$140 Million is Massive

Apart from all sorts of misgivings about Georgia Tech’s MOOCish Master’s program in Computer Science, I want to take a moment to do the math. You charge $7000 a year tuition with the idea you’ll have a 2-year cohort of 10,000 students. If you add that up, you get $140 million. That’s massive, especially when you’re only hiring eight new faculty to educate those 10,000 students. Follow the money, this is no joke,  the profits are huge even after you split 40% of the kitty with Udacity.

Update: As Robert MCGuire notes in the comments, my math is off (how about that for doing the math), the number is probably closer 50-60 million given they are charing $7,000 for the whole degree over three years. My bad.

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Syndication-Oriented Architecture: a Solution to Problem of Coherence

I’ve been preparing a talk that I will be delivering this afternoon for Campus Technology’s Virtual Leadership Summit. Given the session will be moderated by Gardner Campbell, I figured I’d take the opportunity to try and frame out the broader vision behind Domain of One’s Own that goes well beyond the education sphere. In fact, it’s remarkable how much of the vision is encapsulated in Jon Udell‘s 2007 talk “The Disruptive Nature of Technology.” For this presentation I have take seven clips from this talk—each roughly two minutes long. I’ll be using them as a touchstone for various concepts I want to try and demonstrate why it is essential at this moment to be encouraging people (and for the purposes of this talk faculty and students) to take control of the work they do online.

So, in order to both prepare for the talk and “narrate my public agenda”simultaneously, I’m going to link to the seven clips and contextualize each of them as part of a larger narrative centered on  how new methods of instruction can be augmented by an architecture that defines learners and faculty as personalized, connected nodes within the networked world of the web. We’ll see how this goes.

1. The Problem of Coherence

Udell recognizes early on in this talk that despite all the great and magical qualities of the web to connect people and ideas, there remains an enduring issue and one which remains just as problematic six years on: a sense of coherence to the work we do online. In the following clip, Udell frames the issue of coherence in terms of what universities are used to in terms of monolithic IT systems that provide a sense of organization and structure that is anathema to the loosely coupled properties of the web, but endure because they make the interactions and exchanges fairly coherent, but using crude, outdated tools that accrue back to the university system rather than the individuals who actually created within them.

For example, you can do work within your school’s  content management system (CMS) or learning management system (LMS) but there is often no effortless way  (or even possibility) to allow people to port that work into their own personal archive. So while you might have some semblance of coherence in these systems, they lack any of the any the affordances that make the web the web (these are the limitations xMOOCS still seem to operate within monolithic systems with none of the affordances of the web). On the other hand, the loosely distributed spaces for creation like blogs, wikis, twitter, tumblr, Facebook, etc. allow for greater interaction, collaboration, and promotion of what is happening at your university, but often at the cost of coherence. There has been no quick and easy way to aggregate that work within the university’s existing CMS. So, in some ways the two are at “loggerheads.” Let’s listen to Udell first:

The Problem of Coherence

2. Hosted Lifebits

But in good form, Udell doesn’t offer a problem without a solution. He suggests the problem of coherence might be addressed if we start looking at the ways in which we publish and republish our work online somewhat differently. Rather than continuing to use monolithic systems that people are asked to create on, we need to focus our attention on actually designing an architecture that can syndicate (or simply republish seamlessly) the work people are already creating on the web in their own various online spaces. What institutions and communities can then do is use a syndication-orientated architecture to place that work within the proper contexts. In other words, build a republishing system that takes the work happening in these various individual spaces and make it part of a  larger, coherent community web presence. The shift is from monolithic, institutional systems to more atomized, individualized publishing that is reconstituted as a whole through its myriad, distributed parts—not unlike Britian’s technological revolutions during the Spanish Armada: build smaller, faster, more agile ships to overcome the monolithic, sluggish Spanish navy.

Read more from Udell about this one here.

