Kim Tucker - May 7th, 2007 at 7:09 am

    Response to Ken:

    I am glad you raise additional questions. Drawing out “good strategic questions” is one of the most significant things we can do in this process.

    Questions draw us towards the future (“which will be different from the past” to quote Wayne) . . . . sowing the seeds of action in the now . . . .

    This is what we tried to do while discussing a research agenda for OER - http://oerwiki.iiepunesco.org/index.php?title=OER_research_agenda

    Re: Is there the need to develop curriculum around commons-based peer development?

    Certainly include cbpp-like learning activities (among others) for most curriculi (learn by doing) - reminiscent of progressive inquiry and social constructionist activities highlighted in FLOSS such as http://fle3.uiah.fi and http://www.moodle.org. [In both of these, developments in the software were inspired by learning theory (and not the other way round)].

    For teacher training curriculi . . . yes! - facilitating learning via cbpp. If learners have access, collaboration with peers will occur, the challenge for teachers is to become facilitators and keep the learners “productive” towards common goals. In South Africa, it has been our experience that it is difficult to convince teachers to change their ways (another challenge) - building this into teacher training will ensure that the new crop of teachers is well primed.

    I agree it would strike at equity issues: enabling people to empower themselves with knowledge and to be able to engage in cbpp.

    One of Yochai Benkler's claims is that “when you have the kind of information/cultural production system that wikipedia represents, injected into modern complex democracies, you can see significant improvements in autonomy, democracy and, to a limited extent but with some probability, social justice or at least a more just form of global development.” (YB, Wikimania 2006).

    My concern is that most people in developing countries do not have access, so such benefits will not be as pronounced or immediate. In the interim, it might be better to assemble connected experts in the countries to produce base educational content of high quality and get that out there however possible (e.g. in printed form as Wayne suggests) - perhaps including peer production-type or social construction activities which do not require Internet access. Again, skilled facilitation may be necessary to achieve inclusiveness among participants.

    Re: would it help to generate a culture that supports and actively promotes peer development, . . .[and] . . . law that favors . . . community production, etc?

    One thing we must do is question our assumptions, and I suspect there are some in the implicit affirmative answer to this question. Would it help what? (reduce inequalities of access to knowledge/learning?). Whom would it help in what way? (those that are ahead already may simply move further ahead together at a faster rate). When? (only after people have physical access to computers and the Internet?). Why do we think this is important? (will it lead to a sustainable planet and world peace?).

    A question which arises for me (which might help map out intermediate objectives) is “Why do we not have such a culture right now?” - Perhaps we do, but behaviour is modified by the restrictive legal and economic climate created by those with a vested interest in outdated business models (Wikipedia, Apache and GNU/Linux exist in spite of the dominant economic models and legal climate). The Creative Commons offers a way round the legal restraints, and we see a blossoming of new business models in the open source world (http://www.opensourcestrategies.org/ ) and in publishing (e.g. http://icommons.org/2007/03/29/newbusiness-models-are-catching-on-%e2%80%93-lethem-gives-away-film-rights/ ).

    However, there is still a need to counter the pervading overly restrictive copyright regime.

    So, I agree, it would help to embed cbpp activities across the curriculum, and to use FLOSS and free/libre/open resources for education as examples, etc.

    Re: the virtuous cycle you described:

    The chain might well work. It reminds me of what sounded to me like an empassioned plea from Larry Lessig at Wikimania last year: to demonstrate the benefits of cbpp, sharing of knowledge and a read-write Internet to society in areas beyond Wikipedia. Efforts in the education space (such as Wikieducator, LeMill, Connexions, Wikiversity, Educommons, OCW, etc.) may turn out to be particiularly significant in this regard.

