2,237 Matching Annotations
  1. Aug 2016
  2. maurice1979-blog.tumblr.com maurice1979-blog.tumblr.com
    1. Hi there, I am using this open source tool to promote open science by make open annotations directly on the was as a platform for collaboration. You also can jot down your comments in the context where it belongs.

    1. ever-growing

      Not all types of blockchains, or more exactly not all types of technologies providing services similar to blockchains have to have an ever-growing database. It is the Bitcoin model and other models are possible (for the agnostic!). Let's call them the "unblocked chains" e.g. Swirlds

    2. many visions for blockchain in education seem to advocate writing it all to the blockchain

      This is obviously a mistake as it is sufficient to put the address (or its hash value) on the chain, the data (of any size) being stored on something like IPFS. Blockchains were initially designed to store transactions not content — the discussion about the size of the block was about the number of transactions that could go in a block... Things evolved with new systems like https://www.bigchaindb.com/ and the landscape of blockchain-like technologies will continue to grow and diversify...

  3. Jul 2016
    1. A couple of interesting large-scale approaches to making the transition are the Open Access Network and the recently-released Open Access 2020 Roadmap, both of which sketch out ways academic libraries can use their resources and values to make scholarship accessible for the public good.

    1. Figure 3 illustrates at what age ceased ‘indie’ journals stopped publishing. Most journals survived the first 2–5 years period, whereas the mortality rate rose in the critical 6–9 years period. After that, the number of journals ceasing dropped sharply, indicating that the surviving journals had found stability.

      Most critical period for journals is 6-9 years. After year ten, the number of journals that stop drops quickly

    2. The development over time of active ‘indie’ OA journals before and after 2002 is shown in Figs. 1A and 1B. A journal was counted as ‘active’ in a particular year if it was still publishing articles in that year. Before 2002 the number of active journals grew very rapidly from a total of 76 journals in 1995 to 207 journals in 2002. The year 2002 was the cut-off year to be included in the studied cohort, meaning that no new journals were added to the data set after this point in time. After 2002, the number of journals in the cohort decreased steadily to the 127 that stayed active in 2014.

      Interesting charts showing the rise and then decline of independent, scholar-published OA journals

    3. The average number of articles published was 31 per year with 74% publishing 0–30 articles, and 9% 60 or more. The study also contains interesting data about the workload done, revenues etc.

      Average numbers of articles in OJS journals: 31

      • 74% publish 0-30
      • 9% 60 or more
    4. “The key question for OA publishing is whether it can be scaled up from a single journal publishing model with relatively few articles published per year to a comprehensive major journal with of the order of 50–100 articles annually.” They further note: “The continuation of the journal relies very heavily on the personal involvement of the editor and is as such a risk to the model. Employing staff to handle, for example, management, layout and copyediting tasks, is a cost-increasing factor that also is a threat to the model.” Both questions are still highly relevant today.

      Key issues facing scholar-published journals: can they ramp up; can they survive succession.

    5. Earlier studies A number of previous studies, both snapshots and some with longitudinal elements, have shed light on different aspects of such type of journals, which for short we will call “indie” journals.

      Bibliography of "independent journals"

    6. Often the enthusiasm of the founders and their personal network can carry a volunteer-based journal for a few years. But at that same time this type of journal, which lack the support of employed staff and a professional publishing organization, are threatened by many dangers. The editor may change affiliation or retire, or the support of the university hosting the journal might be withdrawn. Authors may stop sending in good manuscripts and it may become more and more difficult to find motivated reviewers. Not being included in the Web of Science, and the impact factor that follows, may in the long run limit the number of submissions severely. On the positive side of the balance the emergence of open source software for publishing (i.e., Open Journals System) and cheap or free hosting services like Latin American Scielo have facilitated the technical parts of publishing.

      Problems with Scholar-published journals

    7. Most of the OA journals founded in the 1990s were of this variety, later many established subscription journals (particularly society ones) have made their digital versions freely available immediately or with a delay. This has been particularly noticeable in countries where cheap or free national or regional electronic portals have become available, like Scielo, Redalyc, and J-stage. Since around 2003 the OA market has become increasingly dominated by professionally published journals, which finance themselves by charging authors so-called article processing charges, APCs. At first such journals were being launched by open access publishers like BioMedCentral and PLOS, but in the last couple of years the major commercial and society publishers have increasingly started new OA journals and have also converted some subscription journals to APC-financed models.

