153 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2021
    1. Business Communication For Everyone was created by Arley Cruthers. Several chapters were written from scratch, while others were adapted and remixed from other open textbooks

      Add in my own comments

  2. Jun 2020
    1. [reveal-answer q=”641412″]Show Answer[/reveal-answer] [hidden-answer a=”641412″]D[/hidden-answer]

      Remove old coding

  3. Feb 2020
  4. Jan 2020
    1. please leave a comment using Hypothesis

      To leave a comment on this page, hilight the section you want to comment on and leave your comment in this Hypothesis sidebar.

  5. Sep 2019
    1. Notably, several of the catalysts identified by participants were not directly related to an awareness of OER or open textbooks. Several of these catalysts are related to innovation, learner empowerment, and increasing access to knowledge more generally. While these individuals identified as open education practitioners, they did not necessarily cite OER as their starting point for integrating openness in teaching and learning.

      This is an interesting conclusion as it has oft been stated that OER are a gateway to OEP. While that appears to be the case for 3 of the participants, for the rest it appears that OER was not the starting point to OEP. What bears deeper investigation is whether the second or third step to OEP was OER. Reminds me of a blog post I wrote a few years back wondering if OEP required OER http://clintlalonde.net/2017/02/04/does-open-pedagogy-require-oer/

    2. There is a growing need to establish literacies around open education, copyright, social media and networked learning as a foundational skill.

      Among both students AND instructors. Instructors teach what they know, and if they do not feel comfortable themselves working in these environments b/c they lack digital skills, then they will not encourage students to work openly.

    3. Thomas further commented “it’s openness in what we bring into the classroom, openness in what we take out of the classroom, and an openness between what happens between the students and myself and the students and each other in how we organise the classroom.”

      Great quote

    4. Alice noted her feeling that the use and sharing of OER were one of the “less threatening” components of OEP.

      This is an important change in perception that has occurred in the past 10-15 years of OER. OER's used to be met with much skepticism by faculty. It is nice to see that these are now becoming "less threatening" and, by extension, more accessible.

    5. Supporting Personalised Learning Frequently mentioned throughout the interviews was the goal of allowing learners to explore their personal interests, culture and social context through assessment. Several participants sought to design assessment that allowed learners to tap into these aspects of their personal lives. Where learners could exercise choice and pursue projects of personal interest, a greater sense of ownership was observed. James commented that “they love the idea that they are in control of what they do”, when given more choice around assessment. Other participants suggested it was possible to have learners working on projects that could benefit their personal lives or professional trajectories as part of formal coursework. In her final assignment, Olivia provides the learners “absolute free reign in terms of what kind of a thing they produced.” Learners use their creative interests to develop resources for the course, as Olivia reflects “some opted for essays still, but other students created digital timelines, infographics, podcasts, comic books, videos.” Personalisation of assessment was suggested to allow learners to represent and situate themselves authentically and creatively through their work.

      Giving learners more autonomy in their learning is a great pedagogical principle, and in the context of the article focusing on learning design, I can see how this fits with "open" as it does require that the course design needs to be more "open" as in flexible to allow for this kind of learner autonomy. There is overlap here between authentic learning and open pedagogy.

    6. “students will write differently, you know, if they know it’s not just going to their professor.

      Changes the audience and gets students to think about writing for a larger, perhaps more general audience. This is an important aspect if we want to have, say, highly technical disciplines, like sciences, learning to engage more broadly with the public. Having learners understand the importance of writing for an audience that is more general could become an important open pedagogy principle for disciplines that want to have their work have a broader impact with the general public.

    1. moderating discussion forums

      I don't know if I would consider this a routine task considering the amount of facilitation a good discussion often requires. Perhaps moderating a forum related to routine support questions where the questions might be "when is my term paper due", or "how do I access the course syllabus" could be routine posts in a discussion forum. But when you get into forums where learner discourse is key to the learning process, the moderating is not routine, or that moderating is even the right word to use to frame those discussions as these types of discussion forums often require a facilitator, not a moderator.

  6. Aug 2019
    1. It is possible to simultaneously acknowledge that these systems are capable of dramatically improving student learning AND ask incisive questions about what happens to the data that result from student use of these systems. It’s possible to acknowledge the benefits these systems can offer while being thoughtful and critical about where there might be problems.

      This is the way I feel about much technology these days. You can hold both views. It is rarely an either/or.

    2. On the contrary, more people in the OER community seem to be hostile toward online systems that provide practice and feedback than are interested in finding a way to integrate them with OER.

      Wonder if this hostility is borne out of a suspicion of algorithmic black boxes that assessment apps are often built around?

  7. Jul 2019
    1. I also strongly support the public annotation, archiving and active curation of artifacts (papers, reports, student projects, annotated list of resources, slideshows etc.) that are produced within the COI so as to provide resources for other and subsequent COIs located around the globe (Tibbo, 2015; Ungerer, 2016).

      This is a call to annotate! What better way to support this notion that to create public annotations with Hypothesis :) Leaving this here in the hopes that future annotators of this article will find this and help annotate this important update to a seminal model.

  8. Feb 2019
    1. Instead of viewing a 'digital' version of literacy as a pinnacle to be achieved or surmounted, the focus would be upon Flow. When dealing with digital 'texts' (widely defined) this would result in Digital Flow depending upon literacy. Literacy becomes a staging-post on the journey instead of the destination itself

      This is how I think of digital fluency - this flow-like state where you can maneuver from tool to tool without consciously having to focus on the tool.

    1. Alas, the researchers probably did not ask why the students were multitasking. So, I repeat: was it because they were bored? Was it because they had an important test they were cramming for in another class? Was it because the professor said something they didn't understand (in the classroom or in a video) and they wanted to look it up? I look things up constantly. I hope my students do the same. All occasions of multitasking are not the same.