Hosted Life Bits

3. A Personal Lifetime Digital Archive

This next audio clip is why I decided to include these clips in the first place. I ‘d been presenting for the last four or five months using Udell’s ideas as a framework for my talks, but every time I listen to this talk again I was frustrated at just how much I butchered his examples. But, alas, I refuse to give up, and I figured this format gives me a bit more help 🙂 The idea behind the Personal Lifetime Digital Archive is very compelling to me on many levels. The idea that we all have a ton of digital work both locally and online across various platforms means that we are going to have to continually grapple with the issue of archiving our stuff. I love the example of Suzy in this clip, and following her through what a personal digital archive might look like, and how understanding our digital lifebits as something we can both control and share feeds into a syndication-oriented architecture. What’s more, it changes the axis of how a student might work across various instituions they come into contact with during their lifetime. We should be thinking of their time at school as one in which we are helping them understand the changing nature of publishing and online identity, and helping them understand this in a more nuanced, complex way, but more on that shortly.

Personal Lifetime Digital Archives

4. Not a Federation of Schools

Continuing on with Suzie’s personal digital archive, I think one of the things Udell understands intuitively about the web that most universities fail to understand is that it’s not just about them (another space wherein the xMOOCs are misguided). I guess as a university it’s hard not to be self-centered, but the bottom line is that the idea of a personal digital archive goes well beyond schools, in fact it has to in order for it to be relevant. But, when you think about how most university IT infrastructure is setup right now, it is the absolute opposite. Once you leave, your access (and by extension your archive) is gone. What does this mean for helping the people we educate maintain a coherent, enduring personal archive of the work they’ve done while attending our university? Isn’t making this easier part of what we should be doing?

Not a federation of schools

5. Narrating Your Public Agenda

And while the personal digital archive and the concomitant syndication-orientated architecture cannot be limited to a federation of schools for it to be relevant, at the same time personal publishing and personal archiving remain central to the academic enterprise. The idea of consistently and regularly narrating the work you do is the premise of an intellectual community. In that regard the web provides us to publish in a space of immediacy that enable a community to help each other refine their thinking—kinda sounds like college, right?

Narrating your public agenda

6. Digital Identity

At UMW we have spent a lot of time considering how the work a student might do as part of their college career may be one way to get them thinking responsibly about their digital identity. Just how much the web is becoming integral to how the world beyond understands who you are is a central question for us. We want them to realize that from the start of their career at UMW,  and hep them use their time at UMW to shape an online identity that reflects their best selves. And that is exactly what Udell is arguing for in this next clip, rather than parents and teachers abdicating the responsibility of helping students understand the web, it is our responsibility to show them how to use it responsibly. And that is not a simple matter of rules and protocol, rather it is best done through practical experience and conceptual possibility.

Online Identity

7. Networked Minds

“How effective are you going to be able to be?” This is where Udell brings back the vision behind the syndicated architecture, personal digital archives, and more into the fact that all these ideas are always in service to the core message: the web enables us to dramatically augment the possibilities for sharing and collaborating around ideas. The digitally networked world affords our student a whole new level of potentiality that we, as colleges and universities, must recognize and design for accordingly—that is our responsibility. Fact is, we can’t teach them what it means to be networked learners if we don’t have faculty that understand this and the vision and architecture in place to realize it. What’s more, it’s a community’s responsibility to offer a sense of coherence (in this regard the appropriately designed virtual space) for this to happen in the most powerful ways. Instructional design has never been more important, I just wish it would stop aping the monolithic systems and start adopting and cohering the loosely coupled nature of the web.

Networked Minds

Posted in presentations | Tagged , , , | 7 Comments

Proud to be Maladjusted

Last month I had the pleasure of attending the last Great Lives lecture of the season, a talk delivered by Dr. Ghaemi entitled “Madness and Greatness” —you can see the video archive here. His talk, which is abstracted from his book of the same title, looks at evidence of depression or bipolar illness in series of great historical leaders, such as Winston Churchill, John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., and a few others. He attempts to demonstrate that such mood diseases actually helped them in leading during times of crisis. Diagnosing the dead is tricky business in my mind, but his larger discussion of transvaluing psychological conditions like manic depression was quite powerful.  I particularly liked the video clip of Martin Luther King, Jr. that Dr. Ghaemi ended with about the precarious state of a well adjusted person in a maladjusted society (and vice versa). What’s more Dr. Ghaemi reminded the audience that by 1968, the year of his assassination, MLK was one of the most hated figures in politics because of his global views of systematic oppression that he repeatedly linked back to the imperialist war in Vietnam in the service of capital. Talk about the normative culture of U.S. history selectively claiming just one dimension of a truly great man.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

