The North Dakota legislature now has a resolution urging college profs to make use of open textbooks. The concern seems to be that students pay an average of $1000 a year in textbook costs (see beer money ploy – trust me it makes more sense than you might think).
If I understand the language of the proposal, we hope to sit on our oil money and take advantage of the work done elsewhere.
If you enjoy photography, but are limited to the use of the automatic setting, you might want to explore this simulation from Canon. Change settings and compare the results of photos you take.
I have noticed this trend. I want you to consider if you have been a contributor.
There is this notion that we have given up on the idealism that seemed such a force in the early days of the Internet. It was the idea that we all had a voice or that we all were potential producers and not consumers. We have given up our independence for the convenience of Facebook (just one example).
This is the argument in “Program or be programmed” and in a recent post by Anil Dash (The web we lost) that prompted this comment. It may also be related to the notion that while we assume we have equal input into shaping political action it seems more and more that is the big money that prompts action and not individual voices.
There is some personal accomplishment in sending your own thoughts out into the ether and some satisfaction in reviewing the comments of others making the same effort. It takes a little effort, but the process is more satisfying that accepting the role of a sheep.
Wow – yesterday I generate a lengthy post offering comment on ReadCube and Mendeley (http://learningaloud.com/blog/2013/04/10/document-processing/) and today the Twittersphere is abuzz with negative comments related to Mendeley.
The issue is not the quality of the service, but the purchase of the service by Elsevier (I do mention this but explain the free service received an extra gigabyte of storage in the deal). At least some of the online negativity is in sympathy with a post by danah boyd (http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/04/11/mendeley-elsevier.html).
Not sure what I think yet. Certainly companies gobble up popular services (Apple and lala) or shut down their own services many depend on (Google – iGoogle, soon Reader). Is it that the companies have policies by which they make money and others object to the strategies?
BTW – I just resigned from an Elsevier editorial board (free labor as boyd describes the abuses of academics), but this has nothing to do with the company. It was time to redirect my time. I knew who published the journal, but I gave no thought to the business practices or was aware of the complaints. The folks I worked with including the small number receiving compensation worked hard as a service to researchers and readers. It is extremely important to focus criticism if you feel the need to offer an opinion.
I appreciate the amount of traffic this blog generates. I really do.
HOWEVER, “blurts” implies that these are short posts without extended commentary. I do have things of greater depth to say. I originally started this blog as an alternative to tweeting. I used software called (Chyrp) – really. The database backend for my Chyrp install became corrupted and I then switched to WordPress. I was able to salvage many of my original posts – this is why the archives for this blog shows 424 posts in Jan of 2011. I think of this blog as a way to mostly offer resources. Most posts link to something else.
My long form blog is the original LearningAloud dating to 2003. I now use LearningAloud to offer fewer but longer posts. These the type of comments that take all evening to put together.
Just sayin’
I hate it when the experts can’t make up their minds. First coffee is bad for us, then it is good. Eggs are the perfect food, then eggs increase cholesterol and should be avoided. Potatoes are good, then bad.
A new “hope” in education is the flipped classroom and the opportunities the new approach allows. Technology and more class time for teachers allow for individualization and the opportunity to address student specific needs. Must be a good thing – right? James Gee (I think of him as the games guy) says individualization may not be ideal. Individualization may make learning too easy and prevent students from developing coping skills and self reliance.
There is a new book that explains it all. Isn’t that the way it tends to go!
