Wikieducator.org – OER[YUN1]  Online Community – An Online Community Ethnography

May 11, 2011

Increasingly interacting with digital media, spending thousands of hours watching television, surfing the internet, or playing video games, an ever growing number of individuals can be considered digital natives or digital immigrants (Prensky, 2010; Tapscott, 2008). As a result of this recent change, it is important to understand how these interactions affect individuals living in our time and space, their cognitive abilities and what it all means for the youth of tomorrow. These are among some of the topics that have recently risen to challenge the modern ethnographer. The rapid technological change witnessed by societies in recent years has led to an increasing disconnection between generations. Phrases such as the Net Generation, Digital Natives, or Google Generation are surfacing regularly in popular news channels and have been the subject of recent publications (Tapscott, 2008; Prensky, 2010; Rowlands, et al., 2008). Whether one considers oneself a late adopter or laggard, or an innovator or early adopter we all should have an interest in understanding these changes (Rogers, 2003; Kurzweil, 2006). Therefore, it is important for studies to be conducted that would help us to understand better what happens during the thousands of hours that digital natives spend exploring virtual worlds and immersing themselves in epic digital adventures[YUN2]  (Harry, 2005; Yee, 2006).

By allowing individuals to connect with anyone in the world who shares a similar interest, subcultures are able to thrive at a level only possible before in large urban settings.  Through the internet, individuals can code a program collaboratively, play video games internationally, live “second” lives, buy property within online environments, and develop online learning communities based upon a shared vision and mission such as is the case of Wikipedia and WikiEducator. Through websites such as Ning.com and Groups.Google.com, individuals can connect with likeminded people and change the method through which knowledge is produced. Some of these communities, such as Wikipedia, have been the subject of both intense praise and criticism in press and journal articles as a result of their innovative but controversial collaborative framework and organizational culture.

In a whirlwind of change, Wikipedia, has in a decade, become one of the most visited websites in the world. It encompasses millions of articles that anyone with internet access can create and edit. Wikipedia’s success has been to a large extent a result of its wiki structure, the charismatic leadership of “benevolent dictator” Jim Wales, and its consensus oriented decision making process (Reagle Jr., 2010). Wikipedia has risen to challenge even the highly regarded, professionally written Encyclopedia Britannica, first published in 1797 (Kafker & Loveland, 2009; Katz, 2008). The degree of impact Wikipedia has had as a freely accessible reference tool and the transformative power that results from collective or cooperative knowledge production warrants further study. According to the most recent Alexa rakings, Wikipedia was the 8^th most visited website on the internet from February to April 2011, used primarily by childless people under the age of 35 with postgraduate educations browsing at school or work (Alexa, 2011).

Since the success of Wikipedia, other Wiki websites have attempted to replicate its model. Currently there are many other popular wikis, and some of them, such as Wikia.com and WikiHow.com, have been the subject of recent scholarly research (Levine, 2006; Murley, 2008). This paper analyzes a different wiki community, WikiEducator, which has the potential to bring about a transformative change in education and the way in which youth will learn in the future. WikiEducator hopes to build a worldwide community of educators focused on the development of quality open education resources for K-12 and Higher Education. The success of WikiEducator and OER[YUN3]  would not only enhance education in developing countries but also in developed countries, by supplementing traditional education.

Through the development of Open Education Resources (OER), freely sharable educational materials that can be modified, remixed and redistributed, sites such as WikiEducator may play a role in improving access to high quality educational content and in meeting the goal of creating an increasingly affluent world (Baraniuk R. , 2006; Kamenetz, 2010; Sachs, 2005). Another possible impact of OER would be to reduce textbook costs by either replacing proprietary textbooks or increasing competition among publishers. OER could lead to the increased reuse, modification and redistribution of educational material, provide students with additional resources to supplement their course materials and improve the number and quality of lifelong learning resources.  For some, this type of resource could even potentially contribute to the development of an online only educational system where students would be able to obtain a quality higher education but pay only a small amount in fees. As Jim Taylor (2007) remarks OER are not “intended to threaten existing models of higher education provision, but to create a parallel universe capable of ameliorating the apparently insurmountable problem of meeting the worldwide demand for higher education.” Just “India alone would need nearly 2400 additional universities in the next 25 years – or roughly two new universities per week” to meet the demand for higher education (HE) as  more students finish secondary education or need to return to school in a search for a new career or simply for enjoyment (Daniel et al., 2007).

The objectives of people involved in WikiEducator vary by member, yet they all share the conviction of its founder, Dr Wayne Mackintosh, whose vision is to turn “the digital divide into digital dividends using free content and open networks” (WikiEducator, 2010). Similar to Wikipedia’s Jim Wales, Wayne Mackintosh shares some of the charismatic appeal and friendliness of a “benevolent dictator”. Yet, Mackintosh is only one of many scholars who have written about the transformative potential of OER.

Although the term OER was first coined by UNESCO in 2002, open educational resources have been available since educational materials (formal and informal) were first developed and freely shared with someone else. As social interactions fill our world with meanings, the first educational material was probably a story that was shared orally by members of the community. Hearing a story and retelling it with a slight modification is the equivalent of the remixing idea promoted by OER. More than just free of cost, OER are concerned with freedom of access and the ability to build upon previous works by modifying or remixing them (Baraniuk R. , 2006). OER today are associated primarily with digital resources yet, depending on the definition, OER also include many non-digital materials. For OER supporters, it is important for information to be available through a multiplicity of formats. One of the benefits of OER is their potential to increase the amount of high quality educational materials available online, and to reach individuals with different learning modalities, who can then access materials through a number of devices, asynchronously, at no or much reduced costs.

Since 2002 the OER movement has been spearheaded by the OECD and the Hewitt Foundation together with UNESCO. Various institutions such as MIT, UK Open University, Carnegie Mellon, Rice, Stanford, Yale, and Berkeley have developed, or promoted the development of, OER (OECD, 2007; UNESCO, 2011; Walsh, 2010).  Other organizations or online communities have also been pivotal in promoting OER, such as Saylor.org, Opencollegetextbook.org, Creativecommons.org, and Opencontent.org. Yet one of the few communities that has centered specifically on the development of OER content is WikiEducator.

This paper is a report of an ethnographic study of the WikiEducator community I conducted during the spring semester of 2011, as the precursor to a larger analysis and more in depth study of WikiEducator. This paper used a constructivist methodology in the hope of understanding what WikiEducator represents for its members and to understand some of the inner functions of this online community. As an exploratory study, this study also attempted to establish long term relationships with various members of WikiEducator through the use of semi-structured interviews and participant observation.

Value Premises

Whether we like it or not, bias is there, and despite attempts to reduce it, a researcher should be aware that his/her interactions will affect the results of the study. His/her interaction with participants will be unique and could never be fully replicated (Wolcott, 2008; Fetterman, 1989; Kouritzin, 2002). Because bias is unavoidable scholars stand to benefit and aid their readers by stating their beliefs openly (Myrdal, 1972). As a researcher, I find it difficult to separate the private and the public; writing is to me, as to many critical theory researchers, inherently political (Hanisch, 1970; Elliot, 2009; Crotty, 1998). As Foucault eloquently wrote; “knowledge is not for knowing; knowledge is for cutting” (Foucault, 1984). Through my writings, I hope to show both the limitations and capabilities of OER, yet personally I am interested in the success of this model and the reduction of HE costs worldwide. Having benefited to a great extent from the opportunities that were available to me through a result of both hard work and serendipity, I am aware that while I have succeeded others were not as lucky. Many individuals out there deserve the chance to explore their full potential, to have the opportunity to access higher education, obtain an advanced degree, and feel empowered through their education. To break the cycle of dependency, we need to work so that more and more individuals from low income economies can obtain this opportunity.  It is my personal objective to increase access to educational resources and, by doing so, reduce the achievement gap. Yet, while I am passionate about the possibilities of OER, as a scholar it is important to question assumptions and explore even counterintuitive ways to bring about the necessary changes. As OER scholars debate whether or not private primary schooling may have certain advantages over public primary universal schooling in terms of quality, even at low income levels, so too should the sustainability of OER and its financial model continue to be questioned (Wiley, 2007; Downes, 2007). One of the most frequently expressed concerns by WikiEducators is the need for increased government support and the limited amount of grants available from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) or national governments. Other organizations are hesitant to support the initiative, citing fears that the spread of OER could endanger their job security. Another important concern relates to the distinction between universal knowledge, or “free culture,” and knowledge that should remain private to stimulate further innovation and  for national security purposes (Lessig, 2005; Kramer, Starr, & Wentz, 2009).