ds106zone: You are About to Enter Another Dimension

It’s been a long time coming and I hope you can forgive the delay, but as Luther would say in 48 Hours “I’ve been busy!” That’s right ladies and gentlemen, this is the long awaited—at least by Scottlo—post about ds106zone, the 5 week Summer session of ds106 being taught through UMW that will be starting on Monday, May 20th. I have to thank my old new radio friend Scott Lockman for giving me the required push to finally get this post out, we spent more than an hour Thursday morning talking about the class, and the conversation reinvigorated me to get my act together.

For anyone following ds106 for any length of time the name Scottlo will be synonymous with audio greatness, and for those of you who are new to the game it will soon become such. If you want a good idea of what you might be in for this Summer, take the time to listen to the most recent Scottlocast wherein the master introduces you to old time radio giant Arch Oboler as well as spends some time pulling teeth from yours truly to try and get a read on just what the hell will be happening this Summer. Let’s just say it was an interrogation of sorts 🙂

And, to that end, let me try and map out—albeit loosely—what might be in store for ds106zone this Summer. First things first, what the hell is ds106zone? ds106zone is an idea Dr. Garcia had about framing the Summer session around a Twilight Zone inspired thematic. In other words, approach the class as a kind of play-acted narrative, like we did with Summer of Oblivion, loosely based on the conventions of The Twilight Zone, something like:

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the ds106zone.

When I had world enough and time I was planning on doing no less then 10 full blown episodes on various topics updating Twilight Zone episodes for our cultural moment before the class even started. But life and nervous breakdowns got in the way sometimes, so I’m forced to recalibrate. I plan on introducing each week’s topics through a Twilight Zone inspired episode, and I’ll be tapping various people over the coming weeks as I frame each of these out. So, as of now, there will be one episode a week (five all told) that frame the topics and expectations and that course participants will be invited to riff on—and make there own if they are so inspired.  What’s more, each week there will be a live broadcast on Tuesday (which will be archived) wherein that week’s topics for discussion will be delineated in more detail and our weekly guest will be featured. Another session that will provide a space to ask questions, provide feedback, and publicly berating anyone who is not doing the work will be live broadcast and archived each Thursday. As of right now I have Scottlo locked in for audio weeks 2 and 3 (we’ll be building the radio shows from day one), and I’m working on getting Michael Branson Smith for video for weeks four and five (hence the pingback 🙂 ).

And while I’m a bit tight on time for photography and design during weeks one and two, I think I know a few few folks who’ll be good for talking animated GIFs, photography and design over the next week or two. Either way, I am starting to actually pull this together, and I figured I might as well get this bad boy running and see what comes of it. I sent a slightly tweaked version of Alan Levine’s “scare” email out to the enrolled UMW students just now, and it might give anyone interested a sense of what they’re in for over the next five weeks. Though to be fair, open online participation is play as you want, there is no overhead: it’s fun and it’s free! I’m still fine tuning the syllabus, but as for now this class is on like Donkey King! If you want to participate as an open online student, you can sign-up here: http://ds106.us/handbook/success-the-ds106-way/quick-start/

Posted in digital storytelling | Tagged , , | 13 Comments

UMW’s Innovation isn’t Technical, it’s Narrative


When someone as sharp as Leslie Madsen-Brooks writes an article about the state of innovation in higher education and points to UMW’s Division of Teaching and Learning  Technologies (a.k.a DTLT) as the example, I can’t help but feel pretty good about my life (as I imagine other DTLTers might). I mean quotes like the following reinforce the constant boasting I do in the office to anyone who will listen 🙂

Those who have been paying attention only to partnerships among Silicon Valley companies and the Ivies may be surprised that the beating heart of a tremendous amount of academic technology innovation is a small state university in Fredericksburg, Virginia. At theUniversity of Mary Washington, the Division of Teaching and Learning Technology has launched at least four amazing initiatives [UMW Blogs, ds106, Domain of One’s Own, and the ThinkLab] that should be replicated widely because it’s clear to even casual observers that they advance teaching and learning in myriad ways.