      History of OA journals. Initially scholar-published, non-APC, post 2003 mostly APC-publisher-led journals

    8. Open Access (OA) is nowadays increasingly being used as a business model for the publishing of scholarly peer reviewed journals, both by specialized OA publishing companies and major, predominantly subscription-based publishers. However, in the early days of the web OA journals were mainly founded by independent academics, who were dissatisfied with the predominant print and subscription paradigm and wanted to test the opportunities offered by the new medium. There is still an on-going debate about how OA journals should be operated, and the volunteer model used by many such ‘indie’ journals has been proposed as a viable alternative to the model adopted by big professional publishers where publishing activities are funded by authors paying expensive article processing charges (APCs). Our longitudinal quantitative study of 250 ‘indie’ OA journals founded prior to 2002, showed that 51% of these journals were still in operation in 2014 and that the median number of articles published per year had risen from 11 to 18 among the survivors. Of these surviving journals, only 8% had started collecting APCs. A more detailed qualitative case study of five such journals provided insights into how such journals have tried to ensure the continuity and longevity of operations.

      Abstract

    9. A longitudinal study of independent scholar-published open access journals

      Björk, Bo-Christer, Cenyu Shen, and Mikael Laakso. 2016. “A Longitudinal Study of Independent Scholar-Published Open Access Journals.” PeerJ 4 (May). peerj.com: e1990. doi:10.7717/peerj.1990.

    1. There is still much more emphasis in hyperbolic education discourse on pushing content rather than enabling connections between people

      There is. But it might be shifting a bit. Or, at least, there are people around who are proposing another Sphere of Agency, one which relies much less on content and does a lot more with openness. As with Berkana, our job might be to connect these people who sing in a different voice. We might reach richer harmonies when we don’t expect unison.

    2. a handful in a few major world languages

      One might think that those other languages are well-represented. People connected with the Open Knowledge Foundation are currently tackling this very issue. Here, Open Education isn’t just about content.

    3. The majority of content comes from Western, developed countries
    4. expand access to some knowledge
    1. Colleges using data analytics have to make sure their students have “open futures” — that their programs create educational opportunities, not the other way around.

      Another side to Open Education: open opportunities. While they still mean “opportunities for success in the current system”, it’s compatible with a view of student success which goes beyond the current system.

    1. Decentralized Web Summit (June 8-9, 2016) Tim Berners-Lee, Vint Cerf, Brewster Kahle, Cory Doctorow

    1. disheartened that open education is still mainly focused on MOOCs and OERs, rather than on the broader concept of open textbooks, open research, and open data.

      We often think of the hype cycle but two things this post reveals about MOOC hype: 1) There can be regional differences in the timing of those cycles. 2) We might be in a broad shift from MOOC as a thing to MOOC as a pretext for openness.

    1. “Students chose how they were going to display how they were going to master those standards through projects,”

      A big part of both Competency-Based Education and the open-ended side of Open Education.

    1. The copyright for the materials in this collection is held by Universal Music Canada and their affiliates. These materials have been made available with their consent. Patrons may not download, reproduce, alter or transmit files/images without permission from the copyright holder(s). These files/images may not be used for commercial purposes but may be used under the fair dealing or educational exemptions outlined in the Canadian Copyright Act.

      Being able to access these resources without any cost can lead to cool projects, but the fact that they maintain full copyright does restrict the type of learning which may happen through this. In other words, we’re far from Open Educational Resources. But it doesn’t mean these aren’t useful.

  4. Jun 2016
    1. VIA EFF

      Open access: All human knowledge is there—so why can’t everybody access it? (Ars Techica)

      Excellent report on the state of academic publishing— and why so much of it is still locked down.

      NOTE

      if we can Not access the works we fund, we can Neither annotate all knowledge.

      And this case, it may pertain the most crucial body of all our knowledge — the knowledge upon what we are to found our own futures for us all. What is to be recognized as "the Human knowledge", whilst yet unknown by almost everyone us Humans ourselves.>

    2. A history of open access academic publishing from the early 1990s to 2016.

    1. The web breaks us out of a product-centered publishing cycle and allows us to become part of an ongoing flow, in which knowledge is perpetually negotiated within networks.

      Evolution of knowledge/content: process over product

    2. educators and students alike have found themselves more and more flummoxed by a system that values assessment over engagement, learning management over discovery, content over community, outcomes over epiphanies

      This Systems or "factory farming" approach to education seems antithetical to (and virtually guaranteed to flummox) a community-based, engaged, serendipitous and spontaneous learning explosion in traditional Higher Ed. Where are some cracks and crevices where the System has failed to snuff out the accidental life of learning?