Methodology and Methods

This study conducts an online or virtual ethnography of the WikiEducator community by comparing it to the literature on online learning communities and online ethnographies (Palloff, 2009; Gee, 2003; Nardi, 2010; Boellstorff, 2008). While the digital world offers new possibilities, it also brings new challenges for ethnographic research due to indirect nature of the interactive space (Fetterman, 1989). Online environments, such as Second Life and World of Warcraft, offer their users the possibility to escape their physical environment and live in a world of fantasy (Boellstorff, 2008; Nardi, 2010). Researching on the internet raises a number of complications, such as the limitations of interacting through the internet, complications of obtaining access to information or observing behavior online, difficulties of real vs. constructed fictional identities and lack of context apart from text or voice. However, some of these concerns are being addressed through the increased capabilities of information communication technologies (ICT) as well as through the graphical representation or increased complexity of online environments (Bilir, 2009; Harry, 2005; Wittel, 2000) Online ethnographies will become increasingly relevant as more and more individuals spend time interacting with digital technologies (Correll, 1995; Hine, 2000). This study builds on prior literature by providing a window into an increasingly popular wiki environment (Friesen & Hopkins, 2008). WikiEducator illustrates the possibilities of open-source economics and how a small group of people can effect macro changes through online collaboration (Benkler, 2009; Reagle Jr., 2010).

Methods

To increase the reliability and transferability of the study, I triangulated my methods using participant observation, a literature review, interviews, and discourse[YUN4]  analysis of forum data (Wolcott, 2008). This enabled me to understand the community more deeply. By reading forum discussions as well as conducting interviews, I developed a deeper relationship with respondents. This paper focuses on my interviews and the participant observation aspects of the study.

For this study, I spent various hours a week visiting WikiEducator.org and related OER organizations. During my study the interrelated nature and support between different OER organizations was evident. Other websites that were visited include the OERU Google Group website (Pic 1), Scope OERU Forum (Pic 2), and the WSIS OERU forums (Pic 3). While these sites are managed separately and have their own community numbers, many of the members of one of the communities are also members of the other three. The other three communities visited include a forum for discussion, yet it is only in WikiEducator (Pic 4) where participants are developing content. During my study of the community I came to feel that I was becoming a part of it, transforming myself into a WikiEducator. As part of my participant observation, I wanted to participate in the development of resources and observe how they were developed. In addition, to feel more integrated within the community, I developed a WikiEducator profile page and became involved in the creation of OER, but I was unable to develop as much content as I originally intended. Collaboration when developing OER is primarily asynchronous and it seemed to be at a lower level than I had originally expected.

During the interviews, it was common for WikiEducators to mention having a personal relationship with Wayne Mackintosh and the close knit nature of the OER community, with many of its administrative members communicating regularly over Skype or via e-mail. As an online community the members are spread throughout different countries and the use of ICT technologies is needed for the coordination of events and the development of objectives that guide OER production. Despite of the high level of interest and possibilities for OER in the developing world, most of the members of WikiEducator lived in countries with[YUN5]  high income economies such as the USA, Canada, New Zealand, France, Australia, and the United Kingdom. However, there were also members from countries with low income and middle income economies, including Jamaica, Guyana, India, Trinidad, Samoa, Brazil, among others.

To understand the OER community better and, in particular, WikiEducator, I attended a number of OER / WikiEducator sponsored events, which included a planning meeting on February 23^rd and a five day course on Open Content Licensing for Educators (OCL4Ed). By attending[YUN6]  these two events, I was able to participate as a student in WikiEducator’s educational activities, and learn more about the OERU University initiative. The February 23^rd  meeting was broadcast live through UStream, an online environment that allows attendees to interact digitally with those in the meeting through the UStream chat or by posting messages in indenti.ca, an open social microblogging service similar to twitter. The OCL4Ed course allowed me to see firsthand the quality of their education materials and to become familiar with key texts on OER.

Participant Observation

The February 23^rd meeting shed light on the different connections WikiEducator has with the Commonwealth of Learning and UNESCO, as well as Athabasca University, Otagon Polytechnic and the University of Southern Queensland. The meeting included presentations from a number of professors including Jim Taylor, Phil Ker, Robin Day, David Porter, Paul Stacey and Wayne Mackintosh. The model to follow for the development of an OERU was discussed, as was the history of OER and the need to increase credibility. The concept of the OERU and whether or not the accreditation system would be free were two other major topics of debate. Contrary to popular opinion, OER are not necessarily free. While most of the content may be obtained from the internet free of charge, the OERU was primarily envisioned as consortium of universities that would, after accepting a commonly agreed upon standard for a particular degree, accept a standardized set of courses from any university and provide the students with a degree. Starting with three open universities in three countries, the OERU would originally cost students only a small administrative fee (Pic 5).  In theory, the project would allow anyone to take courses from a variety of places, to register and obtain a diploma or take the courses they have yet to complete to obtain the degree. This added flexibility would permit students to receive credits for courses they have taken in the past, or even in different countries. During the meeting they opened an identi.ca feed #OERU and after a few suggestions they decided to project microblog posts on a wall via a projector. However, despite efforts to include the voice of those attending via the internet, the ability to participate virtually was limited. The planning session also included a couple of closed meetings, yet, as can be seen in the agenda, most of the event was open to the public and the conclusions to those meetings were shared with virtual attendees when the general assembly reconvened[1]. A number of prominent OER figures such as Stephen Downes and Pheo Martin as well as 202 other members from 46 countries registered for the meeting, many of whom attended virtually. Various virtual participants later expressed their opinion about the event through their personal blogs[2].

At the beginning of the meeting, Sir. John Daniel talked about the need for focusing on innovation in only a few aspects at a time to increase credibility, and the need for an open but tough institution. Daniel, the CEO and President of the Commonwealth of Learning (2004-Currently), is considered the founding patron of WikiEducator. As the former Vice-Chancellor of the UK Open University (1990-2001) and having served as UNESCO’s Assistant Director-General for Education (2001-2004), he is enthusiastic about finding new ways in which to extend education to individuals who currently are unable to attend a university. Various countries now face a situation where millions of students are college ready, having benefited from the successful growth in attendance and graduation from primary and secondary education, but lack access to higher education (Taylor, 2007; Daniel et al., 2007). It is important to meet this challenge, but in a way that allows students to obtain a credible credential at an affordable rate.

Following the meeting, I visited a number of blogs from participants and familiarized myself with the resources available through WikiEducator.org.[3] I completed the wiki editing tutorial and edited a basic wiki page.[4] I then visited the page catalog, which includes links to all of the wiki pages available through WikiEducator.org and the number of editors who have worked on those particular wikis. With over 500 wikis between the letters A to C, it was evident that the site included thousands of wiki pages. The community currently has 19,484 users and holds regular Learning4Content workshops to enable visitors to “familiarize themselves with their new neighborhood” (Mackintosh, 2011). Various wiki pages indicated the multinational reach of the initiative. WikiEducators in Colombia, Argentina, and Africa, among other groups, had created a wiki for individuals interested in developing context specific resources and learning about courses for educators being taught in these locations. Considering knowledge as a common good, editors are forewarned that material published on WikiEducator will be licensed under a Creative Commons (CC) CC-BY license. CC-BY is currently the most open Creative Commons license, permitting the remixing, reproduction and commercialization of the content. The only two types of materials accepted by WikiEducator are CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. By adding the SA or Share-Alike condition to the OER, individuals are required to openly share any derivative of the original OER under the same, or a more restrictive license. Other institutions such as MIT have adopted a CC-BY-NC-SA license, requiring individuals to share any modified products under the same license and prohibiting the commercialization of materials.

Apart from visiting various OER resources and collaborating in their development, I also attended the OCL4Ed course for a week to experience WikiEducator as a course participant. After enrolling online free of charge participants were taught a number of basic OER concepts such as open licensing, creating and using an identi.ca account and the objectives of WikiEducator. Readings by OER advocates and videos on various key issues about licensing and the possibilities of OER were assigned. To aid participants in familiarizing themselves with various creative commons licenses, scenarios were presented and participants were asked to explain if the individual had violated copyright law and how that could have been prevented.

Another important objective of the OCL4Ed course was the development of a peer learning environment. The course began by asking everyone to share with the class their name, their country of origin, and their opinions about OER. By posting these answers on a Moodle site, others were able to comment and inquire about the member’s responses. Additionally, through identi.ca, participants were asked to share their opinions on the class topic in less than 144 characters. Posts that were particularly insightful were then retweeted by Wayne Mackintosh (Pic 6). Hosted in New Zealand but offered to participants worldwide, learning took place asynchronously and participants were able to share their thoughts about the course subject-matter in their own time frame and schedule.

Individuals could visit and learn from these materials any time of the year as all of the resources are accessible through WikiEducator. By encouraging multiple types of feedback OCL4Ed was a very effective and efficient course as individuals were able to obtain a good understanding of CC and the importance of open content, and the course provided for a high level of interaction between participants. While some individuals were more expressive than others in their tweets, there seemed to be a high degree of satisfaction with the course, eliciting comments such as  “this is the best course I have ever taken”[5]. However, as with other online courses, interaction with other class members was entirely textual and no interactive meetings with other class members were held. While in the future interactions in online classes may increasingly include the use of video conferences and provide for a more personal environment, online classes today, due to their asynchronous elements and distance between participants, allow some participants to feel more comfortable in expressing themselves more freely.