      Was it because they were just trying to jump through a hoop, perhaps taking a mandatory course in a program that they didn't understand the purpose of or how it fit within their program of study?

    2. And, brace yourselves, taking notes during a lecture is also multitasking. A pen and notebook might not seem like the dangerous distractors

      I doodled in the margins while listening to lectures all the time. Still do when I am in long meetings.

    1. "Online and face-to-face are delivery modes; they are not course designs," she wrote. "To say that online courses are alike because they are online is like saying that rocky road ice cream and tater tots are the same because you find them in the freezer section.

      Exactly (and...LOL)

  9. Jan 2019
    1. Saudi Arabia’s massive $45 billion check to SoftBank’s Vision Fund, the largest venture fund of all time, means Saudi money will likely be part of the biggest pool of venture money for years to come. The Vision Fund has made at least 26 investments including into Slack, WeWork, GM Cruise, and other brand names.

      Slack reference

    1. What social media did was to transform discovery into a passive rather than an active process.

      Nicely put observation on how social media changed the way in which we discover information.

  10. Nov 2018
    1. In some cases, the patients’ drawings looked just like scribbles. But how good – or bad – the drawings were didn’t seem to matter. In fact, in most of the experiments, the researchers assessed their participants’ ability to create vivid images and also their experience at drawing, and neither was correlated with memory performance. Even people who struggle to create a stick figure should, then, get memory benefits from drawing.

      Even if you are a crappy artist, drawing will benefit your memory

    1. In addition to the literature review, we have collaborated with Dr. David Gaertner, instructor in the First Nations and Indigenous Studies Program at the University of British Columbia, on a Wikipedia gap analysis assignment in FNIS 220: Representation and Indigenous Cultural Politics. The gap analysis assignment focuses on how knowledge systems like Wikipedia support or fail to provide a space for inclusive representation of Indigenous culture and identity. We offered a workshop in the FNIS 220 class that focused on how knowledge is constructed in traditional (e.g. library) and open knowledge (e.g. Wikipedia) systems, how to critically analyze who is creating information, the context of the creation process, and how information is made accessible in these spaces. In a second workshop, students took those analyses and worked in small groups to edit Wikipedia to improve Indigenous articles.

      This is a fantastic case study to explore CIL issues with.

    2. At its core, open pedagogy is teaching practices that facilitate the collaborative and transparent construction of knowledge made openly available through online communities.

      This might be one of the most succinct definitions of open pedagogy I have seen.

    1. At the same time, a large share of YouTube users say the site is important for helping them figure out how to do things they haven’t done before. Fully 87% of users say the site is important for this reason, with 51% saying it is very important. And the ability to learn how to do new things is important to users from a wide range of age groups. Roughly half (53%) of users ages 18 to 29 say the site is very important to them for this reason, and that view is shared by 41% of users ages 65 and older. In some cases, users’ responses to these questions show substantial variation based on how frequently they visit the site. Most notably, people who use the site regularly place an especially high level of importance on YouTube for learning about world events. Some 32% of users who visit the site several times a day – and 19% of those who visit once a day – say it is very important for helping them understand things that are happening in the world. That compares with 10% of users who visit less often.

      87% of users say that YouTube is an important outlet for informal learning (51% say it is very important).

    1. OER matters not because textbooks matter. OER matters because it highlights an example of how something central to our public missions, the transfer of our foundational disciplinary knowledge from one generation of scholars to the next, has been co-opted by private profit. And OER is not a solution, but a systemic shift from private to public architecture in how we deliver learning.

      I love this framing of OER as public infrastructure to facilitate the transfer of knowledge. I think it is not only generational, but also more broadly to the public. OER use is not limited to just students within our institutions, but are available freely and openly more broadly to the public. To anyone. I think we need to make that point more widely known. Every OER that is made freely available is making knowledge more open to not only students in our institutions, but to anyone, anywhere. It truly is "public" infrastructure.

  11. Apr 2018
  12. www.openpraxis.org www.openpraxis.org
    1. The eight distinct sub-topics within open education over the past four decades were identified as open access, OER, MOOCs, open educational practice, social media, e-learning, open education in schools and distance learning.

      What I notice is missing from here is open pedagogy which, as Tannis Morgan noted, has historical roots in the late 70's in Quebec. However, it may be that because this is a historical look at open education, and open pedagogy is a relatively recent (despite the work Tannis has discovered) area of interest for open educators, there may just be a lack of formalized research supporting the idea of open pedagogy.

    2. Open education does not constitute a discipline, in the manner of a hard science for example, so there is no agreed canon of research that all researchers will be familiar with. It is also an area that practitioners tend to move into from other fields, often because of an interest in applying aspects of openness to their foundational discipline. This can be seen as an advantage, in that different perspectives are brought into the domain, and it evolves rapidly. However, it also results in an absence of shared knowledge, with the consequence that existing knowledge is often ‘rediscovered’ or not built upon.

      In order for open education to be more than a movement, it feels like we should be consciously moving in this direction - to define a canonical set of resources that are foundational to the field in order to help orient others and further define ourselves as a field/discipline. Because, as we have seen with MOOC's, if we do not do it, then others will do it for us.

    1. Data Re-Use. Contractor agrees that any and all Institutional Data exchanged shall be used expressly and solely for the purposes enumerated in the Agreement. UH Institutional Data shall not be distributed, repurposed or shared across other applications, environments, or business units of the Contractor. The Contractor further agrees that no Institutional Data of any kind shall be revealed, transmitted, exchanged or otherwise passed to other vendors or interested parties except on a case-by-case basis as specifically agreed to in writing by a University officer with designated data, security, or signature authority.