    1. We need to enable and facilitate alternative development models if our vision of universal OER adoption is to become a reality.
  5. www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk
    1. While the open educationfieldtends to focus onthe development and scalability ofeducational resources and practices, networked learningtends to emphasizethe pedagogical experience of learning communities and interpersonal connections, and connected learning promotes instructional designs for holistic, participatorylearning.

      three definitions

    1. who are the gatekeepers in deciding what that looks like.

      perhaps a transformation is necessary here. To many (too many), education means grades and scores and standardization. Capacity for self-directed learning is more important and difficult to quantify.

    2. it can mean that students see themselves as actively building their learning

      This is the heart of the open ed/info lit connection. If the perception is that students go to school to be taught, the more important goal of learning how to learn is so much more difficult to achieve. But fostering lifelong learning means ceding some control over what is to be learned to the learner.

    3. does “open” actually transform the way in which we do “school,” the way in which we teach and learn?

      I think it can, but does higher ed want it to? Does anyone other than the open evangelists? The attempts at transformation in the 70s failed pretty hard. Maybe we need to transform teh public vision of what education looks like.

    4. Free? Open access? Open enrollment? Open data? Openly-licensed materials, as in open educational resources or open source software? Open for discussion? Open for debate? Open to competition? Open for business? Open-ended intellectual exploration?

      love the extended list, esp. "open for discussion/debate" Most definitions don't get past "free." "Open to competition" is an interesting thought. Open to cooperation would be more ideal. What would the competition be? For-profits?

    1. Look for existing networks for collaboration that could be adapted to fit the strategy if formal networks are desired.

      Work with OpenStax here on grant application? Could we somehow piggy back on their relationship with Hewlett and build for them their annotation solution--most recently articulated as requiring better teacher-student communication?

    2. ANCHOR INSTITUTIONS

      Name names...

    3. OER must have the right metadata

      Could h provide that metadata?!

    4. SUPPORTING ROBUST TECHNICAL and INSTITUTIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE

      Possibly where h fits in...

    5. the Foundation will provide enhanced support for grantee collaboration.

      We're already working with grantees: OpenStax, Lumen, Rebus.

      Perhaps the OpenStax collaboration could get funding to enhance 1:1 communication within textbooks.

    6. the technical basis for OER
    7. robust and flexible infrastructure.

      In so far as collaborative annotation might be critical to a broader OER infrastructure, then perhaps it does contribute to scale.

    8. Moreover, ZTC degrees ensure that the benefits of open materials follow students from enrollment to graduation, allowing for a pathway of personalized courses that guide students toward completing their degrees.

      What infrastructure would hold this together, especially if textbooks are remixed and mashed up by both students and teachers. Perhaps an annotation system?

    9. Open materials can empower faculty with the aca-demic freedom to tailor their courses to their students’ needs and even engage students in meaningful learning experiences through adaptation and improvement of the open content itself.10

      HUGE, especially the part about "meaningful learning experiences."

      This is something Kathi Fletcher (OpenStax) alluded to in the edu board meeting: using h to provide a line of communication between students and teachers.

    10. reserve part of its portfolio to con-tinue funding the infrastructure necessary to support the field

      This is at least part of h's play IMO. Annotation should be part of this infrastructure, not only for post-publication discussion but for production and discovery of such resources as well.

    11. Therefore, we refreshed our OER strategy to focus on our goal of using grants to help OER reach mainstream adoption.

      This stage of funding is focused on scale.

    12. high-quality academic materials

      Are tools "materials"?

    1. I hired a bunch of undergrad students and recent alums, and paid them out of my own pocket to assist me.

      I did not know this. And I already thought Robin was a bad-ass. There should be national, philanthropic funding for projects like this.

    1. and any other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge.

      Tools are OERs.

    2. and refreshed OER strategy.

      This "refresh" was done December 2015.

    3. The infrastructure

      Hmm, I wonder if this is thinking inspired by the NGDLE movement (from Gates, EDUCAUSE)?

    4. Develop innovative OER models

      I suppose that would be us.

    1. the frustration faculty members sometimes feel when searching for open content to include in their courses.

      Annotation could help with this discovery, evaluation, and remixing process.

    2. thinking more broadly about what ‘open’ means and how open connects to a variety of different areas

      Yes!

    3. Scaling Up OER
    1. “papers are the only scientific artifacts that are guaranteed to be preserved.”

      Under the current mode of action.

    2. Annotation can help us weave that web of linked data.

      This pithy statement brings together all sorts of previous annotations. Would be neat to map them.

