Another Milestone

[Peter]

It looks as though we just crested 300,000 visits to the WE main
page... That's exciting...
Keep up the great work everyone... particularly the council; your work
is very important for the continued growth and success of WE.
Cheers, Peter

[NELLIE DEUTSCH]

That's great! Thank you for sharing the updates, Peter. I googled myself and found the following: 1,500 English pages for Nellie Deutsch and Wikieducator.

Warm wishes,
Nellie Deutsch
Doctoral Student
Educational Leadership
Curriculum and Instruction
http://www.nelliemuller.com
http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd
http://www.building-relationship.com/education
http://blendedlear.ning.com
http://connecting-online.ning.com

[Randy Fisher]

Hi All,

Yesterday I checked Alexa, and we are in the top 156,000 websites in the world.

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/wikieducator.org

Randy

--
________________
Randy Fisher - Change Management & Collaboration, Human Performance & Engagement, Sustainable Communities & Organizations

* Engaging People in Teams, Communities and Organizations....and WikiEducator!

+ 1 604.684.2275
wiki...@gmail.com

http://www.wikieducator.org
http://www.wikieducator.org/Community_Media
http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Randyfisher

* Cool WikiEducator Video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc9-CNlIqsY

* Can You Do the Wiki-Wiki? http://www.wikieducator.org/Wiki_Wiki

Skype: wikirandy

[Anil]

Dear all,

Great.
Let us celebrate it by further enriching the article about
WikiEducator on Wikipedia viz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiEducator

Warm regards
Anil
http://wikieducator.org/User:Anil_Prasad
http://wikieducator.org/India
http://wikieducator.org/Qualification_Framework
http://wikieducator.org/Qualification_Framework/Professional_Education/Management/MHRM

On Oct 24, 9:07 pm, "Randy Fisher" <wikira...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Yesterday I checked Alexa, and we are in the top 156,000 websites in the
> world.
>
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/wikieducator.org
>
> Randy
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 7:30 AM, NELLIE DEUTSCH <
>
>
>
>
>
> nellie.muller.deut...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That's great! Thank you for sharing the updates, Peter. I googled myself

> > and found the following:* 1,500* *English* pages for *Nellie Deutsch and
> > Wikieducator.
>
> > *Warm wishes,

> > Nellie Deutsch
> > Doctoral Student
> > Educational Leadership
> > Curriculum and Instruction
> >http://www.nelliemuller.com
> >http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd
> >http://www.building-relationship.com/education
> >http://blendedlear.ning.com
> >http://connecting-online.ning.com
>

> > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Peter <prawstho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> It looks as though we just crested 300,000 visits to the WE main
> >> page... That's exciting...
> >> Keep up the great work everyone... particularly the council; your work
> >> is very important for the continued growth and success of WE.
> >> Cheers, Peter
>
> --
> ________________
> Randy Fisher - Change Management & Collaboration, Human Performance &
> Engagement, Sustainable Communities & Organizations
>
> * Engaging People in Teams, Communities and Organizations....and
> WikiEducator!
>
>               + 1 604.684.2275       

> wikira...@gmail.com
>
> http://www.wikieducator.orghttp://www.wikieducator.org/Community_Mediahttp://www.wikieducator.org/User:Randyfisher

>
> * Cool WikiEducator Video on YouTube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc9-CNlIqsY
>
> * Can You Do the Wiki-Wiki?http://www.wikieducator.org/Wiki_Wiki
>

> Skype: wikirandy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Patricia Schlicht]

Thank you, Anil, for sharing, I hadn't seen this yet.
Warm regards,
Patricia

[Randy Fisher]

Hi Anil & others,

Another great way that we can celebrate WikiEducator's success is to have a party, on February 14, 2009 - the anniversary date of WikiEd.....

Imagine....WikiEducators around the world revelling in our mutual success!

Imagine the languages, the settings, the pictures, the stories, the memories!

- Randy

wiki...@gmail.com

http://www.wikieducator.org
http://www.wikieducator.org/Community_Media

http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Randyfisher

* Cool WikiEducator Video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc9-CNlIqsY

[NELLIE DEUTSCH]

Hi Randy,
What a wonderful date: Valentine's Day and my husband's birthday.

Warm wishes,
Nellie Deutsch
Doctoral Student
Educational Leadership
Curriculum and Instruction
http://www.nelliemuller.com
http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd
http://www.building-relationship.com/education
http://blendedlear.ning.com
http://connecting-online.ning.com

[Leigh Blackall]

Thanks for the pointer to the Wikipedia page about Wikieducator Anil

I feel very unsettled by it - particularly:

1. the celebration of an individual above all else (rather than simply in the history),
2. its strong references to COL, UNESCO and Hewlet Foundation (above other partners who can show a far greater contribution to the project than any of those),
3. and its quotation of that perplexing, even frightening line that SOME (one) wikieducator Users choose to use, to the detriment of the project: "...working collaboratively with the free culture movement towards a free version of the education curriculum."

Obviously, we are not talking about developing a single curriculum!.. are we? If we are, I'm out now. If we are not, then can we please systematically go through every piece of PR out there and correct it to something more acceptable: "...working collaboratively with everyone towards the development free versions of education curricula for everyone."

As for the reference to central bodies like COL, UNESCO, A "free culture movement" and even Hewlet Foundation, I think these should not be included in an graphical box heading the article, and should merely be listed along with all other contributing organisations, as is consistant with other Wikipedia articles for similar projects like Wikiversity. 

Could it be that Wikieducator PR is designed to sell the project to specific funding bodies at the expense of a balanced and accurate account of what Wikieducator really is? Seems to me that the Wikipedia entry is in need of some serious wikification! Or could it be that I am completely out of touch with Wikieducator and need to rethink my association to it?

Off to start an edit war in Wikipedia I suspect...

--
--
Leigh Blackall
+64(0)21736539
skype - leigh_blackall
SL - Leroy Goalpost
http://learnonline.wordpress.com
http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Leighblackall

[Patricia Schlicht]

……Or could it be that I am completely out of touch with Wikieducator and need to…

 

No offense intended, Leigh, but I think you seriously need to find the true essence of the project again, so you don’t only talk and completely overanalyze anything and everything, seeing things were there are none, making assumptions and coming to conclusions that are completely out of the sky.

 

You seem to become what Open Educational resources formerly gave a bad reputation. While your intentions might be well-intended, you are reaching the opposite of what you are trying to achieve. You don’t raise issues, rather eye-brows and not the first time.

 

Your unfounded and completely ridiculous accusations of Wayne’s intentions only goes to show that you have absolutely no idea what is involved or what the goal of the project is. It seems to me that you are only out to discredit the good that has been done and in such a way that the rest of us can only shake their head and credit it to your youth.

 

I think you are personally motivated and/or threatened which is why you want to ensure you get to ruin the project by inflicting nonsense into people’s heads. There are 1000s of people out there who you slap in the face with often very negative comments. Ever thought about this?

 

WikiEducator is a fantastic project. Sure, there is lots to be done and many improvements to be made. There is no one here who wants to overpower anyone, Wayne not in particular. He would never do anything that isn’t done with integrity. He is a person of high values which he honors.

 

Leigh, you are knowledgeable guy and your expertise is needed….as part of big team…what are you trying to do???!

 

My friend, seriously, I understand you got your fires burning, but I also think you are running in the wrong direction and have lost any objectivity in this matter.

 

….or maybe this is one of your attempts to stir up controversy?...Not a very productive way of doing this, if that’s the case. The key is "...working collaboratively with everyone…”, so suggest changes instead of “badgering” the author.

 

Cheers,

Patricia

 

---

From: wikied...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wikied...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Leigh Blackall
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 8:02 PM
To: wikied...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [WikiEducator] Re: Another Milestone

 

Thanks for the pointer to the Wikipedia page about Wikieducator Anil

[Chris Harvey]

I agree Leigh, that article doesnt look right, it looks more like what I'd expect on  a meta.wikimedia page as a project proposal or something like that.

Its interesting that depending on who you are, you can pretty much get away with anything on wikipedia.

Warm Regards
Chris Harvey
www.superuser.com.au

[Leigh Blackall]

Offense most certainly taken, and thank you Patricia, things are much clearer now. I'm sorry you see my concerns as destructive and personally motivated. For the record, I have made no such accusations of Wayne but acknowledge that it is very difficult not to. As long as Wayne is the central figure complete with thumbnail image, I suppose my criticism of the message that is out there about Wikieducator (such as the Wikipedia page) inevitably becomes personal.

