Comments on: The First Rule of Government Spending

By: » OLDaily per Stephen Downes, 21 de febrer de 2009 TIC, E/A, REF / PER…:

Mon, 23 Feb 2009 02:40:41 +0000

[...] obert / en xarxa). David Wiley, iterating toward opennesss (iterant cap a l’obertura) [L'enllaç] [etiquetes: escoles, [...]

By: The Black Adder

The Black Adder — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:57:43 +0000

“..schools in the state still enter into contracts with commercial online curriculum providers that require them to pay for a “copy” for each and every student”

Yes, sadly you are correct. However the fault is with both parties. Commercial companies simply refuse to operate in any other way in some cases. The alternative then is for schools not to enter into any contracts.

Additionally, there are many teachers who fail to share the materials they develop. We’ve all had the “I spent all weekend developing this content, I’s sure as hell not giving it to my school system to give to others” reponse I’m sure.

And many universities seem to want to own things too – even BYU only releases its courses once you’ve enacted a shopping cart transaction…

Perhaps this will change over time.

Nice ideas.

By: John Hilton III

John Hilton III — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:41:26 +0000

I appreciate your insights and how you make the ideas clear. I think the paper could be strengthened with some specific examples to back up the assertions–e.g. when you say:

“An online educational resource is different from a physical educational resource because every student in the state of Utah can use the same online resource at the same time. We don’t need to buy a copy for every student in the state – one copy is enough for everyone! Yet despite this fact, schools in the state still enter into contracts with commercial online curriculum providers that require them to pay for a “copy” for each and every student. What a waste!”

What is a specific example of these online courses, how many copies did a state have to buy, and what was the total cost? That might be beyond the scope of what your trying to do, but might add to the argument.

By: Andrew Walker

Andrew Walker — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:58:15 +0000

Quickly, you’re problem is all about economics. One of your big dogs on the Open Ed campus, Wikipedia made combined “revenues” (donations, grants, micro-donations from users, etc . . . ) to the tune of 3.5 million last year. That’s probably not even the operating budget for the average print based publisher.

It’s not personal, it’s business. And when it comes to the business of decision making, publishers have more capital to throw at campaign contributions and lobbyists. It’s like asking why we spend so much money on the defense industry. When a piece of the f-16 is made in almost every state in the union, you’ll have enough congressional reps screaming when you propose a cut.

And these days–you seriously want to sell putting any industry out of business? You either need to change the way business is done, or recognize that it’s not just about the content (sadly enough), you need open education, you need open government, you need an open lobby. You need many people with deep wallets not just shelling it out, but raking it in that they cannot say no.

You want to hear a real tear-jerker? I had a colleague score an NSF DRK-12 grant to do curriculum development. One of the major work products was a textbook. Pure tax dollars being used to produce a print based resource with pure revenues going to a print based publisher. It’s not just about the licensing fee–they’re sticking us for the production cost!

Ok, not quick.

By: Rob Barton

Rob Barton — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:00:30 +0000

I don’t really like the use of the phrase “new economics” although some people still use it. I’m not sure what I’d replace it with, but it conjures up images of the “new economy” craze that led to the dot-com rise and fall in the late 90s/early 00s. Maybe it’s been long enough since then and maybe people in education didn’t go as crazy over the new economy as the business world did.

Otherwise, this is just what we need…great points.

By: Stephanie Moore

Stephanie Moore — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:08:29 +0000

Hmmmm … did I miss something? I thought this was standard and have often argued using this logic that materials developed under federal or state grants are public property (even forcing a rather begrudged web developer to release files to the university that were developed under a federal grant). Was I erroneous, or do most people not know this? (both are equally possible! )

By: Rob Nielsen

Rob Nielsen — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:01:14 +0000

Like the principal once told the teacher who found resources at a discount: “Why do you care? It’s not your money.”

Isn’t it?!

I couldn’t agree more.

By: Judy Breck

Judy Breck — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:40:30 +0000

David, this is great! I have nothing to add. This idea needs to get into the mainstream. When the Tech Trends column comes out, I will post about it on SmartMobs and GoldenSwamp. Judy