[Foundation-l] Re: Wikiversity

[Erik Moeller]

Anthere:

> Example : I do not understand well why we should be confusing education 
> and research. While these two are often done by the same people (my 
> husband for example is both a researcher and a teacher), these two 
> fields not only are different but SHOULD be different.
> 
> I actually think it is a mistake that these two are done so much by the 
> same people, because it results in researchers focusing a lot on ... 
> research... or academic stuff while teaching. This result is teaching 
> most students things they will never use in everyday life. It might 
> expand their horizon, but teaching is not only about learning how 
> nuclear desintegration occur, but also a lot about practical things such 
> wiring a building, making a metal piece or how much fertilizer should be 
> applied on a field. As long as we confuse teaching and researching, we 
> will get students taught to be researchers, instead of being taught a 
> JOB. I wish that we do not fall in this trap ourselves.

This is a fair point, but I see no reason why the two should be 
confused, even if they happen within the same framework. As in real 
life, Wikilearners should be given the opportunity to choose a career 
path, whether it's theoretical or practical knowledge. I want to give 
people a choice: Whether a 15-year-old wikilearner participates in 
research on quantum computing or decides to pursue a career as a 
carpenter should be up to them, and a framework which allows both has an 
amazing potential. I don't think we need to set priorities for people, 
they will do so themselves based on their living conditions, needs and 
interests.

> I am not certain I see very well how it places itself with wikibooks 
> either....

Good question. I believe that Wikibooks will be one of many resources 
utilized by Wikisophia.

> I am not sure it is a good idea at all. For all I can see, setting up 
> wikinews with rather little defined guidelines was possibly not such a 
> good idea.

Little defined? Excuse me? Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikisource and 
Wikibooks were set up basically ad hoc by a developer when they felt 
like there was enough interest. Wikimedia Commons was the first project 
with a proper project plan, and Wikinews was the only project ever 
launched by Wikimedia which went through fully developed discussion, 
definition and decision-making phases.

There was a mailing list proposal, a refinement process you participated 
in, an FAQ, a mission statement, a policy thinktank page, a long 
discussion, and a demo site, before the project was finally set up. If 
this is "little defined", what is Wikispecies? If this is little 
defined, then why did you complain at the time that the project was 
defined *too much* in advance, and that guidelines should be removed 
from the proposal?

I think Wikinews is the model Wikisophia should follow, with perhaps 
more time given to the technical needs evaluation.

> Last, I rejoin notafish question : why the hurry ?

You are confusing a goal-oriented approach with hurry. There is no 
hurry. There is, however, a grants proposal to the World Bank in the 
works, and before we start seriously working on that, I'd like some 
basics to be settled.

Erik