Group items tagged

The empirical findings suggest that creators and users approach the question of noncommercial use similarly and that overall, online U.S. creators and users are more alike than different in their understanding of noncommercial use. Both creators and users generally consider uses that earn users money or involve on

ne advertising to be commercial, while uses by organizations, by individuals, or for charitable purposes are less commercial but not decidedly noncommercial.

Despite increasing rates of enrollment in online colleges, the most recent studies show that faculty in all fields has mixed feelings about the quality of online courses and online teaching. This has been a consistent trend for several years

48% of faculty who have taught online thought that online courses were inferior to on-the-ground courses, and only 37.2% thought that online and face-to-face courses were equivalent in quality and outcomes.

According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, more than 50% of college faculty consistently report that institutional support for teaching and developing online courses is below average

ution CC BY

n-NonCommercial CC BY-NC

Machine Readable Human Readable Legal Code Our public copyright licenses incorporate a unique and innovative “three-layer” design. Each license begins as a traditional legal tool, in the kind of language and text formats that most lawyers know and love. We call this the Legal Code layer of each license.

Moore’s original 1965 article described doubling the number of transistors every 12 months, rather than today’s popular form, which has microprocessor performance doubling every 18 months

A huge collateral effect of Moore’s Law was the creation of the commercial software industry as a meaningful force in the economy. This took place in two ways. First, the falling cost and wide availability of powerful processors greatly increased the number of computers in use, and thus successful software products could be sold in enormous numbers at modest prices.

Last week 34 mathematicians issued a statement denouncing “a system in which commercial publishers make profits based on the free labor of mathematicians and subscription fees from their institutions’ libraries, for a service that has become largely unnecessary.”

For 2010, Elsevier reported a 36 percent profit on revenues of $3.2 billion

Despite this, (and this is my personal view, not the view of the 'anti-Learning Styles lobby'), many teachers and educators continue to find value and benefit by using Learning Styles theory in one way or another, and as often applies in such situations, there is likely to be usage which is appropriate, and other usage which is not.

Education is big business. Much is at stake commercially and reputationally, and so it is not surprising that debate can become quite fierce as to which methods work and which don't. So try to temper what you read with what you know and feel and experience. Personal local situations can be quite different to highly generalised averages, or national 'statistics'. Often your own experiences are likely to be more useful to you than much of the remote 'research' that you encounter through life. You must be careful how you use systems and methods with others, and be careful how you assess research and what it actually means to you for your own purposes.

A note about Learning Styles in young people's education: Towards the end of the first decade of the 2000s a lobby seems to have grown among certain educationalists and educational researchers, which I summarise very briefly as follows: that in terms of substantial large-scale scientific research into young people's education, 'Learning Styles' theories, models, instruments, etc., remain largely unproven methodologies. Moreover Learning Styles objectors and opponents assert that heavy relience upon Learning Styles theory in developing and conducting young people's education, is of questionable benefit, and may in some cases be counter-productive. Despite this, (and this is my personal view, not the view of the 'anti-Learning Styles lobby'), many teachers and educators continue to find value and benefit by using Learning Styles theory in one way or another, and as often applies in such situations, there is likely to be usage which is appropriate, and other usage which is not.

The first course carrying the name MOOC was offered in 2008, so this is new phenomenon. Second, the pedagogical style of the early courses, which we shall call cMOOCs, was based on a philosophy of connectivism and networking. This is quite distinct from the xMOOCs now being developed by elite US institutions that follow a more behaviourist approach. Third, the few academic studies of MOOCs are about the earlier offerings because there has been no time for systematic research on the crop of 2012 xMOOCs. Analysis of the latter has to be based on a large volume of press articles and blogs. Fourth, commentary on MOOCs includes thinly disguised promotional material by commercial interests (e.g. Koller, 2012) and articles by practitioners whose perspective is their own MOOC courses.

The term MOOC originated in Canada. Dave Cormier and Bryan Alexander coined the acronym to describe an open online course at the University of Manitoba designed by George Siemens and Stephen Downes. The course, Connectivism and Connective Knowledge, was presented to 25 fee-paying students on campus and 2,300 other students from the general public who took the online class free of charge (Wikipedia, 2012a).

Can xMOOCs make money?

where people medicate themselves into bliss

Postman asserts the presentation of television news is a form of entertainment programming; arguing inclusion of theme music, the interruption of commercials, and "talking hairdos" bear witness that televised news cannot readily be taken seriously