[Anil]

Hi friends,

There is nothing wrong in mentioning the founder in the very beginning
of the topic, you can see thousands of such articles that are well
read on www. Nothing that is man-made happens in the world without a
sparkling thought in somebody's mind who has the initiative to trigger
action for making it a reality. It is such initiators who become
founders. Let us accept this fact and deliver the beauty and worth of
mutual trust, recognition and consideration that are the crux of the
very existence of human societies. .

Founders can bring in the support of very big institutions into the
project. Neither it prevents any one from placing a reference or photo
of the founder at the opening of the article about the project nor it
any way reduces the importance of organizational partners.These are
the ways societies express its gratitude to those who provide valuable
social services.

''WikiEducator is a community project working collaboratively with the
Free Culture Movement towards a free version of the education
curriculum by 2015'' is a well accepted vision statement of the
project. We are all attracted to the project via that vision. I don't
see any reason to dispute it now. Let us not disrupt the decorum for
no reason.

Finally about the anxiety over the curriculum, I think, since it is a
wiki project, there may not have any restrictions in thinking about
different national curricula and connecting them to an international
movement. Let us itry to see the faces of billions and billions of
poor to whom the free and open educational material that we are
developing would become godsend...then the trivial issues may
disappear in void for we have no time to waste.

Anil

On Oct 28, 1:03 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <leighblack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Offense most certainly taken, and thank you Patricia, things are much
> clearer now. I'm sorry you see my concerns as destructive and personally
> motivated. For the record, I have made no such accusations of Wayne but
> acknowledge that it is very difficult not to. As long as Wayne is the
> central figure complete with thumbnail image, I suppose my criticism of the
> message that is out there about Wikieducator (such as the Wikipedia page)
> inevitably becomes personal.
>

> > very productive way of doing this, if that's the case. The key is *"...working
> > collaboratively with everyone…", *so suggest changes instead of

> > "badgering" the author.
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > Patricia
>

> >  ------------------------------
>
> > *From:* wikied...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> > wikied...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Leigh Blackall
> > *Sent:* Monday, October 27, 2008 8:02 PM
> > *To:* wikied...@googlegroups.com
> > *Subject:* [WikiEducator] Re: Another Milestone

>
> > Thanks for the pointer to the Wikipedia page about Wikieducator Anil
>
> > I feel very unsettled by it - particularly:
>

> >    1. the celebration of an individual above all else (rather than simply
> >    in the history),
> >    2. its strong references to COL, UNESCO and Hewlet Foundation (above

> >    other partners who can show a far greater contribution to the project than
> >    any of those),

> >    3. and its quotation of that perplexing, even frightening line that

> >    SOME (one) wikieducator Users choose to use, to the detriment of the

> >    project: *"...working collaboratively with the free culture movement<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?mjhOCyYMeodIL6zBYQsCzAQsLCM0vMUN8H9...>towards a free version of the education curriculum.
> >    *"

>
> > Obviously, we are not talking about developing a single curriculum!.. are
> > we? If we are, I'm out now. If we are not, then can we please systematically
> > go through every piece of PR out there and correct it to something more

> > acceptable: *"...working collaboratively with everyone towards the
> > development free versions of education curricula for everyone.*"

>
> > As for the reference to central bodies like COL, UNESCO, A "free culture
> > movement" and even Hewlet Foundation, I think these should not be included
> > in an graphical box heading the article, and should merely be listed along
> > with all other contributing organisations, as is consistant with other

> > Wikipedia articles for similar projects like Wikiversity<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?2OqekQnC1P1JBUQsLCzAQsCzBYS03-7695p...>.

>
> > Could it be that Wikieducator PR is designed to sell the project to
> > specific funding bodies at the expense of a balanced and accurate account of
> > what Wikieducator really is? Seems to me that the Wikipedia entry is in need

> > of some serious wikification<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?5AQsFELc3C3rbNEVvd79EVd7bVI07YeciaO...>!

> > Or could it be that I am completely out of touch with Wikieducator and need
> > to rethink my association to it?
>
> > Off to start an edit war in Wikipedia I suspect...
>
> >  On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 9:57 PM, NELLIE DEUTSCH <

> > nellie.muller.deut...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Randy,
> > What a wonderful date: Valentine's Day and my husband's birthday.
>
> > Warm wishes,
> > Nellie Deutsch
> > Doctoral Student
> > Educational Leadership
> > Curriculum and Instruction

> >http://www.nelliemuller.com<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?1pd7aqbP0VwSOYqenPhOqejhO-r01gYY-nG...>
> >http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?2OqekQnC1P1JBUQsLCzAQsCzBYS02B2vAoX...>
> >http://www.building-relationship.com/education<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?1pd7aqbP0VwSOYqenPhOqejhO-r0146V7Ei...>
> >http://blendedlear.ning.com<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?b9EVjhuo7c6SnzhO-qejhOqenPo0cwvY4fg...>
> >http://connecting-online.ning.com<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?b9EVjhuo7c6SnzhO-qejhOqenPo0eRog-QV...>
>
> >    On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Randy Fisher <wikira...@gmail.com>

> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Anil & others,
>
> > Another great way that we can celebrate WikiEducator's success is to have a
> > party, on February 14, 2009 - the anniversary date of WikiEd.....
>
> > Imagine....WikiEducators around the world revelling in our mutual success!
>
> > Imagine the languages, the settings, the pictures, the stories, the
> > memories!
>
> > - Randy
>

> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Anil <aplett...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
>
> > Great.
> > Let us celebrate it by further enriching the article about

> > WikiEducator on Wikipedia vizhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiEducator<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?mjhOCyYMeodIL6zBYQsCzAQsLCM0vMUN8H9...>
>
> > Warm regards
> > Anil
> >http://wikieducator.org/User:Anil_Prasad<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?b9EVjhuo7c6SnzhO-qejhOqenPo0cN8HbQ6...>
> >http://wikieducator.org/India<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?mjhOCyYMeodIL6zBYQsCzAQsLCM0pyhmnEd...>
> >http://wikieducator.org/Qualification_Framework<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?mjhOCyYMeodIL6zBYQsCzAQsLCM0pyhmnEd...>
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -

[Leigh Blackall]

Thank you for your perspective Anil, I hope more will share theirs on this, however briefly if it is seen as a time wasting thread. It is helping me to think things through on a bigger picture level, even though I have gone ahead and edited the Wikipedia entry so it is consistent with other entries, and see that other edits have followed.

I am not apposed to mentioning Wayne as the founder - nor including reference to COL, UNESCO and HF. I was apposed to the significance those pieces of information had over and at the expense of any other information about the project.

To me, the idea of a single curriculum is of grave concern - and I always took it as just careless language (haven spoken to Wayne personally about it) and that it would be rectified sooner than it has. In countries where colonisation is a very sensitive issue, such as Australia and New Zealand (but certainly not limited to those as you know), such a statement of singularity would be the very thing that prevents engagement. Indeed, it is associations like this that is one of the reasons that most my network (prior to participating in the Wikieducator project) has not followed me into Wikieducator. This has troubled and perplexed me for a long time, thinking it to be mere technical or usability issues.

While I have come to appreciate some of the new connections that the Wikieducator project has given me, I think my history in this email forum shows a great many issues I have brought up that have exhausted a huge amount of everyone's time in debating here, not the least my own. Almost all of these issues have largely remained unresolved. The only good that I can see coming out of argument is the opportunity to clarify the expression of a position, but to what end?

[Barbara Dieu]

Thank you, Leigh for voicing your worries about the single curriculum
and dotting the i's . I believe it is healthy to raise and discuss
issues one is not comfortable with. If there are any doubts , everyone
can only benefit and grow stronger with transparency and openness.
Warm regards,
Bee

--
Barbara Dieu
http://dekita.org
http://beespace.net

[Peter]

Leigh,

Do not give up being so candid. And please do not consider your time
spent with WE as too exhasting. You add great value, as I would like
to think WE has also brought you great value and further insight into
international efforts toward truely open education. Your knowledge on
the matter I am sure now exceeds most of your network due to the
"hands-on" experience you have had with WE...

The challenge I have is I agree with most of what you say. I also see
WE moving toward what you aspire, not away from it. I see rubber hits
the road activities that (I believe) will open WE up even further...
time will tell on this... I certainly hope WE finds ways to attract
people from all over the world and surrounds it all with language that
will engage many people. I certainly hope that one individual,
philanthropist, group, etc... will not be highlighted over another.
For in the end this is what I see collaboration all about.

Go Leigh Go... If not for WE I would not know you and that would be a
big loss for me...

Peter

[Anil]

Hi Leigh,

My view is that TQF need not necessarily mean replacing of NQFs,
where as we can further strengthen the NQFs by identifying learning
outcomes etc which would be internationally accepted and that could
naturally establish healthy bonds between TQF and NQFs. Here TQF will
function as a meta-data model.