Or….

The innovations and—yes, I’ll say it—disruptions, emerging from UMW exemplify some of the best practices in developing communities of learners, fostering collaboration, encouraging writing and reflection and developing curiosity about the world.

And…

In an age when universities are pushing faculty ever harder to develop monetizable intellectual property, it’s refreshing to see faculty doubling down on using relatively inexpensive technologies to improve student learning. UMW is a case in point: it’s a modestly funded, small state university that, thanks to all the active minds (and periodic strategic hires) at DTLT and on the faculty, has become a major hub of innovation in higher education.

I’m verklempt! 🙂  It’s awesome to see the innovative work happening at UMW  for almost a decade now  get recognized more broadly. Leslie’s framing her brilliant article around our work is the highest of compliments, and it really means a lot coming from someone who has been doing this work from  both a support staff and faculty position for a long time now. People often ask “What’s in the water at UMW?” or “What are you all smoking?!” And while I don’t have a stock answer to that, I can say this: the simple process of openly narrating the work we do on our blogs has almost everything to do with our success. In other words, our willingness to regularly document the work we do, shared it openly, and even featured the work of others happening around the community has been what ultimately has made UMW’s DTLT that much better (and we are that much better). When you think about it, we’re not that different from a ton of other ed tech shops around the world: we support faculty, we run an LMS, we experiment with web-based tools, we pretend to understand what new media means, etc. For me, the one real difference is we have taken the time to narrate that process openly, which usually results in promoting the work happening around campus and injecting a little fun into the process (Andy Rush and I talk about this very thing all the time).

What’s most interesting to me about this formula is that it isn’t technical, it’s all cultural. Rather than squawking about MOOCs and the inescapable educational apocalypse, we went ahead and built our own networked online course (the ever irreverent ds106) that was very much inspired by the OG MOOCs, but was designed for our particular campus culture. Why aren’t more people doing this? Why are so many people wasting endless time writing about “MOOCs and the Latest Form of Autodidactic Rock Climbing Walls” rather then actually promoting the real work happening on the ground at their campuses. And I am not trying to be critical here because I have been to enough campuses the last four or five years to know there is a ton of awesome stuff happening at so many of them, it just so happens very few people are actually narrating it. The MOOC narrative has taken over, and we are all the poorer for it. Homegrown innovation on a university or college campus is not really all that complicated, it starts with the commitment to regularly tell the story about where you are and what you are doing rather than hanging to a bill of goods you are being sold about where you should be. Anyway, thanks Leslie, your article ruled, and it really made a bad month a little better. Big fan!

Posted in dtlt | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

OSU’s Writers Talk: Platforms that Unlock Passion

Back in March I gave a keynote presentation at THE Ohio University’s InnovateOSU conference (which I documented here) framing the various experimentations at UMW that led up to our current Domain of One’s Own project. The day before that presentation I was fortunate enough to sit down with the remarkable Jonathan Diehl, an OSU student that does his university proud. [N.B. – Jonathan doesn’t have a domain of his own I can link to so I will settle for his twitter 🙂 ] I had a compelling and wide-ranging discussion with Jonathan, and what I really loved about talking with him was the fact he had done is research quite thoroughly. He knew about and read this blog; he was familiar with EDUPUNK; he researched ds106; and, he even had a working knowledge of Domain of One’s Own. Unlike many “professionals” I have talked with over the years, John did his homework before this interview and there is no question what a huge difference that made in the tenor and depth of a conversation.

The half-hour conversation had a very specific arc that I think worked quite well. Here are the topics we covered (I think in this order):

  • how I rediscovered writing through blogging?
  • what the hell is EDUPUNK?!
  • how did EDUPUNK morph into ds106?
  • is ds106 a MOOC?;
  • what might the technical architecture of learning look like in the future?
  • what exactly is a MOOC and what might it mean for the future of higher ed?
  • and, finally, how might platforms (and communities) unlock passion?

