On 12/20/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote: [snip]
I think that the key thing that would distinguish Wikiversity from the other projects is that it is about process while the others are about product.
In considering your suggested three foci I thinkl that as long as we can't get past the first one Wikiversity is just as well in Wikibooks. The third is very far ahead of where we are. It would be absolutely forbidden in Wikipedia under the No Original Research rule. Making that a part of Wikiversity before Wikiversity is ready for it could be an invitation to all kinds of nutcase research that defies peer review. Peer reviewers would need to be in place before original research could take place.
Well, I think peer review would grow out of having research hosted on Wikiversity. But until the research is peer reviewed, it shouldn't be considered an appropriate source for Wikipedia/books. I personally think the Wikimedia community is hampered by not having recourse to publishing research somewhere within Wikimedia (even though we all do - in Wikibooks!)
Your second focus is key to Wikiversity.but I would leave it simply at "growing learning communities" without reference to specific tasks. Getting tangled up in specific tasks and courses leaves too much room for Wikiversity to repeat the educational model established by traditional universities. The top down development of a course by a "teacher" imposes a range of requirements on what's being done. It does nothing about revolutionizing the entire learning process. "Courses" are about the teacher rather than the learner.
I agree that top-down course development shouldn't be where we're going, but I just meant that learning communities generally have to have some sort of goal (ie writing a good article, exploring the pros and cons of advertising, etc.) - that's all.
The name "Wikiversity" is just fine *because* it is about all learners at all levels and all ages. That's what universality is all about. It's about life-long learning from kindergarten to post-graduate. It's about those who know a little bit more helping (not teaching) those who know a little bit less. I think that it's very encouraging that kids can go into seniors' homes to teach about computers. A book that I recently acquired "What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy" by James Paul Gee. He analyzes video game playing in terms of 36 "Learning principles". The first of these is the "Active, Critical Learning Principle" - "All aspects of the learning environment (including the ways in which the semiotic domain is designed and presented) are set up to encourage active and critical, not passive, learning."
Absolutely - the wiki-format is entirely geared towards active, critical learning. Learning by doing - experiential learning. That's the kind of learning that I'm personally talking about when I talk about wikiversity - not the acquisition and repetition of facts.
Perhaps the first "course" to be offered in the Wikiversity should be about learning, and how it happens. If it is to have any such thing as a core curriculum maybe that should be on it.
Sounds good (I had already thought of this). Would you be willing to help out? (I am..)
Cormac
Ec
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l