      Like this clause. Wonder if this is the exception or the rule in Uni procurement deals these days?

  13. Mar 2018
    1. argument from authority (e.g., President Richard Nixon should be re-elected because he has a secret plan to end the war in Southeast Asia — but because it was secret, there was no way for the electorate to evaluate it on its merits; the argument amounted to trusting him because he was President: a mistake, as it turned out)

      Everytime I hear Trump say "trust me", I think of this.

    1. the growing tendency to see educational development as an integral component in helping colleges and universities effect change in multiple areas.
  14. Feb 2018
    1. They now stand out as the only one in the class (or, if they’re lucky, one of two) who gets to use a device while other students wonder just why they get to use one. I have seen a couple of students on social media say that as soon as they see a “no devices” policy on a syllabus they drop the class because of this concern.

      Good rationale for not enacting a blanket classroom tech ban

  15. Jan 2018
    1. personalized learning is not a one-size-fits-all method.

      Right. Isn't this what "personalized" means?

    2. to edtech skeptics that fear computers will replace teachers

      I think the criticisms are a bit more nuanced than this F.U.D.

  16. Jul 2017
    1. In other words, all the evidence of a changing industry, open access, hundreds of millions on licensing, and transactional licenses do not matter. What matters to the trial judge is that Access Copyright, one of many intermediaries for authors, is generating less revenue. That conclusion is a striking rejection of the Supreme Court’s careful approach to economic evidence in fair dealing cases.

      Economics trumps education?

    2. The judge engaged in no such analysis of the Access Copyright repertoire, which is suspect given the recent Copyright Board of Canada decision that questioned the repertoire

      Why did he not ask AC to provide their catalogue?

    3. Access Copyright pointed out that textbook sales had shrunk over 30 percent in 20 years.  However, as noted by the Coalition, there was no evidence that this decline was linked to photocopying done by teachers.  Moreover, it noted that there were several other factors that were likely to have contributed to the decline in sales, such as the adoption of semester teaching, a decrease in registrations, the longer lifespan of textbooks, increased use of the Internet and other electronic tools, and more resource-based learning...

      No mention of OER or open textbooks here as a possible factor as to why textbook sales have shrunk.

    4. despite admitting that the data provided by both sides in the case was unreliable

      And yet he found that the data from the AC expert to be more credible than the York expert.

    5. But the goal of the dealing was also, from York’s perspective, to keep enrolment up by keeping student costs down and to use whatever savings there may be in other parts of the university’s operation.

      What a crass analysis.

    6. If any of the six factors should have been a slam dunk for York, it is the purpose of the dealing.

      Yet the judge ruled that educational use wasn't enough

  17. Jun 2017
    1. The one aspect of institutional culture that needs to be changed is the propensity to “discuss” things to death with no resolution and no one accountable for actually implementing directives that have been agreed upon. How about we deliver on some promises and let this prove to government that we are worth funding.

      Thumbs up, Rory!

    2. Major changes in course design, educational technology, student support and administration, marketing and PR are urgently needed to bring AU into advanced 21st century practice in online and distance learning. I fear that while there are visionary faculty and staff at AU who understand this, there is still too much resistance from traditionalists and those who see change as undermining academic excellence or threatening their comfort zone.

      Man, talk about blowing your first-mover advantage

    3. The Board of Governors, senior administration, faculty, staff and students still need to develop together a clear and shared vision for the future of the institution that presents a strong enough value proposition to the government to justify the increased operational and investment funding that is needed.

      Can they all get on board in time? That is the question

    1. A key factor in keeping your team on the right track is transparency.

      What are people working on? Bogging, collaborative documentation, wikis, Slack, status updates

    2. Team members have a clear understanding of where they can best serve the team’s needs, and everyone is highly motivated to get to the same goal.

      Importance of leadership. This is where good leaders shine - always have their eye on the prize, and can communicate that eye on the prize to team members..

    3. people feel comfortable to exchange ideas and challenge the status quo without fear of misplaced judgement or rejection.

      THIS! Need to have healthy space for discussions, even when it is uncomfortable discussions.

    4. Trust, group identity, and a sense of group efficacy.

      Beyond efficacy, I would also include a clear sense of group purpose and goals.

    5. Teams that perform are constantly working out things like communication preferences, recognition of achievements, and workflows.

      Teamwork is always a work in progress. However, if the original clear goals and objectives are not there, then this is often just wheel spinning.

    6. The key value to emphasize in the team is positive intent. This is to say that, even when things aren’t going smoothly, each person should assume that their “challenger” is coming from a good place and is trying to act in the best interest of the team.

      Assume good and no ill will. Don't take conflicts personally.

    7. Fair warning to team members (and leaders) who don’t like conflict — things will get awkward. But if teams can’t identify the issues, communicate constructively, and work to resolve them, they will get stuck at this stage.

      Expect conflict. Respectful conflict is healthy and should be encouraged.

    8. The other part is building emotional connections.

      Start with small talk, then move to productivity

    9. What everyone needs most is a clear understanding of their part in the journey.

      What leaders need to do in the forming stage - work with the team to develop clear goals, expectations & roles

    10. Part of this is leading them to realize that their new team members are bringing skills to the table that help everyone to succeed in a way they couldn’t do by themselves. Setting goals together puts these skills and interests into the open.

      Delicate balance as leaders often have something that they need to get done, but there needs to be room for team members to individually contribute here in order to achieve buy-in.

    1. Another page/module that isn't consistent with formats laid out in previous modules.

    2. Learning Outcomes Explain how CC works with copyright Understand license scope and intent of licenses List what content licenses can/should be used for Determine when/how CC interacts with fair use Explain when licenses don’t apply Understand irrevocable nature No extra conditions Will license expire?

