open content

Video from MIT OCW

It’s great to see open education getting press. (More will be coming next week!) At the recent MIT OCW Milestone Event the movement got a lot of praise from Tom Friedman of Flat World fame. Catch the video of Friedman’s keynote talk on OCW over at YouTube.

open content

Social Objects and Campfires

Just found an interesting article about “social objects” via Stephen Downes. Back when I was writing more actively about learning objects, and the desperate need for us to consider the importance of social interaction in learning, I recommended that the proper way to think about educational content was as a campfire. The campfire does, of course, have important nonsocial functions (like providing heat) just like educational content has important nonsocial functions (like conveying information), but the most important function of both the campfire and educational content is the manner in which it draws people together. A good campfire is a thing around which storytelling, singing, and other social interactions happen. The same is true for the best educational content – it draws people into arguments, explorations, discussions, relationships, and friendships.

Martin’s original post referenced by Stephen led me into several by Hugh, plus video of Jyri’s talk that seems to have started the whole thing. Two points from Hugh that are worth reiterating here:

  • Social Networks are built around Social Objects, not vice versa. The latter act as “nodes”. The nodes appear before the network does.
  • My overall marketing thesis invariably asks the question, “If your product is not a Social Object, why are you in business?”

Without a campfire all you have is a bunch of tents setup and people wandering around disconnectedly. The campfire provides a place for people to congregate and interact. The campfire appears before the singing starts. Likewise, the proper way to view online content is as a “place” for people to congregate around in order for social learning interactions to happen.

The second bullet is perhaps the most revealing, though. If your educational materials are not “social objects” – in other words, if you don’t already understand that their main purpose is to bring people together so that social learning interactions can happen – why are you producing and sharing them? A relevant follow-up question is, if you are not providing the functional space for these social learning interactions to happen in (or at least pointing to a space where they can), why are you producing and sharing them?  This is the key question for all OER and OCW projects.


Open… as in Open

Steve Carson writes about a recent survey of Japanese attitudes toward open education projects at universities (like OCWs). I have to agree with his selection of a favorite bit from the survey:

Q9: What should be the scope of the universities that open up their lecture materials? (Sample size=1,050)

  • Just well-known public and private universities 17.2%
  • As many public universities as possible 14.2%
  • As many private universities as possible 3.4%
  • As many public and private universities as possible 64.8%
  • Other 0.4%

Two out of three surveyed felt that as many schools as possible should open access to their courses. I agre with them. =)