    1. If the limitations are acknowledged and accounted for, there is no reason why open education should not offer genuine opportunities for promoting equity of access to higher education
    1. If texts — content — are at the heart of a course, and content is now shaped into a process that depends on learner engagement in order to function fully, then OER propels us into truly student-centered territory.

      from OER to OEP and open pedagogy

    1. the learning-analytics industry still lacks the kinds of standards and protocols that would make it easy to extract, organize, and share such data among institutions for research purposes.

    Tags

    Annotators

  6. www.constituteproject.org www.constituteproject.org
    1. Preamble Share We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

      You can't get much better than this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GwjfUFyY6M

    1. talking about open pedagogy as the “second power of open.”

      There are clear signs that some move towards Open Pedagogy is in fact happening. At SALTISE, last week, @Downes made it quite clear that Open Education is about openness, not merely about cost.

    2. talking about open pedagogy as the “second power of open.”
    1. the LMS’s institutionally friendly attributes have an important role in shaping our thinking about teaching and learning.

      But should it?

    2. In considering considerations, I think it’s important to begin with a thinking (or erasing?) exercise that asks you to forget everything you know or think you know about ed tech and start over.  
  7. May 2016
    1. The essay competition will run until June 15th and will be judged by a committee of scientists, librarians, members of industry, and students based on the following criteria. 

      Which criteria are you referring to?

    1. that OER can provide benefits to some schools, but that commercial resources will continue to have value because of the tech-based enhancements, in analytics and adaptive learning and other areas, that they offer beyond academic content.

      Why can't OERs have the equivalent?

    1. Wiggins and McTighe’s solutions—backward design, sharing detailed rubrics with students, etc.—are certainly the right way to do teacher-centered, standards-driven education based on measurable outcomes.

      I've been wondering for a long time about ID, UbD and the like as they fit in with open educational practices and open pedagogy. It seems like they're closed in a way, in that the the goals, the way they're defined and the means to getting there are all defined for the learner. But if we really want to help people grow and be all they can be, we have to cede control to the learners, so they can start to define their own goals, and find out how to set their own paths.

    1. FLEXspace is a repository and open online education resource institutions can use to research and share information about successful learning space design.
    1. Work on exploitation arising from asymmetries of information is an important example.

      What is being referred to when "asymmetries of information" is mentioned? Could the open access (to scholarly publishing) movement help to reshape this asymmetry to be more symmetric?

    1. A public must allow for new members to join as the old fade away. A public must not die every semester. 
    1. first MOOC was open in the sense articulated by the Open Education Consortium: knowledge, insights, and information were shared between students, and new knowledge, skills, ideas, and understanding built through sharing. This is perhaps the purest form of open education, in which the instructor is a facilitator, and the students collaborate to create a shared understanding.

      in line with the Barth definition

    2. Cape Town Open Education Declaration (n.d.) declares that the promise of open education is that “each and every person on earth can access and contribute to the sum of all human knowledge.

      compare definition to Barth

    3. Jenkins’ argument is that cultural progress is necessarily the result of freedom

      that progress is a result of technical abilities (literacies) as well as permissions

    4. material objects that may be patentable, rather than copyrightable, may be open. The Open Design Definition, for example, was developed in 2000 by the Open Design Foundation for the world of manufacturing design

      open patent

    1. My experimentation with open pedagogy – and my attempts to guide students’ learning with/in and across open platforms – was a social endeavor that invited reciprocal networking.
    1. I can be in Egypt and in my home office at the same time. And because I can communicate with her at any moment, unexpectedly, I am always in Egypt and in my home office.

      We saw this with Maha and Keegan via Twitter at OLC Innovate. Virtually Connecting added a dimension to the meeting, both bringing people together and challenging the pay to play standard of conferences.

    1. Writing and submission. The process of compiling findings, writing accompanying narrative and making this available for public view and scrutiny can be simplified by the use of new improved software. These tools can help identify relevant papers through increasingly powerful learning algorithms (e.g. F1000Workspace, Mendeley, Readcube). They can also enable collaborative authoring (e.g. F1000Workspace, Overleaf, Google docs), and provide formatting tools to simplify the process of structuring an article to ensure all the necessary underlying information has been captured (e.g. F1000Workspace, EndNote). Submission for posting as a preprint, and/or for formal publication and peer review, should be as simple as a single click.

      How can an "Open Science Platform" be built upon proprietary tools only? Maybe is meaning of "open" to define here?