    Some education systems are moving in compatible directions. In South Africa there has been a move towards “outcomes-based education (and training)” - OBE(T).

http://www.saqa.org.za/show.asp?main=structure/nqf/docs/curricul2005.html&menu=docspol

    One would assume that once the required outcomes are defined, there is some freedom permitted in the approach to achieving those objectives. The materials produced in this process are released to the public domain. However, the process seems bogged down in bureaucracy and the complexities of gaining approval from SAQA. It has also proved difficult to convince educators to change their ways towards becoming facilitators of technology assisted learning (rather than fountains of knowledge).

    The Thutong portal http://www.thutong.org.za/ is becoming “freedom-friendly” by including a metadata field for the license of learning objects along with a host of others to enable effective search. It is not a wiki environment however, and cbpp is not yet accommodated within the portal itself.

    The (world-wide) challenge is to go ahead and create learning resources which embed cbpp among the learning activities, encourage wide use of the resources and the approach, to evaluate and demonstrate the effectiveness. In a Wiki environment (e.g. Wikieducator, Wikiversity, etc.) this is likely to be almost automatic.

    Another question that arises is “How do we integrate software development into this process?”

    Not everyone can or desires to develop software. I recall learning a lot about ecological processes through modelling. At the time, we mostly used spreadsheets and the programmers in the class were happy to share their knowledge in exchange for ecological insights. Together we produced models which seemed plausible. Although these models were not capable of quantitative prediction, they did illustrate the effects of variables on the systems under investigation, and helped us understand the processes. The key to this is either deskilling software development, or collaboration across disciplines. Raise awareness among FLOSS developers of the needs in education and encourage them to work with educators and learners. This is a good way to demonstrate the value of shared knowledge in problem solving.

    [A project I encountered some time ago intended to do something similar for non-profit organisations, though it seems more general now: http://www.socialsourcecommons.org/]

    One of the take-home messages from the modelling exercise above was that the real value of modelling is in the learning and insight gained through the modelling process (i.e. as opposed to the models produced or their qualitative predictions).

    Here is a useful set of models for learning physics I discovered some time ago: http://phetweb.colorado.edu/ .

    Would it make sense to construct learning activities with incomplete versions of such software - students could then develop the programs (e.g. define formulae) their own way as part of the learning. The complete source code would represent a solution to the exercise?

    In a wiki environment, I can imagine pages on specific needs for a piece of software, describing new use cases which software developers might like to implement in collaboration with the learners etc. as part of their software engineering programmes.

    In terms of content development, I recently heard of a project using collaborative video production as a means of “crossing cultural borders”.

    The great thing about software development and video co-production, is that they are sufficiently complex to require some co-planning, role and design negotiation, critical thinking and technical skill. Here is a project which emphasises a general ability which all learners should acquire through school” . . . the skill of analysis. . . the ability to break a complex problem into pieces, identify familiar patterns in the pieces, solve them using existing tools, and synthesize the results into a view or answer.” http://www.kusasa.org/ .

    “We want to ensure that learners graduate with this ability, making them effective, successful, productive and fulfilled members of society.”

    It might be useful to extend some of the ideas here into other levels of education and introduce social constructionist learning and cbpp in the development of the tool.

    For content production, see also http://www.elephantsdream.org/ as an example of an open movie built with FLOSS (www.blender.org) and with production files freely available.

    Much of the above type of activity is happening already (links welcome), we are not short of ideas and encouraging such activities can only help - even if it is done in low/no connectivity environments, and is seen as nurturing the existing culture of collaboration and sharing in readiness for cbpp when access for all becomes a reality.

    I think we agree that the people in Africa are likely to take to cbpp quite naturally on account of the traditional cultures, and by being less affected by the artificial barriers.

    In summary, embedding cbpp across curricular is recommended, and generating a culture of collaborative learning is a good idea, though the impact may be delayed and less pronounced in places where access is limited. FLOSS and collaborative free/libre/open content development may serve as good vehicles to promote cbpp, though the required culture of sharing may be nurtured even without the Internet.

    Speaking of peer production, it might be useful to share: