I have been a fan of Stallman for ages. I’m an open educator, believing knowledge should NOT be a commodity. This presentation http://eflclassroom.com/flash/manifesto20.swf and my own educational community (I call it a bunker for when the dark ages come), espouse openess and letting ideas reign free. It’s Ning (but I now regret that choice) http://eflclassroom.com

I delight in your own revealing of the emperors without clothes. There really isn’t that much “openess” out there in education. I’ve been hoping that once the dinosaurs die, there’d be more open savaanah but ain’t the case at all. Just more guns and shooting and “don’t touch my ideas”, as if a thought were something that could be owned (and where did they receive it from? ).

I’ve been warning others of the great consolidation coming to social networks. Meaning, if “content is king”, the big fishes will close in and scoop up all those tuna through laws, size, muscle and technology (which is not just a means to good). I see it happening. But like hackers, we stay ahead and horde and remain faithful to the potential of being able to view ideas as not a means to a profit but as something which can benefit society and take even let it prosper economically too.

But you said it all, “openess should be ruled by ideology not convenience”. However much bad press that word has got – it’s the truth. Ideology is of all things. I believe. But we need more educators putting their ideas/thoughts where their mouths are.

David

The district office is doing a disservice to the children by limiting them on interactions with other students throughout the world. They receive very little real world experiences in which they could make personal connections and manipulate information allowing it to be stored in their long-term memory (Orey, 2001). Instead, we have to create a fake “real world” and try to encourage students that this is actually how it is in real life. It does not quite have the same effect than the real deal.

In terms of openness what can teachers do? According to Huitt, teachers are able to implement group discussions, teach goal setting, and provide choices for tasks and activities. Beyond that, limits are set by the district. Any other ideas on how open education can be achieved in a classroom setting?

The article Open Education: A New Paradigm demonstrates the importance of open education and the benefits it provides, locally as well as nationally. King states that “Open education isn’t just about technology; it’s about new ways of communicating, collaborating, and exchanging information such that every student is able to achieve his or her full potential.” Isn’t this something that a system would want to embrace if it truly was putting students first?

Open education would be greatly beneficial to teachers and students. Unfortunately, teachers are so controlled on what they can and cannot do, open education seems like a far off place that is currently out of reach. If anyone has any ideas on how to enhance instruction with openness in mind, suggestions are much appreciated.

Huitt, W. (2009). Humanism and open education. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved January 17, 2010, from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/affsys/humed.html

King, M. (2009) Open Education: A New Paradigm. University Business: Solutions for Higher Education Management. Retrieved January 17, 2010, from http://www.universitybusiness.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=1192&p=2#0.

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved January 16, 2010, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/