Other important elements of my study as an active participant included visiting the WSIS OER website and responding to the debate regarding whether or not OER should allow commercialization. Voting ended with 57% in favor of commercialization to 43% against it. (WSIS, 2011) Further investigation of this issue would be helpful and a future study should include additional observation of relationships in the wider OER community.

Interviews

After attending the meeting, in an attempt to become better acquainted with the community, I used the list of 226 attendees to construct a database of participants’ names, organization, and email address as well as their administrative position, their blog (if available), and their country of origin. Following the development of this list, an email message was drafted and individuals were subsequently contacted for a 30 minute interview. This process[YUN7]  allowed me to meet 13 different WikiEducators and OER supporters.

A first email was sent only to the 23 individuals who registered to physically attend the OERU meeting. This email included not only the purpose of my study but also a brief disclaimer about my personal views and value premises (Annex 1). Receiving only one hesitant response from 23 emails the letter was shortened, removing my value premises. While the lack of responses to the first email was discouraging, it was not unexpected as many of these individuals hold high level administrative positions and are also some of the most prominent members of the community. The second letter (Annex 2), sent to 226 people, resulted in a higher response rate with 13 individuals being interviewed through Skype.  Participants were able to sign up for any date in March, April and May where there were times available (Pic 8).

Surprisingly, several of the individuals who responded were administrators or directors of different OER programs. The rest of the individuals who were interviewed were OER producers and university professors at their particular institutions. Respondents included Cable Green (Director of Global Learning – Creative Commons), Abel Caine (UNESCO – OER Project Administrator), Joyce McKight (SUNY Empire State College, April 2011 WikiEducator of the Month), Richard Heller (Director of the People’s University), Steve Forester (LCO Ojibwe Community College, Consultant), Pheo Martin (Director of the Realizing Education’s Potential Institute (REPI)), Joan Garfield* (College Open Textbook Communities)[6], Simon Yalams (Professor at the University of Technology, Jamaica), Anna Gruszczynska (C-SAP – University of Birmingham OER initiative), Sean Linton (PhD Student – Otago Polytechnic), Jane Park (Creative Commons Education Coordinator), Dennis Taylor (HIRAM College – Co-Director STEM Program), Benjamin Steward (Autonomous University Aguascalientes) and David Porter (Executive Director – Bccampus.ca, British Columbia). Having scheduled interviews through an email, without prior personal contacts, the project obtained a respectable 5% response rate. While five percent of individuals responded to my request for interviews, another five percent communicated with me to express an interest in scheduling an interview at a later date or contributing to the research project, and 90% of those emailed did not reply or participate. As individuals are bombarded by emails, 10% represents an acceptable response rate yet, for an open community, their cooperation with the study was not unusually high.

Some of these interviews were subsequently transcribed and emailed to the participants for further clarification. It is the project’s objective to develop a reciprocal relationship with participants and, once they are finalized, I will email all of the transcripts to the participants. To prevent the unexpected loss of data, interviews were recorded through three electronic[YUN8]  devices simultaneously, a digital recorder (Olympus DS-61), a desktop screen / video recorder (Camtasia), and a virtual video recorder (Audacity) (Pic 9). On more than one occasion one of the recording devices experienced a minor malfunction. Having three recording devices increased reliability. The interviewees were asked whether they wanted their interviews to be private or public and under what license they could be shared. With one exception, all of the participants interviewed were comfortable with the open publication of the interview and the use of an open license without first reading the transcript.

After transcribing the interviews and obtaining further feedback or clarification from the interviewees the interviews were coded according to themes. Some of these themes are discussed in the following section. As mentioned by one of the interviewees, despite a degree of philosophical homogeneity among participants, members who were interviewed had differences of opinion regarding the goal of OER, the future outlook of OER, whether OER is a social and/or international movement, their sustainability, and ways in which the community could conduct further outreach and raise awareness about OER.

The interview questions were analyzed by two graduate students  and a faculty member from Curriculum and Instruction after the original draft and modified to increase their effectiveness as well as to single out questions that would be of greater interest to the participants. A list of questions can be read in the annex section (Annex 3). Apart from recording the interviews and analyzing differences of opinion and similarities through the interviews, the study also hoped to find out how open the community is to outsiders, what  it takes to be accepted as a member of the community and whether members would be willing to support a researcher from a closed institution? During my study, I was not questioned as to why I was studying OER and WikiEducator, rather respondents were sympathetic and keen to help a PhD student interested in their subject area. They encouraged me to play a stronger role in the community in the future.

Preliminary Findings (Pilot Mini Ethnography – Spring 2011), Openness, OER, and WikiEducators:

Defining the term “open resource” and the degree of openness of OER and WikiEducator are questions of heated debate within the OER community. Various individuals interviewed were unsure which open license they regularly used for their materials. In addition, the licenses recommended by major OER producers varied. While WikiEducator recommends the use of CC-BY licensing which does not require remixed materials to be shared or to be limited to non-commercial endeavors, the United Kingdom’s (UK) Joint Information System Committee (JISC) promotes the use of CC-BY-NC-SA for most materials, and the CC-BY-NC-ND license for ‘sensitive’ resources[7].  Despite the support for open licenses among OER advocates, I noticed that several OER supporters have published books that sell for a price similar to that of an average paperback book. The books were not expensive, but it symbolizes the balance that individuals have to make between their ideological beliefs and their financial reality.

An inclusive and diverse movement, OER are not all produced under the same license. WikiEducator, through their OCL4Ed course, has attempted to promote the advantages of CC-BY over other licenses. By providing individuals with the freedom to use the resource as they see fit, OER follow closely Stallman’s quote of Open Source Software (OSS) being more like free speech than free beer (GNU, 2010). With the goal of increasing society’s creative output and the amount of knowledge accessible to all, Mackintosh hopes that others will also decide to share their remixed or original OER under the CC-BY license yet individuals are free to choose the license they are most comfortable in supporting. For WikiEducators, OER should contain four essential freedoms: the freedom to use a resource, to adapt it to your needs, to help your neighbor (by sharing copies), and to help your community. Focused on the practical and improving the living conditions of not just the user but the community, WikiEducator hosts courses and hopes to reduce barriers for people who cannot attend Higher Education courses or obtain credentials.

Sustainability

A major concern of my informants was the need for greater government support. According to Joyce McKnight (SUNY), without the support of the government, various OER programs will likely experience financial difficulties. However, Cable Green (CC) explained how the disappearance of a particular OER, due to lack of maintenance or a server crash is likely to happen at times, but the community will likely either replace the lost material, or have uploaded it to a different site before the server went offline, lost or erased the data. Yet, grants for OER projects are increasingly competitive and it is likely that some programs will lack the financial resources to sustain their OER , as has been the case with many dot com initiatives.

During my interview with Anna Gruszczynska (JISC) she mentioned the likelihood of her program losing financial support at the end of this year. While the project has received funding for two years, the inability to be self-sufficient financially may result in the loss of their expertise. While she believed that OER created by independent producers will continue to be developed without financial support, larger scale initiatives could expand rapidly if only they were given the right type of incentives. While all of the individuals interviewed expressed their desire to continue producing OER and wished to spend more time developing these resources, full time faculty members and many other educators already have a very busy schedule. If administrations were to offer benefits for teachers to publish in open access journals or develop open education resources, their quantity and quality could grow exponentially. Abel Caine (UNESCO) argued that concerns of educators regarding a loss of job security from the growth of OER is a “red herring,” or misconception, as many students would continue to prefer living the college experience, going out and socializing, and living away from home to exclusively using online resources. In addition, there is a large unmet demand of students who are capable but unable to attend a higher education institution (Daniel et al, 2007; Taylor, 2007).

Jane Park (CC) reiterated that recent policy changes, such as the US government recently requiring educational resources produced with a $2 billion grant to be published under a CC-BY license are steps in the right direction that will hopefully continue (DOL, 2011). Similar pressure from national governments and grant makers in the future would provide the OER movement with much needed support and legitimacy, increasing the chances of obtaining a critical mass of supporters, and reaching a tipping point (Rogers, 2003).

Networking and Relationships

From the interviews, it became apparent that many participants communicated with each other on a regular basis. Unlike in larger networks, it seemed that the most active members of the OER community were regularly in touch with each other. New information communication technologies (ICT) have clearly played a role not only in making it possible for almost 20,000 individuals to develop OER through WikiEducator alone, but also to build a sense of community and camaraderie. A recent survey of WikiEducator members showed that 60.5%   had found out about the site from a friend or a referral, 19.3% had found the site through a search engine, 2.7% through a social tagging site, and 20% through other ways (WikiEducator, 2008). It appears that the open nature of the movement, in particular its leadership, has aided its early expansion.