Moreover, in education, every thing is connected, but the connections
may be some times very complex and may not be easily understandable by
learners, teachers and other stakeholders especially the labour
market. Therefore, I think, one of the major tasks of Educators
involved in TQF is to streamline these connections regularly to ensure
that they are connected in most systematic/logical way. Possibly you
can talk more facts about it from OP experience.

In fact, this kind of a protocol is already in practice as part of
Transnational or Borderless Education being promoted by many
internationally accepted academic bodies/institutions and even
business firms as well.

Anil

[Leigh Blackall]

Anil, I see the TQF project as quite separate from the idea of a single curriculum. TQF (to me) is primarily about assessment and qualifications that have currency accross borders. Curriculum is about what and how we teach and learn. Admittedly, assessment and qualification frameworks have very heavy influences on what and how people teach and learn, and so the TQF project would need to be very cautious of this fact.

The TQF discussion was progressing into some quite interesting territory, but we saw that a key person in COL had objections to it progressing in Wikieducator. I'm afraid I would have objections also now (for whatever that is worth), but for very different reasons to that COL representative. I think Wikieducator would need to do a lot more to clarify its position (or even awareness!) of issues relating to colonisation and globalisation and to distance itself from anything that associates with such ideas, or practices that unwittingly lend a hand to such ideas.

[Alex P. Real]

Hi Leigh,

 

Thought-provoking thread! Why did the COL rep had objections? Not being a Commonwealth citizen I’m not the best to speak, but I’d  have thought WE would be ideal grounds for a different approach to framework development and assessment rather than more traditional approaches which may not take into account  educators and students.  Formal education and NQF are regulated, and as such, associated to national political interests and likely to become an intervening factor in “negotiating” any TQF as happened with the European Space for Higher Education (ESHE).  At the same time, if enforced, countries and institutions may be prone to introduce “cosmetic” changes and avoid a proper full reform, or simply align existing qualifications/levels to the new framework, frequently the case with CEFR, and thus reduce it to comparison/equivalency purposes.   

 

I can see why some are  happy to have some sort of open curriculum and speak about “a” maybe in the sense of “one” to spread access, and at the same time share your concern for one-dimensional readings.  Could you please expand your argument on colonization and globalization? Why do some of your people think that about WE? Missing background info there!  

 

Sorry, not acquainted enough so this may be  a silly question but is this TQF the same as VUSSC’s? If this is the case, then maybe WE should aim at complementing efforts/focusing on educator-specific issues (??).

 

Cheers,

 

Alex

[Peter]

Wow,

Alex, Anil, Leigh & COL... I really like where this thread is going.
For I see a discussion about what is seen as assistance and who
controls a "partnership" when it comes to providing "services" or
developing sustainability. In particular, we are talking about
developing countries helping themselves without any barriers. Are
barriers starting to form? I am certian the barriers aren't forming
conciously... an interesting issue. I see the spirit of Goal 8 from
the MDG was to break down any barriers to access;
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/global.shtml

What do others think???

Cheers,

On Oct 29, 11:51 am, "Alex P. Real" <alex.pr...@googlemail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Anil < <mailto:aplett...@gmail.com>

>
> aplett...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Leigh,
>
> My view is that  TQF need not necessarily mean replacing of NQFs,
> where as we can further strengthen the NQFs by identifying learning
> outcomes etc which would be internationally accepted and that could
> naturally establish healthy bonds between TQF and NQFs. Here TQF will
> function as a meta-data model.
>
> Moreover, in education, every thing is connected, but the connections
> may be some times very complex and may not be easily understandable by
> learners, teachers and other stakeholders especially the labour
> market. Therefore, I think, one of the major tasks of Educators
> involved in TQF is to streamline these connections regularly to ensure
> that they are connected in most systematic/logical way.  Possibly you
> can talk more facts about it from OP experience.
>
> In fact, this kind of a protocol is already in practice as part of
> Transnational or Borderless Education being promoted by many
> internationally accepted academic bodies/institutions and even
> business firms as well.
>
> Anil
>

> On Oct 29, 12:21 am, "Leigh Blackall" < <mailto:leighblack...@gmail.com>

> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 9:51 PM, Anil < <mailto:aplett...@gmail.com>

> > > On Oct 28, 1:03 pm, "Leigh Blackall" < <mailto:leighblack...@gmail.com>

> leighblack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Offense most certainly taken, and thank you Patricia, things are much
> > > > clearer now. I'm sorry you see my concerns as destructive and
> personally
> > > > motivated. For the record, I have made no such accusations of Wayne
> but
> > > > acknowledge that it is very difficult not to. As long as Wayne is the
> > > > central figure complete with thumbnail image, I suppose my criticism
> of
> > > the
> > > > message that is out there about Wikieducator (such as the Wikipedia
> page)
> > > > inevitably becomes personal.
>
> > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Patricia Schlicht <
>

> <mailto:PSchli...@col.org> PSchli...@col.org

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Maria Droujkova]

Some entities involved in this conversation are new to me. From this extreme newbie perspective, this conversation seems to be about "voting for the best, the most logical, the most streamlined" vs. having many different sorts, kinds and flavors of... curricula, connections, models, theories. Am I close?

Ever since wiki was invented, I've been wondering about this question, though, even if it only relates to this conversation through a tangent. So I am going to formulate it again. Wiki uses a "single idea, single space" metaphor, hardcoded by allowing one single page by each name. Names stand for ideas, so there will be the one and the only page about "constructivism" and "math" and "multiplication" in any wiki. This calls up all territorial mechanisms of controlling this seemingly limited "land" - and do these necessarily lead to wars? As Leigh said resignedly, in this thread, "Off to start an edit war in Wikipedia."

In general, human groups need a healthy balance between convergence and divergence of ideas. It looks like wikis tend to promote convergence (either synergy-style, or survival-of-the-fittest style) rather than collections of multitudes of ideas. So, would wiki ed projects attract people who work in "the bestest single curriculum" direction?


--
Cheers,
MariaD

I write, 'In the beginning was the Deed!' - Goethe, Faust

naturalmath.com: a sketch of a social math site
groups.google.com/group/naturalmath: a mailing list about math maker activities

[Leigh Blackall]

Great insight Maria! You are more than close I think. A thing that has troubled me very much about the WIkieducator project is this one-ness. We all encourage each other to identify as Wikieductors (up until this thread), and the Wikipedia article gave me clarity on this concern. Some of us use words like, "Wikieducator family", and "Wikieducator community" and this spreads a feeling of commitment to the collective and one-ness. Stephen Downes' talk about the differences between groups and networks is the best yet articulation of this problem.

Your observtion about wikis is very close to my sense too Maria, but I can think of one very (the most) successful open education resource wiki that is not - Wikispaces. Wikispaces is first and foremost about the many different spaces on the platform. The Wikispace platform and business takes a very back seat in it all, and in the early stages the owners went out of their way to promote the projects on Wikispaces more than the Wikispace platform itself. Today, it is clear to see (in comparison to Wikieducator and Wikipedia) that Wikispaces is all about the projects on the platform.

To some extent I think Wikiversity is successfully doing this, but there is plenty of evidence to centrally control the project, and have users adopt group identity and a sense of one-ness.

Where this gets most unsettling for me is when that sense of one-ness is then represented by a single person, or celebrity. In the case of Wikipedia, it is of course Jim Wales.

Alex, regarding globalisation. The roots of this is in the very inception of the Commonwealth. Today it is through the free marketeering speer headed by the USA, but echoed in the "West". Some wonder just how much bodies like the UN and perhaps COL, inadvertently represent that globalised view.

This might be seen as a new form of colonisation, a concept that the Commonwealth again knows all about. The new form of colonisation is no different. Its culltural, its educational, its delivered through media and peak bodies, and relies on a sense of one-ness

[Chris Harvey]

Names stand for ideas, so there will be the one and the only page about "constructivism" and "math" and "multiplication" in any wiki.

This is wrong, in an encyclopedia or dictionary this may be true.

Warm regards
Chris Harvey
chris.superuser.com.au

[Peter]

Holly Poop!

This is a thread that is really getting to the nut of the issue. And
an issue that has me thinking, well to be honest, I've always found
myself an anarchist and my trust of western philosophies "imposed" on
others has often got my goat. You know, what right do we have to think
we have it right... So many initiatives started in good faith gone
awry. Look at development efforts over the last 40 years... Can we
actually say they have done more good than disruption? We will never
know cause they were (in general) imposed... enough ranting... For
those so inclined, I believe we can do an incredible amount of
development work from home; http://www.gg.rhul.ac.uk/ict4d/Research%20at%20home.pdf
And I also believe that work done from your home community provides an
arms length where the "recipients" have greater choice in what they
"consume". Working from home also lessens your environmental impact...

