intro’d to him several years ago. the open guy.
this comment really stuck/resonated. quote that often.
just recently added the extra words.. after writing diplomacy.
David’s twitter name and bio sum him up – perhaps:
@opencontent – Working to improve the affordability and effectiveness of education for everyone.
tuesday, february 1, 2011
Dr. David Wiley is Associate Professor of Instructional Psychology and Technology at Brigham Young University, where he also serves as Associate Director of the Center for the Improvement of Teacher Education and Schooling with responsibility for the research unit.
David is founder and board member of the Open High School of Utah and Chief Openness Officer of Flat World Knowledge. David was formerly Associate Professor of Instructional Technology and Director of the Center for Open and Sustainable Learning at Utah State University. David has been a Nonresident Fellow at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School, a Visiting Scholar at the Open University of the Netherlands, and a recipient of the US National Science Foundation’s CAREER grant. David is also the Founder of OpenContent.org and was recently named one of the 100 Most Creative People in Business. His career is dedicated to increasing access to educational opportunity for everyone around the world.
David is an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons), and served a two-year mission for the church in Fukuoka, Japan. David lives in Utah with his wife, Elaine, and their five children.
open ed conf – open source moving into non-software types of communities
8 yrs ago only higher ed, but now greater involvement in 9-12 and community colleges
announcement via David dec 2013:
The small number of people in the world with deep expertise in open education just isn’t sufficient to get the job done.
i guess i’m not following what oer is.
doesn’t seem it would be that selective/difficult for people. perhaps it’s the trying to fit it into the current institutional thinking that’s making it difficult..
perhaps it’s the policy getting in the way ness – that’s making it difficult..?
isn’t it kaboshing the open ness if we have/assume ipr ? (sara ness) – how does anyone own anything? i thought that was one of the main things open was freeing us from/back to… no?
open highschool, he founded a couple yrs ago, it’s a charter school, fully online, public school, so state pays for utah students, and capacity is capped, funded for 250
committed to a high level, continuous quality improvement
in charter app:
1) only using open ed resources – to sustain ongoing continuous quality improvement
2) culture on really caring about data in day to day kinds of ways, rather than waiting till end
teachers involved in a process of being involved in learning management system
all course materials are loaded into moodle, students interact there
teachers interacting all day, skype, phone, etc
instead of giving same lecture 6 times in a day. so on days it works for you, you don’t hear from teacher, so sort of like a blended model but all on line
strategic tutoring… only
goal – to be useful/helpful
open 1.0 -mit – how it’s supported, not connected to something sustainable. also very much a read only as opposed to a read-write, even though all are open, there’s a lot that you couldn’t edit if you wanted to (pdf)
doesn’t model something others can adopt broadly
not a critique of mit – just the first guy out of the gate is a 1.0 and now it’s 10 yrs later, we ought to be better
2.0 – more connected – have revenue generations built in – can sustain over long time (how easily editable it is)
sunday, may 20, 2012
5/17/12 8:46 AM
Listening is important – but if you do not speak, people do not know you are listening to them, and will fall silent.
@dlnorman Yes, you can get a doc or docx version fromdownes.ca/me/mybooks.htm
@dlnorman The ePub version of CCK looks great in Calibre, thank you – I’ve posted it on my eBooks page –downes.ca/me/mybooks.htmDownes
I try to answer David Wiley’s questions – Experts and Empowermentdlvr.it/1XXzC3
wednesday, december 19, 2012
|George Siemens (@gsiemens)
12/18/12 8:55 PM
“there is time and room..to invent another model [mooc], a responsible and relevant one for the challenges of our time” globalhighered.wordpress.com/2012/12/18/the…
Education brands are investing in digital platforms for maintaining the traditional way of learning for the benefit of the same big ones, this. “If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change” as Lampedusa told us in his famous novel The Leopard. This is how digital technology is perversely used and how we miss their powerful enticement for innovation in education processes.
let’s not moot mooc..
Back to Cormier, the guy who coined the term “MOOC” back in 2008, long before Stanford’s massively-hyped online artificial intelligence class. That’s an important piece of education technology history that’s been overlooked a lot this year as Sebastian Thrun and his Stanford colleagues have received most of the credit in the mainstream press for “inventing” the MOOC.
But MOOCs have a longer history, dating back to some of the open online learning experiments conducted by Cormier, George Siemens, Stephen Downes, Alec Couros, David Wiley and others. Downes and Siemens’ 2008 class “Connectivism and Connective Knowledge,”for example, was offered to some 20-odd tuition-paying students at the University of Manitoba, along with over 2300 who signed up for a free and open version online.
In July, Downes made the distinction between “cMOOCs,” the types he has offered, and “xMOOCs,” those offered by Udacity, Coursera, edX and others. The terminology is very useful to help distinguish between the connectivist origins of MOOCs (and the connectivist principles and practices of open learning and online networks) and the MOOCs that have made headlines this year (with their emphasis on lecture videos and multiple choice tests). While cMOOCs are strongly connectivist and Canadian, xMOOCs, as Mike Caulfield contends, exist “at the intersection of Wall Street and Silicon Valley.”
wednesday, june 12, 2013
|Clay Shirky (@cshirky)
6/12/13 6:24 AM
As with SOPA/PIPA, Congress denying they understood what they agreed to may precede them changing their minds
a day even.
jan 2016 – open
Summary: The Consensus Around Open
Each and every one of these terms containing the word “open” and relating to education or educational technology has two things in common:
- Free access to the content, resource, journal article, data, knowledge artifact, software, or standard, and
- A formal grant of rights and permissions giving back to the user many of the rights and permissions copyright normally reserves exclusively for the creator or other rights holder.
As a shorthand, we might say open = free access + open licensing (e.g., GPL or Creative Commons).
openwashing: “to spin a product or company as open, although it is not.”
I couldn’t agree more with the notion that increased openness – free access to and 5R permissions in the platforms, tools, and resources they use – will put students and educators in an infinitely better position to achieve their goals.
Inasmuch as Laster is really arguing for interoperability in his article, I should make one final point. I wholeheartedly agree that companies, nonprofits, and other creators of educational platforms, tools, and resources should conform to standards that maximize their interoperability – standards like HTML5 for content, LTI for tools, and QTI for assessments. I hope that MH will become a role model worthy of emulating in this regard. Heaven knows the market would benefit from strong leadership by a major publisher. However, when platforms, tools, and resources are truly open, the community has the permissions necessary to fix any interoperability issues we discover in the platforms, tools, and resources we find otherwise valuable. That’s just one more benefit of being truly open.