The above topic list was created by me post-facto, so it may not be entirely accurate—consider yourself warned. Also, listening to the conversation again I was struck by how much work I have to do on clarifying my thoughts about the technical architecture of the future of learning, I found my description and examples far too broad and vague. What’s more, the ideas around the open architecture of the future of personalized learning is something I have been spending a lot of time thinking about recently. So listening to this conversation has been very useful in forcing me to clarify my thoughts in preparation for a presentation I’ll be giving May 16th at the Campus Technology Virtual Leadership Summit (moderated by none other than Gardner Campbell). My talk for the Campus Technology event is inspired by Jon Udell‘s 2007 “The Disruptive Nature of Technology” talk (as well as his IT Conversation with Rohit Khare and his 2010 Kynetx  Keynote) as a means to think about how a technical architecture for education is better driven by coherence and context rather than scale and broadcasting, but more on that shortly. In the mean time, I’d like to give another thank you to Jonathan Diehl for being an amazing interlocutor, and tolerating the fact I talk too damn much!

OSU Writers Talk

Posted in interview | Tagged , , , , , , | 4 Comments

bavatuesdays Episode 4: Blood and Black Lace

Above is the fourth episode of bavatuesdays, in this discussion Paul Bond and I take a look at Mario Bava’s 1964 giallo Blood and Black Lace. It’s quite a masterpiece of murderous technicolor, and it’s considered by many the beginning of the body count/slasher film genre. The premise is that a fashion house becomes the epicenter of a series of gruesome murders of  six female models, and hence the Italian title Sei donne per l’assassino (Six Women for the Murder). The assorted murders  are stylized to seem as if they had been taken from the pages of a death-themed fashion magazine. There is a lot to love about this film, and while Paul and I try to cover as much as we can, we couldn’t help but spend much of the time lauding Tim Lucas’s (of Video Watchdog fame) amazing commentary on the DVD. The man has nothing short of an encyclopedic knoweldge surrounding just about every detail of Mario Bava’s career. It is absolutely compellign to hear him talk, and it makes me want his book Mario Bava: All the Colors of the Dark all the more.

As for the recording of our conversation, I’m still working on getting the delay between Paul in the Google Hangout and the Wirecast broadcast to mesh more cleanly. As of now we are still a couple of seconds out of sync which is annoying. And while this doesn’t break the deal for me because we are doing it for fun and to learn about Bava’s films, I have to say it makes it harder to watch and having it synched would make the world a little bit of a better place to be ;). Anyway, I’ll try and figure this out this week so the next six episodes are clean. Hope you enjoy the show  despite all it’s imperfections!

You can see Paul Bond’s post on the film here and his flickr set of relevant images here.

 

Posted in bavatuesdays | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Oh, my offence is rank

I attended a Great Lives lecture on Abraham Lincoln delivered by Michael Burlingame at UMW the other night . Like so many others, I am intrigued that Lincoln continues to capture the popular imagination in some pretty powerful and playful ways long after his death. During the lecture I was taken by the fact that Lincoln preferred King Claudius’s soliloquy to Hamlet’s oft-quoted “to be or not to be….” I didn’t really remember Claudius’s soliloquy so I looked it up after the lecture, and it comes in Act III, Scene III at line 37. I’ve reproduced it below.

Oh, my offence is rank. It smells to heaven.
It hath the primal eldest curse upon ’t,
A brother’s murder. Pray can I not.
Though inclination be as sharp as will,
My stronger guilt defeats my strong intent,
And, like a man to double business bound,
I stand in pause where I shall first begin,
And both neglect. What if this cursed hand
Were thicker than itself with brother’s blood?
Is there not rain enough in the sweet heavens
To wash it white as snow? Whereto serves mercy
But to confront the visage of offence?
And what’s in prayer but this twofold force,
To be forestalled ere we come to fall
Or pardoned being down? Then I’ll look up.
My fault is past. But oh, what form of prayer
Can serve my turn, “Forgive me my foul murder”?
That cannot be, since I am still possessed
Of those effects for which I did the murder:
My crown, mine own ambition, and my queen.
May one be pardoned and retain th’ offense?
In the corrupted currents of this world
Offense’s gilded hand may shove by justice,
And oft ’tis seen the wicked prize itself
Buys out the law. But ’tis not so above.
There is no shuffling. There the action lies
In his true nature, and we ourselves compelled,
Even to the teeth and forehead of our faults,
To give in evidence. What then? What rests?
Try what repentance can. What can it not?
Yet what can it when one can not repent?
O wretched state! O bosom black as death!
O limèd soul that, struggling to be free,
Art more engaged! Help, angels. Make assay.
Bow, stubborn knees, and, heart with strings of steel,
Be soft as sinews of the newborn babe.
All may be well. (kneels)