      Obviously not finished. Lots of content already covered before you get here. Generally, I prefer to see LO as the first thing at the top of the module.

    3. 4.0

      Do you need to specific type? This will change. Why not just say CC license?

  18. certificates.creativecommons.org certificates.creativecommons.org
    1. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA) version 4.0.

      License incompatibility on this page

  19. certificates.creativecommons.org certificates.creativecommons.org
    1. Application of learning through creation of a toolkit, engaging in the Creative Commons community, and applied practice.

      I would expand on these for people. Maybe show an example of what a toolkit might look like?

    1. CC Certificates aim to engage you in direct application of learning for personal and / or professional use. Toward that end the following learning activities aim to help you you use and apply basic knowledge in ways directly relevant to you. Learning activities are structured around 1. Creation of a personal learner toolkit. 2 Active participation in CC’s community, and 3. Applied practice.

      This should be in each Application of Learning section to give context. Or at least have this earlier on. Maybe have an intro section on how to use this material as a learner and as an instructor?

    1. This module has a slightly different layout than the previous modules. The Learner Toolkit bit is different and it has a new section at the end of the page called Closing the Loop that doesn't appear on previous modules.

  20. certificates.creativecommons.org certificates.creativecommons.org
    1. The Commons module has four units of learning that provide a grounding in the commons and Creative Commons role in stewarding and supporting it.

      Minor thing, but a bit confusing to say 4 units and then have 5 options listed below. The Quest is not an actual unit so likely should be presented differently, otherwise could be confusing when people see 4 and see 5 listed when the 5th looks like the actual 4 units..

    1. All Too True – make a case for keeping works in the public domain by writing a letter to your government representatives.

      Excellent! Love this advocacy step. Connects perfectly with the LO about communicating the value of the public domain.

    2. Following step costs

      sp - steep

    1. Can you come up with an example that might enjoy two forms of protection simultaneously? How about an example that might enjoy all three forms of protection?

      These are good prompts.

    1. CC Certificate social forum

      Mention off the top to let learners know where and what this is?

    2. Learner Toolkit

      This should be established ahead of getting into content. In the beginning there should be section informing students to create a learning toolkit & suggestions on how to do that.

    3. What is Protected?.

      broken link

    4. purpose of copyright

      This UMinn document starts with framing in a US context. Again, may be better to adapt the document and remove US specific references.

    5. Trace basic history of copyright

      Outline may be more clear than trace?

    6. Understand copyright is automatic

      Actionable word. Understand not specific enough - Recognize that copyright is automatic

  21. certificates.creativecommons.org certificates.creativecommons.org
    1. final summit quest

      Broken link

    2. Creative Commons licenses do not replace copyright, they built on top of it.

      grammar - build/are built?

  22. May 2017
    1. Did the writer engage with anyone who disagrees? Did they call a senator whose legislation bugs them? Did they try to grasp what the president-elect was doing, or merely repeat one of his more outrageous statements? If it's a broadcast interview, was the guest presented with genuine opposing views and challenged to answer? Those who wrestle with opposing arguments do you a service and often improve their own arguments.

      This is a double-edged sword in traditional media - the need to get both sides of the argument. It is important for balanced and factual reporting, but it can also be problematic as it frames both sides as having equal importance in an issue. Think of the debate about climate change. In the name of journalistic fairness, a mainstream reporter may often feel obliged to get the opinion of a climate change denier to balance the story. This often gives the impression that the deniers are of equal weight on the issue. Could lead the general public to believe that climate change is a devisive issue since there are 2 sides, despite the fact that 99% of the science and research is weighted towards climate change. Should both sides be given equal weight in journalism? Could this actually help to create an environment of skepticism about facts? Making all facts seem debatable?

    2. But let's properly define the problem. History and experience tell me it's not a post-truth era: Facts have always been hard to separate from falsehoods, and political partisans have always made it harder. It's better to call this a post-trust era.

      We are not post-truth, we're post-trust.

      Kind of. A lot of people "trusted" the Denver Guardian because it fit within their pre-existing narrative framework. Maybe we are "post-trust" with the institutions and organizations that got us this far: traditional mainstream media, higher ed, researchers and scientists.

    1. #NotAllEdTech can be a tactic that derails and deflects from discussions of educational technology as a practice that needs deep questioning. #NotAllEdTech could, perhaps inadvertently, redirect attention on the optimism surrounding educational technology, ignoring the broader landscape around which educational technology operates. It might also create a false binary: the heroes and good guys of EdTech vis-à-vis the bad ones (e.g., for-profits, large companies, and so on). Most importantly, such a binary might imply that those on the good side are somehow shielded by outside forces (some of which, such as pressures to rethink our practices, might in fact be very useful).

      Bingo. It can't be a binary this or that. It can be (to paraphrase Postman) this AND that. Tech gives and it takes away. We need to approach conversations about EdTech with a more nuanced lens and be willing to throw away the binaries. Just because you are a critic doesn't mean you are also not a supporter.

    2. #NotAllEdTech posits that not all educational technology is malevolent and not all educational technology represents an insidious attempt at privatizing and automating education. The #NotAllEdTech argument notes that there are many good people in our field. People who care. Entrepreneurs, researchers, and colleagues of many vocations – instructors, instructional designers, directors of digital learning  – who are working, in their own way, to improve teaching and learning with technology. Not all educational technology is sinister, atheoretical, ahistorical, and driven by unsavory desires. #NotAllEdTech.

      I have always found conversations about educational technology to be difficult because people don't necessarily want to engage with nuanced discussions of edtech. It's the perception that, if you are FOR technology,, then you must also be FOR this Silicon Valley agenda of EdTech. I've had this discussion/argument with others that, if you support tech, then you must be blind to the insidiousness and negative side of technology. It's like you cannot be both a supporter and a critic of technology - it is a dichotomous either/or.

