Nice analysis of the Oz situation. I particularly liked Fig 2 and associated text, where they identify different reasons for university study and where online approaches might or might not be appropriate.
This is the most thorough, comprehensive and balanced overview and analysis of MOOCs that I have read. This is not surprising since Sir John Daniel has had a long and distinguished career in open and distance learning, including being President of the Commonwealth of Learning and Vice-Chancellor of the UK Open University.
The paper is worth reading in full
The paper contains a number of real ‘zingers’. Some of my favourites:
Creative Commons licences are intended to facilitate open access to copyright materials, both online and offline, while allowing the copyright owner to expressly reserve some rights. 'Creative Commons' describes both a movement and a network of organisations whose focus is the drafting and promotion of various licences that can be applied to copyright materials.
Interesting article. The key concept I took away was multiple perspectives where "Citizens could watch multiple versions of the same basic courses taught by different professors across the country and see a variety of ways of approaching the same questions".. but I wonder (especially for 1st yr students) if students would listen to multiple lectures on the same topic?
We grabbed five minutes with Steven Schwartz, VC at Macquarie University, to talk about the online course revolution and how the UK and Australia compare on social mobility
North American article promoting changes in pedagogy afforded by the Open movement. Advocating a changing teacher role, like we've been dioing in Oz for 20 years.