on 10/22/06 9:16 PM, Michael R. Irwin at michael_irwin(a)verizon.net wrote:
> Hi Morley
> Your text outline looks pretty good to me. I suggest being bold
> and placing at the proper location. Be ready for significant editing as you
>
touch on many political issues.
>
> For example: The original proposal was on
> hold for about a year prior to Wikimedia Foundation Board approval because
> they did not like the term course or any use of the word which might suggest
> to someone an accredited learning process.
I've already participated in considerable discussion on this theme. Which is
precisely why I prepared my opening statement the way I did.
Actually I personally agree with the decision to stand aside from
accreditation, certainly at this very early stage and possibly forever. But
the controversy was so stormy some appear to have come to the belief it can
only be resolved by offering no teaching. That position I totally disagree
with.
Your newcomer page is actually a marketing statement. Its purpose is to
arouse confidence the site is worth pursuing, not by good feeling statements
but by offering solutions to the visitor's needs, reasons for visiting the
site in the first place.
It should do this right off the top. If the first sentence doesn't satisfy
or feels muddled the reader won't proceed to the next. And so forth. It's
all about setting a positive, productive agenda for the visitor and making a
clear, positive first impression.
I went to the page today to continue fleshing out the following material.
Instead I find myself engaged in a muddle-headed turf war.
If mine is "pretty good", then it should last more than just two days. Mine
was also pre-published for community comment. If my contributions are
welcome, I shouldn't have to fight tooth and nail, constantly fighting off
this fear of accreditation issues.
> Obviously similar objections
> apply to "teacher" or "student" with no way to review or assign credibility
> or credentials to potential "instructors".
With respect, this is silly. Accredited universities do not have a lock, a
patent on the terms "teacher", "student", "instructor" or "course". Lots of
institutions of learning which do not give or require accreditation use
these terms every day, world wide. There's no good reason for the
Wikiversity to avoid commonplace terminology.
By stating up front this is NOT an accredited learning situation that whole
issue really ought to be put aside and simply get on with it. To ban courses
or to try to invent some other word, to ban teachers or try to invent some
other word, you're making the institution look foolish.
A Wikiversity with teaching materials but no support for online teaching
would be a major piece of foolishness. And to obsess over this issue is
simply alienating.
If the Wikiversity gets involved in online learning in any way you will
always have people in positions of leadership, whatever their title. There
will always be something analogous to a "course" even if you ban that word.
Such foolishness. You're doing damage to the very institution you're trying
to birth.
> Many of the issues you address
> below are at the root of major policy discussions that in my view will need
> to be repeated periodically for newcomers as they flock to Wikiversity before
> and after it achieves critical mass.
I agree. The structure, purposes and organization should be regularly
reviewed. But avoidance of supporting online learning because of this
accreditation nonsense is unthinkable. Get past this issue.
> I congratulate you on the initiative
> shown attempting to coordinate and document these types of discussions for
> the benefit of current and future users.
This newcomers project needs practical support, well beyond good wishes. Get
on with the positive, what you're going to do, rather than obsess on what
you're not doing. Unfortunately yanking back and forth on this accreditation
issue has been going on for quite some time.
I believe something like the Wikiversity would be of great benefit, but
until it develops a process of integrating its volunteers it's not going to
achieve its potential.
Kind regards,
Morley Chalmers
--
Do not worry if you have built your castles in the air. They are where they
should be. Now put the foundations under them. -- Henry David Thoreau
On 10/27/06, Michael R. Irwin <michael_irwin(a)verizon.net> wrote:
> Cormac Lawler wrote:
>
> >
> >In my talks with the KDE developer people (who want to transfer and
> >develop their entire set of training materials in/to Wikiversity),
> >they suggested they might want to have some way of having a
> >differential level of login for people who were learning and others
> >who are helping others learn. However, I don't personally regard this
> >as "inevitable" - I think we need to discuss this to see if it is
> >desirable for what we're building.
> >
> >
> >
> I think it might be useful as long it is strictly under the control of
> the person logging in. Hopefully this capability can be delivered by
> adequate labeling of click trails so one can get where one wants/needs
> to be by following the labeled links.
>
> regards,
> mirwin
That's a very useful comment, Michael. In fact, this is pretty much
what the KDE people want - to outline "paths" that the learner would
take to carry out specific tasks. They've painted it as a "structure
on top of a web" - the "web" being the whole network of pages on
relevant subjects (from core subjects to more peripheral ones), and
the "structure" being a network of paths that people could take to
learn various skills, whether it's supplemental course on basic skills
in C++ combined with advanced PhP, or a clearly outlined path of "this
is what you need to be able to do to become a KDE developer from
scratch", or whatever.
There are two issues here - how to technically code this course
structure capability - and whether or not it is desirable to have
people labelled "teachers" and/or "learners".
