[Oz-teachers] what the ... ?
DALGLIESH, Andrew
Andrew.Dalgliesh at qed.qld.gov.au
Fri Nov 28 16:11:54 EST 2003
Hi Bronwyn
> I hope that EQ is fielding some robust research while
> conducting out these
> pilots (not just anecdotal stuff and rubbery figures/stats).
> I think you are
> in a brilliant position to really contribute to the field
> from these online
> pilots and the teacher and student practices that might
> evolve around them.
We are conducting evaluations on curriculum use, delivery and deployment and a range of technical issues. Our pilot participants are asked to provide us with their planning and we will be putting the pick of these in the Curriculum Exchange as a resource for teachers. I hope to be publishing next year.
> One issue though - surely copyright was on the table from the
> beginning as
> these were to be custom designed objects (ie no third party
> material). What IP
> should be attached?
The initiative will be conducted under the terms of a Memo of Agreement between the investing jurisdictions (States, Territories, Commonwealth, NZ) and the joint venture companies (Curriculum Corporation and education.au ltd. Currently the proposal is to vest all IP in the joint venture (as it is owned by the Ministers via MCEETYA and AESOC) on behalf of the investors. All jurisdictions however have asked for more detailed modelling of licensing issues before agreeing to vest IP for which they have paid. Also, there is no guarantee that third party IP won't exist in commissioned content (that would severely limit the scope of the content) but developers are required to warrant clearance of this IP. Licensing-in issues are dealt with separately to licensing out.
>
> Wasn't this developed with public moneys who will be paying
> licensing?
That depends on who the licensee is and what the use is. The original concept was that basic use in schools would not incur a license fee (although the issue of non-government sectors will be decided at a higher level), but that external parties (developers, commercial providers, international and non-school authorities) could be required to pay licenses depending on how they wanted to use the content.
Also, there are issues around what jurisdictions are able to do with the content beyond the basic use by teachers and students. A good example has been the issue of "commercialisation". As investors, jurisdictions have an interest in vesting commercialisation rights centrally to ensure maximum market benefit. On the other hand, individual jurisdictions may want to use some content in their own commercial products. And commercial doesn't just mean fully blown Microsoft-style shrink wrapped stuff. It could just be a school or unit charging fees in an online course (that includes TLF content) to pay for the release of the teacher who facilitates it. There is also the issue of access by other associated organisations such as Universities (for teacher education) and TAFEs (for VET), which is a line we have been pushing very hard.
I am
> confused here? Will people get to see them before that - why
> so darned
> secretive? Isn't this supposed to be in the spirit of sharing?
Its not about being secretive - it is about getting the licensing right and not exposing the department by distributing material we don't have permission to distribute. It is also about making sure we don't sign away the rights of the department and making it hard for schools to do what they need to with the content. Imagine a school wanted to get its prac students to plan a unit involving TLF content, linked to other Uni subjects, and the Uni had to go back to TLF and ask permission because it wasn't covered by a license that would allow the content to be used outside the school.
> PS the fact that kids love a silly frog or a gecko does not
> mean it is
> appropriate to dress a frog in clothes nor for me as a
> teacher to use such a
> banal actvity. A 2 year old could dress a doll for the right weather.
> Such activities make Maths Blaster look pedagogically sound.
That is a very good point and goes to the heart of the question "what is a learning object"? Even to call it an "activity" and imagine that teachers will have their kids use it in the same way as they would a felt board (which would be much better for that type of use) is to make assumptions about how a teacher will use the content. That has been a criticism of "traditional" curriculum software - that it prescribes certain uses by including too much of the context for learning.
The alternative view of learning objects is that they are more like resources than activities - that it is the teacher who provide the instructional (for want of a better word) sequence. This definition would see many digital photos included potentially as "learning objects". I personally think that is an over-reaction to the limiting nature of a lot of the drill-and-kill or complete-classroom style software, but somewhere in between is the right balance between the sopphistication needed to exploit the digital realm, and the simplicty needed to ensure teacher-driven pedagogy.
That is one of the reasons I prefer "Give me a Brake" over "Experience the Weather" - not because of the characters or style, but because of the open-endedness of the object. By giving students control over valid tools to manipulate variables, the object does not contain, but rather encourages, constructivist pedagogy. Of course, a teacher can still use it in a pedagogically poor way.