    1. The use of outsourcing for course design is rare.

      This will change with more textbook publishers and LMS providers offering course design solutions to institutions.

    2. Another 18 percent expect faculty to develop their online courses independently.

      Not a great strategy imo. Takes a team to develop good effective online learning.

    3. The research found that for "larger" programs, four in 10 require the use of instructional design support, three in 10 use a team approach for online course design and one in 10 outsources the work. Overall, some 80 percent of larger programs use instructional design expertise. The advantage is that those programs tend to show "greater consistency and quality of design" and do a better job of institutional branding for their online programs.

      Evidence that ID and EdTech development support have a better overall consistency and do a better job at institutional branding. Hmmm. Institutional branding. That is hardly an inspiring rallying cry for having a broader ID led course development process.

    4. The asynchronous nature of this kind of education may explain why threaded discussions turned up as the most commonly named teaching and learning technique, mentioned by 27.4 percent of respondents, closely followed by practice-based learning, listed by 27.3 percent of survey participants.

      Threaded discussion boards - the original and still going strong pedagogical tool of online learning.

    1. Does the punishment for online mistakes far outweigh the mistakes themselves?

      How often are political candidates yanked from participating when it becomes public that they got drunk in public when they were young? Failure to forgive and mob on is becoming prevalent in our society. People cannot make mistakes. The stakes are too high.

    2. few of us talk to our students about social media on a philosophical and critical level.

      YES! How to be in the conversation, not avoid the conversation. But when you see the public drubbing people get when they make a mistake, and how quick the mob turns with no forgiveness, then why should they engage?

    3. In our classrooms, we urge our students to express a range of opinions, to disagree, to become critical thinkers. Online is a different matter. On their Facebook and Instagram feeds, they are learning to conform and be uniformly agreeable, because opinion and difference can come with a high price. Vulnerability, sadness, failure, and nonconformity are not to be owned publicly, lest they reflect negatively on their brands. Could this have an effect on how they handle vulnerability, sadness, failure, and nonconformity offline?

      Are we silencing a generation? Was that episode of Dark Mirror right? Or The Circle?

    4. The problem with the self-as-brand social media is the dissonance it breeds. We’ve taught our kids to hide the whole truth of who they are online — even as we’ve instilled in them the importance of "being yourself" growing up. Thus the self-branding mind-set that defines social-media use among the young doesn’t make them happy. It mostly just makes them stressed.

      Nicely put. Be yourself....but not online. Then be someone else.

    1. The model I'm interested in was developed nearly a hundred years ago, on the North Atlantic coast of North America, in a landscape populated with fishing villages and hard-luck mining towns. Called "The Antigonish Movement,"8 this renowned adult education experiment of the 1920s–1940s based in Antigonish, Nova Scotia, led to the development of local credit unions that still dot the landscape around Maritime Canada. Its vision was as education-focused as it was economic, with an emphasis on building literacy as an avenue toward civic participation. The Antigonish Movement addressed people's poverty and lack of agency by creating collaborative capacity for pushing back on the structures of their disenfranchisement.

      Echoes of co-operatives.

    2. Rather, the same higher education institutions whose hierarchy and gatekeeping the web was supposed to open up and democratize7 are increasingly necessary partners in building any kind of democratic future for society, full stop.


    1. ne critical element in the effectiveness of these networks is “working in the open.” This includes a number of simple practices commonly associated with open source software: making curriculum and tools easy for others to discover; publishing using an editable format that allows others to freely use and adapt them; using an open license like Creative Commons. It also includes a set of work practices that make it easy for people to collaborate across organizations and locations: collaborative writing in shared online documents; shared public plans on wiki or other editable documents; progress reports and insights shared in real time and posted on blogs. These simple practices are the grease that lubricates the network, allowing ideas to flow and innovations to spread. More importantly, they make it possible for people to genuinely build things together—and learn along the way. This point cannot be emphasized strongly enough: when people build things together they tend to own them emotionally and want to roll them out after they are created. If the people building together are from different institutions, then the innovations spread more quickly to more institutions.

      These are all important aspects of open pedagogy, imo. Transparent, network practices that connect, but also create space and opportunities for particiaption by those on the edges. Working in the open is an invitation to particiaption to others.

    2. Rather than selecting a single organization to lead the network, consider a spoke-and-hub or constellation model that empowers teams of organizations to act as “network hubs” for different sectors of the network. The best candidates for these hubs are intermediary organizations that act in the best interests of the network, allowing other network members to focus on their core mission and programmatic activities. Hub organizations play several roles. As conveners, they bring people together and build the field. As catalysts, they invest money and resources to get new ideas off the ground or help exciting projects to develop. As communicators, hub organizations enhance networks members’ ability to tell their story effectively and efficiently, internally and externally. As champions, hubs lift up the accomplishments of network actors, regionally, nationally, and internationally. And, as coordinators, hub organizations connect the dots, recommend priorities for the network, and connect those priorities to national resources.

      This could describe BCcampus - a hub organization that connects networks

  23. Feb 2017
    1. Crucially, adopting OEP requires more of a shift of mindset than does adopting OER, more critical reflection about the roles of the instructor and the student when education continues to be based on content consumption rather than critical digital literacy despite information (and misinformation) being abundant.

      I think there are already plenty of examples of OEP in the wild, just not identified as OEP. It may go under the name Digital Pedagogy, Student as Producer, Network Learning, Networks of Practice, Service Learning, Public Sphere Pedagogy.

    2. Of course, this is far from an exhaustive list of strategic possibilities and only aims to illustrate the mechanics of an integrative approach.