Unlike more traditional academic fields, OER scholars are few and they appear to hold minor or mid-level management positions within their institutions, making it difficult to influence high level administrators. In addition, while it was MIT which first opened its courses to the World Wide Web, and was soon followed by Yale and other top tier US universities, members from these institutions do not seem to be present on a regular basis within any of the OER communities I studied. Having started my study by visiting the OCW Consortium website, it quickly becomes clear that while the universities within the consortium are producing some of the most valuable content within the OER movement, their online forums are not very active. WikiEducator seems to have, and be increasingly developing, this interactive environment yet, as David Porter (BC) stated, the quality of WikiEducator resources has still not reached the desired level. However, just as the internet and wiki technologies proved to be essential to the success of Wikipedia, these technologies can also enable WikiEducators have a broader societal impact. The ability for anyone with access to the internet to use OER from any place in the world, reduces the number of individuals who are needed for the movement to develop a critical mass.

This will be particularly helpful for the success of OER as their supporters are growing but limited in number in comparison to the broader population. Out of 7 billion people, what can be achieved by 20,000 members? Cumulatively, much more that most would expect! However, while some respondents considered OER to be part of a social movement, most of them asserted that OER is not a commonly known term, and has only moderate support. Abel Caine (UNESCO) envisions a steady growth in the use of OER and its support, yet he does not envision its development or use growing exponentially. David Porter emphasized the need to promote the reuse of OER, increase quality, and encourage new members to advocate for OER. In his view, OER communities are led by various charismatic individuals who, while they have been essential for the growth of OER, have also not provided much of a space for new voices to be heard.

The “benevolent dictator” is considered an influential aspect of other Free Culture initiatives such as Wikipedia, Linux, and OSS. While there are OSS initiatives without a charismatic leader, some of the most successful projects do have a key figure who plays an important role in guiding and developing the initiative. Functioning as CEOs these members hold considerable influence and contribute to the overall success of the initiative. This seemed to hold true for WikiEducator, according to my respondents. All of the individuals who were interviewed knew or had spoken to Wayne Mackintosh on some level, and had connections with various other OER members.

Apart from the regular exchange of ideas between different members of the OER community, David Porter mentioned that there is a high level of philosophical homogeneity among supporters. This was seconded by Joan Garfield*, as well as Joyce McKnight (SUNY), and Pheo Martin (REPI). Yet, Pheo Martin and others emphasized that, given the small size of the OER community, this degree of homogeneity is not surprising. However, as the community expands, it will be more likely for subcultures or subsets of the community to develop. As of now, the number of developers and advocates is small and their sense of community has increased the sustainability of the OER movement by constructing a network of knowledge and support. Surprisingly, despite the collective spirit of WikiEducator, several of the individuals interviewed mentioned that resources are currently developed primarily by individual contributors and cooperation is not as common as one would expect.

Conclusions from Interviews and Participant Observation

After conducting 13 interviews and being part of the community for most of the spring 2011 semester, it became apparent that WikiEducators, despite sharing a belief in the importance of developing OER, have different motivations for joining the community. Reasons given ranged from having been hired by an institution supportive of OER to having a desire to make education free for all and developing resources during their spare time. Despite my interest in learning more about the importance of WikiEducator for developing countries, only one participant from a developing country was interviewed. Simon Yalams (Jamaica Technology University) expressed a strong interest in OER, but had not been able to spend as much time developing them as he had hoped. He saw the need for more resources to be developed locally, but was primarily interested in increasing their use and support across Jamaica. With 47 countries represented in the OERU planning meeting it would be beneficial to analyze WikiEducator from a multicultural perspective. In regards to sustainability, it would be interesting to see if they will have financial difficulties in the upcoming years, or whether the open model will continue to sustain itself. The WikiEducator website generates between 8 and 10 million online hits per month. Developing a sustainable financial model will require a substantial amount of donations and grant awards. To meet this challenge, they have developed packages for individuals and organizations to buy a membership and be part of the OER Foundation (OERF). Members did not answer whether they thought WikiEducator itself was sustainable, but rather discussed economic problems in terms of the broader OER movement. In general, WikiEducator is a very open and community oriented environment. They have concerns over quality, but they have continuously increased the number of resources available and participating members, and they are confident about meeting the quality challenge over time. Reaching a critical mass of contributors and supporters is key to increasing adoption and to the overall success of the initiative. Opinions about the future of OER and WikiEducator or whether OER was a social and/or an international movement varied, yet respondents generally agreed that the community will continue to grow over time. A very close community, OER have benefited from inter-institutional cooperation and support. Having members from a long list of countries and places, but being a project of the Commonwealth of Learning, whose countries communicate primarily in English, parallel WikiEducator projects in different languages may not be as successful. Further study will help clarify some of these questions.

Conclusions – Research Framework

While this preliminary study provided me with a broad understanding of WikiEducator and the OER community and the relationships between different institutions supporting OER, asking questions that deal with more specific details would be helpful in producing a more nuanced and in-depth study. Additional interviews would enable me to find out more about certain issues, as well as increase the number of members from other countries who participate in WikiEducator, adding their perspectives to my analysis. Aiming to provide the reader with the thickest description possible, spending 9 months to a year participating in WikiEducator would help me to develop deeper and more nourishing relationships with community members who may then be more open to sharing further details about their experiences. Perhaps I would eventually obtain access to some of the people in key administrative roles within WikiEducator.

Thank you WikiEducators for your help and collaboration in making this idea a reality!

Works Cited

Alexa. (2011, May 07). Wikipedia.org – Wikipedia. Retrieved May 07, 2011, from Alexa.com – The Web Information Company: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikipedia.org.

Baraniuk, R. (2006, August). Richard Baraniuk: Open Source Learning. Retrieved November 3, 2010, from TED Ideas Worth Spreading: http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_baraniuk_on_open_source_learning.html

Benkler, Y. (2009). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Bilir, T. E. (2009). Real economies in virtual worlds: A massively multiplayer online game case study, Runescape. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.

Boellstorff, T. (2008). Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores the Virtually Human. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Correll, S. (1995). The Ethnography of an Electronic Bar. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography , 270-298.

Daniel, J., Kanwar, A., & Uvalić-Trumbić, S. (2007, 6 15). Mass Tertiary Education in the Developing World: Distant Prospect or Distinct Possibility? Retrieved February 20, 2011, from Commonwealth of Learning: http://www.col.org/resources/speeches/2007presentations/Pages/2007-massTertiaryEd.aspx

DOL. (2011, January 20). US Labor Department encourages applications for Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College . Retrieved January 23, 2011, from United States Department of Labor: http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/eta20101436.htm

Donner, J. (2008). Research Approaches to Mobile Use in the Developing World: A Review of the Literature. The Information Society , 140–159.

Downes, S. (2007). Models for Sustainable Open Educational Resources. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects , 29-44.

Elliot, A. (2009). Contemporary Social Theory. New York: Routledge.

Fetterman, D. M. (1989). Ethnography: Step-by-Step. London: SAGE.

Foucault, M. (1984). The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon .

Friesen, N., & Hopkins, J. (2008). Wikiversity: or education meets free culture movement: An ethnographic investigation. First Monday .

Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

GNU. (2010, November 12). The Free Software Definition. Retrieved April 25, 2011, from GNU Operating System: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Hanisch, C. (1970). The Personal is Political. Notes From the Second Year: Women’s Liberation: Major Writings of the Radical Feminists .

Harry, D. (2005). Bridging the Gap: How Offline Relationships Affect Online Sociality in World of Warcraft. Needham: Olin College.

Heeks, R. (2008). ICT4D 2.0: The Next Phase of Applying ICT for International Development. Computer , 26-33.

Hine, C. M. (2000). Virtual Ethnography. London: SAGE.

Kafker, F. A., & Loveland, J. (2009). The Early Britannica: The Growth of an Outstanding Encyclopedia. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation.

Kamenetz, A. (2010). DIY U: Edupunks, Edupreneurs, and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.

Katz, R. N. (2008). The Tower and The Cloud: Higher Education in the Age of Cloud Computing. Boulder: EDUCAUSE.

Kouritzin, S. (2002). The “Half-Baked” Concept of “Raw” Data in Ethnographic Observation. Canadian Journal of Education , 119-138.

Kramer, F. D., Starr, S. H., & Wentz, L. (2009). Cyberpower and National Security. Washington D.C.: Potomac Books Inc.

Kurzweil, R. (2006). The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. New York: Penguin.

Lessig, L. (2005). Free Culture – How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control. New York: Penguin Press HC.

Levine, R. (2006, September 6). New Web Sites Seeking Profit in Wiki Model. New York Times .

Mackintosh, W. (2011, May 5). EL4C50 – WikiEducator Learning4Content Workshop . Retrieved May 5, 2011, from WikiEducator: http://otago.wikieducator.org/Learning4Content/Workshops/eL4C50/Workshop_schedule#Getting_started_.28Pre-workshop.29

Murley, D. (2008). What Second Life Taught Me about Learning. Law Library Journal , 787-792.

Myrdal, G. (1972). How Scientific are the Social Sciences? Journal of Social Issues , 151-170.