My point was not to say that only kids' views are valid, but that we should be careful about translating our own strong views about, and experiences of ICT in learning, into judgement about new resources before we see how they actually work in the field. Equally valid are the stories of how teachers use the content. I also wanted to point out how fully developers test their content with their audience (teachers and students) rather than creating something and then trying to drum up a market.
> BIG QUESTION Who is "your audience" in a learning object? Is
> it the teacher
> who chooses to adaopt/adapt it or the student who uses it or both?
>
That's another good point I didn't make - one of our schools has got Yr 6 kids developing their own learning obejcts using the TLF ones as a source of ideas. I had the chance to observe them at work and was impressed with the critical eye they used in assessing the objects, their ability to relate the objects to DeBono's Thinking hats and their plans for their own learning objects with a variety of audiences. More amazing was that the teacher refused to believe what she was doing was anything at all impressive :-)
Cheers
Andrew
------------------------------------
Andrew Dalgliesh
Senior Project Officer
ICTs and Learning
Education Queensland
Mobile 0417 751 495
Phone 07 3421 6586 Fax 07 3421 6588
PO BOX 1238 Coorparoo DC 4151
------------------------------------
This e-mail (including any attached files) is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that any transmission, distribution, printing or photocopying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me.
Unless explicitly attributed, the opinions expressed do not necessarily represent the official position of Education Queensland.
>
> Quoting "DALGLIESH, Andrew" <Andrew.Dalgliesh at qed.qld.gov.au>:
>
> > Hi everyone
> >
> > I have today rejoined this list after a couple of years
> absence and I believe
> > I can add to this discussion. By way of background, I am
> the Contact Liaison
> > Officer on The Le at rning Federation initiative for Education
> Queensland. That
> > means I work for EQ and my role is to help prepare staff in
> EQ to get the
> > most from this initiative, and keep the heirachy informed
> about the sucess or
> > otherwisee of our investment. It isn't my aim to be an
> apologist for the
> > initiative - I have to take a critical view of it to ensure
> my department
> > gets good value. But I am glad to see more informed debate
> around this and
> > hope I can contribute.
> >
> > As a result of my role, I get a huge amount of feedback
> from a wide range of
> > people in the field, as well as getting to find out a lot about the
> > background and progress of the initiative. So I have put
> together some
> > comments that I hope will put a lot of this issue into
> perspective...
> >
> > 1. At this stage, content release from The Le at rning
> Federation (TLF - because
> > everything has to have an acronym!) is only being done on
> the basis of
> > trialling. This is because intellectual property and
> licensing issues are
> > still being negotiated and jurisdictions are keen to get a
> good balance
> > between their rights as end-users, and their interests as
> investors. For this
> > reason, the learning objects will only be made available
> for distribution to
> > schools as part of trials. In Queensland, we have about 60
> schools involved
> > in such pilots and expect to get more on for the new year
> (please contact me
> > if you are interested!) I am hoping licenses will be
> finalised early next
> > year and we can start to move to wider distribution then.
> >
> > 2. The TLF website contains one object available for
> viewing (Give me a
> > Brake) and it runs fine with the right techincal specs. The
> full range of
> > specs (which are constantly being updated and include specs
> on educational
> > soundness and accessibility) can be found at:
> > http://www.thelearningfederation.edu.au/tlf/newcms/view_Page.asp?
> Men_Id=72&page_id=8519
> > Further objects are not being made available beyond the
> trialling process but
> > I can tell you that we have already taken delivery of 111
> objects in Science,
> > Mathematics & Numeracy, and Literacy for Students at Risk.
> >
> > 3. There are a lot of issues about delivery of learning objects that
> > jurisdictions will have to work out. In Queensland we are
> delivering through
> > the Curriculum Exchange, with CD's as a supplementary form
> of access. We are
> > keen not to see all our networks and servers fall over so
> our pilots and
> > releases will be incremental to minimise risk and maximise
> continuity of
> > service. Other issues relate to deployment of content once
> it arrives in the
> > school and helping schools minimise bandwidth issues with a
> balance of online
> > and local solutions.
