The 5 principles of ‘open’ and 11 case studies of how governments, industry and education are using them
Before our Friday online teaching class I tweeted out a request for suggestions for the ONE THING that people would send someone if they were moving online for the first time.
If you were going to send someone ONE document/video about teaching online, what would it be? Looking for ‘further reading’ …
Many people have told me that they feel the dynamic kick in with even a tiny handful of viewers. I’d argue that the cognitive shift in going from an audience of zero (talking to yourself) to an audience of 10 (a few friends or random strangers checking out your online post) is so big that it’s actually huger than going from 10 people to a million.
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.
Dear 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
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.
- 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.
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.
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.
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