    1. After hundreds of emails with developers and peer-reviewers, his open-source book will be ready for use at UConn. Neth began planning for the second version of the book in January and the project has taken more than four months.
  8. Apr 2016
    1. SocialBoost — is a tech NGO that promotes open data and coordinates the activities of more than 1,000 IT-enthusiasts, biggest IT-companies and government bodies in Ukraine through hackathons for socially meaningful IT-projects, related to e-government, e-services, data visualization and open government data. SocialBoost has developed dozens of public services, interactive maps, websites for niche communities, as well as state projects such as data.gov.ua, ogp.gov.ua. SocialBoost builds the bridge between civic activists, government and IT-industry through technology. Main goal is to make government more open by crowdsourcing the creation of innovative public services with the help of civic society.
    1. I utilize some of the useful critiques OA has generated to inform the discussion of OER creation and practice.

      Though there are major differences between Open Access and Open Educational Resources, the two approaches to openness share a lot. Advocates for both are likely to have a lot of values in common, including a distaste for inequalities.

    1. Reasons Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have dominated the Web over blogs and independent sites:

      • People prefer a single interface that makes it easy to flip or scroll through the new stuff. They don't like visiting a dozen different sites with different interfaces.
      • Most people don't want to deal with site structure or complex editors, let alone markup languages or servers.
      • Facebook quickly became a friends-and-family network, which pulled in more of the same.
      • Following and unfollowing should only require a single click.
      • Retweets and mentions introduce new people to follow, even if you aren't looking for them.
      • Reposting should be easy, include obvious attribution, and comments should be attached.
      • RSS readers had the potential to offer these things, but standard ways of using it were not widely adopted. Then Google Reader pushed out other readers, but was nevertheless shut down.

      Let go of the idea of people reading your stuff on your site, and develop or support interfaces that put your readers in control of how they view the web instead of giving the control to the people with the servers.

    1. Blogs tend towards conversational and quotative reuse, which is great for some subject areas, but not so great for others. Wiki feeds forward into a consensus process that provides a high level of remix and reuse, but at the expense of personal control and the preservation of divergent goals. Wikity takes lessons from federated wiki, combining the individual control of blogging with the permissionless improvement of wiki.

      Mike Caulfield introduces http://wikity.cc, a personal wiki platform in which editing is blog-like (it runs on WordPress), but pages can be easily copied and remixed.

      I am particularly excited about ways it might be used to help faculty and students to collaborate on OER across institutions.

    1. Do we mean free open access?

      Yes; this isn't hard. That is what all well-established (over a decade old) definitions of "open access" mean.

      The comparison to inter-library loan both is and isn't helpful. It is helpful because it shows that libraries have never been purely competitive spaces. It is less helpful because the digital environment fundamentally alters the way we disseminate material and shifts the vast majority of costs to labour-to-first-copy, rather than in the dissemination phase.

    1. the hyperlink provided a diversity and decentralisation that the real world lacked
    2. We’re also losing the organic and open shape of the web. It’s becoming something much more rigid and more hierarchical.
    3. The hyperlink was a way to abandon centralization — all the links, lines and hierarchies — and replace them with something more distributed, a system of nodes and networks.
    1. "connected copies" - multiple copies of pages and other files stored across the Web, accessed by name rather than just a single address.

      Some examples already exist: git, torrents, federated wiki, various named data networking projects, and the Interplanetary File System.

      Distributed copies fight link rot and reduce Internet traffic congestion. More importantly, if the files are freely licensed, easy to copy, and easy to edit, the concept reaches toward the full peer-to-peer potential of the Web.

    1. what we sell in the Open Textbook movement is not just reduced cost.

      And it's not just equality of access to "required" materials (though that's important too). It's more about the pedagogical process.

    2. Those students that bought the cheap version of the text back in 1991? They were pill-splitters. And they failed at pill-splitting (and maybe at the course). Do we own that failure? What we’ve learned over the past five years or so in OER is that what we sell in the Open Textbook movement is not just reduced cost. It’s the simplicity that you can get when you’re not working with an industry trying to milk every last dollar out of students. It’s every student having their materials on day one, for as long as they like, without having to navigate “simple” questions of what to buy, what to rent, and when-is-the-book-on-the-syllabus-that’s-required-not-really-required.
    1. “In the last 15 years, we’ve seen a massive transition in the way academic publishing is being done,” said Jules Blais, an environmental scientist at the University of Ottawa and editor of FACETS.
    1. To date 5'-cytosine methylation (5mC) has not been reported in Caenorhabditis elegans, and using ultra-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) the existence of DNA methylation in T. spiralis was detected, making it the first 5mC reported in any species of nematode.

