Wayne's world

Wayne Mackintosh's world vision of free learning for all is one that is shared by countless educators around the world. We all want to see quality learning provided, especially to the populations of the less well-off nations of the world. The difference though, is that he's going to make it happen. Born in South Africa, and now working in New Zealand, Wayne Mackintosh is chair of the WikiEducator Community Council, and is a strategy innovator with a passion for making learning futures happen. Trained as an accountant, he is in his own words, 'an educator by choice.' He has more than a passion. He also has the pragmatic wherewithal to realise his dream, cultivating many connections and in the process, helping to establish a powerful worldwide consortium of Open Education Anchor partners. These are universities across the globe who are willing to open up their courses and programmes to any learner for free. What's more, they have also agreed to provide free accreditation of learning in the form of degrees.

Speaking at the opening plenary of the Efquel Innovation Forum in Oeiras, Portugal, Wayne asked the delegates: Why do we ask people to pay more than they can afford for education? This is of course an important question to ask, even if it is unpalatable to many in the higher education sector. It's one that many institutions worldwide would be wise to begin asking themselves. Wayne didn't pull any punches in his keynote. Citing Sir John Daniel's iron triangle, he argued that the biggest challenge for free open worldwide education is to lower the cost while widening access and raising quality. We WILL provide free education for all, he declared. This will be done by creating a growing network of partners who have enough influence and reach to create the critical mass with which the Open Educational Resources movement will gain purchase. Recognition of prior learning, whether credentialed or experiential, will be a key part of the success in achieving this vision, he said. His key question was that we already have all the ingredients to provide free learning for all at university level, so why aren't we doing it?

There is a long way to go to achieve this vision, but Wayne warned that those who do not subscribe will be left behind. It is a red herring question, he assured us, to ask whether providing free and open education for all will put universities our of business and lose teachers their jobs. Another red herring, he suggested, was that open educational resources were poorer in quality than the traditional course delivery currently offered by most universities. If the quality is poorer, he remarked, then the institution is unlikely to risk its reputation by offering it.

Image source


Wayne's world by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Fire and brimstone

I spoke earlier today at the Concede User Generated Conference in the venerable surroundings of the old Palace of the Marquis de Pombal, here in Oeiras, Lisbon. In my presentation, entitled The Good, the Blog and the Wiki, I tried to paint some broad brushstrokes on how students (and their teachers) are creating and sharing content that supports their learning, both socially and academically, through a range of social media. I pointed out some of the tensions that exist between what the institution requires (course accreditation, structure, security and other formalised activities) and what the individual does (chaotic and unstructured, informal and rule-free). I gave some examples from my own recent research with students using blogs and wikis in authentic learning contexts. The talk seemed to go down well, but one of my remarks, about creativity seemed to ruffle a feather or two. I suggested that in school, we are taught to follow rules and that colouring outside the lines is frowned upon. I was of course, referring to the inherent need that all institutions seem to have of establishing order, compliance and ultimately, a lack of freedom to experiment, take risks and make mistakes.

One of the speakers who followed me remarked that 'colouring outside the lines' never helped anyone gain any course credit. As there was no time to challenge her in a question session, I responded on Twitter by stating that colouring outside the lines actually helps many students to go beyond the course requirements. I also remarked that if we don't teach in creative ways, then no wonder our students are bored and demotivated. I fail to comprehend how some people, having spent a lifetime in education, are still reluctant to give their students licence to experiment, ask the what if questions, and ... yes, colour outside the lines. If you facilitate freedom to learn, students will - and do respond, and it is often astounding what they can achieve when given such freedom.

And so we move from the mildly irritating to the absolutely bizarre.... Earlier today one of my colleagues here at the Concede conference (Anthony Camilleri) found an outrageous blog post entitled Blogging is sinful and hampers your research productivity and tweeted the link after my keynote. Now, you can take this blog post one of two ways. You could surmise that the author is being deliberately provocative and is taking a stance that is ultimately indefensible, simply to provoke debate. The somewhat archaic language and the hectoring tones are possibly a give away. All power to him if he is promoting debate. On the other hand, and this is the disturbing part - he may actually be deadly serious when he declares:

Scholars who write blogs obviously try to avoid the harshness of the peer review system and to air their half-baked thoughts through a less demanding publication channel than a peer reviewed journal. This modern opportunity creates a public bad of immense proportions as it invites an endless stream of reactions from other colleagues who do not want to live up to the publish or perish reality that even starts to exist in the sleepy European social sciences. 

Sinful, I ask you.... Good grief. I for one have never been shy of criticism, even of the harshest kind, from some over opinionated journal reviewers. I blog because of the immediacy of the medium - I can publish my ideas and questions instantly, and can receive back 'reactions' from my peers that are valued, relevant and timely. The publish or perish reality above is not a reality at all - it's more likely to be publish and be jammed with the backlog some traditional journals suffer from. You can consider yourself most fortunate if you manage to get your article published in under a year from submission to publication. The absolute irony that should not escape you is that the author is using a blog as his platform to preach this anti-blogging madness. What he is doing in a great Elmer Gantry parody, is using archaic words such as Purgatory and Hell, and rhetoric likely to bring tears to the eyes of a puritan, to hammer home his particular brand of Fire and Brimstone fervour. Either way, it's a seriously inflammatory post designed to get your back up, and it's worth a read of the brief article just to take sample a flavour of some of the lunacy the anti-social media brigade like to peddle.

Image source


Fire and brimstone by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.