I honestly believe we need diversity. I do not believe in centralized
control. We need a platform that encourages diversity, not singularity
negotiated. We do not need one place or one piece of OER to fill a
common need. We need the ability to subclass, reuse, alter, and create
multiple versions of OER. Localized yet reference the source... This
would provide diversity and celebrate similarities. I look forward to
the day where we can have multiple versions of the same OER,
localized.

All this said, any work we do toward the goal of CC-BY-SA OER is good
work...

Sincerely.

On Oct 29, 10:51 pm, "Chris Harvey" <gnuch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Names stand for ideas, so there will be the one and the only page about
> > "constructivism" and "math" and "multiplication" in any wiki.
>
> This is wrong, in an encyclopedia or dictionary this may be true.
>
> Warm regards
> Chris Harvey
> chris.superuser.com.au
>

[Leigh Blackall]

That was a fresh and accessible read thanks Peter. I especially liked and found interesting the 5 suggested areas of development research. There was a sudden jump in the level of detail, but I hung in there.

BTW, have you heard of this thing called the Delphi Technique?

[NELLIE DEUTSCH]

Peter,
Is it really about ideas and opinions? I don't think so. I believe it's about egos and how we manage to live with our feelings. Ideas only get in the way. I think it's time we dealt with our emotions at a much deeper level so that ideas and circumstances don't separate us from ourselves and others. I believe we need to understand ourselves first before we attempt to understand others. But, my thoughts and ideas come from my experiences. These experiences may not be true for anyone else. Yet, I have generalized and used the word "we". There are no right or wrong answers to ideas, but I believe our attitudes and feelings are important and we may want to study them a bit more closely.

Warm wishes,
Nellie Deutsch
Doctoral Student
Educational Leadership
Curriculum and Instruction
http://www.nelliemuller.com

http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd
http://www.building-relationship.com/education
http://blendedlear.ning.com
http://connecting-online.ning.com

[Minhaaj ur Rehman]

Dear Leigh, i am amazed by your continous bringing up of controversial
topics in wikieducator like me and i would like to applaud you for
your tenacity. You can most certainly ignore people like Patricia and
Randy who are ACTUALLY the destructive profiteers. Thanks for
highlighting the issues that i am catching up on at the moment. Just
came back from UAE and now have some time to catch up on politics :)

Don't be discouraged by the vultures because an eagle flies far above
them :)

On Oct 30, 1:38 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <leighblack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That was a fresh and accessible read thanks Peter. I especially liked and
> found interesting the 5 suggested areas of development research. There was a
> sudden jump in the level of detail, but I hung in there.
>
> BTW, have you heard of this thing called the Delphi

> Technique<http://www.illinoisloop.org/delphi_battey.html>
> ?

> SL - Leroy Goalposthttp://learnonline.wordpress.comhttp://www.wikieducator.org/User:Leighblackall- Hide quoted text -

[john stampe]

This is an interesting discussion, and I would like to add my two cents. I am quite new to wikieducator, however, this discussion, in general terms, is not really new. I spend some time on Linux forums and you often see the same issues. For example, on the Gentoo forum (my Linux distro) there is a couple times a month a thread started titled something like "is Gentoo dead?".

The thing is with software development or collaborative editing is that there are trade-offs. You want a product (software, text, learning tools, etc.) that is open to new ideas, new features, and new approaches. One the other hand you need somebody (a "maintainer" in open software circles) who will maintain direction and purpose to the project.

Likewise, you need to have different perspectives, approaches, etc. to topics. One the other hand you need some coherence to specific areas.

In physics there are competing theorems on the universe. There is string theory and quantum gravity. Which is correct? We do not know. The issue for a physics wiki is not which is best, but providing for adequate discussion of the differences and similarities.

My point here is that wikis are not "the best" vs. "many different kinds". But a trade-off between the two.

You will never have an organization like wikieducator without politics. However, I think that is very healthly as long as it is kept in the open. Some people will leave, new ones will join. Hopefully, WE will keep going.

---

From: Minhaaj ur Rehman <min...@gmail.com>
To: WikiEducator <wikied...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 4:09:18 PM
Subject: [WikiEducator] Re: !!RE: [WikiEducator] Re: Another Milestone

[Alex P. Real]

Hi Leigh, Minhaaj & All,

Thanks for the clarification Leigh, thought you were referring to some
NZ/Aus specificity I was not aware of! In terms of global edu I couldn't
agree more, though I think it runs deeper than West/ non-West and it's
rather about social control & associated political/capitalist interests.
Sorry for referring to European frameworks; I'd have thought lessons-learnt
could be useful for copying US/UK models has ruined several national edu
systems due to their cultural meaninglessness. But I'm rather fed up with
apologizing for my passport.

At the same time, providing access is important to many people in WE and
several million worldwide; their approach can differ from yours and some may
prefer to plunge on whatever op. arises for there are not many. Like
citizenship/residence permits, the goal is to get "papers". No judgment
here, right? UN is certainly limited but it seems practical to learn, take
what's good & discard what's not. If WE is wiki and free, what's wrong in
the coexistence of different perspectives? Sorry if pushy here but have you
considered your approach could be perceived as an imposition itself?
Criticism is great, and I mean it, but what alternatives do you suggest?
Ever thought TQF could ease many lives, e.g. qual recognition abroad, which
can be a real nightmare?

Minhaaj, I guess there's more than your UAE trip, but why are Patricia &
Randy "destructive profiteers"? Gee, rather strong, so I think we deserve to
know. Political struggles...lol

Cheers,

Alex

-----Mensaje original-----

De: wikied...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wikied...@googlegroups.com] En

nombre de Minhaaj ur Rehman
Enviado el: jueves, 30 de octubre de 2008 10:09
Para: WikiEducator

Asunto: [WikiEducator] Re: !!RE: [WikiEducator] Re: Another Milestone

[Maria Droujkova]

Chris,

Can you please point me in the direction of some good examples? I want to see multiple pages from different points of view about the same concept.

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Chris Harvey <gnuc...@gmail.com> wrote:

Names stand for ideas, so there will be the one and the only page about "constructivism" and "math" and "multiplication" in any wiki.

This is wrong, in an encyclopedia or dictionary this may be true.

Warm regards
Chris Harvey
chris.superuser.com.au

[Maria Droujkova]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 2:27 AM, Peter <praws...@gmail.com> wrote:

We need the ability to subclass, reuse, alter, and create
multiple versions of OER. Localized yet reference the source... This
would provide diversity and celebrate similarities. I look forward to
the day where we can have multiple versions of the same OER,
localized.

I usually work with "families" as basic units of research and development, or maybe "a group of friends consisting of several families" - in other words, very small and very local communities. My ideal for mathematics materials are "living books" easily customizable BY EACH FAMILY using them. Right now, you can choose AMONG books, but that's not nearly enough customization. I know families who use literally hundreds of books to put a math course together for a kid, sometimes pulling just one or two ideas out of that one. This is a problem for everybody, because money, time and other resources are being wasted. I would like to see much more "atomizing" and customizing in materials.

[Chris Harvey]

Your asking something different. Originally you were talking about naming. Disambiguation would probably be a good example of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation

For a good example of multiple pages from different points of view about the same concept perhaps look at this page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_education

Or perhaps portals like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_portal

Anyway, I should be in bed, I'll try to find more info tommorow if your not satisfied.

Warm Regards
Chris

[Leigh Blackall]

Alex said:

Sorry if pushy here but have you
considered your approach could be perceived as an imposition itself?
Criticism is great, and I mean it, but what alternatives do you suggest?
Ever thought TQF could ease many lives, e.g. qual recognition abroad, which
can be a real nightmare?

Yes, of course Alex, I have and do consider the question - often reflecting on the many years I have spent encouraging (to put it lightly) teachers to use socially networked media, and arguing for a specific type of change, namely individual capability and independence, and networked practice. The question I ask myself is how much my methods align with individuality, and undermine those of us who value collectiveness. An age old dilemma really - the individual and the state (and everything in between).