      This one revolves around OER. Too bad there wasn't one that revolved around OEP that could be an example.

    3. OE movement

      From what I know about other open communities, the Open Ed movement isn't the only Open community that experiences this kind of tension between idealists and pragmatics.

    4. an integrated approach that is sensitive to the diversity across and within the audiences whom we seek to serve


    5. Outlined like this, it is easy to recognize the merits of both strategies. Indeed, idealists would do well to recognize that open textbook adoption tangibly benefits students in material and educational terms that are not insignificant. On the other hand, pragmatists might recognize that the idealistic approach is appealing to those for whom the construct of a traditional textbook is a dinosaur best served by a meteor strike (and can therefore can be pragmatic).

      This nicely sums up the tension, fiery apocalyptic imagery and all :) I touched upon this tension in my post OpenEd 15 posts here and here.

    6. Whereas idealists work through collaborative networks such as faculty learning communities, pragmatists work to create grant programs for individual faculty to create, adapt, or adopt OER.

      I don't know if this is the case. In fact, I see plenty of pragmatists working in faculty learning communities.

    7. eight-stage theory of psychosocial development

      Nice framing of the issue within Erikson's work.

    8. ‘what else can I do because of these permissions?’, we’ve come within striking distance of realizing the full power of open.”

      With full respect to David, I might phrase this as "we've come within striking distance of realizing the full power of open educational resources."

    9. the goal posts must be placed further than simply cheaper textbooks.

      Yes. Because publishers will always be able to beat OER on price as they mine new business models. Not hard to image where the content becomes the loss leader for the publishers in order to get faculty buy-in into tools that have the real gold - data.

    10. Framing OER as free, digital versions of expense, print textbooks also risks playing directly into the hands of commercial textbook publishers who are in the midst of a pivot away from a business model based on selling “new editions” of print textbooks every three years to one based on leasing 180-day access to digital content delivery platforms.

      Exactly, although part of me wonders if OER hasn't had a hand in this pivot. If there were no OER's or open textbooks, would the industry be pivoting? Or are the pivoting as a response to the rising use of open textbooks and OER?

    11. This begs a broader question: If open educational practices are a game changer, why are OER advocates playing by the rules of the commercial textbook industry?

      This is a wonderful question. In part, I think it is to make it as palatable as possible to bring on board new faculty. If you make it like it old, but slightly different (incremental change) it may be easier for some to come around and on board. The problem with this is then OER no longer become truly innovative - it is reactive to the rules of the textbook industry. And that industry is going away.

    12. At the same time, this narrow focus on cost savings is immediately less relevant in countries where faculty are less reliant on expensive textbooks

      A North American problem.

    1. For me this willingness has always been about meeting faculty where they are and just getting them moving – no matter how small the first step may be.

      Ha! Finish reading the article, Clint before you start annotating

    2. In this light, rather than a static framing like “what kind of advocate should I be?,” I think a more useful framing would be dynamic, like “as I’m advocating for open with this specific faculty member, should I advocate for an evolutionary approach to open (knowing that it will be a longer road to revolution for this person), or should my advocacy go straight to revolution?” My goal as an advocate is to get faculty to revolution as quickly as possible. For some, that means going straight to revolution. But for many of them – for most of them – the path to revolution will start with evolution and “evolve” from there. For these faculty, an unyielding “let’s have a revolution” conversation will be the last conversation they ever have about open. Because if you equate open with revolution, and they’re unable to go straight to revolution, then they’re done with open. (Yes, I’ve done this in the past; and no, you don’t ever want to experience it.) And that’s the most #epicfail you can have as an advocate – not only are you unpersuasive in that moment, but you poison the well for future conversations, too.

      Meet them where they are and take them where they want to go.

    1. This is all great, but here's the annoying thing: it should be totally unnecessary. These are digitizations of public domain works, and there's no reasonable basis for granting them any copyright protection that would need to be divested with a CC0 mark in the first place. They are not creative transformative works, and in fact they are the opposite: attempts to capture the original as faithfully and accurately as possible, with no detectable changes in the transfer from one medium to another. It might take a lot of work, but sweat of the brow does not establish copyright, and allowing such images to be re-copyrighted (in some cases hundreds or even thousands of years after their original creation) would be pointless and disastrous.

      Interesting. I never realized there was this much of a distinction between CC0 and the CC PD license, but it makes sense.

    1. simply incorporating a technological tool without reflecting upon pedagogical change isn’t digital pedagogy

      This is the key to what makes a pedagogy a pedagogy, I think - the thoughtful articulation of the rationale behind the practice. The intentionality of application by the instructor.

    1. If we want to better understand when and how we lost our way with educational technology, we must go back to the early days of the Internet.

      ...and a time when higher education WAS the internet

    2. These are positive, incremental improvements in the quality and flexibility of our classrooms, but are nowhere near being transformational (Laurillard, 2007). This is not the use of technology that I’m interested in

      Me, too.

    1. Next time Silicon Valley comes up with a new way to “disrupt” education, let’s see if we faculty can invest more time and effort in getting our bosses to listen to common sense.

      And force them to do a standard lit review and design online learning experiences that are grounded in the rich research history of online learning.

    1. Here, incubation becomes a method to develop a mindset for engaging with the world.

      Open pedagogy? No. Public Pedagogy maybe. Is public pedagogy a thing?

    2. There is an unsettling gap between our pedagogical goals and the structural rewards of university. Students fear that taking chances in an assignment might mean a lower grade. Taking a class outside their main discipline might prove a stretch and lower their GPA. This produces risk-averse behaviour rather than bold, fearless action. We need opportunities to better align the learning goals we say we aspire to teach and the learning outcomes we get.

