find fascinating - when watching new interactive & global > > > > > media institutions, like Wikipedia, et al, get their Project Groups' > > > > > Learning ground(s) together and professionalize good habits, while at > > > > > the same time watching national Teaching institutions struggling to > > > > > think outside their squares - is that nothing seems to have changed. > > > > > > In the professionals' web space, you see the beginnings of global > > > > > interactive environments, which are obviously self sustaining and > > > > > appear to help people meet peers, get their heads around the things a > > > > > good web designer needs to know and maybe get some (paid) experience. > > > > >http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/Andthen you look at unis' web sites/ > > > > > brochureware, ho! ho! One obviously puts an emphasis on their > > > > > members' communications, the other on the institution's information. > > > > > i.e. communicating global GROUPS vs, National (.edu) NETWORKS. > > > > > > As Cormac says, "you don't get a PhD, but you might be a damn sight > > > > > > more eligible to get a job with a certain employer institution that > > is > > > > > open-minded enough to recognise this particular work done". I don't > > > > > think it's even a matter of them being open minded. It's more a > > matter > > > > > that in the commercial world, one gets paid for results, and if you > > > > > can point to something, like Liam can, who do you think will get the > > > > > job?.This is very new ground. > > > > > > I also think Leigh is quite right. "Through an international network > > > > > > of teachers and assessors, we might see the cost of > > > > > such processes and services greatly reduced!" But you have to have > > the > > > > > "international network" first, and all we do have at the moment is a > > > > > bunch of National .edu ones. Thankfully Web 2.0 Inc. are able to help > > > > > fill the obvious gaps. But you got this wrong. "Learning is still > > > > > free, education still costs". Nah, "accreditation still costs". You > > > > > know, priests used to sell indulgences. That's why the Reformation > > > > > (supposedly) started. > > > > > > Perhaps, rather than talking about accreditation, we should be > > talking > > > > > about where the new jobs are, what skills are required and who's > > doing > > > > > the employing. > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > Leigh Blackall > > > > +64(0)21736539 > > > > skype - leigh_blackall > > > > SL - Leroy Goalpost > > > >http://learnonline.wordpress.com-Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group. To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
