Group items tagged

"Funded by tertiary institutions rather than individual researchers, this new model seeks to provide open access not just to traditional academic publications but to all forms of scholarly output."

The "manifesto" for the open access movement, written by Aaron Swartz from 2008. Only 6 years old, but already, it carries a historical value. "Will you join us?" Creative Commons license: Attribution 3.0 United States

Great resource and very relevant to this weeks' module! Thank you for sharing. The idea of "Guerilla Open Access" is something I had really hoped to cover more in depth in the lecture materials. Yes, there's a tension -- or a "balance", as many of the lecturers said -- between protecting creators vs. protecting consumers, but there has not been nearly enough discussion on the power dynamics and implicit within our current system. I am taking this class partly in person through UBC, and I will be sharing this resource with my seminar group this week.

I liked this article on the tension between indigenous knowledge, which wants to be closed and contained, and open knowledge which wants to be freely accessible to all. It highlights the need to find a balancing middle path between the two trajectories. This issue speaks to the sources found in Additional resources in Module 1.

Some of readings in module 2 made me thing of this radio report. It gives an interesting look at gamification in education, focusing on highschool and college levels. While they don't directing talk about open knowledge I think gamification is something important to consider and look at when thinking of alternative forms of education.

A good combination of game and education can definitely inspire more children to learn. So if wen can combine game and education, we may also be able to bring social media (i.e. Facebook, twitter) into our classroom, which could inspire university students to study.

The wonderful blog, Hack Library School, has recently posted a piece on open access publishing. This piece is a great overview, which covers many of the basic concepts covered in Module 6. The article discusses what open access is (and what it isn't) and some of the biggest discussion points on the issue today. It's a great overview and well worth the read if you want an overview or a refresher on the topic!

This blog covers a lot of relevant concepts related to OA, but a finer point need to be clarified. Regarding Google Scholar, not everything retrieved from GS is OA. GS is a web crowler, it crows wherever it is allowed, including references and citations to articles behind paywalls. On the other hand, many librarians are working to make their paid journals subscriptions available to their faculty and students via Google Scholar. So when faculty/students are on their universities' network, they can search GS, find articles from journals. If their library subscribes to that journal, there is a good chance a link to the full text will be available.

I agree with the point that "findability" for green OA articles is a current problem. We need a PubMed or Web of Science for green OA articles!

If you were interested in the Cancer Commons resource from the last module, this one might be something you'd like to peruse. The OERC's portal is open and free for everyone around the world to use to: Find free, open, and online educational and training resources. We will be "recommending the best" and "linking to the rest" of materials that could meet your interdisciplinary needs.

Dr Jane McGonigal (a professional game developer) talks about the time spent playing video games (which approximates to the span of human evolution), and that this time has to increase to make any major changes to the world. I have selected this resource partially in relation to week 3's Clarke's lecture (and others), which talks about using our idle time to do something meaningful - participate in citizen science games, for example. Dr McGonigal's talk very much illustrates this point - except that it talks about solving global issues through indirect games, e.g. a World Without Oil online game simulates a world in which you have to survive oil shortage. Creator's research shows, that people maintain the skills and habits they have taken up after playing this intense game, which include making better choices for our changing environment. The only difference here from actual citizen science games is that Dr McGonigal's games are fictional (rather than providing direct data / input for actual scientific research), however, they empower people to influence global change, which is the topic of the other lectures this week, especially Morozov's thoughts about the power of internet and connectiveness to create "revolutions". Although Morozov has taken up a rather critical view, suggesting only those who want it, take the best from the Internet, Dr McGonigal's ideas might be what bridges the two - taking games, which are integral part of many people's lives, especially in the younger generation, and turning them into real "life schools" may help more people get the idea and the essential skills to "fix" their environments. In all honesty, this is a video I would watch again and again, and recommend it to anyone who would listen (and that doesn't happen often for me).

Gamification for learning - using game elements - sounds very promising. Prior to the internet, technology, there were board games or hands on projects - all with the intent to engage and interact with each other. So it is no surprise to me given the appropriate design/project that students can learn and solve real world problems. Letting students choose their persona and role also allows them to make their own future and take ownership for how they want to participate. Just like the original promise of multimedia training that was purported to replace the traditional classroom events and enable getting the "best" teacher recorded for all to have the same experience...I believe it was then thought that the learning experience needs o be "blended". Different techniques - online, face to face, etc.. This is not my field of expertise so these are just personal opinions. If the online game approach can be combined with face to face and tactile/outdoor activities, aka a blended approach - I think that might be very useful. I do also believe that design solutions should be encouraging win win situations to reinforce collaboration and the feeling that all can succeed. One question I might have is how do you measure success in learning?

Gaming promoters unfortunately for me have a commercial agenda and its always difficult to make that balance of pure learning and commercialization aspect

más de conocimiento abierto

revistas de acceso abierto