Nardi, B. (2010). My Life as a Night Elf Priest: An Anthropological Account of World of Warcraft (Technologies of the Imagination: New Media in Everyday Life). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Naughton, B. (1993). Deng Xiaoping: the economist. The China Quarterly , 491-514.

OECD. (2007). Giving Knowledge for Free: The Emergence of Open Education Resources. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Palloff, R. M. (2009). Building Online Learning Communities: Effective Strategies for the Virtual Classroom. Hoboken: Jossey-Bass.

Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching Digital Natives: Partnering for Real Learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.

Prensky, M. (2010). Why You Tube Matters? The Horizon , 124-131.

Reagle Jr., J. M. (2010). Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.

Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, P., Fieldhouse, M., Gunter, B., et al. (2008). The Google Generation: The Information Behavior of the Researcher of the Future. Emerald Insight , 290-310.

Sachs, J. D. (2005). The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York: Penguin Press.

Schaller, R. R. (1997). Moore’s law: past, present and future. Spectrum – IEEE , 52-59.

Somekh, B., & Lewin, C. (2006). Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: SAGE.

Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation is Changing Your World. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Taylor, J. C. (2007). Open Courseware Futures: Creating a Parallel Universe. e-JIST , 1-9.

UNESCO. (2011). Shifting Focus to Open Education Practices – Opal Report 2011. Paris: UNESCO.

Vest, C. M. (2006). Open Content and the Emerging Global Meta-University. EDUCAUSE Review , 18-30.

Walsh, T. (2010). Unlocking the Gates: How and Why Leading Universities Are Opening Up Access to Their Courses. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

WikiEducator. (2008). WikiEducator Survey for New Accounts. Internet: WikiEducator.

WikiEducator. (2010, December 24). WikiEducator:M and E Overview. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from WikiEducator: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:M_and_E_Overview

Wiley, D. (2007). On The Sustainability of Open Education Resource Initiatives in Higher Education. Paris: OECD.

Wittel, A. (2000). Ethnography on the move: From field to net to Internet. Forum: Qualitative Social Research , 23 Paragraphs.

Wolcott, H. F. (2008). Ethnography: A Way of Seeing. AltaMira Press.

WSIS. (2011, May 6). Should OER favour commercial use? Retrieved May 07, 2011, from WSIS Platform of Communities: http://www.wsis-community.org/pg/debates/group:14358/phase/251476/252291

Yee, N. (2006). The Demographics, Motivations and Derived Experiences of Users of Massively Multi-User Online Graphical Environments. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments , 309-329.

Annex #1 – Original Letter Sent to OER and WikiEducator Supporters

To: Mark Brown

Dear OER and Wikieducator.org supporter,

My name is Alfonso Sintjago, I am a PhD student from Venezuela studying at the University of Minnesota and I am currently conducting an ethnographic study of the OERU – Wikieducator.org initiative (http://wikieducator.org/User:Sintjago). Apart from engaging in the community as a participant observer and analyzing forum data through discourse analysis, I am hoping to conduct interviews regarding OERs and investigate how individuals become involved in this initiative, their aspirations, their outlooks, and other personal opinions.

I hope to record video conferences with users, OER advocates, developers, and other community members and share the interviews through the use of a CC-BY license. These interviews may be podcasted, vodcasted, and placed on a YouTube channel for increased viewing. The interviews could also be private and anonymous if this is in the interest of the participant. I appreciate your time and collaboration. Please contact me if you are interested in scheduling an interview. My schedule is currently flexible and I am available most days.

To increase transparency, I wanted to clarify my personal beliefs and possible biases. I am currently promoting the increased use of OER in Latin America and development of them from educators in the United States in institutions such as the University of Minnesota, as well as through academic communities whose work focuses on development issues or public studies. I am also interested in promoting the development of OER by academics who have left developing countries, by promoting a brain gain or the production of “knowledge remittances”. However, I am interested in learning about your opinion and experience, and listening to the multiple influences, perspectives and voices about OER, its local and global implications.

These conversations have the flexibility to be private or open to accommodate different opinions and desires. Participants will have the opportunity at the beginning and the end of the study to express their desire for the information to be considered private, confidential and anonymous. I truly hope you are able to participate. While I plan on doing my personal remix with materials captured through the conversations, by being CC-BY, this material could later be used in a number of additional ways. Willing your participation, this material could also later be expanded through focus groups organized according to type of interaction (student, developer), region, or mixed groups to further discuss some shared topics, goals, and experiences.

I hope you are able to share with me sometime in the upcoming weeks your motivation, your experience and your thoughts as an OER developer.

Thank you for your time,

Alfonso Sintjago

352-359-4026

sintj002@umn.edu

Do not reply to this email. To respond to this invitation, click the button above or the link below.
http://my.timedriver.com/af3248798sd98u89uu98uu98agsdf  – Powered by TimeTrade

To: Dennis Taylor

Annex #2 – Modified Letter Sent to OER and WikiEducator Supporters

Dear OER and Wikieducator.org supporter,

My name is Alfonso Sintjago, I am a PhD student from Venezuela studying at the University of Minnesota, USA and I am currently conducting an ethnographic study of the OERU – Wikieducator.org initiative (http://wikieducator.org/User:Sintjago). Apart from engaging in the community as a participant observer and analyzing forum data through discourse analysis, I am hoping to conduct interviews regarding OERs and investigate how individuals become involved in this initiative, the broader OER movement, their aspirations, their outlooks, and other personal opinions.

I hope to either take notes during the meeting, or record the audio or video from the interview, depending on the wishes of the participant. The interview can be private and anonymous if this is in the interest of the participant. If the participant wishes, the recorded audio, video or written notes from the interview can be posted online and shared through the use of a CC-BY license.
I appreciate your time and collaboration. Please contact me if you are interested in scheduling an interview. My schedule is currently flexible and I am available most days.

I hope you are able to share with me sometime in the upcoming weeks your motivation, your experience and your thoughts as an OER developer.

Thank you for your time,

Alfonso Sintjago

352-359-4026

sintj002@umn.edu

skype: fastfonz

Do not reply to this email. To respond to this invitation, click the button above or the link below.
http://my.timedriver.com/af3248798sd98u89uu98uu98agsdf

Powered by TimeTrade

Annex #3 – Original List of Questions for Semi-Structured Interviews

OER Ethnography Study – Questions (1^st Draft)

Thank you for deciding to contribute to this study. Below are some of the questions that we may discuss during the interview. The interview will be semi-structured and I am also interested in learning from you what you consider relevant. Feel free to expand on any point or make suggestions about other areas to explore. These questions are only an outline of potential topics. The questions will be refined and modified after a predetermined number of interviews to better address relevant issues. Some of the questions will not be addressed due to time constrains and availability.

Thank you for your collaboration,

Alfonso Sintjago

How and when did you first become involved with OER? How has your involvement with OER changed over time? What attracts you the most about OER?

If the answer is different from the previous question, how and when did you first become involved with Wikieducator.org and the OERU initiative?

How does OER influence knowledge and technology transfers? locally and globally what, in your opinion, is the goal of the OER movement? Is the OER a social movement?

Do you consider Wikieducator.org and OERU an international movement or an international initiative? Why or why not?

What are some of the greatest obstacles facing OER? Should every country participate in the development of OER?

Should OER be produced in least spoken languages as well as major languages?

Would you say they are currently being developed in a large number of languages, which languages are most prevalent? How important is contextualization in the production of OER?

What license should OER be produced under (if Creative Commons, what type of Creative Commons)? What license do you publish most of your work under?

Are you currently employed? Does your employer support the development of OER?

How important is strong support from the university administration for the development of OER?

How important is grass roots support of local communities for the development of OER? Is Wikieducator.org sustainable? Which other OER supporting websites are, in your opinion, sustainable?

What are some obstacles that limit you from spending a greater amount of time developing OER?

What are some of the greatest obstacles the OERU and the WikiEducator initiative face? What are some of the initiative greatest strengths and greatest weaknesses?

What are some limitations of OER? Wikieducator.org and the OERU initiative?

Are most people aware of what OER means or are they passive users of OER?

What leads a person to become more active in the community? How does the community strengthen itself?

Is Wikieducator.org doing enough in terms of outreach? Is the OER community doing enough in terms of outreach?

How are the wikieducator.org and OERU community different from the OER community at large?

Should the term OER be a household or commonly known term?  Have you taught your children about OER? Are your family and friends supportive of OER?

Are most of your friends aware of what OER are and are they supportive of the idea?

Have you met people within Wikieducator.org? Have these relationships extended between the online community? What has been the nature of these relationships?

To what extent do you consider OERU and Wikieducator.org to be an online community? What has limited it from growing?

If you do not mind me asking, how do you identify yourself; political conservative, liberal, independent?

How do you envision the OER movement to be in 2 years, 5 years, 10 years? What role with the OERU and Wikieducator.org play in the future of OER? What role does OER play within ICT4D?

How many hours do you devote a week to the development of OER? How frequently do you visit Wikieducator.org or affiliated websites? Which other websites do you visit?

Which OER sites do you frequently visit?  How did the OERU idea develop? What has been your level of involvement with the OERU initiative?