      Fear of failure

    1. If you strive to see behavior change in your participants and are willing to drop the more comfortable role of constantly “telling”, and  these guidelines will help. Ask questions. Plan and integrate questions that will spur not-so-easy thinking and feeling. Be provocative. Be willing to name dynamics, factions, or hidden assumptions in the group…with the positive intention of causing disequilibrium and curiosity. Encourage experimentation. Balance your “Telling” role with opportunities for participants to explore, create, and make mistakes.

      Asking provocative and probing questions to spur deeper thinking.

  24. Jan 2017
    1. They could also be the only way workers and Internet users can become masters—and owners—of powerful artificial intelligence systems that can’t be built without data we all produce.

      I have not heard this before, but it makes complete sense. Own the data, control how the data is used.

    2. But perhaps the most important takeaway from last year’s Platform Cooperatives Consortium organizing meeting was the message it conveyed not to despair or lose hope.

      YES! Hope for a new way forward. So happy to see talk of hope and not despair.

    3. We’re talking about nurturing a return to a more humane form of capitalism

      I like this phrase - humane form of capitalism

    1. When asked how this new paradigm might impact the role of the CIO and the IT department, Brown said, "I think there is a huge role. I don't see that role changing. IT is still going to be in charge of the infrastructure, but also, given their technical expertise, they are the most informed about what is plausible to connect and what is not, and to encourage open standards," he said. Procurement is another important factor, he added, because an institution can say, "We are looking to buy x, but one of the requirements for x is that it needs to adopt open standards." Brown said no one understands the strategic importance of technology better than the IT folks. "Their role is not diminished in this, because there is a lot we need to figure out."

      IT departments need to encourage open standards. Wonder how many IT departments are up on open learning standards?

    2. "We are using Canvas for collecting material from the students, and the faculty are using its SpeedGrader app," he explained. "We are using Canvas as a thin layer and laying apps on top of it. For instance, we needed a better way to record video, so we developed an app to record video on an iPhone or iPad. Once you upload it, it automatically gets bounced into your Canvas account. We are using Canvas as the core glue to hold together a bunch of other things."

      Canvas as the glue

    3. The LMS would still have a role to play, Brown insisted. "You could still have the LMS as the sun of your environment around which all the planets orbit," he said. "You could have it partially obscured, so the user interface is largely through the LMS, but augmented by side applications." Or the other applications could form the basis of the user experience, and those applications could hook into the LMS as a hub for them.

      Integration would need to be seemles from an instructional design perspective to keep the student experience smooth.

    4. He noted that the Unizin collaboration is seeking to innovate precisely in this manner. "You can have a confederation, a looser association of various components," he said. That gives its members the freedom to plug things in and pull them out again, and allow their environment to evolve with open standards.

      Confederation is a good model. NGDLE works like Canada - provinces forming a whole loosely tied together. Hmmm, maybe a political metaphor would work better than lego?

    1. started using metaphors such as Legos

      Poor Lego. I get how this works as metaphorical device but has been used and abused in EdTech over the years. Might be some baggage from the LO crowd from past days if we continue to use lego as a metaphor for component.

    2. There is an increasingly diverse student population in today's colleges and universities, and a wide variety of modalities and course models. "Try to imagine a single application like an LMS that could possibly do justice to the wide range of needs," Brown said,

      It can't. One size cannot fit every pedagogical model.

    1. Asking questions via social media that are intentionally designed to elicit responses can provide a plethora of useful responses. Why wait until an end-of-year survey to find out about an issue when you can poll/question students throughout the year via social media?

      It doesn't have to be just student feedback about the operations and mechanics of the course, or as a replacement for a course survey tool. You can also use the platform as a way to engage students on the content relevant to the learning outcomes of the course. And use the platform to connect learners with people in the field of study.

  25. Dec 2016
    1. It’s a deal with the Soviets. We approach them on this basis: We both recognize the nonproliferation treaty’s not working, that half a dozen countries are on the brink of getting a bomb. Which can only cause trouble for the two of us. The deterrence of mutual assured destruction that prevents the United States and the USSR from nuking each other won’t work on the level of an India-Pakistan nuclear exchange. Or a madman dictator with a briefcase-bomb team. The only answer is for the Big Two to make a deal now to step in and prevent the next generation of nations about to go nuclear from doing so. By whatever means necessary. “Most of those [pre-nuclear] countries are in one form or another dominated by the U.S. and the Soviet Union,” Trump says. “Between those two nations you have the power to dominate any of those countries. So we should use our power of economic retaliation and they use their powers of retaliation and between the two of us we will prevent the problem from happening. It would have been better having done something five years ago,” he says. “But I believe even a country such as Pakistan would have to do something now. Five years from now they’ll laugh.”

      30 years later, here is finally executing his plan

    2. “I’ll tell you why,” Trump says. “People just don’t believe the inevitable.

      There is something profoundly unsettling when you hear the future President of the US refer to nuclear war as "inevitable"

    3. Hair-trigger. Trump foresees a situation soon when such hair-trigger heads of state will have their hands on multiple nuclear triggers. And it drives him crazy that nobody in the White House senses the danger.

      High irony. Talking about mad men with hair triggers by a madman with a hard trigger.

    1. Pearson still intends to have Ernst and Young audit the efficacy of all their products.

      Wahhh? Odd choice that calls into question why the audits are being done - to impress shareholders, or strengthen academic rigour?

    2. This is not easy. Well-designed educational technology has often lacked a learning sciences base, and many research-based education products have lacked a compelling user-centered design. How can world-class user experience (UX) design— grounded in a fail-fast culture—and educational research— grounded in rigor—peacefully coexist?

      In this Pearson sounds more like an edtech company than a content publisher. I wonder at what point will Pearson release a full LMS product that competes directly with BB, D2L, etc?

