[Foundation-l] Re: Wikiversity

[Anthere]

Erik Moeller a écrit:
 > 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.

Hummm, I fear you absolutely did not understand my point.

Researchers have a special frame of mind and research requests some 
abilities which are different from teaching. It is a different job. 
While the researcher is deeply involved in his research, he tends to see 
all things through this sort of filter, and lose the sense of reality 
and of what would really be helpful for students in their future 
professional life OUT of the research frame.

It may be that the french system relies more on academics than the 
german system for you not to see what I mean. Possibly. I remember the 
american system was much more practical

Or... I also realise this now, while I did not realise it when I just 
finished my studies. Many things are clearer after a couple of years 
working to earn one's bread. You get the sense of what was useful in 
your education and of what was possibly fun, but not very helpful.


As for letting people the choice and letting them define their 
priorities, if we get a big mix of research framework with education 
one, I think we might just as well have left news in the current event 
section of wikipedia.



 >> 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.


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.

Then why are both wikicommons and wikinews still envased in copyright 
issues ?


 > 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?

Good point...
I *complained* mostly that guidelines given were not community build I 
think... but good point.


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

Wikisophia ?


 >> 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

goal-oriented... indeed :-)

Bon, et ben on va attendre les commentaires depuis le pas de la porte.