Group items tagged

Description: "This post discusses some of the tensions that exist between the increasing effort to enforce Intellectual Property Rights and the impact of the Internet." "It suggests that Internet users and IP owners are not fully reconciled on the impact of the Internet on IP. IP owners are often eager for the support of users in promoting their products, ideas, services online, still want to have almost exclusive control of how those activities are conducted, which often and inherently undermines the desire (and opportunity) to share. Hence although a mutually beneficial relationship between IP and IT can exist, there are still a number adjustments that ought to be made to better accommodate the changing paradigm that is occurring due to the Internet."

So, you need an image for your blog? We've spent some time categorizing our favorite sources for free images and organizing them in such a way as to help you find what you're looking for. Here are the criteria we've examined: Subjects: Does a site focus on specific genres of images, or is it a mass collection of various image types?

Very helpful resource. The categories help to narrow one's search.

Nice! Thanks for sharing. Both useful IRL, and pertinent to the course.

What Role Can MOOCs Play in the Development Agenda? Five Key Questions By: Rajika Bhandari on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 With the Millennium Development Goals nearing their deadline, the development sector has been rife with speculation about what the post-2015 development agenda will look like and what role, if any, higher education should play in this future outlook. Personal note: This highlights the reality of so called 3rd world countries and the real reach of MOOCs

1. Talk things through Start a discussion on any topic, and bring in the right people. Share diverse perspectives and develop ideas together. 2. Build agreement Anyone can propose a course of action. People can agree, abstain, disagree, or block - so you can see how everyone feels, and why.

How can open educational practices empower less used and minority languages? - Webinar series (part of the European project LangOER) that aims at enhancing the teaching and learning of less used languages through open educational resources and practices

How can open educational practices empower less used and minority languages? - Webinar series (part of the European project LangOER) that aims at enhancing the teaching and learning of less used languages through open educational resources and practices

More than just playing and making, be able to reflect after creating something new is what makes this new mode of learning different. One step further would then be "open to critiques", then learn from both peers and master. Seemly Brown also discussed a new "networked identity": based on what one has created and what others have then built on it. This is the idea of building new things from other existing things, but give credit to where credit is due. Provide one's creation or product openly so that others can remix/build something new based on this product. This would be how an ideal knowledge environment would grow and sustain.

A really like the sequence of events he mentioned at the beginning: Create, Reflect, Share. It is so simple yet can result in so much production! And of course, it all starts with imagination :)

Great video! It will be/ is becoming the new mode of learning. We collaborate to create an active knowledge environment. It's definitely a mode of open learning, which can benefit all of us.

How an open course can work. "We don't want the students to remember the formulas. We want to change the way they look at the world."

I liked how Ted explains the way students access to Open Courses and how right he is when he says that if there are no due dates, even if the topic is very interesting, there are always other things to do first, therefore, you end up not doing it. I am also with him in not doing moocs to long that can get you bored and end up losing all your attention.

very informative!

This site explains why people choose to illegally downloads, even if some people know that they are breaking the copyright law.

Interesting read as I'm guilty of illegally downloading/streaming TV and music. Very surprised to see that the rich are the ones who illegally download on a regular basis.

"I'd have to wait too long to see it on TV" is the reason I hear the most about when it comes to illegal downloading. Those people generally do make an effort to watch it when it does officially come out on TV though, to off-set their piracy. The way companies will show something in one country and then sit on it for five months before letting someone in another country watch it seems silly to me at this point, though. Yes digital piracy is illegal, but it seems to be getting to the point of the Prohibition Era in the United States: yes, it's illegal, but everyone's doing it anyway. I think somebody's going to need to change things up here, and it seems doubtful that the companies producing these shows can alter the cultural norms without a lot more work than it seems they're willing to put in.

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!

THERE was a time, not long ago, when access to the internet could be gained only through a computer. Now people can get to it using phones, tablets and some games...

THERE was a time, not long ago, when access to the internet could be gained only through a computer. Now people can get to it using phones, tablets and some games...

"If, as rumoured, google builds a platform for depositing unrefereed research papers for "peer-reviewing" via crowd-sourcing, can this create a substitute for classical peer-review or will it merely supplement classical peer review with crowd-sourcing?"

Two facts that makes me think, peer-reviewing via crowd-sourcing, at best would supplement the traditional peer-review process. Fact one, there are already open access repositories that allow "deposit first; review later", but those repositories have not taken over other journals. Fact two, Wikipedia is an example in that, though theoretically anyone can contribute and edit the articles, there is definite number of people who would do it. Therefore, I don't see crowd sourcing peer review would really substitute the traditional route.

