I think with many of the Wikiversitys there is still the challenge to find what is it for. I would propose that Wikiversity could focus on:
(1) collaborative learning in online courses in the P2PU style (http://p2pu.org/ ), just being more community-driven and open, and
(2) building interactive self-study courses (computer-based training)
It would probably be possible to start a School of the Wiki Way or something similar *within* P2PU. There is already a School of Webcraft, and now a School of Social Innovation, and School of the Mathematical Future (the latter one I helped start).
At the moment, I don't see a particular reason for Wikiversity to rebuild P2PU infrastructure from scratch, when it could instead be reused to do something cool more quickly and then tweaked with considerable future promise. I know several P2PU courses are using Wikiversity as a place to host some of their content, and perhaps good things would come from a suitable bidirectional channel :)
As for the computer-based training idea: not likely to go from 0 to 8000BPS overnight. Does Wikiversity have a roadmap? If CBT was in the roadmap, it might actually happen ;). Note, in my Ph. D. project I'm working on something related, for mathematics, in the PlanetMath setting.
One thing both P2PU and PlanetMath have in common is that they are not wikis, at least not in the traditional sense, though both have wiki aspects. I've often asked myself what PlanetMath's role is in the "wiki world" of wikimedia. Wikiversity could also ask what its role is in the broader and often non-wiki, or not exclusively wiki, world of online educational communities.
On 22.1.2011, at 17.52, Joe Corneli wrote:
At the moment, I don't see a particular reason for Wikiversity to rebuild P2PU infrastructure from scratch, when it could instead be reused to do something cool more quickly and then tweaked with considerable future promise.
I do not see the "infrastructure" to be here a great challenge. Especially with the liquid threads extension (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:LiquidThreads ) the infrastructure is already in there.
I know several P2PU courses are using Wikiversity as a place to host some of their content, and perhaps good things would come from a suitable bidirectional channel :)
Collaborating with the P2PU and all the other open education projects is extremely important. When the movement is growing (as I hope) different approaches with a similar kind of objectives will benefit all.
As for the computer-based training idea: not likely to go from 0 to 8000BPS overnight. Does Wikiversity have a roadmap? If CBT was in the roadmap, it might actually happen ;).
I agree. I am actually proposing this for the community. If it (we) will find it as a good idea writing a road map is a good idea. The emphasis on CBT and self-study (with some software intelligence) would make the role of Wikiversity and Wikibooks more clear — an issue discussed since the day one.
One thing both P2PU and PlanetMath have in common is that they are not wikis, at least not in the traditional sense, though both have wiki aspects. I've often asked myself what PlanetMath's role is in the "wiki world" of wikimedia. Wikiversity could also ask what its role is in the broader and often non-wiki, or not exclusively wiki, world of online educational communities.
If we agree, as we probably should, the definition of a wiki by Wikipedia(* at least P2PU is not a wiki. The P2PU is great, but it definitely much closer community than the Wikiversity.
Wikiversity community should definitely think what is its role in the world of online educational communities and services. Learning from each other without Not Invented Here -syndrome would be great, too. If Wikieducator, P2PU, PlanetMath or LeMill (http://lemill.net/) does something better, the Wikiversity community should do the same. This is what P2PU is also doing. Actually many of their practices were invited in Wikiversity (and some other sites) and they just took them and made them better. That is good!
Best regards,
- Teemu
*)A wiki is a website that allows the creation and editing of any number of interlinked web pages via a web browser using a simplified markup language or a WYSIWYG text editor
----------------------------------------------- Teemu Leinonen http://www.uiah.fi/~tleinone/ +358 50 351 6796 Media Lab http://mlab.uiah.fi Aalto University School of Art and Design -----------------------------------------------
Well, CBT is exactly what Wikiversity needs. Not to be just repository of text based educational resources which seem to overlap with other WMF projects. But who will write them?
BTW, Wikiversity is already P2p, isnt it?
