I'm going to publish my notes for Changing Education... Open Content, Open Hardware, Open Source curricula, from Portland Ballroom 252. Schmidt, Cooper, Shuttleworth, Keats, Kurshan, Wiley and Behlendorf are our panelists (not saying we know them all... yet). Each speaker is introducing themselves with three tag words, like licensing, poverty, literacy, freedom, collaboration, Africa. OSC means Open Source Curriculum. "Community before code" was a fun slogan. Foo Conference just ended, some of this discussion is a continuation of those threads, but less North America focused, is our moderator's hope. The question on history (when did this "movement" get started) -- I'd have to echo R0ml and point to liberal academic cultures in general, where Stallman had his roots, UC Berkeley a big influence (one of the panelists). People build for each other, appreciate the role synergy plays, and so off course we should be open, not in lock down mode. Backsteps in 70s, 80s, 90s. How extensive is the use of open source anyway, in education? Compared to the US? Mark Shuttleworth is saying one of the most extraordinary tools is Moodle (award for that guy last night). One of Mark's key words is certification, similar to accreditation, in the sense of curriculum content having imprimaturs from various sources (governments?). Push versus pull is something we hear about. E-Textbooks are a buzzword, but who's building these in practice? Are we talking about mashups? Is a web site an e-text? Why or why not? Curriki is growing: http://www.curriki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome Indonesia etc. Education institutions are monolithic island structures (silos), with technology's decentralizing effects starting to erode them the way they've eroded many corporate institutions. Scarcity drives aggregation, hoarding of resources, the genesis of the professoriate. This is starting to break down -- semi-permeable and permeable membrane metaphors. Not just teaching, but accrediting the people who learn from them, is incipient. All this hearkens back to the discussions I've been having with Steve Holden around Python certification. It's not about developing a monolithic Microsoft University of University of Phoenix. Schools develop a rep by "minting students" meaning you find out over time what a certification really means. Schools don't have to ask permission of other schools before putting their stamp on a transcript or c.v., e.g. Saturday Academy hands out certificates with "currency value" when it comes to applying for college (proves you've not been wasting your time -- at least constitutes evidence). Teachers really want a bigger role in content development, whereas publishers are hungry for content, so there's an obvious synergy here, with teachers playing the role of open source developers, hired guns in the sense that publishers have some say about what gets their imprimatur (many schools are also publishers, as are many private companies, not that schools aren't themselves companies in many cases). Teachers identifying as curriculum writers (as I do) will be banding and branding, doing OSCs. What about "suspect curricula"? How do we develop "trust". Mark is tackling that one, thinking opening up is a great strategy for improving content. Teachers often will not touch material that hasn't been certified. They only teach approved materials. Can we identify things which will be "contentious" like Intelligent Design? Mark sees contention more as the exception, Wikipedia more the model. Ideology is a problem in "corner cases" only -- might be a blind spot on Mark's spot, given "certification" is in itself a tool of control, keeps controversies suppressed. One of our panelists is espousing the goal of having 100% open source materials in its curriculum. Any remaining gaps to be plugged, 9th grade kicking off in 2009. Curriki is likewise K-12 focussed, historically. What we're seeing is a generation of open source developers old enough to be bending their model towards teaching, i.e. using our new muscle and savvy around keeping software free and open is feeding into the education world, setting new standards wherein "open source" is in itself a point in its favor. Using a free market approach, where the community has feedback as to whether a curriculum is any good. Many governments are nervous about letting teachers just go for it, as the potential for inciting tensions between ethnic groups is quite high. Strong bias and opinion colors courseware, inevitably, and governments often want a top-down way of controlling quality. The idea of a "global curriculum" is inappropriate and dumb, but the practice of openness and adaptability means each community has the ability to import and export. Expanding the Internet is a great way to build teacher quality. Realistically, OLPC notwithstanding, it's the teacher community that is gaining access first. Many countries are experiencing an acute teacher shortage -- the certifications coming over the Internet might be just the ticket in many cases, in terms of giving them career boosts. Mark: it's increasing difficult to censor TV, audit radio. The moderator is talking about Unschool, an organization that allows students to start customizing their own curricula even without parental knowledge. Different cultures are in different places in terms how willing they are to motivate change. On the other hand, there's that quote from this morning (Tim had it) about history moving faster than the people living it (future shock in other words -- we don't always get asked, before we have to adapt). This web page is being displayed, Mark encouraging us to take a look: http://www.capetowndeclaration.org/ I think a strong teacher in a school with good access is in a position to offer dynamite open and closed curricula. Not every school will put all its best stuff on line, like that Pueblo Museum in New Mexico, warns tourists up front that not everything is explained in the museum (not the appropriate context for explaining everything). Open Content License -- big in Africa. How can we contribute? LiteracyBridge.org -- has some cute little hardware that still needs software. Mark: both philosophy and practice, with the latter including workflows for aggregating and certifying. Content management frameworks in education, still a hotbed for innovation in need of new code. OpenHighSchool.org Vendors have a role (like 4dsolutions.net -- plug), usually tied to sales of some product. New brands of vendor will recognize that this isn't just about selling new "stuff" to teachers. So what *is* the business model then? How do content providers get rewarded or compensated, or do they? Scholarships to teachers, who vote with their feet, meaning kudos back to the vendors of highest repute? In spending tuition money upstream, teachers net access and goodies downstream (get value in exchange). Is that the model? I need to move my car, risking a parking ticket. Kirby