Here come my notes on the Open Education 2006: Community, Culture, and Content that we are attending:
Friday, September 29, 2006
Concurrent sessions
Open Content in Education: The Instructor Benefits of MIT OpenCourseWare
Preston Parker, Utah State University
Five ways to be compensated:
- duplication
- distribution
- alteration
- derivation
- exhibition
Benefits of “Open Content”:
- Better quality
- better compensation for creators (credit to the right person)
- more efficient
- less expensive product (eliminate the intermediary)
How are people compensated:
- traditional methods
- suppelmentary goods
- suplementary services
- reception
- sponsoring
- adds revenues
Institutional benefits (of OCW):
- enhance faculty and student enrollment
- showcase student content
- offer alumni something more
- make connection with life long learners
What are faculty benefits:
- Recognition
- marketing
- leave and accessible academic legacy
- connections/networking/collaboration
- reach learners not reachable otherwise
- increase class enrollment
- easier content dissemination.
Open Business Models:
- Marketing model
- Advertising model
- Suplementary goods
- Individualisation goods
Tools for Creating Open Content: CMS4OCW and CMS4ROCKL. When Teachers Want to Share.
Pedro Pernias & Manuel Marco Such, Universidad Alicante
CMS4OCW: CMS for OCW. For institutions.
CMS4ROCKL: CMS for content for knowledge and learning. For individuals, creating p2p repositories.
Both tools facilitate the creations of organized structures tgo aggregate context for the individual items. Each course is a especific “portal” to access the catalogue. They are CMS (not LMS), handle Scorm, let users create more complex structures by using single items, creates a repositoryof Scorm packagge which can be harvested easily through MHP or OAI, sindicates through RSS.
The user can upload documents and files to “my contents”. Organize the documents & files there and preview the results.
LOR@: Learning Objects Repository Architecture. Not a repository, but an architecture.
Web 2.0 for Development related posts (2006)
If you need to cite this article in a formal way (i.e. for bibliographical purposes) I dare suggest:
Peña-López, I. (2006) “Open Education 2006 (VIII): Benefits and Tools for Open Content” In ICTlogy,
#36, September 2006. Barcelona: ICTlogy.
Retrieved month dd, yyyy from
https://ictlogy.net/review/?p=452
Previous post: Open Education 2006 (VII): The Technology of Open Education
Next post: Open Education 2006 (IX): Higher Education and OER Research
RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
