Open doesn’t mean democracy, it mostly means for business. This is the genius of the Internet evolution, is that it gets us all working in the service of opening things up for the “community”. Democratizing everything. Then once everything is on the table, companies grab what they want, and show very little interest in giving anything back to the movement. I know I have fallen for several waves of this ver the last decade.
Tag: Open
Greg McVerryDear educators using @wix please stop and read the Terms of Service. Did you know you can not export and use your data anywhere else but wix? This isn’t how the web should work. Plenty of easy UI that still rely on a commitment to portability
Repository for The Open Organization Guide for Educators source code – open-organization-ambassadors/open-org-educators-guide
via Laura Hilliger
To support open educational practices, we must understand the meaning of open pedagogy and articulate the values that shape it.
I’ve done a number of introduction to OER conversations over the last few years. I did another recently. Here is my revised attempt at getting at a very broad overview and maybe going a bit farther afield than is typically the case. This particular presentation emphasized OER as addition and that you could use all sorts of pieces as augmentation rather than replacement.
I liked Obama’s speech. He talks about voting the way I talk about the open web.
On the open web, we implicitly consent to more than I think we mean to.
Maha Bali reflects on her open education story. This involves responding to three questions:
- What does the open web mean to you?
- Why should we care about the open web?
- Who are you?
She talks about the challenges of doing a PhD remotely, participation in MOOCs such as Rhizo14 and the creation of Virtually Connecting. She also shares some of the limits to open education, especially in regards to those who are vulnerable.
I’m supporting Thought Shrapnel on Patreon and I have to say, I’m inspired by Doug’s use of the platform. I updated my own Patreon page a bit and have started sharing things just for patrons.
I find this move to Patreon interesting. I have unpacked it elsewhere. I am wondering about the impact that this has on the open web? Am I allowed to share something that is for a privileged audience?
Five years. Between 1994 and 1999, there was a brief period when the web was truly open. There was no one who could veto you. No one who, if they took offense to what you said or did, could knock you off the net. There were people who tried. That made it dramatic. But there was blue sky everywhere. Now the web is divided into silos controlled by big companies. A little bit of light shows through between the cracks. I keep hoping that one crack will open into a new world that’s open where we can play where we have users to serve, and competitors to compete with. I go from slightly optimistic to get-a-clue-Dave-it-ain’t-happening.
Winer remembers when the web was without silos who could control what we see or do. He wonders about finding cracks in today’s web to support such expression and experience once again. This reminds me of Chris Aldrich’s desire for a better web:
I’m not looking for just a “hipster-web”, but a new and demonstrably better web.
I wonder what part something like Micro.blogs could play with all this.
Open as in Apertures
Alan Levine reflects on the recent discussions of open at OER17 and by Jim Groom. In response he adds a metaphor of his own, aperture, to represent the nuances associated with open and online identity.
Maybe we ought to think about openness as an aperture that is not just fixed at one size, but continually adjusts, as Kate suggests, with appreciation opportunities and risks. There is no single “open” setting applied to pedagogy or people. It’s variable and shifting all the time, like the student in the video suggests, based on context.Source