There was some dark shit going on with Lincoln.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

bavatuesdays episode 3: The Girl Who Knew Too Much

This was a particularly fun discussion for me, and it came at a time that I desperately needed a distraction. Paul Bond continues to be nothing short of gold when it comes to these discussions about Mario Bava’s films, and it’s pretty amazing how we’ve been able to work together in a pretty loose, distributed way to make this show happen fairly organically. He’s very mellow and doesn’t seem the least bit phased by my lack of organization and planning, what’s more he does his research and has a ton of interesting things to frame about each film as well as Bava’s career more generally. You can see Paul’s post about The Girl Who Knew Too Much (1963) here, and his screen shots for the discussion here.

The discussion starts out talking with a focus on the trailer for the American International release of this film in the U.S. titled The Evil Eye, which appears to be dramatically different from the Italian version—which was a complete flop in the theaters, being pulled after only a week. Neither of us have seen the film, but would love to know if there are any existing versions of the U.S. version out there, because we really want to see it.

It’s fun to talk about the trailer because it includes so many scenes that just aren’t in the Italian version of the film. That said, I must recognize that I misspoke about the proximity of Rome to the sea. Rather than being two or three hours away from the Mediterranean (as I stated during the show), it just so happens the center of Rome is just 30 miles away from Ostia (which Paul mentioned), a beach community that is frequented by Romans during the Summer. In other words, my knowledge of Italian geography is greatly exaggerated, and I suck. Research, Jim, RESEARCH!!!

GialloennaFrom there we spend some time talking about Leticia Romàn‘s career, the unbelievable use of lighting in this film to create suspense and horror, a few prolonged scenes demonstrating Bava’s mastery of the medium, as well as the fact that many consider The Girl Who Knew Too Much the first film Giallo. We cover even more than this (the conversation lasts over an hour), and I feel the more Paul and I watch Bava’s film in succession the more attentive and comfortable we become with our discussions. There is something be said about working your way through a director’s ouevre to get a more precise sense of their art.

Finally, we also talked about the theme song for this film in the Italian version: Adriano Celantano’s song “Furore.” Celantano is a titan of Italian pop music and film culture, and “Furore” was an earlier hit from 1960. He was inspired by Elvis Presley, and has gone on to have a 50 year career selling millions and millions of records. What we have in this film is an early appearances of Italy’s “King of Pop.” Also, another correction is due here. I’m not sure if “Furore” was Celantano’s first major hit in Italy, that is something I said in the discussion but I can’t confirm it. But, to be frank, I don’t think it was given how many singles he had made before that song—but I recognize that is not proof. What’s more, I am not sure if Furore was Celantano’s first appearance on a movie soundtrack–another point I make that needs to be fact checked. Anyway, I guess it was good no one watches less they be dreadfully misinformed by me, Paul on the other hand is the genuine article 🙂

Posted in bavatuesdays | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Designed to undermine

When I was in Cambridge, Massachusetts last weekend—which oddly (or not so oddly) seems like a lifetime ago—I spent some time talking to Audrey Watters about our somewhat similar visceral reactions to grad school. What I really like about Audrey’s  presence in edtech right now is her deeply critical vision of the higher ed machine as anything but a romanticized, sacred space being innocently assaulted on all sides by evil corporations. Five years ago this fact was more deeply ingrained in my thinking, but I have to admit it had been blunted a bit as I receded more and more from a position of subversion in edtech given how quickly I saw EDUPUNK become a brand for neoliberal imaginings of the future of highered.  And that future amounts to a cheap blend of technology and corporatism (along with the necessary celebration of a few entrepreneurs) to build a new educational system I have no faith in.

