Main Nav

Hi all,

 

I thought I would let you know about an open online course Shandin Pete and I will be facilitating through The University of Montana starting next week. Education Across Cultures explores issues of multicultural education and social justice, and we’re seeking participation from individuals around the world. (Anywhere ok). You can learn more and sign up at the following site. (A work in progress…): http://eac.instructionaldesigning.org/?q=node/1

 

Hopefully some of you will join us!

 

Thanks,

 

Robert

 

Robert Squires

Director of Instructional Design and Technical Support

UMOnline

School of Extended & Lifelong Learning

The University of Montana, Missoula 59812

O: 406.243.6056

M: 406.240.3837

 

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Cable Green
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 11:04 PM
To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: [OPENNESS] Webinar: June 5: 2:00pm (eastern): Fulbright Specialist Program and the Open Educational Resources Projects Initiative

 

Hi All:

Please participate if you are available.

Thank you,

Cable


Cable Green, PhD
Director of Global Learning

 

AttachmentSize
image001.gif1.59 KB
image002.jpg332 bytes
image003.png4.02 KB

Comments

Message from mackintosh.wayne@gmail.com

Hi Robert,

Looks like an very interesting course. 

Visiting your course homepage I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct?

Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing.  The signup form ccontains the following text 

 "I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement. 

One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option.

Is this an OER course?

Wayne



Message from nilayy@nmims.edu

Hi Robert

Your course looks very interesting.Can I give a talk on an aspect of information technology in management? I could give examples about experiences of organizations in India.Do let me know if this would fit into your course.

 

Regards

Nilay

 

Dr.Nilay Yajnik

Professor and Chairman – Information Systems Area

Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies , Mumbai , India

 

From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Wayne Mackintosh
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:14 PM
To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

 

Hi Robert,

 

Looks like an very interesting course. 

 

Visiting your course homepage I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct?

 

Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing.  The signup form ccontains the following text 

 

 "I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement. 

One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option.

 

Is this an OER course?

 

Wayne

 

 

Wayne, Good questions. It's really not an OER course. It's a typical university course open to non-credit participants (guests). Access to the course materials depends on enrolling at the site and receiving an id and password to enter a proprietary version of Moodle. I added the language on licensing to try to make it clear that some of the content (i.e. articles) should not be reused/uploaded elsewhere. Perhaps there's a better way to get at this. Perhaps its redundant. What are your thoughts? The embedded videos are from me or Vance Stevens and both of us generally have a preference for openness. I'll look into that. Thanks, Robert ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] on behalf of Wayne Mackintosh [mackintosh.wayne@GMAIL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:43 AM To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Hi Robert, Looks like an very interesting course. Visiting your course homepage I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct? Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing. The signup form ccontains the following text "I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement. One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option. Is this an OER course? Wayne
I think this really exemplifies the ambiguity around "open" I am seeing now. Please do not take this as an accusation of deception or "open-washing" as I think there are several benefits to increasing access to education (i.e. open education, open universities, open enrollment, etc.) enabled through courses like this. My only point is I am seeing more and more examples where ambiguity leads to confusion with the term open. Obviously Wayne (and I) assumed "open" to include a licensing model of the content that enabled access, remixing, reuse, redistribution, etc. I know folks cringe when they hear talk of standards, but without some guidelines many will have false expectations (leading to disillusionment and reduced adoption) while others, who may not realize the full range of opportunities of openness, settle for a narrower set of benefits, and finally, we may see actual deception capitalizing on the trendiness of open (think green, organic, cloud, lite, etc.). With more and more grant dollars, state legislations, government policies, campuses, etc. rewarding, indeed mandating, "open," there is an increasing benefit for organizations and initiatives to orient themselves toward open and tout their openness. I would offer Jasig's 2-3-98 project's as a forum to develop such a standard definition and assessment tools to measure the type and maturity of openness of a project, initiative, organization. I would be interested in other references folks may know. Thanks, Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Squires, Robert [Robert.Squires@MSO.UMT.EDU] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 9:52 AM To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Wayne, Good questions. It's really not an OER course. It's a typical university course open to non-credit participants (guests). Access to the course materials depends on enrolling at the site and receiving an id and password to enter a proprietary version of Moodle. I added the language on licensing to try to make it clear that some of the content (i.e. articles) should not be reused/uploaded elsewhere. Perhaps there's a better way to get at this. Perhaps its redundant. What are your thoughts? The embedded videos are from me or Vance Stevens and both of us generally have a preference for openness. I'll look into that. Thanks, Robert ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] on behalf of Wayne Mackintosh [mackintosh.wayne@GMAIL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:43 AM To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Hi Robert, Looks like an very interesting course. Visiting your course homepage I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct? Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing. The signup form ccontains the following text "I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement. One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option. Is this an OER course? Wayne
I agree that there is a great deal of confusion with regards to "open".

I would like to share with you all the draft of the Paris Declaration that will be presented at the World OER Congress in a couple of weeks: Version 7 of the declaration is available for comments until 15 June 2012 http://oercongress.weebly.com/paris-declaration.html. The Declaration will be presented to the World OER Congress which will be held the 20th - 22nd of June.