      As a novel and potentially controversial finding, the huge amounts of supporting data are depositedhere to assist others to follow on and reproduce the results. This won the BMC Open Data Prize, as the judges were impressed by the numerous extra steps taken by the authors in optimizing the openness and easy accessibility of this data, and were keen to emphasize that the value of open data for such breakthrough science lies not only in providing a resource, but also in conferring transparency to unexpected conclusions that others will naturally wish to challenge. You can see more in the blog posting and interview with the authors here: http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/gigablog/2013/10/02/open-data-for-the-win/

    1. Scholarly communication is the system through which research and other scholarly writings are created, evaluated for quality, disseminated to the scholarly community, and preserved for future use.” –Association of College and Research Libraries
    1. networked discovery of connections would be at the center of both the learning environment as designed by faculty and the learning environment as experienced by students

      Would love to hear Campbell or Kuh elaborate on this. Identifying "connections" as more important than identifying content/information? A new way for searching the Internet? Mining connections among content/people? Mining the connections I've made among content/people on the Internet?

    1. It also arguably just shifts the costs of a broken system from students to the library.

      Maybe thinking beyond the textbook needs to be there from the start. See Downes "the textbook is a monolith."

    2. involving students throughout the entire process

      There is the goal. Free textbooks is a baby-step along the way.

    3. it sometimes isn’t enough just to say “this will save students money so we should do it.

      Indeed!

    1. “While we have the ‘must do’ layer, there’s also that little bit of subversion here, giving kids that little bit of creativity and maybe a ray of hope,” Reisinger said. “I want them to learn that learning is not all about what someone else preordains for you. It’s OK to tinker and play with things.”

      Refreshing! Self-directed learning. Agency. Almost smells like open pedagogy!

  9. Mar 2016
    1. In the MIT Libraries we’ve just launched a new and innovative approach for our scholarly communications program — and for our collections budget: the collections budget is now part of the scholarly communications program.

      Super rad!

    1. What occurs when we decide that agency and not expertise is the core principle of learning is that we must, as teachers, learn to see the very best in students.
    1. Imagine having at least part of your virtual learning environment (VLE) open, not just for current students (and even current students usually can't see all the teaching that might be useful to them) but for non-students, prospective students, or staff members who want to know what's happening down the road, across the country, in that academic department that interests them. NetworkED 2020 Watch Donna at NetworkED 2020: The London University, as she asks 'what if all of London were a networked University?'There would be so much potential for seeing the different ways in which departments are teaching, for instance. Which departments of biology are doing what in their labs? What theoretical approaches are they taking?

      This to me is more transparent than open where the world outside can see,

      In this context open to me is more about connecting, communicating, learning together and from each other. it's people can walk in on their own or be invited in, people inside can go explore and visit others

      Important: Open to me is much more than that still. I remember the Vconnecting we had during OpenEd15 : No consensus on what "Open" means yet.

    1. Open data

      Sadly, there may not be much work on opening up data in Higher Education. For instance, there was only one panel at last year’s international Open Data Conference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUtQBC4SqTU

      Looking at the interoperability of competency profiles, been wondering if it could be enhanced through use of Linked Open Data.

    1. Think about that, a student speaks up to represent her class.
    2. The Open Stuff that I am interested in, is not just that anyone can walk through the door, as there are often ONLY IFs. They can walk through the door ONLY IF they create an account and login. They can walk through the door ONLY IF they are in certain parts of the world (geographic limits on media). Openness is not just a door.

      This is a crucial paragraph in this post ... many of us assume openness as a possibility for everyone but the world is complicated for many, and the "if" question -- and how to change the nature of the world to lower barriers -- is as crucial as designing something that has the possibilities of open.

    3. you do not always know who is there with what class, or on their own.

      I rarely even think about that idea of a "class of students is here" -- I just figure, this is my space and I am doing what I am doing, and enjoying what you re doing and so ... away we go ...

    4. inner cynic

    1. open – that is, to make public, transparent, and participatory

      Neat definition of “open”, very contextual, it sounds like.

    1. As of fall 2015, the University of Maryland University College (UMUC) no longer expects any undergraduate to spend money on textbooks.
    1. open annotation.

      I'd like to hear discussion around the term "open" here. How exactly are you using it @remiholden? To mean public as opposed to private?

      For me, open has specific infrastructural connotations: it's about a variety of annotation clients like hypothes.is conforming to certain wider standards so that web annotation--like the web itself--is an interoperable system.

      But I'm curious the degree to which that matters to teachers and learners. And why? We're using hypothes.is, which promises to conform to standards being developed by the w3c, but could DIIGO do the trick even though they're system (for now) is closed?

