[Foundation-l] Open teaching materials in the Netherlands

Jan-Bart de Vreede janbart at wikimedia.org
Wed May 20 18:34:55 UTC 2009

Hi All,

Being VERY closely involved in Wikiwijs within the Kennisnet  
Foundation (my employer) I can only agree with effeietsanders  
statement. Things are often not as NC as they seem :)

The wikiwijs project is still taking shape but is founded on a few  
guiding principles

1) Be as Open as you can be (not just open content, but also open  
source and open standards). CC-BY is definately the way we would want  
to go.
2) This should not be a top down project. Although the initial push  
was done by the minister, the teachers and schools who are to work  
with this are able to fill in their needs and give the project more  
3) Connect to any and all other initiatives with regards to  
educational content in the Netherlands, on any level (from small  
content elements to complete lesson plans) by offering connections on  
al these levels by means of open standards.

Funny thing is here: I have taken a lot of the lessons I have learned  
from the Wikimedia community and our Advisory board members back to  
Kennisnet and together with the Open University we have tried to apply  
these experiences in the Wikiwijs project.

Little headsup: Melissa Hagemann (advisory board member) and me have  
submitted a proposal for a workshop at Wikimania 2009 which will deal  
with Open Educational Resources and the Wikiwijs project. If this gets  
approved by the programme committee I invite you all to come (should  
you have to opportunity to attend wikimania this year)

Kennisnet and the Open University are currently in an orientation  
phase together with the potential members of the Wikiwijs community.  
When more is known about the practical details of the project I will  
post it here :)


On 19 mei 2009, at 22:03, Dedalus wrote:

> Ziko wrote:
> "Nearly all already existing initiatives for open teaching materials  
> use the
> CC-NC-SA, the Creative Commons license that prohibits commercial  
> use. I was
> told that you cannot explain to teachers why others should have the  
> right to
> commercially exploit their work..."
> What a great news! All those wat too expensive school teachers that
> are a burden to the Dutch taxpayer voluntarily move to become
> volunteer teachers. Please pass the champaign on this. Let's
> celebrate!
> Where is Mike Godwin our legal counselor. I really need a terrier
> preparing a big law suit on this. Just in case a single teacher would
> have the guts to accept a pay check while using CC-NC-SA material in
> class.
> Why? That is my interpretation of 'commercial': making directly money
> while using the material. Article 4c of CC-NC-SA is very clear about
> this: "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in
> Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or
> directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary
> compensation." Even Dutch teachers can be instructed to read aloud the
> last three words "private monetary compensation."
> So far, so good for the first part of the defense, thank you Mike.
> That was only the part concerning the selfish and myopic Dutch
> teachers. Now for the second part, to open their eyes. Primary and
> secondary education might perform a whole range of goals, and a tiny
> little one of them is to prepare kids for a future role as income
> earning participants in society (deliberately not specifying in which
> way). Having been educated with CC-NC-SA materials those poor kids
> will not be allowed to make any money with the knowledge thus
> gathered. This contradicts at least one of the primary goals of
> education.
> What the Dutch teachers want sounds all too much like wanting to get
> direct monetary compensation at the taxpayers expense up front for
> creating the teaching materials *and* failing to deliver the materials
> (distribute it to who paid for it, the taxpayers, that is the public
> at large, so distribute it freely) *and* looking for ways to collect
> royalties without repaying the expenses paid up front.
> A great counter example is the image project. The WMF has paid for the
> creation of content (imagery) with the explicition condition the
> material is freely licensed. If the Dutch minister is going to pay 385
> million euro annually for the creation of content without requiring
> the material to be freely licensed, he is f***ing nuts.
> Dedalus
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list