Juan
2011/1/22 Teemu Leinonen teemu.leinonen@aalto.fi
On 22.1.2011, at 17.52, Joe Corneli wrote:
At the moment, I don't see a particular reason for Wikiversity to rebuild P2PU infrastructure from scratch, when it could instead be reused to do something cool more quickly and then tweaked with considerable future promise.
I do not see the "infrastructure" to be here a great challenge. Especially with the liquid threads extension ( http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:LiquidThreads ) the infrastructure is already in there.
I know several P2PU courses are using Wikiversity as a place to host some of their content, and perhaps good things would come from a suitable bidirectional channel :)
Collaborating with the P2PU and all the other open education projects is extremely important. When the movement is growing (as I hope) different approaches with a similar kind of objectives will benefit all.
As for the computer-based training idea: not likely to go from 0 to 8000BPS overnight. Does Wikiversity have a roadmap? If CBT was in the roadmap, it might actually happen ;).
I agree. I am actually proposing this for the community. If it (we) will find it as a good idea writing a road map is a good idea. The emphasis on CBT and self-study (with some software intelligence) would make the role of Wikiversity and Wikibooks more clear — an issue discussed since the day one.
One thing both P2PU and PlanetMath have in common is that they are not wikis, at least not in the traditional sense, though both have wiki aspects. I've often asked myself what PlanetMath's role is in the "wiki world" of wikimedia. Wikiversity could also ask what its role is in the broader and often non-wiki, or not exclusively wiki, world of online educational communities.
If we agree, as we probably should, the definition of a wiki by Wikipedia(* at least P2PU is not a wiki. The P2PU is great, but it definitely much closer community than the Wikiversity.
Wikiversity community should definitely think what is its role in the world of online educational communities and services. Learning from each other without Not Invented Here -syndrome would be great, too. If Wikieducator, P2PU, PlanetMath or LeMill (http://lemill.net/) does something better, the Wikiversity community should do the same. This is what P2PU is also doing. Actually many of their practices were invited in Wikiversity (and some other sites) and they just took them and made them better. That is good!
Best regards,
- Teemu*)A wiki is a website that allows the creation and editing of any number of interlinked web pages via a web browser using a simplified markup language or a WYSIWYG text editor
Teemu Leinonen http://www.uiah.fi/~tleinone/ http://www.uiah.fi/%7Etleinone/ +358 50 351 6796 Media Lab http://mlab.uiah.fi Aalto University School of Art and Design
Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l
I do not see the "infrastructure" to be here a great challenge.
To some extent I also meant to imply social infrastructure. The site itself mainly acts as a tool to keep track of who is signed up for what, plus fairly typical forum software (similar to liquid threads or any other forum implementation): not so unique. I'm certainly not suggesting that P2PU has the most amazing platform or anything like that (in fact, they are currently in the process of rebuilding it). I'm just saying that it seems like a place to possibly simplify by reusing/combining.
(Just today I learned about a course that will be running on Wikiversity, and I signed myself up for that, for purposes of comparison - and out of interest in the subject matter of course!)
Collaborating with the P2PU and all the other open education projects is extremely important. When the movement is growing (as I hope) different approaches with a similar kind of objectives will benefit all.
I quite agree. One shortfall that I can see in the broader community is that there isn't any particularly well established practices for cross-site or "meta" collaboration. Is there good potential for many of these sites/organizations to work together in a "coalition" of sorts? Admittedly there are many very different approaches, as you say, that should come with the possibility for mutual benefits from collaboration.
Learning from each other without Not Invented Here -syndrome would be great, too. If Wikieducator, P2PU, PlanetMath or LeMill (http://lemill.net/) does something better, the Wikiversity community should do the same.
Definitely important, and I think the particular syndrome you mentioned really should be stamped out if possible!
I'll also add that there may be times when it is a better strategy to do some "division of labour" than to clone features found elsewhere. It's just a tiny wording difference from what you wrote, but it could be the difference between e.g. reimplementing the P2PU systems, or using them. Maybe both approaches should be pursued - certainly both should be considered.
wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org