No description available.

This item belongs to: audio/librivoxaudio.

This item has files of the following types: 128Kbps MP3, 64Kbps MP3, Metadata, Ogg Vorbis

By Donald Marron, Christian Science Monitor

Former Stanford professor Sebastian Thrun has already taught a class of 160,000. Now he’s aiming to teach 500,000 students. Sound impossible? Well, he’s already taught a class of 160,000 students. As Felix Salmon recounts: Thrun told the story of his Introduction to Artificial Intelligence class, which ran from October to December last year. It started as a way of putting his Stanford course online — he was going to teach the whole thing, for free, to anybody in the world who wanted it. With quizzes and grades and a final certificate, in parallel with the in-person course he was giving his Stanford undergrad students. He sent out one email to announce the class, and from that one email there was ultimately an enrollment of 160,000 students.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Donald-Marron/2012/0127/Can-one-professor-teach-500-000-students-at-once

by the College Network

Carla A. Downing, gives an example of implementing pedagogical and andragogal theory at the 16th Annual Sloan-C International Conference on Online Learning in November, 2010 in her presentation “The Importance of Pedagogy and Andragogy.” Dr. Downing, using herself as an example, provides additional insight into how incorporating pedagogical and antragogical theory can increase the quality of discourse in student-student and student-instructor discussions and how students can move up Bloom’s taxonomy to mastery of concepts.

http://youtu.be/ykc70tYMgqw

By Audrey Watters, Inside Higher Ed

The Open Badges Project is a recognition that “learning looks very different today than traditionally imagined. Legitimate and interest-driven learning is occurring through a multitude of channels outside of formal education, and yet much of that learning does not “count” in today’s world. Mozilla is responsible for the design of the technical infrastructure of the badge ecosystem. This means, no surprise coming from Mozilla, that the technology is open-source (documentation, source code). Of course, making an open source and openly accessible system like this flies in the face of the proprietary systems that currently control those “real-world results like jobs or formal credit” — namely, universities. The proposed Open Badges Project challenges not just certification, but also assessment. What does it mean that anyone can issue any sort of badge? Does a badge offer a better representation of skills or competencies than having a formal degree? If so, when? Will these badges be meaningful — to students, to schools, to employers? Will they be accepted? If so, by whom?

http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/hack-higher-education/how-will-mozillas-open-badges-project-affect-higher-ed

Building Bridges: Your Community and Labor Report National Edition 26:20 Produced by Ken Nash and Mimi Rosenberg ******************************************** TAXES, WE DONâT PAY NO STINKIN' TAXES SAYS VERIZON, AS THE 99% CRIES FOUL! With The Tax Dodgers, OWS Occupy the Boardroom, United NY, Make th....

This item belongs to: audio/building_bridges.

This item has files of the following types: Metadata, Ogg Vorbis, VBR MP3

Building Bridges: Your Community and Labor Report National Edition 26:20 Produced by Ken Nash and Mimi Rosenberg ******************************************** TAXES, WE DONâT PAY NO STINKIN' TAXES SAYS VERIZON, AS THE 99% CRIES FOUL! With The Tax Dodgers, OWS Occupy the Boardroom, United NY, Make th....

This item belongs to: audio/building_bridges.

This item has files of the following types: Metadata, Ogg Vorbis, VBR MP3

By Michael Feldstein

David Wiley writes:

You have to admit that some of the things the publishers are working on are both cooler and better than almost everything that currently exists in the OER space. Can you name a single OER project that does assessment at all (and I don’t mean PDFs of quizzes)? Can you name one that does diagnostic assessment or handles mastery in any meaningful way? We’ve narrowed the entire field of OER down to CMU OLI, Khan Academy, and possibly Thrun’s new stuff. Now, can you think of one of these three that openly licenses their assessments and the engines they run them on? No.

Open education currently has no response to the coming wave of diagnostic, adaptive products coming from the publishers. To the best of my knowledge there is no one really working on next gen OER – OER that are interactive, simulative, really rich with multimedia AND combined with OAR that drive diagnosis, remediation, and adaptation. There’s certainly no one funding next gen OER. And believe me – if it took $100M to get the field to where it currently stands in terms of relatively static openly licensed content, it will take at least that much investment again over the next decade for the field to do something truly next gen.

Because this stuff costs so much to do, if no one steps up to the funding plate the entire field is at serious risk. Much has been written about 2012 being “the year of OER.” Let’s hope it’s not the year OER peaks. We need brains, energy, and funding on the next gen OER/OAR problem NOW. [Emphasis added.]

I have long argued that for-profit companies are neither the mortal enemies nor the white knights of education. In this particular case, given the heavy lift involved in funding this sort of effort relative to the resources available in the academic and philanthropic communities—and David is in a position to know—I think it is important to think about for-profit entities in roles that are potentially cooperative with rather than in opposition to OERs. We should be asking the following questions:

• What sort of commercial ventures could prosper in an ecosystem where quality educational resources are abundant and free rather than scarce and expensive?
• Specifically, what sorts of ventures could make money ethically by adding real value in the context of abundant and free educational resources?
• What are the barriers preventing those ventures (either existing or yet-to-be-formed) from helping to create such an ecosystem?
• Who are the right people and what are the right institutions to forge the relationships that could foster such an ecosystem?