As for the Transnational Qualification Framework. Anil, Peter and myself have had interesting discussions about TQF on this list. I must say again, I don't see TQF relating (yet) to the concerns I have about words to the effect of one curriculum (which is where this thread started from - relating to the Wikipedia article about Wikieducator). TQF (if done well) should be able to support many curricula including ones that have not formed yet, and include any subject area. There was a little bit of concern back in the early TQF thread when someone started stating that some forms of knowledge are "redundant" and should not be included in a TQF, and this is where it starts to go wrong. But over all, the idea of developing an assessment framework that aids the strengthening of new knowledge, the easier migration of people, and an exchange of ideas.. this is certainly something that is attractive. But over stating that, or developing something that has an impact of people's ideas about curricula, or the establishment of new forms of knowledge, or the squashing of old forms, this is something to watch out for every step of the way.

I'm not sure I agree with John Stampe's organising principles based on his experience in software development.

The thing is with software development or collaborative editing is that there are trade-offs. You want a product (software, text, learning tools, etc.) that is open to new ideas, new features, and new approaches. One the other hand you need somebody (a "maintainer" in open software circles) who will maintain direction and purpose to the project.

In my experience there has in fact been very very little actual collaborative editing on Wikieducator - and this is a good thing in many ways. Yet we continue to refer to collaborative editing as one of the key organising principles for Wikieducator. Instead, we have a networked model. Again I would refer to the video of Stephen Downes articulating his thoughts about the tension between groups and networks, where I sit more comfortably in the zone of networked participant, and I think it is a more realistic organising principle for Wikieducator. The distribution and re-networking of information and communication is different (I think) to software development. To use the software development analogy that John has reintroduced: the information and communication development (that we might just call content for now) exists in 100s of thousands of "folks", and those "folks" are converged from time to time to form nodes (as Maria explains). Those nodes build up and/or disappear. Very rarely (never) do they converge to make one (although Maria desires it). It is kind of the opposite to software development, and so far it is opposite to Wikieducator. I myself have been following the collaborative editing promise and software development analogy (sharing in Maria's desire for one thing), but increasingly I'm becoming more and more uncomfortable with it as I find myself centralising and struggling with grouped thinking and tradeoffs.

[Peter]

Leigh,

A very wise observation. And you are correct, at an atomic level, we
have very little collaborative work on WE. The whole of WE is a
collaborative effort, yet all the individual lessons, materials,
modules, etc... are in general created by an individual and rarely
edited by another. So you are correct the collaborative editing
promise is not coming to be... Maybe the coming generation of
contributors will collaborate building upon the complete K12, higher
ed, tertiary, etc curriculum when it is available... who knows when
that will be... this could make sense given we are of at the start of
the whole free curriculum project being available online. We aren't
even close to having the basics available and well organized. So maybe
the promise of collaborative editing will happen when we are getting
closer to having the first complete set of curriculum available... Or
maybe the idea of collaboratively creating educational materials needs
to become a bigger part of teacher education... Come to think of it,
during my masters we never took any courses specifically targeted
toward creating collaborative works. I haven't yet come across any
materials that really get into teaching people to collaboratively
create materials... Maybe this is an OER that is well overdue... upon
a review of the recently published OER handbook (http://
www.wikieducator.org/OER_Handbook/educator) there isn't a lot of
materials on encouraging collaboration...

Just to think this whole thread started as a celebration of our
300,000 visitor...

Peter

> networks<http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540>,

> where I sit more comfortably in the zone of networked participant, and I
> think it is a more realistic organising principle for Wikieducator. The
> distribution and re-networking of information and communication is different
> (I think) to software development. To use the software development analogy
> that John has reintroduced: the information and communication development
> (that we might just call content for now) exists in 100s of thousands of
> "folks", and those "folks" are converged from time to time to form nodes (as
> Maria explains). Those nodes build up and/or disappear. Very rarely (never)
> do they converge to make one (although Maria desires it). It is kind of the
> opposite to software development, and so far it is opposite to Wikieducator.
> I myself have been following the collaborative editing promise and software
> development analogy (sharing in Maria's desire for one thing), but
> increasingly I'm becoming more and more uncomfortable with it as I find
> myself centralising and struggling with grouped thinking and tradeoffs.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 3:12 AM, Chris Harvey <gnuch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Your asking something different. Originally you were talking about naming.
> > Disambiguation would probably be a good example of this.
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation
>
> > For a good example of multiple pages from different points of view about
> > the same concept perhaps look at this page.
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_education
>

> > Or perhaps portals likehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_portal

>
> > Anyway, I should be in bed, I'll try to find more info tommorow if your not
> > satisfied.
>
> > Warm Regards
> > Chris
>

> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Maria Droujkova <droujk...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> Chris,
>
> >> Can you please point me in the direction of some good examples? I want to
> >> see multiple pages from different points of view about the same concept.
>

[Maria Droujkova]

 I haven't yet come across any
materials that really get into teaching people to collaboratively
create materials... Maybe this is an OER that is well overdue... upon
a review of the recently published OER handbook (http://
www.wikieducator.org/OER_Handbook/educator) there isn't a lot of
materials on encouraging collaboration...

In "Here comes everybody", a wonderful book overall, Shirky talks about levels of interaction, listing sharing, conversation, collaboration and collective action. Unfortunately, all his examples of collective action are protests :-) I think social software can elevate simple sharing into something bigger, better and more meaningful.

One easy collaboration task is creating a collection. I've used the task many times in different settings, from international conferences to algebra playgroups for five year olds. Here is the latest online collection example: collecting math morphemes into an "English language extender" called MathLexicon. It's basically a dictionary ran with a couple of game mechanics. Maybe we can have a "lesson creation" party where we can collect some lesson ideas, collectively ;-) Everybody can contribute from the point of view of his or her discipline. We can build a whole lesson this way, which will, surely, be bigger than the sum of our individually contributed parts.

[Barbara Dieu]

Agree, Peter. It's important to project our hope towards the future
and consider the macros, mesos and micros. However, more important is
never forget to question them, discuss them, debate the
multi-possibilities. Dealing with /knowing how to cope with cognitive
dissonance and working collaboratively (not uniformly but allowing
branch-outs and questionings) is an important 21st century skill and
challenge. Transition times.
Warm regards from Brazil,

[NELLIE DEUTSCH]

Peter,
You said: Come to think of it, during my masters we never took any courses specifically targeted
toward creating collaborative works.

Well, during my masters, we did a lot of collaborative team work. We wrote papers together and even created a collaborative WebQuest. Even in my doc program we collaborate on projects. So why don't we decide to collaborate at WE? We can set an example for others. Not everyone is comfortable with sharing. I think the need has to be there. In the case of students, it is a grade. Any suggestions on how to encourage collaboration on WE?

Warm wishes,
Nellie Deutsch
Doctoral Student
Educational Leadership
Curriculum and Instruction
http://www.nelliemuller.com

http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd
http://www.building-relationship.com/education
http://blendedlear.ning.com
http://connecting-online.ning.com

[Leigh Blackall]

Peter, Nellie I guess you're ignoring my suggestion that collaboration is NOT what we need. At least not the sort we have been thinking of and looking to measure...

--
--
Leigh Blackall
+64(0)21736539

skype - leigh_blackall

[NELLIE DEUTSCH]

Leigh,
I may be slow. I apologize because I certainly did not intend to ignore your suggestions. I had no idea anyone you were suggesting not to collaborate. I missed it all. I would be very grateful if you could explain what you mean by collaboration and why we don't need it. It may be that I misunderstood the rationale behind the wiki. I thought the whole point was to work together.

Thank you.

Nellie Deutsch
Doctoral Student
Educational Leadership
Curriculum and Instruction
http://www.nelliemuller.com
http://www.integrating-technology.com/pd
http://www.building-relationship.com/education
http://blendedlear.ning.com
http://connecting-online.ning.com

[Alex P. Real]

Hi Leigh,

 

Beautiful response, I really appreciate it <smile>.  The scenario product/maintainer/tradeoff is recurrent in many realms, not just software. I can only agree to your reading on collaborative editing, the main reason why I’ve refrained from contributing contents, to see how things work and avoid potential uneasiness among  page creators. I find more productive adding to something going on than starting from scratch. And as the prime focus is the Commonwealth  it seemed coherent to leave the initiative to intended beneficiaries, maybe a bias acquired in development projects. I know I can start my own page, node,  but seemed out of place, so focused on Collage G-group until it fulfilled its role in COL’s agenda. No criticism, right?

 

Re TQF I got involved replying to an email by Anil re content development and read the full thread with keen interest, same as  the Wikipedia entry. With such a diverse base of educators WE seems ideal to conduct some research re existing frameworks, limitations, alternatives, etc. to contribute to TQF or whatever and try minimize the dangers you rightly perceive, and take into account country/cultural specificities usually set aside; or as some sort of repository.  But again, not for me to tell.   I’ll start my own stuff to pursue my interests, otherwise I’ll end quitting.