 If you follow the progress of this document, you will see that it was presented, discussed, and edit at regional  policy forums around the globe: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/events/calendar-of-events/events-websites/world-open-educational-resources-congress/

I was lucky enough to have been part of the European Forum in April, out of which came version 4 of the draft, and I can say that the process has truly been collaborative and inspirational.

Ellen

Ellen Marie Murphy
Director of Online Curriculum
SUNY Empire State College
113 West Ave
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
518-587-2100 Ext: 2961
twitter: ellen_marie



From:        "Masson, Patrick" <pmasson@UMASSONLINE.NET>
To:        OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU,
Date:        06/05/2012 01:04 PM
Subject:        Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures
Sent by:        The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv <OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>



I think this really exemplifies the ambiguity around "open" I am seeing now. Please do not take this as an accusation of deception or "open-washing" as I think there are several benefits to increasing access to education (i.e. open education, open universities, open enrollment, etc.) enabled through courses like this. My only point is I am seeing more and more examples where ambiguity leads to confusion with the term open. Obviously Wayne (and I) assumed "open" to include a licensing model of the content that enabled access, remixing, reuse, redistribution, etc.

I know folks cringe when they hear talk of standards, but without some guidelines many will have false expectations (leading to disillusionment and reduced adoption) while others, who may not realize the full range of opportunities of openness, settle for a narrower set of benefits, and finally, we may see actual deception capitalizing on the trendiness of open (think green, organic, cloud, lite, etc.). With more and more grant dollars, state legislations, government policies, campuses, etc. rewarding, indeed mandating, "open," there is an increasing benefit for organizations and initiatives to orient themselves toward open and tout their openness. I would offer Jasig's 2-3-98 project's as a forum to develop such a standard definition and assessment tools to measure the type and maturity of openness of a project, initiative, organization.

I would be interested in other references folks may know.

Thanks,
Patrick



|| |||| |||     ||  | | || |||  || |||  ||  | | |||  || |||  ||
Patrick Masson
Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline
The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President
333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545

(774) 455-7615: Office
(774) 455-7620: Fax
(970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice
UMOLPatMasson: AIM
massonpj: Skype

Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net
Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com
________________________________________
From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Squires, Robert [Robert.Squires@MSO.UMT.EDU]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 9:52 AM
To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

Wayne,

Good questions. It's really not an OER course. It's a typical university course open to non-credit participants (guests). Access to the course materials depends on enrolling at the site and receiving an id and password to enter a proprietary version of Moodle. I added the language on licensing to try to make it clear that some of the content (i.e. articles) should not be reused/uploaded elsewhere. Perhaps there's a better way to get at this. Perhaps its redundant. What are your thoughts? The embedded videos are from me or Vance Stevens and both of us generally have a preference for openness. I'll look into that.

Thanks,

Robert
________________________________
From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] on behalf of Wayne Mackintosh [mackintosh.wayne@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:43 AM
To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

Hi Robert,

Looks like an very interesting course.

Visiting your course homepage<UrlBlockedError.aspx> I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct?

Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing.  The signup form ccontains the following text

"I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement.

One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option.

Is this an OER course?

Wayne



Hi All:

At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;)

This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons:
  • Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others.
What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute.

Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F

The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition

I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here.

Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." 
  • If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment."  All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER.

  • In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license.
Does this resonate with anyone else?

Cable


Cable Green, PhD
Director of Global Learning

=====================

Absolutely, Cable. That is the meaning of “open” when we talk about open source software – i.e, no cost access and no cost to revise, reuse etc. No cost software that is not openly licensed is free/freeware.

 

Shahron Williams van Rooij, Ph.D., PMP

Assistant Professor, Learning Technologies Division

College of Education and Human Development

George Mason University

4400 University Dr. MSN 5D6

Fairfax, VA 22030

Phone: (703) 993-9704

Fax: (703) 993-2722

Program URL: http://it.gse.gmu.edu/idd

 

From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Cable Green
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:46 PM
To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

 

Hi All:

At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;)

This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons:

  • Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others.

What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute.

Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F

The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition

I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here.

Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." 

  • If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment."  All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER.
  • In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license.

Does this resonate with anyone else?

Cable


Cable Green, PhD
Director of Global Learning



=====================

Message from ken.udas@gmail.com

Hello,

I hope that all is well.  This thread has really taken a life of its own... so I feel enabled to continue to feed it.  I just want to point back to what I think is a nice article by Kim Tucker titled "Just Say Libre."  I think that it goes beyond being a very good openness primer to creating/framing some ideological touchstones and perhaps pointing to some of the connections between openness applications that Pat Masson eluded to.  If you have not read it, I think that it may be worth the time.  Here is a link to the article:

http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre


Cheers!

Ken




On 6/5/12 2:50 PM, Shahron Williams van Rooij wrote:

Absolutely, Cable. That is the meaning of “open” when we talk about open source software – i.e, no cost access and no cost to revise, reuse etc. No cost software that is not openly licensed is free/freeware.

 

Shahron Williams van Rooij, Ph.D., PMP

Assistant Professor, Learning Technologies Division

College of Education and Human Development

George Mason University

4400 University Dr. MSN 5D6

Fairfax, VA 22030

Phone: (703) 993-9704

Fax: (703) 993-2722

Program URL: http://it.gse.gmu.edu/idd

 

From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Cable Green
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:46 PM
To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

 

Hi All:

At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;)

This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons:

  • Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others.