ds106 was my retreat, a space to simply create art, have fun, and experiment wildly. To some degree it worked, it simultaneously rejuvenated my spirits and pushed me to create and imagine distributed, online learning in some exhilerating ways alongside an entire community of people. At the same time, though, it exhausted me completely—a fact I am just now coming to terms with. And that “class” was in addition to my day job on an adjunct’s salary, which plays right back into the poverty-wage teaching machine that is at the heart of higher ed’s crisis. I make no excuses for my hypocrisy, in fact I reinforce it all the time on this blog. Higher ed has just as much, if not more, responsibility in creating the current climate of attacks on their value than any “evil” corporation. And while the market forces that point to the education sector as ripe for the raiding for profits may be unsavory, I feel I’ve been attacking them while letting higher ed off the hook. And it’s funny because when Audrey and I were talking last week this very thing came up, and we both, at times (her much more eloquently and intelligently than me), find ourselves arguing for a system that effectively chewed us up and spit us out pretty harshly. I honestly can’t say a corporation has done that to me just yet. Hell, I liked working at Univsion Online in the late 1990s, and I made more than I did working for an educational instution for the ensuing decade.

But all that is prelude to what I really want to talk about, namely how much I appreciated Stephen Downes’s “The Great Rebranding” post yesterday. Downes has been many things over the last 8 or 9 years I have been working in edtech: unbelievably productive, consistent, critical, and supportive. Some may jar at that last one, but frankly when my small moment in the edtech sun occurred in the form of EDUPUNK Downes was the most vocal supporter of the idea. I had imagined folks far closer to me, and who I thought knew me much better than Downes, would be just that—turns out that wasn’t the case. Downes liked the idea, so he reframed it to be relevant to his vision, which has been razor sharp and remarkably consistent throughout all the MOOC madness: education should be free—as in accessible beyond elite universities (which basically characterizes almost all colleges and Universities in the US given their price point). Of all the visions in edtech that inspire, at the end of the day none more than Downes’s reinforces a powerful and deeply difficult alternative to the status quo I find myself flirting with more and more these days.  

I had often wondered how Downes was holding up under the pressure of watching an idea he effectively brought into the world, alongside George Siemens, be co-opted so ruthlessly by the very institutions that he has been working to route around. What’s more, they also claimed his vision of educating the world through access and freedom—it’s a montra I’ve heard Daphne Koller and Sebastian Thron repeat ad nauseam. At the same time, from what I understand, Downes is more preoccupied with keeping his job as a researcher for the Canadian government given the current cuts, than seeking out venture capital funding for his next career move. The dark, horrific irony of that should be lost on none of us. So, when Downes took a moment yesterday to clarify his vision again and restate, in his typically clear, sharp, and uncompromising way, I feel a little better about what I do today knowing he’s out there. I am reminded there are people out their doing this stuff that is buoyed by an ideal that all-too-often the omnipresent pressures of life can easily corrupt. Downes’s thinking stands as a beacon in the storm for me these days, and in no small way because of passages like what follows:

The arguments in which the four elements of MOOCs – ‘massive’, ‘open’, ‘online’, and ‘course’ – are one by one putated to be ‘optional’ or ‘unnecessary’ seems to me to be a desparate attempt to cleanse MOOCs of any disruptive impact they may have on the traditional action of in-person teaching to a teacher to a small group of people.

These arguments miss the point of the MOOC, and that point is, precisely, to make education available to people who cannot afford pay the cost to travel to and attend these small in-person events. Having one instructor for 20-50 people is expensive, and most of the world cannot afford that cost. That’s *why* the institutions – from which the attendees of this conference were uniquely selected – charge thousands of dollars of tuition every year.

MOOCs were not designed to serve the missions of the elite colleges and universities. They were designed to undermine them, and make those missions obsolete.

Yes there has been a great rebranding and co-option of the concept of the MOOC over the last couple of years. The near-instant response from the elites, almost unprecedented in my experience, is a recognition of the deeply subversive intent and design of the original MOOCs (which they would like very much to erase from history).

Hope springs eternal in the edtech’s breast. Thank you, Stephen!

Posted in experimenting | Tagged , , | 9 Comments