Cormac
Please unsubscribe my email address fromyour files
richard.oldfort(a)btinternet.com
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.0.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.16/504 - Release Date: 27-Oct-2006
This is **most** discouraging. Certainly not a skilful way to bring new
volunteers into the fold.
Over the past several weeks I've been attempting to engage an improvement to
how the Wikiversity introduces itself to new users. As a new user myself I
was particularly struck by the lack of clarity to statements of purpose.
Indeed I encountered outright controversy, very muddy waters indeed.
In that light I attempted to engage discussion towards a redefinition of how
the Wikiversity describes itself to new comers. I proposed a change in copy
from the present "all over the map" vague introduction to one that makes
explicit what the Wikiversity includes and what it does not.
This discussion has been posted to the Wikiversity mailing list at
<wikiversity-l(a)wikimedia.org> and on the Colloquium. With some supportive
and no negatives, I then proceeded to add the new copy to
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Welcome%2C_n
Two days later I find my proposed new copy has been removed, replaced by the
original.
I am **not** an old hand at Wikimedia, which is exactly the point. I'm as
good a guinea pig for assembling a functional newcomer section as you are
likely to find, at least in the short term.
I've attempted to be a responsible participant in a co-operative
collaborative enterprise. Yanking my edit after prior consultation is not
encouragement to collaborative participation.
What's going on? What do I not get?
Morley Chalmers
--
Do not worry if you have built your castles in the air. They are where they
should be. Now put the foundations under them. -- Henry David Thoreau
I'm currently working on improving the new visitor's introduction to the
Wikiversity what it's all about, how to get involved, that sort of thing.
I'm proposing the following text on
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Welcome%2C_newcomers
===
The Wikiversity is for learning, where you'll find a learning materials
ready for downloading and courses ready to take. Anyone can participate, no
cost, no advertising, no credentials required, no degrees awarded just
learning.
Anyone can upload new teaching materials or revise the ones already here.
The Wikiversity is following the traditions of the Wikipedia.
Anyone can take a course. Anyone can teach a course. No entrance
requirements. No fees. No certificate at the end. In the context of the
Wikiversity, a course is an undertaking of a student to follow through a set
of materials under the guidance of someone willing to teach.
===
Here are my current thoughts of what would fill out the balance of the page.
What am I leaving out that should be here? Would appreciate your thoughts.
Learning materials:
What types of learning materials will be found here.
Licensing of content. How it's protected, how freely it can be used.
Fairly mature example links to explore, to give the new user a feeling for
what to expect.
How to download and use this material.
How to give back by editing, adding.
Whether and how to fork to take a set of materials in a radically different
direction.
How these materials are currently being protected from vandalism.
How to determine the provenance of these learning materials.
Online courses:
An overview of how some current Wikiversity online courses are being
conducted, with example links.
Discussion of how the examples cited are structured. Discussion of our
openness to other directions than these particular examples.
Discussion of the policy of openness (no credentials, no degrees) and the
benefits of having this policy.
Languages currently supported.
How to navigate the Wikiversity.
How to edit what you see.
Long range goals of the Wikiversity.
The history of the Wikiversity, how it came to be, its association with
Wikipedia, Wikibooks, etc.
Before I start editing the current newcomer page I'd appreciate getting
feedback on the above.
I would particularly appreciate specific examples of good learning materials
and ongoing courses to cite.
Kind regards,
Morley Chalmers
--
Do not worry if you have built your castles in the air. They are where they
should be. Now put the foundations under them. -- Henry David Thoreau
In Spanish Wikiversity we don't have bureacrat to make
administrators. Could someone activate the
administratorship for the user:Axxgreazz.
http://es.wikiversity.org/wiki/Usuario:Axxgreazz
It would be temporally, like my case, till the
community has time to choose my voting more ones.
Axxgreazz is a trustworthy user and administrator of
Spanish Wikipedia.
Thank you very much,
Usuario:Javier Carro
___________________________________________________________________________
Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions !
Demandez à ceux qui savent sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses
http://fr.answers.yahoo.com
Hello,
I just want to inform you that I already have
requested in bugzilla the setting up of the Spanish
Wikiversity. You can see the request in
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7512
It is the first bug I request, so it may have some
mistakes.
Javier Carro
___________________________________________________________________________
Découvrez un nouveau moyen de poser toutes vos questions quel que soit le sujet !
Yahoo! Questions/Réponses pour partager vos connaissances, vos opinions et vos expériences.
http://fr.answers.yahoo.com
thanks every body for your information about the spanish edition of wikipedia. i think
that is a real posibility for my languajes. I apologize because i can´t understand a lot
of your information because of my bad english. thanks anyway. nieves
-------------------------------------------------
Este mensaje fue enviado usando el servicio de correo en web de Infomed
http://webmail.sld.cu
hello. I´m a spanish speach girl. I´d like to comunicate with other person which know about the restauration or another issue.
I promese to answer with my bad english
see you