What do you think is the greatest barrier for other universities when considering whether or not to join the OER movement?

What has the OER community done to increase awareness of OER? What other steps need to be taken?

What to you is the ultimate goal of OER? Are OERs sustainable? Why or why not?

Please explain your work within OER and what led you to choose this approach when developing education resources? What is your average day like? Have you recently participated in OER courses?

If there was one variable missing from the OER that is most hindering its growth and expansion, what would that be? What is the greatest piece missing in the OER movement?

Annex #4 – Modified List of Questions for Semi-Structured Interviews

Most Frequently Asked Questions (2^nd Draft)

How and when did you first become involved with OER? How has your involvement with OER changed over time? What attracts you the most about OER?

What are some of the greatest obstacles facing OER? Should every country participate in the development of OER?

How important is strong support from the university administration for the development of OER?

What are some obstacles that limit you from spending a greater amount of time developing OER?

What leads a person to become more active in the community? How does the community strengthen itself?

Should the term OER be a household or commonly known term?  Have you taught your children about OER? Are your family and friends supportive of OER?

Are most of your friends aware of what OER are and are they supportive of the idea?

Have you met people within Wikieducator.org? Have these relationships extended between the online community? What has been the nature of these relationships?

If you do not mind me asking, how do you identify yourself; political conservative, liberal, independent?

Which OER sites do you frequently visit?  How did the OERU idea develop? What has been your level of involvement with the OERU initiative?

What do you think is the greatest barrier for other universities when considering whether or not to join the OER movement?

What has the OER community done to increase awareness of OER? What other steps need to be taken?

What to you is the ultimate goal  of OER? Are OERs sustainable? Why or why not?

Please explain your work within OER and what led you to choose this approach when developing education resources? What is your average day like? Have you recently participated in OER courses?

Motivational Videos – OER – CI5323 Assignment – Week 6

February 23, 2011

As part of a UMN Class, I recently had to send to the instructor a motivational video for week 6 of the course. The course online learning communities is taught by Cassie Scharber and has been an interesting experience.

– Steve Johnson: “Where Good Ideas Come From”

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU&w=640&h=390]

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU (Riverheadview) – Looks like an RSA Animate

– Tim Berners-Lee: The year open data went worldwide

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YcZ3Zqk0a8&w=640&h=390]

> http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/tim_berners_lee_the_year_open_data_went_worldwide.html (TED Talk – Short – 6 mins)

Together these videos symbolize how we can all benefit from the growth of Open Education Resources, not only could individuals anywhere in the world obtain access to high quality educational materials, increase lifelong learning and perhaps help some individuals with limited financial means to obtain a university degree, but how the development of OER can also contribute to worldwide innovation.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Other videos by Steven Johnson:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7a5YZ_m0Ys (Fora TV – 5 mins)

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0af00UcTO-c (TED Talk – 16 mins)

Other videos by Tim Berners-Lee:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM6XIICm_qo (TED Talk – 16 mins)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IQFjTnDozo (UnitedBritannia – 3 mins)

• Note: How does the ability to change your image regularly change how others interact with a person and how will it change a person’s behavior? Will individuals within an online community be colorless and be judged more by the context of their character than by the appearance?

• Will conflict be promoted in this course? What is your opinion of the quote? And if conflict will be encouraged and regulated, how will it be regulated and encouraged within the course?

Online Communities Week 3

2/7/2011

1) Quotes:

a) The use of online communities such as Second Life for the delivery of online classes may change this picture, however, by providing “noisier” spaces that make use of graphic three-dimensional avatars and voice, as well as the use of text. (Read more at location 790 – Kindle)

–      Note: How does the ability to change your image regularly change how others interact with a person and how will it change a person’s behavior? Will individuals within an online community be colorless and be judged more by the context of their character than by the appearance?

b) So if conflict is not such a bad thing, and if it is necessary in order to achieve group cohesiveness and intimacy, why do so many fear it and attempt to avoid it, especially in the online medium? And how do we as educators establish norms and procedures for resolving conflict in this virtual community of online learning? (Read more at location 945 – Kindle)

–      Will conflict be promoted in this course? What is your opinion of the quote? And if conflict will be encouraged and regulated, how will it be regulated and encouraged within the course?

2) –Discussion Puzzle:

Quote: It is clearly no longer enough to be simply social animals, babbling together at cocktail parties and brawling with each other in business and over boundaries. It is our task—our essential, central, crucial task—to transform ourselves from mere social creatures into community creatures. It is the only way that human evolution will be able to proceed. (p. 165) – Location 714 (Kindle – Sorry but I won’t be able to quote pages — while the Kindle software should include both the page number and the location, it currently includes only the a fixed text location)

– When I read this quote, I thought about in which ways are we truly different today than we were yesterday? In what ways are the homo sapiens different today? Communism tried to create a more gregarious altruistic “new” man, and develop a stronger community built upon the idea of togetherness. Yet, despite their efforts, neo-liberalism or capitalism proved to be more akin to human nature (requiring less government control and coercion to be successful), more economically productive, and along with a much longer list of reasons, capitalism and individualism triumphed.

With this in mind, why would technology or digital communities create society that would be any more community oriented (in broader terms) than it has been before? Narcissistic and individualistic tendencies are on the rise (1). More importantly why would man be more community oriented tomorrow? Thinking about tomorrow, I came across a TED talk while reading an article on CNN (2) regarding “homo evolutis”.  While the technological advances explored in this video are very promising, they made me question the assumption that the digital divide is shirking, instead than it has only been bridged within certain technological advances. What are your thought on the effect of technology on man and culture? While mobile technology is becoming increasingly ubiquitous, other technologies may also be increasing exclusion and depending on future policy changes our own health may in the future be prolonged according to our financial capacity.  (As it will be the case with many of my future post, this post was written to hopefully generate an educated debate and some degree of controversy)
1 – http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/sep2010/bs20100913_429948.htm

2 – http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/06/enriquez.gullans.human.species/index.html

3) I am interested in seeing to what degree “groupthink” develops within our community. I also visited WELL’s website (Whole Earth ’Lectric Link) and found their site somewhat antiquated but the site appeared to still be active. I wanted to learn more about them, their development and transitions. It was interesting how the book encouraged celebrating events together and also the need to during unfortunate times mourn together. One of the questions I had about WELL and other communities was: How do most online communities form and what is their bonding element? Be it through an MMORPG or through a shared interested in Hispanic food, do all communities share a common element? Also, what are the most successful online communities and did some of them become social movements, and if so, how? The reading was interesting but it brought forth more questions than answers.

3

EDPA 4xxx – Innovation Lab

(Class should be cross listed so that it can fulfill a requirement for most CEHD students)

Credit Hours: 1

Number of Students: 5 to 10

Course Grading: Pass or Fail (No A through F)

(Alfonso Sintjago and Isaac Bolger)

Course Description:

Prerequisite: None

This course will serve as a space where CEHD students will be able to expand on their innovative ideas by collaborating with other students within the school of education. They will develop projects of their interest and contribute to other project being developed by their peers. While students are currently learning about a wide number of innovative ideas taking place within the field of education, there are few opportunities for students to go beyond the textbook and develop projects that can impact the local and global community during their studies at the University of Minnesota. Having a very capable, highly educated and self-motivated group of students, this laboratory could serve as an empowering space, where individuals could learn to develop, collaborate on, and implement innovative projects transforming and improving society. The course would promote the regular discussion of ideas. A bulletin board would be developed where ideas would be visualized and discussed by all the members. Through the bulletin board, students will be able to share their innovative ideas and obtain feedback and support for their concepts from other students. Everyone will be encouraged to promote various ideas throughout the course of the semester. Students will be able to submit these ideas either openly or anonymously. As a number of ideas are explored and refined, every year the most captivating ideas would be realized. Students can either chose to collaborate on a particular project or use the space to develop their own unique idea. With the school’s purchase of iPads for CEHD undergraduate students, one of the particular projects that will be discussed will be the establishment of an iOS application development team and the implications of mobile technology for education.

The course will be located in Wulling Hall and students will have access to examples of educational technology available in the market (such as the Kno, Nook, Kindle, $100 laptop, etc). The space will include white boards, bulletin boards, conference tables, small work spaces. There will be areas where students can pin up photos, physical articles, as well as other physical objects that are ed-related.There will also be a PC set up with some recent, and older, simulations and bookmarks connecting to education software examples. Through the use of a Moodle site students will be able to communicate and discuss, not only within the confines of the physical laboratory, but anywhere in the world. Through a number of semesters, successful projects will be continued and expanded. Particular attention will be given to national and international educational innovation competitions. The class will consist of 2 hours/week for 7 weeks and can be re-taken for up to 3 credits for students wishing to undertake longer projects. Students will not be required to sign up for a credit to be engaged. Yet, students will be required to apply to be admitted into the laboratory.

