> As oxymoronic as it may be, one still needs to use existing structures
> to change the system, otherwise change might be impossible given that
> most education students don't know of the world (or movement?) of Open
> Education.  Thus, a course on Open Ed is necessitated.

> On Jul 27, 12:42 am, John Graves <john.graves.at....@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Aiming to develop "a course on Open Education (for graduate students)" may,
> > unfortunately, be oxymoronic. Open Education has the potential to follow a
> > different paradigm that might not involve such well-defined things as a
> > "course" or set of students ("graduate" of what?).

> > Start with this Idea:
> > Lots of learners, available all the time, everywhere.

> > How are the learning needs met?
> > Current “closed” system:
> > Time for each lesson is set at certain time of day, in a certain learning
> > sequence, for a certain set of students.
> > Student needs are addressed by a single teacher for each subject.
> > Pre-requisites are set via filters – only those who have passed certain
> > courses can have access to the higher level courses. Success = not failing.
> > The system gives assessment relative to a peer group which is out of student
> > control. Students may suffer from systematic bias if their birthday falls in
> > the wrong month (see Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell).
> > The student must refer back to the system to determine status (obtain
> > transcripts).  

> > Alternative “open” arrangement:
> > A lesson can be used by anyone at any time in any sequence.
> > Student needs are addressed by a collaboration of teachers and fellow
> > students. [crowd sourcing]
> > Pre-requisites are managed via remediation – those who lack pre-requisite
> > knowledge are directed to resources which fill in the knowledge gaps.  
> > Success = mastery.
> > The student has understanding and control of their own learning process and
> > portfolio. They can compare themselves to peers they select (Facebook). They
> > can present their work to demonstrate qualifications, rather than an
> > institution’s evaluation of their work.

> > Conventional educational experiences have given us a set of assumptions
> > about learning which are not necessarily true.  On-line learning offers a
> > collection of step changes which, taken together, may lead to the
> > development of a different "open" system featuring:

> > 1. All the time instruction. While it has always been true that a dedicated
> > student could study at all hours, the time for one-on-one or many-to-one
> > student-teacher interaction was limited and synchronous. On-line systems
> > allow for more (or even exclusively) asynchronous interactions. Look at Khan
> > Academy's millions of views-to-one teacher ratio or Wikipedia's audience of
> > 400 million users per month versus 150,000 active contributors
> > (thousands-to-one ratio).

> > 2. As a corollary to 1, no set start and end times for a course. The
> > conventional teaching approach assumed front-loaded lessons would provide
> > sufficient knowledge for subsequent applications/work. Now knowledge changes
> > so fast it can become obsolete before it can be applied. Consequently,
> > learning may need to become much more continuous and just-in-time, requiring
> > a different skill set than the traditional memorize/regurgitate/qualify
> > approach conventionally required of students. Teachers need to be prepared
> > to collaborate and build on one another's work (as at Wikipedia), rather
> > than try to reinvent the wheel for their course for their students over and
> > over again.

> > 3. As a corollary to 2, no set group of students. If a time is not set for a
> > course, then the parameters of who is "in" the course are also blurred.  
> > Look at this eduMOOC. We have about 300 folks who put their contact details
> > in a spreadsheet, some 2600 who expressed interested through registration
> > and an potentially much larger number who will "participate" later on and
> > learn from/about what happened here.

> > 4. Everywhere instruction. Previously, access to a teacher required
> > physical access to a school or money enough to pay the teacher to visit the
> > home or workplace. Now that access can be delivered on-line at far lower
> > cost (with regard to the physical delivery of bodies to buildings).

> > 5. As a corollary to 4, new economics. Compare the music industry. At one
> > time, you could only hear music live. Then you could hear it recorded, but
> > you had to purchase the physical recording. Now all you need is the proper
> > equipment and a free or low price contract for unlimited, on demand access:http://www.spotify.com/int/

> > 6. Something for everyone. The lessons available on-line are, like the music
> > available, very diverse.  The long tail of instructional content.  Look athttp://www.ehow.com/orhttp://www.instructables.com/orhttp://www.guita...) ...- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -