Free as in cost is something I'm interested in. Indulge me on the following:
Music will survive long after its institutions die Journalism will survive long after its institutions die Education will survive long after its institutions die (Inspired by a recent post by George Siemens) Granted, there will be a lot of loses, but with that impending doom as a possible future for educational institutions, it is interesting to imagine how education might be post apocalypse? Recently, I have been looking at student debt in New Zealand, their costs of living, the sacrifices they have to make to get an education.. and then the cost to institutions for offering the education services. I'm convinced that we could get the cost way way down, to a point where it could be conceivably free - so long as there is about 60% public funding behind current education services, as it seems there is in NZ. And that's without changing much in the way of education practice - most of it comes from rethinking ICT budgets.. we in this thread are only skimming the surface of what the future may look like... On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:31 PM, vmensah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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 - > > > -- -- Leigh Blackall +64(0)21736539 skype - leigh_blackall SL - Leroy Goalpost http://learnonline.wordpress.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
