Group items tagged

These digital activities should not be the sole measure of tenure, but they should be counted in the tenure formula. The irony today is that if the open activity is analog (e.g., participation on a committee), it likely counts toward tenure, but if the open activity is digital (e.g., writing an academic blog), it probably does not.

They will push at (and leak out of) the boundaries of whatever learning management system (or other enterprise systems) the institution wants them to use. This is not because they are uncooperative; it's simply that these enterprise systems tend to be locked down, allowing only employees and students to share within these environments

For me, an interesting side effect of sharing on the open web is that I've learned to be more careful about what I say and write.

Looking for indicators of open digital faculty is easier than coming up with a strict definition. The presence of several of the following characteristics should be taken as an indication of open digital faculty: Writing a public blog or maintaining a public wiki to share academic interests Freely sharing what might otherwise be guarded intellectual property (e.g., textbooks, research-in-progress, computer programs, course materials, artwork) Participating in a learning community in a social networking platform (e.g., Twitter or LinkedIn discussion groups) Participating in a social network that includes students, both current and past (e.g., Facebook) Encouraging students to participate in class-related projects that employ web-based media (e.g., student blogs, group wikis) Creating or participating in open courses Sharing video or audio content created for a course (e.g., podcasts) Sharing information and ideas from conference talks on the web (e.g., recordings, tweets, presentation links)

If the answers to these two questions are "yes," a court is likely to find a use fair

whether the use will cause excessive economic harm to the copyright owner

the purpose of copyright—to promote the advancement of knowledge through balancing the rights of owners and users.

In some cases, this will mean using a clip or excerpt; in other cases, the whole work is needed. Whenever possible, educators should provide proper attribution and model citation practices that are appropriate to the form and context of use.

educators should provide reasonable protection against third-party access and downloads

educators using concepts and techniques of media literacy should be free to enable learners to incorporate, modify, and re-present existing media objects in their own classroom work

Students’ use of copyrighted material should not be a substitute for creative effort

Students should be able to understand and demonstrate, in a manner appropriate to their developmental level, how their use of a copyrighted work repurposes or transforms the original.

but cannot rely on fair use when their goal is simply to establish a mood or convey an emotional tone, or when they employ popular songs simply to exploit their appeal and popularity

material that is incorporated under fair use should be properly attributed wherever possible

attribution, in itself, does not convert an infringing use into a fair one.

If student work that incorporates, modifies, and re-presents existing media content meets the transformativeness standard, it can be distributed to wide audiences under the doctrine of fair use.

When sharing is confined to a delimited network, such uses are more likely to receive special consideration under the fair use doctrine

there are no cut-and-dried rules (such as 10 percent of the work being quoted, or 400 words of text, or two bars of music, or 10 seconds of video).

Transformativeness, a key value in fair use law, can involve modifying material or putting material in a new context, or both

Copyright Act itself makes it clear that educational uses will often be considered fair because they add important pedagogical value to referenced media objects.

If educators or learners want to share their work only with a class (or another defined, closed group) they are in a favorable position

if work is going to be shared widely, it is good to be able to rely on transformativeness

courts have found that asking permission and then being rejected has actually enhanced fair use claims.

We don’t know of any lawsuit actually brought by an American media company against an educator over the use of media in the educational process

fair use requires judgment.

if the user “transforms” the material in some way, repurposing it in a new media composition, for instance, then fair use likely applies.

or did it just repeat the work for the same intent and value as the original?

Students’ use of copyrighted material should not be a substitute for creative effort.

in the basic forms, as well as in the content of people's thinking.

The early 1930

had experienced the conditions necessary to alter radically the content and form of their thought.

we expected that they would display a predominance of those forms of thought that come from activity that is guided by the physical features of familiar objects.

Therefore we began, as most field work with people does, by emphasizing contact with the people who would serve as our subjects. We tried to establish friendly relations so that experimental sessions seemed natural and non-threatening. We were particularly careful not to conduct hasty or unprepared presentations of the test materials.

As a rule, our experimental sessions began with long conversations which were sometimes repeated with the subjects in the relaxed atmosphere of a tea house, where the villagers spent most of their free time, or in camps in the field and in mountain pastures around the evening campfire. These talks were frequently held in groups. Even when the interviews were held with one person, the experimenter and other subjects made up a group of two or three who listened attentively to the person being interviewed and who sometimes offered remarks or comments on what he said. The talk often took the form of a free-flowing exchange of opinion between participants, and a particular problem might be solved simultaneously by two or three subjects, each proposing an answer. Only gradually did the experimenters introduce the prepared tasks, which resembled the “riddles” familiar to the population and therefore seemed like a natural extension of the conversation.

He characterized primitive thinking as “prelogical” and “loosely organized.” Primitive people were said to be indifferent to logical contradiction and dominated by the idea that mystical forces control natural phenomena

We conceived the idea of carrying out the first far-reaching study of intellectual functions among adults from a non-technological non-literate, traditional society

hamlets

nomad

1. Women living in remote villages who were illiterate and who were not involved in any modern social activities. There were still a considerable number of such women at the time our study was made. Their interviews were conducted by women, since they alone had the right to enter the women's quarters. 2. Peasants living in remote villages who were in no way involved with socialized labor and who continued to maintain an individualistic economy. These peasants were not literate. 3. Women who attended short-term courses in the teaching of kindergarteners. As a rule, they had no formal schooling and almost no training in literacy. 4. Active kolhoz (collective farm) workers and young people who had taken short courses. They were involved as chairmen running collective farms, as holders of other offices on the, collective farm, or as brigade leaders. They had considerable experience in planning production, distributing labor, and taking stock of output. By dealing with other collective farm members, they had acquired a much broader outlook than isolated peasants. But they had attended school only briefly, and many were still barely literate. 5. Women students admitted to teachers school after two or three years of study. Their educational qualifications, however, were still fairly low.

Short-term psychological experiments would have been highly problematic under the field conditions we expected to encounter

I’ve been to parties and social gatherings there many times where one set of people stay at one end of the room and another -- the newcomers -- at the other end.

Gentrification in Berlin has now started to make itself felt in staunchly working class and immigrant Neukoelln

A video has recently appeared on YouTube about the phenomena of gentrification in Neukoelln

can understand some of the points he makes about the superficiality of the hipsters with their “Starbucks standards and expectations” and how they just want to party for a few years before moving on again somewhere else. But I don’t entirely agree with his point of view. Berlin needs newcomers, it needs new creativity and new enterprise. It can’t afford to stagnate and just remain a working class city in a city with little for the working class to do anymore. I find this hostility towards “Aerzte, Architekten und Anwaelte” rather parochial and narrow-minded. Why be against these people? Because they are doing well for themselves? What are they supposed to do? Sweep the streets or draw Stuetze (unemployment benefit)?

funny rant, critical of the newcomers and their standardized Latte Macchiato attitudes.  The video was also featured on Dutch TV recently.