5.1 Wikieducator: memoirs, myths, misrepresentations and the magic  (Page 20/21)

Ken

17. philippschmidt - april 11th, 2007 at 10:14 am

Thanks for a fascinating discussion, and sorry for jumping in so very late …

Richard, I really liked your short summary of why NC does not make sense. I have been arguing this point for a long time, but don’t think I have been able to explain it as well as you do. Thanks!

A few points that were brought up seem related to the perspective we are considering, either that of the teacher/lecturer or that of the students. I find that once we start looking towards students as the sources for content and innovation in education, some things we are still struggling with might start to fall into place more naturally.

• Wayne said something about still having to crack the nut of getting teachers to remix lectures

I propose changing the nutcracker, and getting students to remix the lecture content instead (or in addition rather). They are doing this already on flickr and myspace and facebook - as was pointed out - and the social feedback mechanisms seem to be more powerful incentives for students than for lecturers.

• The users of our software want quizzes, tests, etc.

This is true, only if you ask the lecturers. I would argue that we have not seen a great deal of innovation in teaching and learning, because we have relied on the lecturers to innovate - and they lacked the right incentives. If we want innovation, I think we need to turn to the students. A comparison of free software development models also makes a lot more sense if you include students as “developers” of open education.

A friend and I just started blogging about applying some of the incentive mechanisms from software to other fields. Have a look for the grumpy old guys from the muppet show over at icommons.org if you are interested, and join the conversation.

/Philipp (Freecourseware Project, University of the Western Cape)

18. richardwyles - 11th, 2007 at 11:20 pm

Hi David, I’ve read your post and sure thing, I think all of us in this space are very much aware of the personal effort that goes into this. But I don’t think anyone is detracting from that. I’ll rebut the notion that anyone is being insulting of those efforts. Challenging perhaps, but it’s not an emotive response. In fact I think “ubiquitous politics prevalent in large educational institutions plus general fear of the unknown” is the way I described just what you’re talking about. We’re all working in contexts where we’re trying to move towards openness but have various constraints to overcome. I really like your header “iterating towards openness” as that sums it up nicely.

So I think that characterising this as negativity is incorrect. We are having a dialogue on an important issue. Constructive debate is a away for each of us to find some answers and I’ve always found robust discussion as one of the faster ways for me to learn. And even if I agree with Ken or Wayne then it’s often more fun to engage in debate. Wayne’s been on my case for years that I use Windows on a daily basis - arrgh, it’s out in the open now ;-) - but due to our IT department I have to add…