Some of the topics that may be discussed include the impact of incentives on a student’s motivation, the growing use of Open Education Resources (OER), the “gamification” of education, rapid growth and spread of online education, growing use of blended learning, one laptop per student initiatives, the implications of cloud computing, mobile learning, invisible learning, the impact of innovative design, diversity within the charter school movement, the movement towards a personalized education, increased access to educational material outside of traditional education settings and its implications for lifelong learning and its impact on formal schooling, as well as other innovative education policies currently being discussed and implemented in different communities and countries across the world. Students will be evaluated based on their attendance, their contributions to the innovation lab, and on a final report and presentation.

ICGC-COMPTON INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP (Application 2011)

January 18, 2011

As a PhD student within the Comparative and International Development Education program, I am interested in exploring and researching the concept of dependency, development, technology and inequality. Having met other ICGC-Compton fellows during my first year at the University of Minnesota, I found myself to have a strong relationship with several of these students and would be very interested in being part of this learning community. I have a strong interest and an affinity with Latin America, and it is my goal to spend my professional career working in the region. “A man’s feet must be planted in his country, but his eyes should survey the world.” George Santayana. During my time at the University of Minnesota, I hope to learn the skills and obtain the knowledge to help steer Latin America or a developing country to a more equitable and inclusive future. Through both critical pedagogy and experiential learning, I hope to give back to the region from which I came. As with my master in Latin American Studies – Development, I hope throughout my graduate studies to further explore the question of “development” and society. As the best trained individuals migrate to improve their socioeconomic conditions, developing countries periodically lose a portion of their human capital investments to the international brain drain. During my PhD studies I hope to find ways in which technology can help reduce the impact of the brain drain, influence brain gain initiatives and “knowledge remittances” as well as study the ways in which technology can provide a space for both youth and marginalized voices to empower themselves and address societal problems. The improvement of the education system in developing countries should address issues such as peace education, conflict resolution, environmental sustainability, civic values, and service values. These objectives can be address by the proper inclusion of technology within society and the classroom and the promotion of best practices. As modern technologies become more ubiquitous, they will increasingly influence the global economy, and, as a consequence, formal education.

Despite their promise, modern technologies can accentuate rather than reduce inequalities. They can strengthen the influence and the advertising capabilities of the richest countries, eroding local traditional values. Modern technologies also may improve the terms of trade in favor of the northern states, developed or “center” countries who export their technological innovations to developing states at a cost which surpasses the income generated through the exportation of raw materials (least developed countries most common export goods) and the discretionary income of the majority of the population. It is therefore not unfair to question whether the acquisition of modern technologies improve living conditions throughout third world countries, or whether it increases a country’s dependency on foreign goods that develop new societal “needs” or wants rather than address the pre-existing needs and problems. The erosion of local communities, local dialects and cultures in an increasingly globalized world is a subject that has been extensively studied. In many instances modern technologies have increased dependency and inequality. As certain technologies such as television sets and computers and mobile phones become more ubiquitous, the debate has shifted towards how to best use modern technologies within developing countries. Information Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) is a rapidly growing field addressing some of these questions.

Within my research, I am particularly interested on the possible influence of Open Education Resources (OER). Some of the most common and well known OER projects include the OpenCourseWare Consortium, Connexions Consortium, Educational Arcade, and Open Source Software as well as other freely accessible knowledge repositories such as Wikipedia. Today in the United States, an individual could obtain a free computer through a “learn to pay” program and access a freely accessible internet hotspot through a library or a business such as McDonalds or Starbucks.  In addition, the need for a powerful personal computer may decrease as more and more companies invest on web-based programs and move their services to the cloud. Studies show that the cost of technology has decreased rapidly over time and individuals are increasingly storing more digital information. Currently Google offers any individual seven gigabytes of free cloud storage. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Blogger and other freely accessible websites allow individuals to upload their own media content, develop social or business relationships and share their thoughts and opinions instantaneously to the world, requiring a increasingly reduced personal investment. However, the internet has become increasingly “balkanized”. While one out of every four servers runs on Apache OS software (Linux), companies such as Macintosh, Microsoft and Google are providing services that are yet only accessible to the affluent members of society. Technological innovations such as augmented reality devices, motion sensors and touch screen interfaces are providing a different technological experience to a segment of society remaining inaccessible to the general population. Despite the introduction of iPad and other technological devices into various educational institutions during the past year, it can be questioned whether they will have a strong pedagogical influence on education or simply act as a novelty item. The rapidly changing nature of the system further generates difficulties in developing best policies and evaluating the impact of the technological changes. When moving into the future, which technologies must developing countries invest on? How will developing countries move from being programmed to becoming programmers?

Not only is technology changing rapidly but with it so has the general society. The way scholarship, business, and government are conducted today are very different from how they were conducted a few decades ago. Within this rapidly changing context, what will be the influence of Open Education Resources? Will they lead to a transformation of education as we know it as in order to meet the needs of an information and an innovation based 21^st century society? What role must governments take to increase computer literacy and reduce the digital divide? To what degree should technology be prioritized within a country’s development plans and what future should developing countries attempt to leapfrog into? How must developing countries transform their education system to meet the challenges of the 21^st century and improve their terms of trade and diminish their long term dependency? To meet these research objectives during my time at the University of Minnesota, I plan to obtain a minor in evaluation studies as well as an online learning certificate.

Modern technology has a strong influence on today’s youth. Technology can empower youth and allow them to both develop and publish media from a very early age. Generations Y, and Z grew up and have lived in a world characterized by rapid change and technological improvement. Having only ten years in existence, Wikipedia is used more frequently than traditional encyclopedias such as encyclopedia Britannica. Beginning less than 8 years ago, Facebook today has close to $700 members and is valued at over $50 billion. The rapid growing costs of a university education, may lead to unexpected changes within the higher education industry. How will these changes affect individuals in developing countries? According to some, the United States itself can be considered a “developing” country, under these lenses what are the objectives and what path must be taken by developing countries as they adapt to meet the needs of the 21^st century? Unlike their parents, “digital natives” are expected to change jobs on a regular basis. How will teachers meet the challenge of teaching “digital natives?”  What will education be for developing countries in the later part of the 21^st century?

During my studies, I will analyze innovative programs taking place throughout Latin America including initiatives such as the One Laptop per Child (OLPD) program, rural connectivity program, technological community center programs, and other programs which are helping students obtain the skills to not only use modern media and improve their computer skills, but learn the basic of programs, finding reliable sources, creating media, and networking. Some of the countries which I am currently surveying include the Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Argentina, Mexico and Haiti. I plan on researching in one of these countries both during this summer and in future years.

Some of the Dominican Republic recent technological initiatives include the establishment of the Technological Institute of the Americas, (ITLA) founded in 2000, the Dominican Telecommunication Institute (INDOTEL), established in 1998, the Cyberpark of Santo Domingo, founded in 2001, and the new Network Access Point (NAP) of the Caribbean built in 2008 as well as various innovative programs such as LINCOS (Current CTCs), and Educando.edu.do, among others. The government’s investments in ICT technologies recently resulted in the First Lady of the D.R. receiving the World Information Society Award in 2007 from the United Nations. While the Dominican Republic education expenditure accounts for a below average 2.2% o the GDP (2007), during the governments of Leonel Fernandez (1996-2000 & 2004-today), and Hipolito Mejia (2000-2004) the Dominican Republic has greatly improved and expanded its telecommunication industry.

The increased investment and emphasis on ICT development has contributed to the rapid expansion of Internet use in the D.R. in recent years, increasing from 183.687 Internet accounts in 2006 to 508.603 Internet accounts by June 2010.  Based on the average users per Internet connection, INDOTEL believes that 33% of Dominicans, or 3,214,371 people, had access to the Internet by June 2010 (INDOTEL, 2010). The D.R. has a cell phone use rate of 0.91 cellular phones per person (INDOTEL, 2010), and mobile phone coverage is increasing in rural areas. In addition, through the rural connectivity program, INDOTEL hopes to bring broadband access to every town with over 300 inhabitants by 2012 (San Roman, 2009; INDOTEL, 2010). The telecommunications industry has grown by over 15% annually between 1997 and 2004 with most of the traffic from the D.R. is destined for the United States (Stern, 2006). With 1 million, or 9%, of Dominicans living outside the country, most of them in the United States, the D.R. received 3.477 billion dollars in remittances in 2009 (World Bank, 2010). Remittances are not only a major source of foreign revenue but they have also fueled the growing development of ICT as families are in favor of investing to increase communication with their loved ones.