Possibly related posts:

1. Four Key Questions for the Apple Education Announcement There is growing buzz online about Apple’s planned media event...

OER Funding: Ask the Right Questions by %%AUTHORINK%% on e-Literate

By Michael Feldstein

Scott Leslie has a good post up ruminating on the moving target of open textbooks which reminded me that I have long intended to write a follow-up to an exchange that he, I, and Rob Abel had in the comments section of a post a I wrote a while back. Scott lamented that the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges was releasing its open course content in IMS Common Cartridge format, which seemed to him to be not so easily accessible or universally usable as one might like. I wrote in response,

Fundamentally, I don’t believe in cartridges. I don’t believe in forking a copy of a digital resource and stuffing it into another system. It’s bad for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to the implementation challenges that Scott ran into with Moodle (although it’s fair to say that some LMSs handle CC import better than others). Common Cartridge made more sense 5 or 10 years ago, but it’s late to the game and is ultimately destined to be eclipsed by in-place APIs, including but not limited to IMS LTI. (By the way, I’m not so sure it’s such a good idea to let Google own our integration API either.)

Unsurprisingly, Rob Abel, as CEO of the IMS, took issue:

If there is agreement that CC helps with the issue of content in an LMS then, well in your scenario the content is inside the publisher “LMS” (or equivalent).

Can I tailor it? Can I put things in there – like a syllabus – and get it out? If I’m the student and I create something in there can I get it out? Can I mix and match with other publisher materials? Can I archive that mixing for next term? Can I share what I did with my faculty peers who might want to learn from it? Can I create assessments in there and then use them somewhere else or just put them somewhere so that I can use them in the future?

Common Cartridge – or something like it – helps solve those issues. Fits right into the topic of openness. But, most importantly, in the digital education age we need to make digital education easy for the faculty and the students. Otherwise there won’t be a digital education age 

Perhaps a mixture of OER and publisher proprietary stuff might be a solution. IMHO, some stuff needs to be tailored, remixed, moved in, and moved out. Doesn’t matter whether it’s a publisher platform or an LMS. Faculty want their stuff. Students want their stuff. Publishers need to help them, not thwart them.

I said that the binary choice Rob was offering up wasn’t the right one and promised to elaborate in a future post. Here, at last, is that response.

Let me start by reviewing an argument that I have made here before, which is that there should only ever be one copy of a learning resource except under very limited and specific circumstances. In this era of iframes, you can embed content pretty much wherever you want. By keeping the single canonical copy at one URL and surfacing it where it is needed (as opposed to copying it), you both maintain access to the most updated version from the authoritative source and preserve the ability to do in-depth usage and learning analytics. Who is using this content to learn what in which contexts? If you have a thousand copies of the same resource floating around, you can’t effectively aggregate this data (especially if you don’t know whether or how the content has been altered in those copies). There are only two circumstances under which it makes sense to make a second copy of a web-based learning resource: (1) you want to cache it locally for access in offline or bandwidth-constrained environments, or (2) you deliberately intend to fork the content and create a new version of it. And the first case should be addressed as a caching problem rather than a copying problem.

We have a number of formats today that are designed to take web-based resources and organize them for a particular type of consumption. Common Cartridge is one such format. It provides the content wrapped in metadata so the LMS knows where to put it. EPUB and the .ibooks derivative are other examples; they pull together disparate web-native resources into a book-like sequence and user experience. That’s fine. I have no problem with it. My problem is when those resources are copied and stored locally for no good reason. If you want to use one of these formats as a metadata wrapper to surface the remotely stored content within a context and user experience that makes it most useful, then yay. Use iframes or some similar technology and wrap them in the metadata you need. But don’t make local copies of the resources unless you have good reason to do so.

I would argue that efforts like the one by Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges should make the OER content available in canonical copies on their servers as plain old web pages and then provide cartridges that include pointers to those copies. Since one of the values of OERs is being able to remix, then maybe Common Cartridge should be extended to include an option to pull down the remote resource for local editing, constrained by the particular machine-readable license of that remote content. (I actually have an idea that would allow remixing but still maintain the “chain of custody” to the original resource for the purpose of learning analytics, but that’s another post for another time.) But the decision to download should be a deliberate one, not a default one, and all resources should be available on the naked web and not locked up by default in some metadata container that you have to crack open if you want access to the content.

Possibly related posts:

1. Rockin' Content Management So, I’ve been keeping an eye lately on Alfresco, a...
2. Sakai 3: The Benefits of 'Everything is Content' One of the more radical departures that Sakai 3 makes...
3. Separating Content from Presentation for Pedagogy and Reusability A post on the OpenACS discussion board clued me in...
4. A Guide To Open Content Licenses The Piet Zwart Institute has published a fairly comprehensive online...
5. e-Portfolios and Personal Content Management–Rip, Mix, Burn Last week I had the pleasure of spending most of...

When It Comes to Content, Say “Yes” to Wrappers But “No” to Containers by %%AUTHORINK%% on e-Literate