Peace requires caring for and supporting each of the things that are taken from us in a time of war: a civil and social infrastructure we can trust to protect us, a respect for and celebration of each others' distinct identity, an ability for each of us to participate in governance and conflict resolution, and the right to the necessities of life and conditions enabling each of us to aspire toward achieving our goals.
I can see why this will resonate with readers, and certainly we want something much better than pre-arranged courses and expensive fees. And if learning and watching videos were the same then the Netflix analogy would work. But learning - especially informal learning - isn't about selecting something to view from a recommender. It's about solving problems, getting help, working together, and reflecting on experiences and lessons learned. It's as much about creation as consumption. So, sure, the Netflix experience may seem appealing, but more is required.
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have opened a Request for Information (RFI) about work that can help increase student success in math, non-fiction writing, and "executive function (the skill set concerning memory, self-control, attention, and flexible thinking)" (I couldn't help but giggle a bit when I read the third one). "The RFI represents an invitation to researchers and practitioners to deepen public understanding of where the most important, ambitious, and innovative work is being done in a variety of disciplines." I found the submission process a bit off-putting. They note that "All responses generated by this RFI become the property of BMGF and CZI" and they ask for a lot of biographical information up front. all what a to be a closed online form.
There are two telling quotes in this article, and I'll address them in reverse order: first, "the factor that seems most effective in determining young people’s earning power is not having done an internship, or a sandwich year, but privilege," and second, "if they (universities) want students to work out ways to improve the world, they’ll need to start providing a model of such a world." This might be very hard - maybe even impossible - for universities. Universities don't just foster knowledge and culture. Their value proposition hinges on connecting people to elite already-established networks of wealth and influence. Could they give this up and still remain viable? Would they?
The questions cover a wide range of topics and insights. For example, why should science be open to the public, because after all, they neither understand nor are interested in the details? As Poynder says, "Transparency has become important if only because science appears to be facing a major credibility crisis right now." Also, "In providing public access to information about trials and studies the greater transparency that results should help reduce or eliminate unethical practices." Hard to disagree.
As I commented to the author of this article: First, don't say "Those of us who are actually involved..." It's fine to speak for yourself, but you should not position yourself as representative of the people who build, developed or taught MOOCs. There's a wide range of opinion in the community, and a lot of it will disagree with yours. Second, I don't see how this can be true: "The real value comes in the active and experiential learning that can only occur at a small scale. This only happens when a professor has the opportunity to get to know her students as individuals." There are many cases where active and experiential learning happens at a massive scale, and there are many cases where this happens without the mediation of professors. Image: Washington Post
Michael Feldstein writes, "the handwriting is on the wall. If textbook prices come down, then textbook royalties also have to come down." But by how much? And how will they be paid? "They either will get smaller royalty agreements or will be paid once on a fee-for-services basis so that the company can own the content outright. My guess is that there will be a lot more of the latter than the former." I'm inclined to agree. And the lawsuit? Who cares! As Feldstein says, "all of this is transitional."
This newsletter is sent only at the request of subscribers. If you would like to unsubscribe, Click here.
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. Click here to subscribe.
Copyright 2018 Stephen Downes Contact: firstname.lastname@example.orgThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.