 

I can only guess what you mean  by “grouped thinking”  (my ignorance re WE subtleties), keep fighting for  your beliefs. I may not agree with you 100%  which is  healthy and enriching, but it doesn’t mean I don’t follow/like/admire what you do.  

 

Cheers,

 

Alex

 

De: wikied...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wikied...@googlegroups.com] En nombre de Leigh Blackall
Enviado el: jueves, 30 de octubre de 2008 22:46
Para: wikied...@googlegroups.com
Asunto: [WikiEducator] Re: !!RE: [WikiEducator] Re: Another Milestone

 

Alex said:

[Minhaaj ur Rehman]

Dear Alex,

If you haven't nosed out profiteering in WikiEducator you
probably have a lot to catch up on. Read, read, read :)

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Leigh Blackall]

In many ways it was Minhaaj who started me questioning. His confrontational postings are all too easy to dismiss. Instead, I thought about what he was saying, and that thinking lead me to other issues, and that gave voice to these long held quiet concerns I've had all along.

Thanks Alex for the encouraging remarks. Its not really here nor there to "agree", but simply the opportunity for each of us to practice articulating what we mean, and through that get a clearer grasp on what it is we are thinking. I found it interesting to read your thoughts as to why you haven't started something from scratch. Your impression that the Wikieducator project was here for COL constituents is curious. Do you work in Wikiversity much?

Nellie, I'm reflecting on the reality that not a lot of collaboration happens the way we seem to expect it to happen, and yet there is productivity. From my experience, the availability of an add free media wiki in which to develop web content for my inidividual purposes is a primary motivation to use Wikieducator (along with the many other free publishing services that are available). If my work is of use to others that is great, but more and more I am becoming comfortable with the fact that collaboration in terms of page edits is actually insignificant and unimportant to me here. Now days I wonder if I actually even want collaboration in the sense we are expecting - the page edit sense. That sort of collaboration is certainly enabled by the wiki, and is evident in things like Wikipedia - but we are not building an encylcopedia are we. What we are doing is much more open ended, much more complex with everypage designed for a specific context, basically impossible for random uncoordinated collaborative edits like there is in Wikipedia. So, I'm wondering if we should adjust our expectations about collaboration? I'm proposing a consideration of a networked and distributed collaboration, much like what can be observed in blogging networks for example, and what we can see on the Wikispaces project. Could it be that a networked and distributed collaboration is more realistic and in fact waht is happening here? If we came to the project with this type of understanding about collaboration, would that change the rewards, motivations and expectations? Where does that leave the idea of one-ness that is promoted in Wikieducator? I would hope that it would lead to Wikieducator being very much in the background.

[Maria Droujkova]

Leigh, and others,

What are the main differences in goals (and, as a result, "software-as-law") of Wikispaces and Wikieducator?

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 7:22 AM, Leigh Blackall <leighb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Nellie, I'm reflecting on the reality that not a lot of collaboration happens the way we seem to expect it to happen, and yet there is productivity. From my experience, the availability of an add free media wiki in which to develop web content for my inidividual purposes is a primary motivation to use Wikieducator (along with the many other free publishing services that are available). If my work is of use to others that is great, but more and more I am becoming comfortable with the fact that collaboration in terms of page edits is actually insignificant and unimportant to me here. Now days I wonder if I actually even want collaboration in the sense we are expecting - the page edit sense. That sort of collaboration is certainly enabled by the wiki, and is evident in things like Wikipedia - but we are not building an encylcopedia are we. What we are doing is much more open ended, much more complex with everypage designed for a specific context, basically impossible for random uncoordinated collaborative edits like there is in Wikipedia. So, I'm wondering if we should adjust our expectations about collaboration? I'm proposing a consideration of a networked and distributed collaboration, much like what can be observed in blogging networks for example, and what we can see on the Wikispaces project. Could it be that a networked and distributed collaboration is more realistic and in fact waht is happening here? If we came to the project with this type of understanding about collaboration, would that change the rewards, motivations and expectations? Where does that leave the idea of one-ness that is promoted in Wikieducator? I would hope that it would lead to Wikieducator being very much in the background.

[Leigh Blackall]

But Maria! There we go again! Is there one single goal (or list of goals) for Wikieducator? Clearly there is, and that's what I'm challenging in some respects. I have my goals, you have yours.. what we share is an interest in education and the ability to share resources. Wikispaces focuses on providing a usable and reliable platform, so I giess that's its goal (as well as to sustain an income for its administrators). It just so happens that a great many teachers use Wikispaces for educational purposes and they license CC BY SA. They do so right along side projects that have nothing to do with education. SO you see there are infinite goals in Wikispaces as there are in reality on Wikieducator. Its just that in Wikieducator, we are over shadowed by a centralised set of goals and expectations.

[Maria Droujkova]

Well, I should have probably said "a network of goals" implying openness, lack of bounds, non-hierarchical structure, and impossibility to know exactly how many there are. Here is why I am asking this question, though. If Wikispaces' network of goals mostly contains Wikieducator's network of goals, why have two structures? If that "overshadowing, centralized set of goals and expectations" you just mentioned (not a network? a hierachy? hmmm) is a separate, different set from Wikispaces' goals, what are the main differences? As a new person, I can't see this level of summary for myself, so I am asking.

[Peter]

I agree, let's collaborate! Let's create a storytelling portal and see
where it goes... If you agree with the storytelling theme, let me know
and I will get started...

Don't get me wrong, during my Masters there was a lot of
collaboration. We collaborated on a lot of projects as small teams. I
guess the point I was trying to make is that there wasn't any
dedicated modules to building Web 2.0 collaborative teams in my Ed
Masters... I believe that there are a lot of attributes to building
collaboration within Web 2.0 technologies. Maybe I should start an
outline and see where that goes...

Cheers, Peter

On Oct 30, 8:18 pm, "NELLIE DEUTSCH" <nellie.muller.deut...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Peter,
> You said: Come to think of it, during my masters we never took any courses
> specifically targeted
> toward creating collaborative works.
>
> Well, during my masters, we did a lot of collaborative team work. We wrote
> papers together and even created a collaborative WebQuest. Even in my doc
> program we collaborate on projects. So why don't we decide to collaborate at
> WE? We can set an example for others. Not everyone is comfortable with
> sharing. I think the need has to be there. In the case of students, it is a
> grade. Any suggestions on how to encourage collaboration on WE?
> Warm wishes,
> Nellie Deutsch
> Doctoral Student
> Educational Leadership

> Curriculum and Instructionhttp://www.nelliemuller.comhttp://www.integrating-technology.com/pdhttp://www.building-relationship.com/educationhttp://blendedlear.ning.comhttp://connecting-online.ning.com

> > > SL - Leroy Goalposthttp://learnonline.wordpress.comhttp://
> >www.wikieducator.org/User:Leighblackall- Hide quoted text -

[Peter]

Leigh,

I believe I get what you are saying... Does the centrallizing nature
of a COL influenced WE end up creating a wiki environment different to
what we aspire? Is there a dissonence of localized and disparate
learning modules with a controlled and centrallized management
approach. As you say wikispaces is a better way to go... for the
wikispaces "administrators" provide the infrastructure and then get
out of the way. Where WE has a council setting setting policy of where
WE is going. All this council stuff kind of goes against freedom...
Should WE be only providing an international infrastructure for the
deployment of OER and otherwise get out of the way? Allow OER
developers (individuals or small teams) to do as they wish.

I agree we need to rethink all this within WE as a lot of assumptions
are made when you approach this as a collaborative effort as opposed
to a whole bunch of small OER projects held together by an "agnostic"
infrastructure...

Again, this has becoame a very interesting thread of conversation...

Peter

> SL - Leroy Goalposthttp://learnonline.wordpress.comhttp://www.wikieducator.org/User:Leighblackall- Hide quoted text -

[Peter]

Minhaaj,

I'd be very interested in your detailed definition of "profiteering".
I think I may be getting a sense of what you mean, but I think I may
be missing even what should be considered profit... or why taken in a
different context (yours) why what is going on should be considered
profiteering...

Sincerely, Peter

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -

[Maria Droujkova]

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Peter <praws...@gmail.com> wrote:

Minhaaj,

I'd be very interested in your detailed definition of "profiteering".
I think I may be getting a sense of what you mean, but I think I may
be missing even what should be considered profit... or why taken in a
different context (yours) why what is going on should be considered
profiteering...

Sincerely, Peter

I'd be specifically interested in the distinction this definition makes between "profit" and "benefit." I've been looking at non-monetary economies for some time. They don't have these clear boundaries between profits and benefits that money-based economies have. Supposedly, all project participants benefit, though.