What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute.

Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F

The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition

I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here.

Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." 

  • If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment."  All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER.
  • In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license.

Does this resonate with anyone else?

Cable


Cable Green, PhD
Director of Global Learning



=====================

All, Just so Robert does not think we are ganging up on him, I think it is important to note that Robert did not use the term OER and was quick to acknowledge this and the ambiguity: even asking for assistance. I like the OER definition offered by Cable below, and note that he included in the qualification of that definition, "when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources" (is there a typo there?). To me this signifies that the "open" in this case qualifies an object, i.e. the educational resource, e.g. a course, a text, a video, etc. I think we need to broaden our application of open to include the organizations/communities that create and manage these resources. For example, is the Creative Commons open? or OERu, or Conextions? or Jasig? or the Sakai Foundation? (tried to pick on everyone here). An organization or community may create artifacts that are open (the four "R's"), but what value (if any) can be derived from an organization that is itself open (allowing it to be enhanced through the contributions of it's members). As I referenced here (http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume46/O...), both uPortal and LifeRay are open source portals. However, the uPortal Steering Committee, "the governing body responsible for the strategic direction and operational oversight of the uPortal project," is composed of two members elected by the Jasig membership, two members selected by the uPortal developers, one member appointed by the Steering Committee, and two members representing the Jasig board. Liferay, is led by a private corporation of founding partners "driving innovation for the benefit of enterprises around the world." These two examples—representing a community versus a corporate approach—highlight what I believe to be a point of ambiguity and thus contention around the viability of open source: open-source governance and, fundamentally, openness itself. What is openness, and how have open communities organized themselves to deliver the quality of products required by higher education—whether that be open-source software or open educational resources? I would offer, as well, Instructure, Moodle and Sakai all allow folks to "revise, reuse, remix and redistribute" their software, however, the organizations that manage that code will influence development. This too, I believe, should be a decision criteria for assessment as institutions engage with open projects/initiatives, that is, the communities themselves. Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Cable Green [cable@CREATIVECOMMONS.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:45 PM To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Hi All: At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;) This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons: * Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others. What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute. Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here. Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." * If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment." All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER. * In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license. Does this resonate with anyone else? Cable Cable Green, PhD Director of Global Learning Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/education http://twitter.com/cgreen =====================
First I want to say that I agree with what Patrick has said, so that when you read the sentences that follow I hope you will take that into account.   I think things will continue to be somewhat confusing, perhaps even more than the "green" movement, because "open" has so many connotations already,  When a class is open, it generally refers to access. We say "the course opens on ..." etc.  A free course, which anyone can take, may not be open as in OER yet most people would consider it open because of the access. Individuals in general do not clearly understand the difference between Open CourseWare and  free courses (like Coursera) on the web--perhaps mostly because both of these are disrupting education in similar ways, and because the individuals that need/want access to the knowledge aren't all that concerned with whether they can actually can be revised, etc or are simply "open to anyone" (I hope this makes sense).  Because they are open to anyone, and at this point it goes beyond simply being free, it means that individuals do not need to meet prerequisites, apply for admission, score high on a standardized test, have a certain GPA,  and be approved, etc, etc.  Knowledge has had a history of being so proprietary that it went beyond cost to being locked up behind all kinds of walls that required all sorts of requirements to access. This history adds a dimension to the "free" courses that goes beyond simply  "free" to a form of open access (though we know that that's not what the term means).  I know I'm guilty of speaking about courses like Coursera in the same sentence as I speak about OCW--especially when I'm speaking about credentialing. Then we have confusing terms like "Open Badging", when what is really open is only the OBI (the infrastructure). The Badges link to the objectives that were assessed (or they are supposed to) so they truly can't be copied, revised, edited, etc. Or maybe they can?  

Ellen

Ellen Marie Murphy
Director of Online Curriculum
SUNY Empire State College
113 West Ave
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
518-587-2100 Ext: 2961
twitter: ellen_marie



From:        Ken Udas <ken.udas@GMAIL.COM>
To:        OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU,
Date:        06/05/2012 04:22 PM
Subject:        Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures
Sent by:        The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv <OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>



Hello,

I hope that all is well.  This thread has really taken a life of its own... so I feel enabled to continue to feed it.  I just want to point back to what I think is a nice article by Kim Tucker titled "Just Say Libre."  I think that it goes beyond being a very good openness primer to creating/framing some ideological touchstones and perhaps pointing to some of the connections between openness applications that Pat Masson eluded to.  If you have not read it, I think that it may be worth the time.  Here is a link to the article:

http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre


Cheers!

Ken




On 6/5/12 2:50 PM, Shahron Williams van Rooij wrote:
Absolutely, Cable. That is the meaning of “open” when we talk about open source software – i.e, no cost access and no cost to revise, reuse etc. No cost software that is not openly licensed is free/freeware.
 
Shahron Williams van Rooij, Ph.D., PMP
Assistant Professor, Learning Technologies Division
College of Education and Human Development
George Mason University
4400 University Dr. MSN 5D6
Fairfax, VA 22030
Phone: (703) 993-9704
Fax: (703) 993-2722
Program URL: http://it.gse.gmu.edu/idd
 
From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Cable Green
Sent:
Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:46 PM
To:
OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject:
Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures
 
Hi All:

At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;)

This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons:
  • Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others.
What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute.

Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F

The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition

I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here.

Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." 
  • If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment."  All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER.
  • In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license.
Does this resonate with anyone else?

Cable


Cable Green, PhD
Director of Global Learning
Creative Commons
http://creativecommons.org/education
http://twitter.com/cgreen


=====================
Patrick, Thanks for that. No need to worry, I greatly appreciate the discussion. (Just meeting-meeting today). I also like Cable's definition and modified the language on the course portal to reflect the notion that it provides an opportunity for participants around the world to enroll and access content not in the public domain. (I wish it were). The language is important, and I'm not sure I've got it right yet: http://eac.instructionaldesigning.org/?q=node/1 If I had to characterize the course, I would say it is an attempt to incorporate diversity and insights that would otherwise not be possible and do so in a way that creates the best possible learning experience for the participants. In part, it's an attempt to address some of the weaknesses in terms of instructor-participant interaction noted in massive open online courses. It's about the primacy of the student and not the network (at the risk of starting another public discussion :-). We'll limit participation numbers, if necessary, so it remains feasible to support the course participants as best we can. We've also spend considerable effort to engineer the experience based on instructional design principles, not with the intention of enforcing the power relationships between instructor-student, but to provide a clear structure from which people can jump off-into further explorations. In part, it's also about navigating our IT, social media and copyright policies as well as the limitations with our university systems. Learning Times (Jonathan Finkelstein) have kindly offered to let us use a room for the sessions with Paul Gorski and Geneva Gay, and we cleared copyright concerns with our library earlier in the week. Social Media is optional only on our campus. Above all, it's a great learning experience, so thank you all for your contributions here. Robert Robert Squires Director of Instructional Design and Technical Support UMOnline School of Extended & Lifelong Learning The University of Montana, Missoula 59812 O: 406.243.6056 M: 406.240.3837 -----Original Message----- From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Masson, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:54 PM To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures All, Just so Robert does not think we are ganging up on him, I think it is important to note that Robert did not use the term OER and was quick to acknowledge this and the ambiguity: even asking for assistance. I like the OER definition offered by Cable below, and note that he included in the qualification of that definition, "when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources" (is there a typo there?). To me this signifies that the "open" in this case qualifies an object, i.e. the educational resource, e.g. a course, a text, a video, etc. I think we need to broaden our application of open to include the organizations/communities that create and manage these resources. For example, is the Creative Commons open? or OERu, or Conextions? or Jasig? or the Sakai Foundation? (tried to pick on everyone here). An organization or community may create artifacts that are open (the four "R's"), but what value (if any) can be derived from an organization that is itself open (allowing it to be enhanced through the contributions of it's members). As I referenced here (http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume46/O...), both uPortal and LifeRay are open source portals. However, the uPortal Steering Committee, "the governing body responsible for the strategic direction and operational oversight of the uPortal project," is composed of two members elected by the Jasig membership, two members selected by the uPortal developers, one member appointed by the Steering Committee, and two members representing the Jasig board. Liferay, is led by a private corporation of founding partners "driving innovation for the benefit of enterprises around the world." These two examples-representing a community versus a corporate approach-highlight what I believe to be a point of ambiguity and thus contention around the viability of open source: open-source governance and, fundamentally, openness itself. What is openness, and how have open communities organized themselves to deliver the quality of products required by higher education-whether that be open-source software or open educational resources? I would offer, as well, Instructure, Moodle and Sakai all allow folks to "revise, reuse, remix and redistribute" their software, however, the organizations that manage that code will influence development. This too, I believe, should be a decision criteria for assessment as institutions engage with open projects/initiatives, that is, the communities themselves. Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Cable Green [cable@CREATIVECOMMONS.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:45 PM To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Hi All: At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;) This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons: * Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others. What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute. Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here. Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." * If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment." All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER. * In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license. Does this resonate with anyone else? Cable Cable Green, PhD Director of Global Learning Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/education http://twitter.com/cgreen =====================
Correct - the definition I put forth is talking about education objects: courses, textbooks, simulations, assessments, data, articles, etc....  the "stuff" we use in learning spaces.

Re: an open organization.

Paul Stacey (BC Campus) wrote a nice blog post on how a truly Open University (one type of org) would go beyond the use of others' OER and openly sharing it's own OER:

http://edtechfrontier.com/2011/01/04/the-university-of-open

The University of Open:

  • uses open source software for its administration and for teaching and learning
  • involves students and faculty in research which is published in open access journals for all to see and use
  • operates in an open government/open data way whereby the learning analytics and data about the institution are open and available
  • offers credential education through programs built using open educational resources developed in-house and reused from elsewhere
  • involves all students and faculty as active contributors in one or more of the open communities that open source software, open access, open government/data, and open educational resources rely on
  • expands on the traditional no-entry requirements open-door policy of an “open university” to intentionally and strategically utilize new and emerging open pedagogies
There is also a guide for "open education practices" here: http://www.oer-quality.org/publications/guide/

Cable



Message from mackintosh.wayne@gmail.com

Hi Robert,

Thanks for the clarification and getting back to the list. Running courses in parallel-mode for  non-credit students is a powerful model for adding learning value for students enrolled for full credit while affording opportunities for wider participation.