    1. Many times, the work we do as educators is actually taking away some of the most powerful learning from our students.
    1. Open educational resources and college textbook choices: a review of research on efficacy and perceptions
    2. If the average college student spends approximately $1000 per year on textbooks and yet performs scholastically no better than the student who utilizes free OER, what exactly is being purchased with that $1000?

      Supplemental materials?

    1. Alongside the Dutch government, which is using its presidency of the EU to push the case for open access, only Hungary, Romania, Sweden and the UK, share the view that academic publishers should stop charging readers a subscription and instead charge authors for publishing their papers.

      Could be worse.

    1. The peer-reviewed journal marks a new era in academic journal publishing. Discrete Analysis will follow the "diamond open access" model - free to read and free to publish in - and will be entirely editor-owned with no publisher middleman.

      diamond open access

    1. A framework for assessing fitness for purpose in open educational resources

      When does using OER make sense... This is a great framework, especially if we are talking about assessing the OER completely on its own. But that probably isn't reality. OER is meant to be used, as in a process rather than a finished product. That process, the purposeful integration of the interactions and connections between teachers, students, "content" and the "open" public should be the foundation for such a framework.

    2. The OER is used to devise interactive ways of using OER to promote students’ engagement in the problem-solving process.

      This is close. How about "promote students' engagement" with the OER itself? Student can annotate, edit, create, improve, expand the OER.

    3. Pedagogy

      The 'O' from OER is pretty absent from this list.

    4. Learners are engaged in solving real-world problems. Existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge. New knowledge is demonstrated to the learner. New knowledge is applied by the learner. New knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world.

      Not totally on board with this. Perhaps if "learner" role can be filled with student or instructor.

    5. 1) Providing open, accessible and quality content for a wider community of teachers and learners.  2) Sharing best practice and helping to avoid re-inventing the wheel.  3) Helping developing countries improve and expand learning for development opportunities.  4) Offering flexible non-formal and informal knowledge and skills accumulation pathways to formal study.  5) Providing learning opportunities for geographically, socially or economically excluded students and non-traditional and work-based learners.  6) Improving the quality of conventional and online education by achieving greater awareness of open and inclusive educational practices and varied perspectives on fields of study.  7) Enabling collaboration between institutions, sectors, disciplines and countries.

      I would have expected a more direct reference to serving students. Students being active participants, potentially creators of the content (knowledge) they are interacting with.

  10. Feb 2016
    1. The feed is how stuff enters their content system. But the feed itself is outside, leaving it available for other services to use. It's great when this happens, rather than doing it via a WG that tend to go on for years, and create stuff that's super-complicated, why not design something that works for you, put it out there with no restrictions and let whatever's going to happen happen.

      Interesting approach for hypothes.is to consider?

    1. We don’t know if content will be interoperable – that is, usable beyond the Amazon (Kindle) ecosystem – or if there’ll be integration with other software systems.

      If not then it really wouldn't be truly "open."

    1. As I have mentioned in previous posts, several platforms have appeared recently that could take on this role of third-party reviewer. I could imagine at least: libreapp.org, peerevaluation.org, pubpeer.com, and publons.com. Pandelis Perakakis mentioned several others as well: http://thomas.arildsen.org/2013/08/01/open-review-of-scientific-literature/comment-page-1/#comment-9.
    1. A coalition of some of the world’s key scholarly publishers, platforms, libraries, and technology organizations

      Important that academia is in this space. It's also important that annotations and connections can be open as this is how knowledge spreads and grows.

    1. REBUS Open Web Textbooks - A new project to build a collaborative system for open source textbooks.

      https://twitter.com/hughmcguire<br> https://twitter.com/Bopuc

    1. What makes this more difficult to resolve is that GitHub is — surprise! — not open source. GitHub is closed source, meaning that only GitHub staff is able to make improvements to its platform.The irony of using a proprietary tool to manage open source projects, much like BitKeeper and Linux, has not been lost on everyone. Some developers refuse to put their code on GitHub to retain their independence. Linus Torvalds, the creator of Git himself, refuses to accept pull requests (code changes) from GitHub.

      That's why I have advocated tools like Fossil to other members of our Hackerspace and other communities like Pharo or decentralized options to Mozilla Science (without much acceptation in the communities or even any reaction from Mozilla Science).

      Going with the de facto and popular defaults (without caring about freedom or diversity) seems the position of open source/science communities and even digital activist, which contrast sharply with their discourse for the building of tools/data/politics, but seems invisible in the building of community/metadata/metapolitics.

