OLDaily
By Stephen Downes
May 27, 2003

Computer Eliminates Teachers
It's the headline long feared in the teaching sector. Essentially, a small private school placed 11 students in a classroom with computers, effectively saving the wages of one teacher. "It takes roughly 10 to 12 students per classroom to pay an average teacher's compensation," said Jerry Goodbar, the principal. "With only 11 students representing the entire fourth through ninth grade (at Christ Centered), this was a great opportunity for students to work on their core subjects and be tested and graded by the computer. It's like a big old lesson plan, except they're getting it from a computer." Now we will no doubt see many accounts explaining why this won't work. But I have only one question: what if it does? By Valerie Christopher, Cincinnati Enquirer, May 27, 2003 [Refer][Research][Reflect]

The Impact of Copyright Ownership on Academic Author Self-Archiving
This is the first of three 'must read' papers based on a survey of academics regarding copyright and self-publishing (the next two are immediately below). This first paper looks at the relation between authors and publishers. Authors, it turns out, appear to be more interested in the 'intellectual' rather than the 'property' side of intellectual property. That is probably why so many assign copyright to publishers, though many do so reluctantly. Publishers, meanwhile, offer a hodge-podge of justifications for taking copyright, but of course, the primary reason is to "protect from copyright infringement." By Elizabeth Gadd, Charles Oppenheim, and Steve Probets, Loughborough University, May, 2003 [Refer][Research][Reflect]

How Academics Want to Protect Their Open-Access Research Papers
Academics, it transpires, are mostly willing to share their work freely. They do not want people to turn around and sell it, however, and they would like to be attributed as the author. The greatest reason authors might not make work available online? The fear that they won't be published as a result. By Elizabeth Gadd, Charles Oppenheim, and Steve Probets, Loughborough University, May, 2003 [Refer][Research][Reflect]

How Academics Expect to Use Open-Access Research Papers
This third part of the study looks at how academics would expect to or want to use papers freely posted by other academics. No, they don't want to run out and sell them. They expect to be able to view, print, save and perhaps aggregate them for use, say, in a course pack. By Elizabeth Gadd, Charles Oppenheim, and Steve Probets, Loughborough University, May, 2003 [Refer][Research][Reflect]

Who Will Pay For Software?
Dave Winer writes a two part piece bemoaning the fact that people do not want to pay for software. (Part Two) The short items are worth reading, but ask yourself this: does everything have to be based on a user-pay model? Winer asks, "Could you run a car in the Indy 500 with no money?" Well no. But also, "If you paid nothing for health care, you'd likely die sooner." In fact, I don't pay for health care: I live in Canada where we have a public health care system. Now of course my free health care doesn't mean that we rely on volunteer doctors. But there are many, many ways to set up an economy. I don't pay to visit public parks. I don't pay to use a road. I don't pay to listen to the radio. Shrink-wrap pricing and licensing is one way to pay for something. Now I'm not saying all software out to be produced by the government. But I am saying is that Winer is setting up a false dilemma. By Dave Winer, DaveNet, May 24, 2003 [Refer][Research][Reflect]

The Fedora Project: Developing An Open-Source Digital Repository Management System
You can see a trend happening here, right? Fedora is "designed to be a foundation upon which interoperable web-based digital libraries, institutional repositories and other information management systems can be built, demonstrates how distributed digital library architecture can be deployed using web-based technologies, including XML and Web services." By Ronda A. Grizzle, University of Virginia Library, May 27, 2003 12:41 p.m. [Refer][Research][Reflect]

Groups Cry Foul Over Malware Course
While it is true that the world does not need more 'malware' - malicious computer programs such as virii and worms - the world does need this course in how to write them, despite the protestations of critics described in this article. Of greater concern would be the impact of a successful lobby to cancel the course. If malware is not going to be studied in universities, then where will it be studied? By Jack Kapica, Globe and Mail, May 26, 2003 [Refer][Research][Reflect]

Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter?

Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list at http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/website/subscribe.cgi

[ About This NewsLetter] [ OLDaily Archives] [ Send me your comments]

Copyright 2003 Stephen Downes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.