[nelliemuller]

Leigh said:
In my experience there has in fact been very very little actual
collaborative editing on Wikieducator - and this is a good thing in

many ways. ..It is kind of the opposite to software development, and

so far it is opposite to Wikieducator. I myself have been following
the collaborative editing promise and software development analogy
(sharing in Maria's desire for one thing), but increasingly I'm
becoming more and more uncomfortable with it as I find myself
centralising and struggling with grouped thinking and tradeoffs.

Leigh,
As someone very new to Wikiducator, I need clarifications. I would
like to understand a bit more about your concerns with "centralising
and struggling with grouped thinking and tradeoffs". Can you provide
specific examples. I would like to understand how you would like
Wikieducator to go.

Thank you.
Nellie

[Derek Chirnside]

Well well.  Saturday, 6.01am here, just off to the Coast with two bands, one classic rock and one progressive rock to play 7 hours at the Empire Hotel during the 6,000 people Ross Fireworks Festival, hay fever disenhanced (severely today), and very very tired after the decision this week in the Moodle trial here and the huge amount of work leading up to this.

Then this post comes.  The first words where I think I really can engage wkith this fascinating discussion, possibly at the risk of missing the point, but I do have some things to say.
I'm based at an unusual institution.  They will give us the OK to start of UCTL.canterbury.ac.nz as a little fun thing, to give away all the work from one of my recent projects, yet quibble over pixel widths on learning pages with branding, and force a 12 month process when 2 weeks would really be enough to make a decision.  etc.  A place of contradictions where I am a minion.  Some things (only some things) are not the best, but I'm finding (vaguely)a place there.

I'm a dabbler in WE.  In and out like a yo yo - committed to OER but like some other software develiopers, mistaking a clear view of the goal with the closeness of it.  Some of your comments probably resonate about why I find it hard at times in the WE OER environment.

BUT: I can't post now more, got to pack trailors etc, and I'll be away from any internet for 36 hours.
The crunch came three weeks ago.  I was off to do a reccee for the Ross trip to the Coast.  At 27 hours notice I got a call to run 2 Podcasting workshops on the coast.  I was already going, so hey, I thought, lets do it.
Where to put it was my query?  WE was obvious.  Checked out the podcasting stuff.  Tried to decide what to do.  Fiddle with it?  Copy and adapt it?  Work with Podcasting to create Derek's Podcasting.  I had no time to do it this way.  How to name my pages?  How to cluster them?  How much to contextualise?  Who owns the page 'podcasting workshop' and can I fiddle with it? Should I start one as well?

This is a trivial context I know, but they made me face a few of these questions you are debating here.

OK. Unfinished.
But I have broken the ice.  I'll be back.
If the discussion has not moved on two much I'll post tomorrow afternoon.  I may post even if it has.  :-)

-Derek

2008/10/31 Alex P. Real <alex....@googlemail.com>

--
From Derek Chirnside.

[Nadia]

Dear Leigh,

Wikipedia is a wiki so you can edit it. If you check the history of
the page you can see who made the entries.
It looks like the initial entry was made on the 11 of March.
I had seen that page before and thought everyone knew it existed.


Maybe I appreciate people who give their frank opinion, there are not
many around. I thought for me anyway it was helpful when you were
honest and direct with comments when I was taking the wikieducator
course and it was extremely helpful.

I think maybe we should listen to different opinions and ideas even if
we do not agree with them but at least there can be a civil dialogue.
Hopefully the wikieducator page will be edited in such a way that it
will reflect what the WE community is. For me it was a friendly
experience.
My starting point was the UNESCO discussion, an email from them
introducing WE, then Wikimania 2008 and information on different
wikis, wikiversity, diplopedia etc.
Maybe what would be useful would be a sort of chart like a dendrogram
to show the relationships between wikis and other organisations.
All the best
Nadia

[Randy Fisher]

Great idea for visualizing the connections!

- Randy

--
________________
Randy Fisher - Change Management & Collaboration, Human Performance & Engagement, Sustainable Communities & Organizations

* Engaging People in Teams, Communities and Organizations....and WikiEducator!

+ 1 604.684.2275
wiki...@gmail.com

http://www.wikieducator.org
http://www.wikieducator.org/Community_Media
http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Randyfisher

* Cool WikiEducator Video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc9-CNlIqsY

* Can You Do the Wiki-Wiki? http://www.wikieducator.org/Wiki_Wiki

Skype: wikirandy

[Leigh Blackall]

Peter, I sense you have it. That makes me happy :)

I am just back from a walk in the mountains, and struggle to find the motivation to explain this any more. I'm satisfied that I've at least communicated my thoughts to Peter, and hope he'll carry the ball further. I will recommend for a third time to watch Downes video explaining the tension between groups and networks, and reflect on the controlling influences that groups have on us individually - especially Wikieducator. Sorry if you all have watched it - I just see little evidence of it.

Legs so sore I can barely keep the laptop on my lap! Face burnt, mouth dry, boots wet. I'll sleep well tonight!

[NELLIE DEUTSCH]

Leigh,

They say Canadians say thank you even when someone steps on their toes. So as a Canadian, I thank you.

 

Warm wishes,

Nellie

 

 

[Peter]

Leigh,
Most Excellent. I agree its time for those who have been following
this thread to watch (or re-watch) the Downes video;
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540
And I would agree I see a GROUP entrenching itself within WE. Not that
this is a bad thing, it just is. Though, I do believe a network
approach will have greater success in meeting the WE mission. WE can
only hope that the council also sees it this way, or maybe they will
see having a group approach is best for meeting the challenges of the
WE mission. I think that encouraging a NETWORK of educators to utilize
the WE infrastructure, and then everyone (WE Council, Etc...) gets out
of the way is the best (re: like WIkiSpaces). In relation to the group
vs. network and the "ills" within a group (control, resources, etc...)
It makes me wonder if this is how Minhaaj sees profiteering?

A few question that come from all this; Can a resource node on the
network be started by a network? Or have all resource nodes grown out
of the efforts of an individual or small group? If you look at the
current set or resource nodes, most of them grew from the efforts of
an individual or small group. Maybe this is the natural lifecycle of a
network node. And the challenge for any node is to transition from
starting as a group, letting go, and becoming a network node...

(Examples of resource nodes starting from individuals or small groups
would be; Skype, OCW, CCK08, Wikipedia, Wikispaces, Delicious, Flickr,
CC...) So what do you think, do all network nodes start out as small
groups?

As another Canadian, Thank-you...I certainly hope this thread plants
some seeds and allows this important discussion to become a part of
the WE consciousness.

Sincerely, Peter

On Nov 3, 1:06 am, "Leigh Blackall" <leighblack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter, I sense you have it. That makes me happy :)
>
> I am just back from a walk in the mountains, and struggle to find the
> motivation to explain this any more. I'm satisfied that I've at least
> communicated my thoughts to Peter, and hope he'll carry the ball further. I
> will recommend for a third time to watch Downes video explaining the tension
> between groups and networks, and reflect on the controlling influences that
> groups have on us individually - especially Wikieducator. Sorry if you all
> have watched it - I just see little evidence of it.
>
> Legs so sore I can barely keep the laptop on my lap! Face burnt, mouth dry,
> boots wet. I'll sleep well tonight!
>
> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Derek Chirnside

> <derek.chirns...@gmail.com>wrote:

> > 2008/10/31 Alex P. Real <alex.pr...@googlemail.com>

> >> *De:* wikied...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wikied...@googlegroups.com]
> >> *En nombre de *Leigh Blackall
> >> *Enviado el:* jueves, 30 de octubre de 2008 22:46
> >> *Para:* wikied...@googlegroups.com
> >> *Asunto:* [WikiEducator] Re: !!RE: [WikiEducator] Re: Another Milestone

> >> thoughts about the tension between groups and networks<http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540>,

> >> where I sit more comfortably in the zone of networked participant, and I
> >> think it is a more realistic organising principle for Wikieducator. The
> >> distribution and re-networking of information and communication is different
> >> (I think) to software development. To use the software development analogy
> >> that John has reintroduced: the information and communication development
> >> (that we might just call content for now) exists in 100s of thousands of
> >> "folks", and those "folks" are converged from time to time to form nodes (as
> >> Maria explains). Those nodes build up and/or disappear. Very rarely (never)
> >> do they converge to make one (although Maria desires it). It is kind of the
> >> opposite to software development, and so far it is opposite to Wikieducator.
> >> I myself have been following the collaborative editing promise and software
> >> development analogy (sharing in Maria's desire for one thing), but
> >> increasingly I'm becoming more and more uncomfortable with it as I find
> >> myself centralising and struggling with grouped thinking and tradeoffs.
>

> >>  On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 3:12 AM, Chris Harvey <gnuch...@gmail.com>

> >> wrote:
>
> >> Your asking something different. Originally you were talking about naming.
> >> Disambiguation would probably be a good example of this.
>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation
>
> >> For a good example of multiple pages from different points of view about
> >> the same concept perhaps look at this page.
>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_education
>

> >> Or perhaps portals likehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_portal

>
> >> Anyway, I should be in bed, I'll try to find more info tommorow if your
> >> not satisfied.
>
> >> Warm Regards
> >> Chris
>
> >>  On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Leigh Blackall]

Interesting Peter, I hadn't considered that list as nodes in a network. I suppose they are in some ways, but I have always considered them as the things that connect the real nodes - the platforms that facilitate communication between nodes.

