I found this to be a nice juxtaposition of stories: on the one hand, the University of California cancels it's Elsevier subscription, and on the other hand, Springer Nature is contributing articles to ResearchGate. The California case is straightforward: "UC wanted to integrate its fees and reduce its costs. Elsevier wanted to charge publishing fees on top of subscription fees, said Ivy Anderson. That predicate made it impossible to reach an agreement.” The Springer Nature initiative is based on a cooperative agreement announced this past April and will see some 6,000 otherwise subscription- only articles made available without access controls. More: Nature Science, Berkeley News, Chronicle, University of California statement. It has taken 20 years, but as the Chronicle reports, Open Access is Going Mainstream.
This booklet (41 page PDF) is a well-informed and forward-looking survey of new appproaches to medical education. Each of its ten sections contains a challenge, short outline of the concept, and a practical example in the form of a case. Topics covered include co-creation, trust networks, personal learning networks, and co-leadership models. As the authors write, "Medical education is shifting its focus from knowledge as the product of learning to realworld competence as its desired outcome. As a result, value creation in medical education is shifting from institutional, positional, and informational silos in favour of fluid networks and communities of practice."
Corporate Twitter, institutional Twitter, academic Twitter - can they use humour (and get away with it)? The sense I get reading this article is that though there are pitfalls, they can - and when they do, they drive more engagement. "Humour on social media can be savvy marketing, a demonstration of cultural or social knowledge, and consequently an indicator of status within or affiliation with particular groups. It can be a community-creating exercise; or, conversely, cut across or work against existing communities or conversations."
Like so many other words in our field, the word 'freedom' suffers from ambiguity. In education, in particular, the word 'freedom' is often equated with 'choice'. That's what we read in this column. But from where I sit, freedom isn't choice. Freedom is agency. Indeed, choice - by limiting agency - is often the opposite of freedom. So when I read advocacy journalism such as this article I reframe the question, asking whether the alternatives support increased agency. All too often I find that they undermine agency instead, replacing the best interests of students with the narrow interests of lobbyists or funders.
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 2019 Stephen Downes Contact: email@example.comThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.