I was wondering whether your university would consider opening the course a little further by working towards a course based solely on OER resources? If so this could potentially widen access for all students through initiatives like the OER university network.

Wow - -your post has been a catalyst for rich discussion on the degrees of openness. Thanks for that.

If anyone on the list is interested, we are running an open online workshop starting 20 June 2012 discussing these issues and registrations are open.  Feel free to spread the word - -more detail below.

Cheers
Wayne


Free online workshop: Open Content Licensing for Educators

Open content licensing for educators (OCL4Ed) is a free online workshop designed for educators and students who want to learn more about open educational resources, copyright, and Creative Commons licenses. OCL4Ed is an international community learning opportunity.  

2012 is a significant year for open education. We are celebrating 10 years since UNESCO adopted the term "Open Educational Resources" (OER). In joining the global celebrations, the OER Foundation will host a free OCL4Ed workshop.

  • When: 20 June - 3 July 2012
  • WhereOnline
  • Cost: Free
  • RegistrationOpen

Download our poster for OCL4Ed Workshop and share the gift of knowledge. Invite a friend to join #OCL4Ed. 


Hi Wayne,

 

I think it would be possible to use solely OER resources, and I’d be willing to give that a try for next time. The independent study aspect of OERu would involve a more substantial redesign of the course, but perhaps we could discuss this more at some point. I’ll hopefully get chance to join your session.

 

Thanks!   

 

Robert

 

Robert Squires

Director of Instructional Design and Technical Support

UMOnline

School of Extended & Lifelong Learning

The University of Montana, Missoula 59812

O: 406.243.6056

M: 406.240.3837

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Mackintosh
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 4:41 PM
To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

 

Hi Robert,

 

Thanks for the clarification and getting back to the list. Running courses in parallel-mode for  non-credit students is a powerful model for adding learning value for students enrolled for full credit while affording opportunities for wider participation.

 

I was wondering whether your university would consider opening the course a little further by working towards a course based solely on OER resources? If so this could potentially widen access for all students through initiatives like the OER university network.

 

Wow - -your post has been a catalyst for rich discussion on the degrees of openness. Thanks for that.

 

If anyone on the list is interested, we are running an open online workshop starting 20 June 2012 discussing these issues and registrations are open.  Feel free to spread the word - -more detail below.

 

Cheers

Wayne

 

 

Free online workshop: Open Content Licensing for Educators

Open content licensing for educators (OCL4Ed) is a free online workshop designed for educators and students who want to learn more about open educational resources, copyright, and Creative Commons licenses. OCL4Ed is an international community learning opportunity.  

2012 is a significant year for open education. We are celebrating 10 years since UNESCO adopted the term "Open Educational Resources" (OER). In joining the global celebrations, the OER Foundation will host a free OCL4Ed workshop.

· When: 20 June - 3 July 2012

· WhereOnline

· Cost: Free

· RegistrationOpen

Download our poster for OCL4Ed Workshop and share the gift of knowledge. Invite a friend to join #OCL4Ed. 

 