I appreciated that this source was framed outside of dichotomous thinking by not pitting more traditional and open access peer review models directly against one another, carrying the assumption that a particular publishing process must choose one or another. Although, I think I would challenge Harnad to take this thought process further. Rather than supplementing or complementing one another, traditional and open peer review models are distinct enough to also be applicable in different types of contexts, without necessarily needing to rely on one another. That is not to disagree with Harnad that the two do not "substitute" one another, but precisely because they cannot substitute one another indicates that they serve different purposes and could thus be useful in different contexts…. Or, as Harnad suggest, supplement each other in the same context. I think this very well parallels the context of taxonomies and folksonomies.

If you're taking this course out of Canada, the Copyright @ UBC website has a lot of really good information available to you. Guides specifically relevant to this course include the Creative Commons Guide (where you can find information about using CC licensed work, applying CC licenses to your own work, and several lists of websites where you can find CC licensed work) and the Public Domain Guide (where you can find information about how to determine if something is in the public domain in Canada). The entire site is CC BY-SA (except where otherwise indicated) though, so the entire thing is a resource for copyright questions in Canada.

Online discussions and post-publication analyses are catching mistakes that sneak past editorial review. This article describes the pitfalls with editorial review and pre-publication peer review, and advocates for post-publication crowd-sourced reviewing through social media platforms.

I think having a comments section is a great way to provide feedback on the information provided. Often when I read articles the comments section allows me to understand different perspectives and interpretations of the information.

This article, while not necessarily explicitly, managed to hint at what I find to be a source of problematic practices/outcomes in the academy, publishing, etc. That is, it is not necessarily that traditional peer review processes are ineffective at finding errors or misconduct, but rather it is when our processes and practices become so systematized that we can mindlessly or effortlessly engage in and reproduce them without our full, critical attention that they can produce problems. While I think there are good reasons to critique the notion of peer and "expert" culture within traditional peer review processes, an additional and separate critique is the problems that arise with systematization. The article implicitly addressed this when the author commented that current post-publication environments "provide a public space that is not under the control of journal editors and conference organizers." Yet, as White indicates, there exists skepticism of the value of post-publication reviews along with a simultaneous effort to build post-publication systems that have standards that put those questioning it at ease. The National Institutes of Health establishing requirements that potential post-publication reviewers must meet demonstrated this. That is, they are trying to figure out how to systematize post-publication. For me, what this article indicates is that we ought to figure out how to keep our academic and publishing processes "fresh," so to speak. This way we don't become so comfortable with our methods and practices that they allow us to simply go through the motions without fostering innovative and critical inquiry.

I´m interested in sharing in this article given the impotance that they have taken social networks; social networks in Internet and expansion can not leave out the risks that these may contein by the lack of real awareness by users of uses that can be made with your personal data, as these may be used illegally, profiles can publish false information or unauthorized or assigned full and unlimited rights all contenst.

' ... licensing really does go to the heart of what open access means ...'

Open source and Open Access They are quite similar terms and with a common philosophy, give freedom to the user to use the share as he wills material. Interestingly both the open source and open access are four levels: Levels of open source 1 Level 0: Freedom to use the code 2 Level 1: Freedom of study code 3 Level 2: Freedom to study it and / or modify 4 Level 3: Freedom to redistribute (with or without changes) Levels of free access 1 Reuse all or part of the material for their own purposes 2 Sharing work with other 3 Power revise, adapt, change, and / or translate the shared work 4 Mix two or more existing sources and combine them to create something new As you can see they are very similar and can cause confusion, and believe they are the same. The authors are open access, public and / or private who wish to retain their copyright while the free code can be found that there is so much trouble (at least I think). ---------------- Código abierto y Acceso abierto Son términos bastante similares y con una filosofía común, dar libertad al usuario de usar el material compartido como a él le parezca. Curiosamente tanto el código abierto y el libre acceso tienen cuatro niveles: Niveles del código abierto 1. Nivel 0: Libertad de usar el código 2. Nivel 1: Libertad de estudiar el código 3. Nivel 2: Libertad de estudiarlo y/o modificarlo 4. Nivel 3: Libertad para redistribuirlo (con o sin cambios) Niveles del acceso abierto 1. Reusar una parte o toda del material para sus propios fines 2. Compartir el trabajo con otros 3. Poder revisar, adaptar, cambiar, y/o traducir el trabajo compartido 4. Mezclar dos o más fuentes existentes y combinarlos para crear algo nuevo Como se puede apreciar son muy similares y pueden causar confusión, y creer que son lo mismo. En el libre acceso existen autores, instituciones públicas y/o privadas que desean conservar sus derechos de aut