      The tension in that last line on the cultural environments of technology vs academia is an important -and real-tension.

    1. Instead, the committee recommends increases in postal rates, muses about expanding Canada Post's mandate to provide cellular services or broadband Internet, including email services or "the basis for a Canadian social network," and suggests the corporation partner with e-commerce companies to increase revenues.

      While this will likely be mocked by some, I think there is merit in exploring initiatives like this within government. An email address for everyone. For free. And a space that is an alternative to commercial social networks.

  26. Nov 2016
    1. Any professors who claim they introduced a new digital tool in the classroom without some kind of friction are probably lying. What makes me luckier than some other faculty members across higher education is that I’ve been given the freedom to fail. My recent department chairs, my dean, and especially the upper administration at my university have created an environment that not only tolerates but actively rewards pedagogical experimentation.

      For me, this is a key point in making "freedom to fail" possible. There needs to be administrative support from not only faculty, but also from students who often have rigid expectations of what their learning should look like and can sometimes resist pedagogical experimentation. I think being very explicit with learners ahead of time that you are trying something a bit different and that there may be hiccups and bumps can help mitigate some of those student expectations.

  27. Aug 2016
    1. I am a student and I would like to understand a concept. I look for other versions of the same book that may explain a concept to me in a way that helps me understand.

      Really fwd thinking here...providing alterantive pathways for students to learn. This is a concept core to personalized learning - ability of students to access resources that are meaningful to them.

    2. to my own copy of the book

      This is good language to help alleviate what I was talking about in the first point/annotation about the culture of changes.

    3. A similar interface is proposed in Figure 1.3.

      Are you proposing a page level copy, or a book level copy? This interface looks like a page level to me. I'm not sure it needs to be an either/or page/book as there are some who may want to copy at the page level and some at the book level. If you could do both that would be ideal. But I don't know enough of the logistics to know if that is what you are planning, or if that kind of flexibility is possible or would throw things out of scope with complexity.

    4. Table 1.1 — Current status of collaborative elements in Pressbooks, Mediawiki and Github.

      This table is excellent

    5. In this type of system, clues/hints/traces of previous work are left for individual agents to decide for themselves which tasks should be prioritized. The self-organization approach to task division affords the most autonomy, drives independent, parallel work and is in line with a stigmergic approach to collaboration.

      This is excellent.

    6. Pressbooks

      Could comments (if enabled) be considered a way to enable Communication in PB?

    7. transparent

      And, I would argue, a stygmergic one where another developer can fork a project and carry on developing in their own way.

    8. While open source developers and wiki authors may be very comfortable with an open and transparent publishing process, the level of comfort academics have with it is an unknown at this point.

      It would likely vary, but considering that, until very recently, all academic peer review was blind, I would say open and transparent publishing processes are still in the minority for most academics.

      There is also a lot of research that one of the biggest barriers to innovation in teaching is faculty fear of looking foolish in front of their peers and their students. So, asking them to adopt open publishing practices that can make them look vulnerable is, again, a cultural hurdle.

    9. Asking that academic publishers use these tools or put aside the time to gain a comprehensive understanding of existing developer tools risks alienating users.

      Excellent point

    10. An idea of community around Pressbooks content is limited to a community of readers, who are a community by chance, are not cognizant of themselves in a community nor of other people in that community.

      Interesting metaphysical point - If a community does not know it exists, is it a community?

    11. As a result, Pressbooks design continues to be concerned with presentation of content in multiple formats.

      And from the perspective of a single, solitary author (ie self-publishing world).

    12. At the very least, establishing a relationship between how knowledge gets created and the tools we use speaks to the importance of system design.

      Excellent point.

    13. not always appropriate for an academic text

      Is the example you have in mind here what i just laid out in my previous annotation? ie) the text can be changed by someone when it is being used by someone else?

    14. Potential contributors need to seek permission from other people with greater authority than them.

      Some care has to be taken with how this setniment is framed to faculty. In traditional academia, this is exactly the paradigm that some will want to continue to see enforced. That only those with sufficient authority should be allowed to collaborate and contribute.

      There is an inherent mistrust in academia of systems that allow for minimal gatekeeping as gatekeeping (aka peer review) is the hallmark of higher ed. This is a cultural hurdle in academia that needs to be addressed in the technology.

      Faculty who use a resource in their teaching have to be assured that the work they are using won't suddenly be changed on them. This assurance can happen by giving each person their own copy and assuring them that no one else can change the copy they have. This ability to copy and keep is implicit in the work we do, but always needs to be made explicit to those coming at our systems for the first time. If they fear that the work they are using can be modified without them knowing, they won't use it.

      For example, instructors who use an open resource want to make sure that open resource isn't changed by others partway through the course they are using it in. So, there needs to be an assurance that this will not happen.

  28. Jun 2016
    1. An academic tech evangelist, Bowen says that “machine-composed textbooks might be the least interesting option to consider in the next five years. Assessment is an area ripe for transformation from new technologies. We could even have entire learning spaces that adapt to suit the specific needs of faculty or students. The possibilities are in some ways beyond our current comprehension.”


  29. Nov 2013
    1. (like the one you will see on this post

      Although you have probably noticed that the number in the right is not 1, but 3 indicating there are 3 comments on this page.

      There may be more, if someone else has commented.

    2. browser first shipped

      According to Wikipedia, version 1 of Mosaic was released on November 11, 1993.

      This comment contains an external link and is written in Markdown, which is supported in the comments.

    3. Mosaic

      Mosaic was the first graphical web browser created by Marc Andreessen and Eric Bina

    1. Hypothesis on my blog now

      I've done the same on mine. Quite like how unobtrusive the annotations are

    1. Never let it be said that I don’t state the obvious.

      I am the master of stating the obvious