Best of luck! "Squires, Robert" wrote: Patrick, Thanks for that. No need to worry, I greatly appreciate the discussion. (Just meeting-meeting today). I also like Cable's definition and modified the language on the course portal to reflect the notion that it provides an opportunity for participants around the world to enroll and access content not in the public domain. (I wish it were). The language is important, and I'm not sure I've got it right yet: http://eac.instructionaldesigning.org/?q=node/1 If I had to characterize the course, I would say it is an attempt to incorporate diversity and insights that would otherwise not be possible and do so in a way that creates the best possible learning experience for the participants. In part, it's an attempt to address some of the weaknesses in terms of instructor-participant interaction noted in massive open online courses. It's about the primacy of the student and not the network (at the risk of starting another public discussion :-). We'll limit participation numbers, if necessary, so it remains feasible to support the course participants as best we can. We've also spend considerable effort to engineer the experience based on instructional design principles, not with the intention of enforcing the power relationships between instructor-student, but to provide a clear structure from which people can jump off-into further explorations. In part, it's also about navigating our IT, social media and copyright policies as well as the limitations with our university systems. Learning Times (Jonathan Finkelstein) have kindly offered to let us use a room for the sessions with Paul Gorski and Geneva Gay, and we cleared copyright concerns with our library earlier in the week. Social Media is optional only on our campus. Above all, it's a great learning experience, so thank you all for your contributions here. Robert Robert Squires Director of Instructional Design and Technical Support UMOnline School of Extended & Lifelong Learning The University of Montana, Missoula 59812 O: 406.243.6056 M: 406.240.3837 -----Original Message----- From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Masson, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:54 PM To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures All, Just so Robert does not think we are ganging up on him, I think it is important to note that Robert did not use the term OER and was quick to acknowledge this and the ambiguity: even asking for assistance. I like the OER definition offered by Cable below, and note that he included in the qualification of that definition, "when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources" (is there a typo there?). To me this signifies that the "open" in this case qualifies an object, i.e. the educational resource, e.g. a course, a text, a video, etc. I think we need to broaden our application of open to include the organizations/communities that create and manage these resources. For example, is the Creative Commons open? or OERu, or Conextions? or Jasig? or the Sakai Foundation? (tried to pick on everyone here). An organization or community may create artifacts that are open (the four "R's"), but what value (if any) can be derived from an organization that is itself open (allowing it to be enhanced through the contributions of it's members). As I referenced here (http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume46/O...), both uPortal and LifeRay are open source portals. However, the uPortal Steering Committee, "the governing body responsible for the strategic direction and operational oversight of the uPortal project," is composed of two members elected by the Jasig membership, two members selected by the uPortal developers, one member appointed by the Steering Committee, and two members representing the Jasig board. Liferay, is led by a private corporation of founding partners "driving innovation for the benefit of enterprises around the world." These two examples-representing a community versus a corporate approach-highlight what I believe to be a point of ambiguity and thus contention around the viability of open source: open-source governance and, fundamentally, openness itself. What is openness, and how have open communities organized themselves to deliver the quality of products required by higher education-whether that be open-source software or open educational resources? I would offer, as well, Instructure, Moodle and Sakai all allow folks to "revise, reuse, remix and redistribute" their software, however, the organizations that manage that code will influence development. This too, I believe, should be a decision criteria for assessment as institutions engage with open projects/initiatives, that is, the communities themselves. Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Cable Green [cable@CREATIVECOMMONS.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 2:45 PM To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Hi All: At the risk of wading into OER definitions .... ;) This is the OER Definition we use at Creative Commons: * Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others. What is important, in this definition, is that OER = both (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute. Other common OER definitions: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F The "Free Cultural Works" site may also be helpful: http://freedomdefined.org/Definition I recently wrote on this topic, with David Wiley, here and here. Agree we should be careful how we use the word "Open." * If something is no cost, but not openly licensed - we might call that "free" or "no cost access." Or if it is a course that has open enrollment - maybe call it "open enrollment." All of those things are great, but to Wayne's point, but they are not OER. * In my opinion, "Open" - when used in the education content - should be reserved for educational resources that both provide (a) no cost access and (b) legal permissions to revise, reuse, remix and redistribute vis-a-vis an open license. Does this resonate with anyone else? Cable Cable Green, PhD Director of Global Learning Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/education http://twitter.com/cgreen =====================
I do think standards are important, and perhaps the Jasig 2/3/98 page for Openness Maturity Model would be a great place for this to be taken up: https://wiki.jasig.org/display/2398/Openness+Maturity+Model. I'm wondering if an additional page that lists various "open" projects and has a visual scale (with colors) of how well they meet openness standards would be helpful. I think there needs to be something more accessible for folks who are not long time practitioners of open--so that the media (if no one else) has a standard to write by ;).

There are articles written by M.D.s for M.D.s, and then there are articles written by M.D.s to help the general public to understand. And, it's important that the "patients" do understand because they contribute back to the medical community by being able to more clearly articulate their problems and make better decisions with regards to their own health. It helps all around :)


Ellen


-----The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv <OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> wrote: -----
To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
From: "Masson, Patrick"
Sent by: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv
Date: 06/09/2012 12:40PM
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

I think this really exemplifies the ambiguity around "open" I am seeing now Please do not take this as an accusation of deception or "open-washing" as I think there are several benefits to increasing access to education (i.e open education, open universities, open enrollment, etc.) enabled through courses like this. My only point is I am seeing more and more examples where ambiguity leads to confusion with the term open. Obviously Wayne (and I) assumed "open" to include a licensing model of the content that enabled access, remixing, reuse, redistribution, etc.

I know folks cringe when they hear talk of standards, but without some guidelines many will have false expectations (leading to disillusionment and reduced adoption) while others, who may not realize the full range of opportunities of openness, settle for a narrower set of benefits, and finally, we may see actual deception capitalizing on the trendiness of open (think green, organic, cloud, lite, etc.). With more and more grant dollars, state legislations, government policies, campuses, etc. rewarding, indeed mandating, "open," there is an increasing benefit for organizations and initiatives to orient themselves toward open and tout their openness. I would offer Jasig's 2-3-98 project's as a forum to develop such a standard definition and assessment tools to measure the type and maturity of openness of a project, initiative, organization.

I would be interested in other references folks may know.

Thanks,
Patrick



|| |||| |||     ||  | | || |||  || |||  ||  | | |||  || |||  ||
Patrick Masson
Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline
The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President
333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545

(774) 455-7615: Office
(774) 455-7620: Fax
(970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice
UMOLPatMasson: AIM
massonpj: Skype

Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net
Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com
________________________________________
From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Squires, Robert [Robert.Squires@MSO.UMT.EDU]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 9:52 AM
To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

Wayne,

Good questions. It's really not an OER course. It's a typical university course open to non-credit participants (guests). Access to the course materials depends on enrolling at the site and receiving an id and password to enter a proprietary version of Moodle. I added the language on licensing to try to make it clear that some of the content (i.e. articles) should not be reused/uploaded elsewhere. Perhaps there's a better way to get at this. Perhaps its redundant. What are your thoughts? The embedded videos are from me or Vance Stevens and both of us generally have a preference for openness. I'll look into that.

Thanks,

Robert
________________________________
From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] on behalf of Wayne Mackintosh [mackintosh.wayne@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:43 AM
To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures

Hi Robert,

Looks like an very interesting course.