Having family living in the Dominican Republic, the country of origin of my paternal grandfather, I am currently networking to make a study there possible in the near future. Haiti has also promoted the use of ICT4D during the past year instituting an innovative mobile banking program. Mexico, through FLASCO, developed relationships in the past with a number of faculty members at the CEHD. Working as a graduate assistant for Dr. Andrew Furco, Associate Vice President for Public Engagement, I will likely be travelling to Argentina during the summer session were apart from fulfilling my requirements at a graduate assistant I will be networking with various organizations within Argentina that are involved in education technology and community engagement. Through my research in these organizations as well as others I hope to not only research but explore ways in which Latin America could appropriate modern technologies and transform them into tools that will guide them into a better tomorrow. Open Education Resources will increase the accessibility quality academic material among the population. A 1997 report by the Inter-American Development Bank identified the lag in education as the single greatest obstacle to future economic growth in the region (Cited in Birsall, 1999).[1]

Latin America today is one of the most unequal regions in the world. The promised trickle down effects of economic growth have failed to materialize, and in many countries the gap between rich and poor is actually increasing. This inequality breeds insecurity, increases social tensions and deepens divisions within societies. Education has been shown to be the most effective investment for raising both productivity and income among the poorest sectors of society and has therefore been identified as “the key factor for reducing the poverty, social tensions, and inequality that continue to plague the region” (Birdsall, 1999).[2] As stated by Anderson (2004), “education is one of the few sustainable means to equip humans around the globe with the skills and resources to confront the challenges of ignorance, poverty, war, and environmental degradation.”[3]

The biggest issue for Latin America is not the number of schools but the quality of the education they provide. The rich tend to educate their children privately, in schools equipped with the latest technology and textbooks, whilst the public school systems often suffer from a chronic lack and/or misuse of resources. It is my belief that online education may provide a cost effective and efficient way of expanding access to educational resources to include even the most marginalized groups within a society. Inspired by the pedagogical theories of Paulo Freire, I intend to examine how new linkages can be made between the life experiences and priorities of students and the online revolution.  Information Technology is no longer the exclusive domain of the rich in Latin America, and cybercafés can be found in some of the most remote and sparsely populated areas.

I hope that, after obtaining a PhD in Comparative and International Development Education, I may be able to participate in the formulation of such an initiative. My objective is to work for the educational ministry of a developing country or as an instructor and researcher in South America or another developing country. I am also interested in working for a non-profit or international organization linked to educational policy making and implementation and exploring the possibilities for cross-regional partnerships in this area.

Education can radically transform a human being, it can awaken our consciousness and opens the door to innumerable possibilities and opportunities. Education, formally or informally, empowers an individual and sets him free from the chains of helplessness. It challenges us to question our preconceptions, examine our values and moral codes and can foster a sense of civic and moral responsibility. Through a high-quality education the linkages between our own lives, the economic and political systems and the environment in which we live become clear, allowing for greater understanding of the consequences of our actions and our position in global society. Ignorance breeds fear and misunderstanding, which can lead to conflict and instability. A good education, therefore, represents one of our greatest tools in our struggle for peace, security and greater understanding among people from all around the world.

For these reasons I believe that my goals and objectives coincide with those of the Interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Global Change and the Compton International Fellowship. I firmly believe in the advantages of an interdisciplinary approach to education, receiving Bachelor’s degrees in Political Science, History, Sociology and Spanish from Ouachita Baptist University and an MA in Latin American Studies with an emphasis in Development from the University of Florida. During my graduate studies I was able to take courses in a number of subjects including economic development, gender and development, anthropology, political science and International Relations. I feel that my Master’s degree has provided me with a firm theoretical grounding in some of the main theories of development and the most pressing issues facing Latin America today. In addition, I was introduced to, and inspired by, the writings of Paulo Freire and theories of critical pedagogy and eco pedagogy. I intend to continue to develop my understanding of educational theory during the course of my PhD studies. By fostering social change through educational policy I hope that I will be able to participate in the construction of a fairer, more equal world, and bring real improvements to the lives of people in Venezuela and make the most of the fantastic opportunities I have been granted to help some of the poorest people in Latin America and begin to narrow the gap between rich and poor.

Adoption and Implementation of the iPad (Draft Survey)

 January 7, 2010

The purpose of this study is to investigate factors that relate to the adoption or nonadoption of the iPad by PsTL faculty.

Research question

How do organizational characteristics and perceptions of the iPad’s attributes relate to the adoption and implementation of the iPad?

Models

• Rogers’ (1995) Diffusion of Innovation
• Davis’ (1971) AVICTORY model for organizational change

Dependent variable

Whether or not faculty are classified as an Adopter or Nonadopter.

Adopters are those individuals who either intend to implement the iPad into courses, or those who already have implemented the iPad.  Nonadopters included faculty who have heard of the iPad and are in the process of gathering more information and those who do not intend to implement the iPad.

Independent variables:

• Perceptions of an innovation’s attributes (Rogers, 1995)
• Organizational characteristics (Davis, 1971)

Survey

The purpose of this study is to learn how faculty make decisions about implementing innovations in their courses. The specific innovation for this study is the iPad.

This survey consists of the following 3 sections and takes approximately 10 minutes to complete:

(1) Your stage in the decision-making process

(2) Your views of your organization’s characteristics

(3) Your views about the innovation’s characteristics

I.  Your individual stage in the innovation-decision process

Note:  This question should reflect your stage in the decision-making process, NOT CEHD’s stage (if they are different).

1.  Which statement best reflects your stage with regard to the iPad?  (check one)

(dependent variable)

q  I have not heard of this innovation.  (0)

q  I have heard of the iPad and have some understanding of what it can do.  (1)

q  I am in the process of gathering more information about the advantages and disadvantages of the iPad.  (2)

q  I do not intend to implement the iPad.  (3)

q  I intend to implement the iPad.  (4)

q  I have implemented the iPad in at least one of my courses.  (5)

q  I plan to continue using the iPad in my courses.  (6)

II.  Organizational Characteristics

Adapted from Davis’ (1971) AVICTORY model for organizational change.

For this section, focus on your perceptions of CEHD’s characteristics
with regard to the iPad. 

2.  Ability—Capacity to implement the innovation

a.   CEHD has sufficient information (knowledge) about the innovation and knows how to implement it.

b.   CEHD has the hardware and software necessary for implementation and maintenance of the innovation.

c.   CEHD has personnel available to implement this innovation.

d.   CEHD has the funds to implement this innovation.

e.   CEHD faculty are given enough time to learn about new innovations.

3.  Values—Pre-decisions, beliefs, manners of operating

a.   The iPad represents a significant departure from traditional practices of our organization.

b.   The iPad is consistent with our organization’s beliefs and values.

c.   CEHD has developed a commitment to implementing the innovation.

d.   CEHD faculty is/was involved in the decision to adopt the innovation.

e.   CEHD leadership supports this innovation.

4.  Idea—Information relevant to taking steps to solve the problem

a.   There is someone in CEHD who functions as a change agent, i.e., has championed implementation of the iPad.

b.   In CEHD it is difficult to obtain needed information about iPad.

5.  Circumstances—Prevailing factors pressing for or detracting from adoption

a.   External circumstances affecting CEHD are influencing or have influenced the implementation of the iPad.

b.   Internal circumstances affecting CEHD are influencing or have influenced the implementation of the innovation.

c.   CEHD is open and flexible with regard to implementing innovations.

6.  Timing—Synchrony with other significant events

a.   The time at which the iPad was first introduced was not the best for its adoption and implementation.

b.   We have/had flexibility as to when we can implement the iPad.

7.  Obligation—Felt need to do something about a problem

a.   The iPad is appropriate to the needs of our students.

8.  Resistance—Concerns for loss if the innovation is adopted

a.   There is/was staff resistance to implementing the iPad.

b.   We expect/expected negative consequences from adopting the iPad.

c.   CEHD faculty is/was suspicious of the reasons the iPad is being adopted.

d.   Ongoing work relationships may be/were disrupted by adoption of the iPad.

e.   CEHD faculty is/was disinterested in the iPad.

9.  Yield—Felt rewards or benefits

a.   Implementation of the iPad will be advantageous to CEHD (e.g., in terms of economic benefit, competitive edge, social prestige).

b.   Implementation of the iPad will be advantageous to me (e.g., in terms of economic benefit, competitive edge, social prestige).

III.  Your individual perceptions of the innovation’s characteristics

Adapted from Rogers (1997) Perceptions of an innovation’s attributes

For this section, focus on your views about implementing the iPad.

10.  Relative advantage—The degree to which the innovation is perceived as advantageous

a.   I think that implementing the iPad will be advantageous to my career.

b.   I think that implementing the iPad innovation will give me satisfaction that I’m enhancing student academic success.

11.  Compatibility—The degree to which the innovation is consistent with existing values and needs

a.   The iPad represents a significant departure from the way I traditionally teach. 

b.   The iPad is consistent with my beliefs and values. 

c.   I have a strong commitment to implementing the iPad. 

12.  Complexity—The degree to which the innovation is difficult to understand and use

a.   This iPad is difficult to understand and implement. 

c.   I do not know where to find information on the iPad. 

d.   The information I have found on the iPad is easy to understand. 

13.  Trialability—The degree to which the innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis

a.   I know how to test the iPad on a limited basis before implementing it in a course.

14.  Observability—The degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others

a.   I have seen the iPad in use. 

b.   I know other faculty who are using an iPad in a course.

c.   I have seen students using iPads.

Other

Answer ONE of the following questions:

Thank you for your time.