[Wikiversity-l] Wikibooks and Wikiversity

[John Schmidt]

Nov 13,  2007 Cormac Lawler wrote:
>"How do Wikiversity and Wikibooks relate to eachother (and within this: do
>they overlap unnecessarily, and how might they be aligned most productively)?"

The English language Wikiversity and English language Wikibooks were
estabolished by the Foundation as sister projects with distinct
missions. I believe that they could have been "aligned most
productively" by leaving Wikiversity within the Wikibooks project.
However, Wikibooks was given a narrow mission and the participants who
started developing the "Wikiversity-type elements" were told to go
away. Now that they are sister projects with distinct missions it is
simple to hyper-link Wikiversity learning resources and  textbooks at
Wikibooks. For example,  learning projects at Wikiversity link to
textbooks hosted by Wikibooks, just as they link to articles at
Wikipedia.

Wikiversity participants can help develop textbooks located at
Wikibooks. However, speaking only for myself, I find the strict
Wikibooks policy against original research to be crippling to my
efforts to develop learning resources. In my view, a reliable and
useful textbook requires significant input from experts who know the
subject and have experience interacting with the intended readers of
the textbook in a learning environment that allows the textbook
creators to intimately know the target audience of learners. A good
textbook is the result of original research; it involves secondary
research and insightful original synthesis of previously published
ideas. Also, I think some aspects conventional textbooks are artifacts
of publishing on paper and not optimal for a wiki-format learning
resource. I'm interested in experimenting with new formats for
learning resources that mix internet-mediated social interactivity
with more  traditional textbook-like content. In short, I am more
comfortable working to developing learning resources under the rules
of Wikiversity than under the more restrictive rules of Wikibooks.

It does not surprise me to hear that the Dutch Wikibooks has extended
their scope in order to host lesson plans and pedagogic guidance for
using textbooks. I feel that giving Wikibooks a narrow mission modeled
on the narrow Wikipedia mission was a decision made by executive fiat
and without proper input from people in the Wikimedia community who
had experience develop textbooks and other learning resources.  Is
this a problem? I would not be surprised if some language-specific
Wikibooks communities continue, for many years to come, to sometimes
decide that Wikibooks should have a broader mission that makes room
for Wikiversity-type elements. Yes, this could turn out to be a
problem. For example, after a couple years, Jimbo could hear about
what is going on and "lower the boom" on the Dutch Wikibooks. If
several years have gone by with development of Wikiversity-type
elements in the Dutch Wikibooks, it will be very painful to have to
surgically remove those elements.

Teemu Leinonen wrote:
>"Wikiversity should give-up the "content production"
>and focus on hosting communities of learners who want to do things  together."

The fact is, there are many types of "content" (learning resources)
that are only allowed in Wikiversity. This is why Wikiversity was
kicked out of Wikibooks. Wikiversity will always be a place to develop
educational content that is not welcome at other Wikimedia Foundation
wikis. If the idea (Wikiversity should give-up the content production)
is to broaden the mission of Wikibooks so as to include the content
that is now only allowed at Wikiversity, it seems like that should
have been the choice made years ago. It is incredibly destructive when
people who do not do the hard work of developing the wiki content feel
free to play ping pong by executive decree...."move this content all
to Wikiversity...oh, no, that's not right, now move it all back to
Wikibooks". Everything is just a link away in the wikisphere. Please,
let's stop shuffling the deck chairs and just do the real work that
needs to be done.  I agree that there should be special emphasis on
the development of collaborative learning communities at Wikiversity.
Having learning communities and developing learning resources are not
two distinct things.

Leigh Blackall wrote:
>"With the likes of Wikiversity, and even Wikibooks, the brief is far less
>clear and the structure of content or point of entry is even less clear."

Jimbo's said it well at Wikimania 2006: "..... the idea here is to
also host learning communities, so people who are actually trying to
learn, actually have a place to come and interact and help each other
figure out how to learn things. We're also going to be hosting and
fostering research into how these kinds of things can be used more
effectively."

Most people are indoctrinated into conventional learning as done at
conventional schools. Wikiversity is a platform for experimenting with
things like using wiki and other new technologies to make possible
collaborative "learn by doing"  projects. Yes, at Wikiversity the
"structure of content" is much more open to innovation and
experimentation than at Wikipedia. That might make some people
nervous. I find it liberating and the path to our future.

See also: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt/Blog/13_November_2007

-John Schmidt
(user JWSchmidt)