Visiting your course homepage<UrlBlockedError.aspx> I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct?

Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing.  The signup form ccontains the following text

 "I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement.

One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option.

Is this an OER course?

Wayne



Wayne, You've listed some great areas to include in the "scope" of openness--Governance/Management/Policy/Business--and thanks to Ellen for pointing to 2-3-98's efforts with an Open Maturity Model. So trying to put the discussion into development, what would be your definition for these? That is, what activities take place in governance, management, etc. that need to be open? I am thinking, for example, with "governance" specific activities include: - Granting authority (approving decisions/budgets) - Defining direction (development, brand) - Requesting information, etc. And, management might include: - overseeing processes - enforcing policy - meeting production expectations - quality assurance, etc. I ask because I would be interested in mapping assessment criteria for each of these. My own work has yielded a few qualities that I believe should be present in order for openness to be present. For example, communication is required for transparency; transparency is required for self-organization; self-organization is required for collaboration; collaboration is required for evidence-based decision making; and evidence is required for a meritocracy. I would like to try and use these as criteria to measure the openness of the areas you included. In addition, it would be great to see if there are artifacts generated through open activities that contribute to the evidence of authentic practice. Looking at WikiEducator, (using my approach--which definitely could be improved), the governance is communicated (through the wiki); transparent (you see discussions and decisions through the minutes, also in the wiki); self organizing (can anyone participate in any initiative/capacity?); collaboration (is there evidence of folks working together?); evidence-based (are there references to organizational activity); and thus open? I have not looked at wikiEducator and I am in now way making any comment on the openness of WikiEducator, I am just using this as an example to highlight one potential process for assessing openness to get your thoughts because it sounds like you have worked hard to ensure openness. I would like to develop this further and would love to talk to you about how I (we) could use OERu and/or WikiEducator as a reference model for creating/strengthening an Openness Maturity Model. Would you be interested/ Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ellen Marie Murphy [Ellen.Murphy@ESC.EDU] Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:01 AM To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures I do think standards are important, and perhaps the Jasig 2/3/98 page for Openness Maturity Model would be a great place for this to be taken up: https://wiki.jasig.org/display/2398/Openness+Maturity+Model. I'm wondering if an additional page that lists various "open" projects and has a visual scale (with colors) of how well they meet openness standards would be helpful. I think there needs to be something more accessible for folks who are not long time practitioners of open--so that the media (if no one else) has a standard to write by ;). There are articles written by M.D.s for M.D.s, and then there are articles written by M.D.s to help the general public to understand. And, it's important that the "patients" do understand because they contribute back to the medical community by being able to more clearly articulate their problems and make better decisions with regards to their own health. It helps all around :) Ellen -----The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv wrote: ----- To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU From: "Masson, Patrick" Sent by: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv Date: 06/09/2012 12:40PM Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures I think this really exemplifies the ambiguity around "open" I am seeing now Please do not take this as an accusation of deception or "open-washing" as I think there are several benefits to increasing access to education (i.e open education, open universities, open enrollment, etc.) enabled through courses like this. My only point is I am seeing more and more examples where ambiguity leads to confusion with the term open. Obviously Wayne (and I) assumed "open" to include a licensing model of the content that enabled access, remixing, reuse, redistribution, etc. I know folks cringe when they hear talk of standards, but without some guidelines many will have false expectations (leading to disillusionment and reduced adoption) while others, who may not realize the full range of opportunities of openness, settle for a narrower set of benefits, and finally, we may see actual deception capitalizing on the trendiness of open (think green, organic, cloud, lite, etc.). With more and more grant dollars, state legislations, government policies, campuses, etc. rewarding, indeed mandating, "open," there is an increasing benefit for organizations and initiatives to orient themselves toward open and tout their openness. I would offer Jasig's 2-3-98 project's as a forum to develop such a standard definition and assessment tools to measure the type and maturity of openness of a project, initiative, organization. I would be interested in other references folks may know. Thanks, Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Squires, Robert [Robert.Squires@MSO.UMT.EDU] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 9:52 AM To: OPENNESS@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Wayne, Good questions. It's really not an OER course. It's a typical university course open to non-credit participants (guests). Access to the course materials depends on enrolling at the site and receiving an id and password to enter a proprietary version of Moodle. I added the language on licensing to try to make it clear that some of the content (i.e. articles) should not be reused/uploaded elsewhere. Perhaps there's a better way to get at this. Perhaps its redundant. What are your thoughts? The embedded videos are from me or Vance Stevens and both of us generally have a preference for openness. I'll look into that. Thanks, Robert ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE OPENNESS Constituent Group Listserv [OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu] on behalf of Wayne Mackintosh [mackintosh.wayne@GMAIL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:43 AM To: OPENNESS@listserv.educause.edu Subject: Re: [OPENNESS] Education Across Cultures Hi Robert, Looks like an very interesting course. Visiting your course homepage I don't see an obvious open license - so I assume the site contents are all rights reserved. Is that correct? Moreover, the copyright statement provided in the online registration form is not clear on open licensing. The signup form ccontains the following text "I understand that content accessed in this course is only to be used in the context of this course and not to be copied or made available on the web unless explicitly noted or identified in the copyright license." The licensing terms are not clear from this statement. One of the embedded videos uses the standard Youtube license instead of the open CC-BY option. Is this an OER course? Wayne
Message from mackintosh.wayne@gmail.com

Hi Patrick,

This is a fascinating and very productive dimension of open practice. I have a very keen interest in your work on open governance.  Apology for the wordy post - -but these are complex issues. 