Take your K12 project on WikiEd. I see that as a node or nodes, both embodied in the content, and in you as the personal point of contact. K12 may someday connect with a similar or complimentary project on Wikispaces.. with a particular blog post.. a Youtube video.. another individual who works on her own space, but through certain technologies - feeds into K12... etc. This same networking of information and people can happen inside a single platform such as Wikieducator - but I would question its capacities if it where only inside Wikied.

Things that make the networked "mission" succeed: Using digital formats published openly online. Use of CC By to unrestrict reuse and sampling (I suspect copyright will be a thing of the past in the not too distant future, if Google's approach to it is anything to go by).

Trappings that can undo the flexibility of a network: Prescribing certain practices - such as CC By, Open Format Standards or Open Source Software (as much as I appreciate their worth, the loss in potential connections is too great if we insist on these too much). Not facilitating "mashup" practices (embedding 3rd party media). Centralising services. Policies that police, and so on.

[Peter]

Leigh,

I get your point. And I do agree with you that if you don't facilitate
mash-up practices you reduce connections, and therefore the network
becomes smaller and restrained... openness is the way... I guess these
subtleties are why so much discussion occurs regarding the meaning of
open...

I also get your point about items that connect nodes vs. being the
nodes themselves. All this said I would think that Lawrence Lessig at
one point would have been considered a node evangelizing the benefits
of a creative commons, through time the CC has become a part of the
conduit. Like flickr, it was at one time a small group hacking
together a photo sharing site (there were a group). Linux at one time
was an individual project... So could it be that all nodes or conduit
technologies start as individuals or small groups... I seek an example
where a network just appeared without it first being started by a
small group or individual...

Cheers, Peter

On Nov 3, 12:00 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <leighblack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting Peter, I hadn't considered that list as nodes in a network. I
> suppose they are in some ways, but I have always considered them as the
> things that connect the real nodes - the platforms that facilitate
> communication between nodes.
>
> Take your K12 project on WikiEd. I see that as a node or nodes, both
> embodied in the content, and in you as the personal point of contact. K12
> may someday connect with a similar or complimentary project on Wikispaces..
> with a particular blog post.. a Youtube video.. another individual who works
> on her own space, but through certain technologies - feeds into K12... etc.
> This same networking of information and people can happen inside a single
> platform such as Wikieducator - but I would question its capacities if it
> where only inside Wikied.
>
> Things that make the networked "mission" succeed: Using digital formats
> published openly online. Use of CC By to unrestrict reuse and sampling (I
> suspect copyright will be a thing of the past in the not too distant future,
> if Google's approach to it is anything to go by).
>
> Trappings that can undo the flexibility of a network: Prescribing certain
> practices - such as CC By, Open Format Standards or Open Source Software (as
> much as I appreciate their worth, the loss in potential connections is too
> great if we insist on these too much). Not facilitating "mashup" practices
> (embedding 3rd party media). Centralising services. Policies that police,
> and so on.
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Leigh Blackall]

"In the beginning there was the word..." :)

In the begining there was the Internet, and the ability for people to publish on it and express themselves. As epxressive individuals they were small nodes, connected by way of the Internet. When their connections to other nodes become stronger, they came closer together. Over time (and all the right agreements) they become close in fact they were indistinguishable from one another. Indivdually they grouped to form a bigger node, but it is now slightly more difficult for them to connect to new nodes because more of their energy is spent refering to each other and keeping their bigger node connected and strong. They are starting to loose the benefit of being in a long tail.

[Peter]

Yes, but networks are organic and fluid, focus ebbs and flows. so
sometimes putting energy into keeping something relevant and strong is
like paddling a canoe up stream. Turn the damn thing around, let the
node die... Don't forget the long tail is forever... So 20 years from
now any resource could again become popular or through time this
thread could be referenced many times... ;)

On Nov 3, 12:43 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <leighblack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "In the beginning there was the word..." :)
>
> In the begining there was the Internet, and the ability for people to
> publish on it and express themselves. As epxressive individuals they were
> small nodes, connected by way of the Internet. When their connections to
> other nodes become stronger, they came closer together. Over time (and all
> the right agreements) they become close in fact they were indistinguishable
> from one another. Indivdually they grouped to form a bigger node, but it is
> now slightly more difficult for them to connect to new nodes because more of
> their energy is spent refering to each other and keeping their bigger node
> connected and strong. They are starting to loose the benefit of being in a

> long tail <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long_Tail>.

> ...
>
> read more »

[elizabeth mbasu]

Hi everyone,
I'd like to fit my text in a table. How do I do this so that it does not spread all over
Liz


--- On Mon, 11/3/08, Peter <praws...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Peter]

Elizabeth,

Yes, getting used to formatting tables with Wiki syntax is different
(and more difficult) than HTML. All I can suggest is you look at other
WE tables to get used to the syntax. The L4C registration page has a
good example of a "well" formatted table; http://www.wikieducator.org/Learning4Content/Registration

Let me know how I could help further.

Peter

On Nov 4, 5:37 am, elizabeth mbasu <emb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> I'd like to fit my text in a table. How do I do this so that it does not spread all over
> Liz
>

> --- On Mon, 11/3/08, Peter <prawstho...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Robert Kruhlak]

Hi Liz,

WE is running a simple table extension (formerly called tabbeddata)
that makes it "simpler" to add data to a table.

To make a table that uses commas for separating columns and <return>
for the rows, try:

<tab sep=comma>
Hi, Hello, Yes
Bye, Good Night, No
</tab>

You can find more information on the syntax and examples at:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TabbedData

Regards,

Rob (aka Kruhly)

--
Robert Kruhlak
Burnaby, BC
CANADA
(M) +1 778 230 1875
(E) kru...@gmail.com

[Peter]

Thanks Rob...

That's an easier table to use...

Peter

On Nov 4, 12:50 pm, "Robert Kruhlak" <kru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Liz,
>
> WE is running a simple table extension (formerly called tabbeddata)
> that makes it "simpler" to add data to a table.
>
> To make a table that uses commas for separating columns and <return>
> for the rows, try:
>
> <tab sep=comma>
> Hi, Hello, Yes
> Bye, Good Night, No
> </tab>
>
> You can find more information on the syntax and examples at:
>
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TabbedData
>
> Regards,
>
> Rob (aka Kruhly)
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:37 AM, elizabeth mbasu <emb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> > I'd like to fit my text in a table. How do I do this so that it does not spread all over
> > Liz
>

> > --- On Mon, 11/3/08, Peter <prawstho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> From: Peter <prawstho...@gmail.com>

[Leigh Blackall]

I use Open Office to create tables. Open Office has an export to media wiki.

[Leigh Blackall]

I was just browsing an old course and came across the good old video The Machine is Using Us. Its been a while since I watched this, but re watching it shows it to be still true and useful in terms of perspective relating to decentralised, distributed, networked and "mashable" services. Take note of the list of things that are suggested as needing a rethink. Can we honestly say we are doing anything new in Wikieducator? Are we even rethinking these things?

[elizabeth mbasu]

Hi Peter,

Thanks, I will be visiting the page sometime today. Right now am so overjoyed by Obama's win as Present of the USA! Wow!
LIZ

--- On Tue, 11/4/08, Peter <praws...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Peter <praws...@gmail.com>

[elizabeth mbasu]

Thanks Rob. I will try this
LIZ


--- On Tue, 11/4/08, Robert Kruhlak <kru...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Robert Kruhlak <kru...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEducator] Re: Reorganising my user page

[elizabeth mbasu]

My OpenOffice does not load. I suspect the bandwidth
LIZ


--- On Tue, 11/4/08, Leigh Blackall <leighb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Leigh Blackall <leighb...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEducator] Re: Reorganising my user page
> To: wikied...@googlegroups.com