      The kind of disempowerment these communities are trying to fight, is the one they're suffering with GitHub, like showed here: https://hypothes.is/a/AVKjLddpvTW_3w8LyrU-

      So there is a tension between the convenience and wider awareness/participation of centralized privative platforms that is wanted by these open/activist communities and a growth in the (over)use of the commons that is bigger that the growth of its sustainability/ethos, as shown here: https://hypothes.is/a/AVKjfsTRvTW_3w8LyrqI . Sacrificing growth/convenience by choosing simpler and more coherent infrastructures aligned with the commons and its ethos seems a sensible approach then.

    2. Technically, if you use someone else’s code revision from Stack Overflow, you would have to add a comment in your code that attributes the code to them. And then that person’s code would potentially have a different license from the rest of your code.Your average hobbyist developer might not care about the rules, but many companies forbid employees from using Stack Overflow, partly for this reason.As we enter a post open source world, Stack Overflow has explored transitioning to a more permissive MIT license, but the conversation hasn’t been easy. Questions like what happens to legacy code, and dual licensing for code and non-code contributions, have generated confusion and strong reactions.
    3. The free software generation had to think about licenses because they were taking a stance on what they were not (that is, proprietary software). The GitHub generation takes this right for granted. They don’t care about permissions. They default to open.Open source is so popular today that we don’t think of it as exceptional anymore. We’re so open source, that maybe we’re post open source:But not is all groovy in the land of post open source.
  11. Jan 2016
    1. Below I list a few advantages and drawbacks of anonymity where I assume that a drawback of anonymous review is an advantage of identified review and vice versa. Drawbacks Reviewers do not get credit for their work. They cannot, for example, reference particular reviews in their CVs as they can with publications. It is relatively “easy” for a reviewer to provide unnecessarily blunt or harsh critique. It is difficult to guess if the reviewer has any conflict of interest with the authors by being, for example, a competing researcher interested in stalling the paper’s publication. Advantages Reviewers do not have to fear “payback” for an unfavourable review that is perceived as unfair by the authors of the work. Some (perhaps especially “high-profile” senior faculty members) reviewers might find it difficult to find the time to provide as thorough a review as they would ideally like to, yet would still like to contribute and can perhaps provide valuable experienced insight. They can do so without putting their reputation on the line.
    1. With most journals, if I submit a paper that is rejected, that information is private and I can re-submit elsewhere. In open review, with a negative review one can publicly lose face as well as lose the possibility of re-submitting the paper. Won’t this be a significant disincentive to submit? This is precisely what we are trying to change. Currently, scientists can submit a paper numerous times, receive numerous negative reviews and ultimately publish their paper somewhere else after having “passed” peer review. If scientists prefer this system then science is in a dangerous place. By choosing this model, we as scientists are basically saying we prefer nice neat stories that no one will criticize. This is silly though because science, more often than not, is not neat and perfect. The Winnower believes that transparency in publishing is of the utmost importance. Going from a closed anonymous system to an open system will be hard for many scientists but I believe that it is the right thing to do if we care about the truth.
    2. PLOS Labs is working on establishing structured reviews and we have talked with them about this.
    3. It should be noted that papers will always be open for review so that a paper can accumulate reviews throughout its lifetime.
    1. I am hoping to change scholarly communication at all levels and I think transparency must be at the heart of this.
    2. While there are some features shared between a university repository and us we are distinctly different for the following reasons: We offer DOIs to all content published on The Winnower All content is automatically typeset on The Winnower Content published on the winnower is not restricted to one university but is published amongst work from peers at different institutions around the world Work is published from around the world it is more discoverable We offer Altmetrics to content  Our site is much more visually appealing than a typical repository  Work can be openly reviewed on The Winnower but often times not even commented on in repositories. This is not to say that repositories have no place, but that we should focus on offering authors choices not restricting them to products developed in house.

      Over this tension/complementary between in house and external publishing platforms I wonder where is the place for indie web self hosted publishing, like the one impulsed by grafoscopio.

      A reproducible structured interactive grafoscopio notebook is self contained in software and data and holds all its history by design. Will in-house solutions and open journals like The Winnower, RIO Journal or the Self Journal of Science, support such kinds of publishing artifacts?

      Technically there is not a big barrier (it's mostly about hosting fossil repositories, which is pretty easy, and adding a discoverability and author layer on top), but it seems that the only option now is going to big DVCS and data platforms now like GitHub or datahub alike for storing other research artifacts like software and data, so it is more about centralized-mostly instead of p2p-also. This other p2p alternatives seem outside the radar for most alternative Open Access and Open Science publishers now.