First an apology to the list for my repeated references to WikiEducator, the OER Foundation and the OERu initiative.  These are projects I know intimately and suggest that readers extrapolate the principles and lessons we have learned for reuse in other contexts. (All our artifacts are licensed under free cultural works approved licenses -- so we are not precious about them being reused or even packaged and sold ;-))  

That said, Patrick you are most welcome to use these projects as reference models as we are bound to learn from the process and reflections.

I like the capability maturity model approach for two reasons:

  1. Getting back to Ken's point, I think that there can be separation of the "openness" among the artifacts, processes and the organisations which implement them. Some organisations will be more closed than others, but the impact on the open ecosystem and the network effect will result in greater openness at the systemic level (economy, society etc.).   In the case of the OER Foundation -- we are radically transparent as derived from the values of the organisation. (See for example the corporate governance section of our 2011 Annual Report  which interestingly  is still "draft" as we are awaiting the text for the forward -- but is openly accessible. Our reports are published under open licenses.) 
  2. There are perfectly legitimate reasons to be closed, for example, where ethics or privacy legislation would require closed information and processes. 
A capability model, or perhaps visual mapping of openness is a better approach than benchmarking, because it recognizes context. 

I think the "definition" or interpretation of governance" is critical (and not unique to open governance). The major challenge in good governance is the separation of governance from operational management. All too frequently, I see the effectiveness of governance curtailed when Boards interfere with operations management. So what's interesting is when organisations implement transparent processes, this mitigates against governance interfering with operations management because every Board member will have the freedom to engage in operations planing etc, because it is conducted openly and transparently. Moreover, if a Board member in an open organisation where Board Meetings are conducted transparently in a wiki, the community will see this.  Open governance processes also facilitate greater opportunities for self-organisation in open delegation of governance activities. So for example, WikiEducator has a Community Workgroup Policy  which enables any community member to institute community wide policy development without the need for a Board to appoint designated groups. The role of the Governance Board in this example is to steward good governance in accordance with community values. When a Community Workgroup presents a policy at the Board - -the Board's role is to see the due process was followed rather than interfering with the content of the policy. 

On the policy side -- openness facilitates reuse. For example, our WikiEducator Open Governance Policy is a derivative work of the Wikimedia Foundation governance policy, but adapted and modified for the formal education sector through a transparent consultation process. We learned from the Wikimedia Foundation experience and refined our approaches to fill identified gaps and implemented structures which are more appropriate for a more conservative formal education sector (72% of the +30,000 WikiEducators are teachers, lecturers or trainers working in the formal sector).  

I think open process also facilitates a healthy dose of common sense - in that everyone can see what is being done. At the operational level our community and flagship projects work on the principles associated with "rough consensus and operational code".  So for example, in the case of the OERu, when taking learning design decisions, we would initiate a rough consensus poll and accept votes from both OERu partners and the open community. (You will appreciate that pedagogical design across international and organisational boundaries can be a contentious topic, especially among educators ;-))  Rough consensus polls do not usually attract high numbers of votes - - in this example about 35 people -- however, the page recorded +800 page views which suggests people do take an interest and our experience is that folk will speak up when they don't agree. 

In our model, we have separated fiscal governance and management from the governance of the individual flagship initiatives. Open wiki communities are not very good at managing money and typically do not have the legal authorities and responsibilities to do this. So the OER Foundation takes care of the legal and money side of the equation. We are a formerly registered with the New Zealand Charities commission and carry responsibility for fiscal and legal issues, eg Audited financial statements, taxation requirements, annual reporting etc. The majority of our funding is generated through institutional memberships so there needs to be robust management of the finances.  

I agree (almost ;-) ) with your summation:  "Communication is required for transparency; transparency is required for self-organization; self-organization is required for collaboration; collaboration is required for evidence-based decision making; and evidence is required for a meritocracy."  I think transparency is required for effective communication in the model -- in other words in open governance, transparency is more important than the communication. 

Hope that's useful and adds a little value.

Cheers
Wayne

Close
Close


Annual Conference
September 29–October 2
Register Now!

Events for all Levels and Interests

Whether you're looking for a conference to attend face-to-face to connect with peers, or for an online event for team professional development, see what's upcoming.

Close

Digital Badges
Member recognition effort
Earn yours >

Career Center


Leadership and Management Programs

EDUCAUSE Institute
Project Management

 

 

Jump Start Your Career Growth

Explore EDUCAUSE professional development opportunities that match your career aspirations and desired level of time investment through our interactive online guide.

 

Close
EDUCAUSE organizes its efforts around three IT Focus Areas

 

 

Join These Programs If Your Focus Is

Close

Get on the Higher Ed IT Map

Employees of EDUCAUSE member institutions and organizations are invited to create individual profiles.
 

 

Close

2014 Strategic Priorities

  • Building the Profession
  • IT as a Game Changer
  • Foundations


Learn More >

Uncommon Thinking for the Common Good™

EDUCAUSE is the foremost community of higher education IT leaders and professionals.