> >
> > 4. Ultimately, it would be good to combine online services
> to allow teachers
> > an easy-to-use interface to search for, select and
> integrate a range of
> > digital resources, including learning objects, into online
> courses and other
> > e-learning experiences. Bronwyn makes a good point about
> the tension between
> > an open-source style teacher publishing and sharing model,
> and one that
> > emphasises quality control, digital rights etc. Ultimately,
> there is no
> > reason we cannot have, and benefit from, both. Good content
> and digital
> > rights management should accommodate, through metadata,
> tracking of use based
> > on IP and Licensing attributes. A good repository (I think)
> should allow
> > teachers to take an obejct and modify it (or build a new
> one from scratch)
> > and upload it to a wider audience, after which some kind of
> metadata editing
> > would occur as a result of use, nomination and referral by
> teachers. In other
> > words, the more teachers find, use and recommend a new
> object, the further up
> > the chain it goes and to a wider audience. There are a
> range of ways this
> > might work (coneptually as well as technically) and I would
> love to hear
> > people's ideas.
> >
> > 5. The quality of some early TLF objects, particularly from
> Science 1 (the
> > ones Brownywn described are from this release) has been
> questioned by a
> > number of people and I know that the TLF has changed its
> content procurement
> > processes to address some of these issues. In particular,
> instead of having
> > multimedia developers supply their own educational
> partners, TLF now takes a
> > more active role in finding and developing the education
> writers and linking
> > them to the developers.
> >
> > 6. My first exposure to TLF learning objects was last year
> when I trained as
> > an In-School Evaluator, to go into schools and get feedback
> from students
> > about content in development. I remember seeing some of the
> objects Bronwyn
> > described and thinking exactly the same as she did. I too,
> believed these
> > were "...amateur, simplistic and twee..." and I also hated
> the voice of the
> > Gecko who was one of the characters. Most of the other
> people in the room
> > felt the same. Later that year I had the pleasure of
> visiting Mistake Creek
> > State School where I was surprised at how engaged the
> students were with the
> > objects. The styles I thought were simplistic, they loved.
> The concepts I
> > thought would confuse them, they understood. They even
> liked the damn Gecko!
> > I have since received similar stories from other
> jurisdictions and it
> > confirmed for me the importance of connecting with your
> audience early on in
> > the development process. We have worked very hard at
> impressing on TLF the
> > importance of this.
> >
> > 7. I realise that it is early to start making assumptions
> about quality on
> > tha basis of our trials to date, but I can tell you that
> 87.5% of respondents
> > so far in our pilots have said they would "certainly"
> recommend the TLF
> > learning objects to colleagues, and 12.5% said they
> "probably" would. (0% for
> > "possibly" and "not at all"). At this stage, the main
> issues seem to be
> > around delivery and deployment of the content rather than
> its quality or use
> > in curriculum contexts and professional development is an
> area we are keeping
> > a close eye on. My view at the moment is that PD will work
> best when it is
> > integrated into PD about online learning and ICTs generally
> rather than being
> > separated out too far.
> >
> > 8. The whole concept of the "learning object" model is an
> interesting one and
> > you should read some of Stephen Downes comments on this.
> TLF is generally
> > regarded as a leader in the development of online content
> partly because of
> > the huge amount of work being done around standards and
> interoperability, but
> > also because of their emphasis on constructivist pedagogy.
> Many other
> > countries are developing collections of LO's but they are
> often very linear
> > and assume a more traditional pedagogy. Of course, there is
> always a fairly
> > rigourous debate about what a LO is, and what it should do.
> Some believe it
> > should be a sophisticated digital experience that embeds
> good pedagogy.
> > Others believe it should be small, repurposeable and not
> imply particular
> > approaches to teaching or learning. A question that often
> arises, and
> > reflects this kind of debate, is whether a digital photo
> can be regarded as a
> > "learning object"?
> >
> > 9. One more thing TLF is doing you may be interested in is
> approaching a
> > range of public institutions to capture their extant
> content for packaging
> > and distribution through the TLF Exchange. I have heard
> some very interesting
> > sound files, including a radio broadcast by
> Kingsford-Smith, and seen some
> > great digital photos that teachers would love to be able to use.
> >
> > If you are in Queensland and would like to know more about
> our pilots, please
> > get in touch with me directly. Your own education
> authorities have their
> > equivalents of me and they will be able to give you a good
> idea of how your
> > state or territory views the initiative and what your local
> issues are.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> > Andrew Dalgliesh
> > Senior Project Officer
> > ICTs and Learning
> > Education Queensland
> > Mobile 0417 751 495
> > Phone 07 3421 6586 Fax 07 3421 6588
> > PO BOX 1238 Coorparoo DC 4151
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > This e-mail (including any attached files) is intended only
> for the addressee
> > and may contain confidential information. If you are not
> the addressee, you
> > are notified that any transmission, distribution, printing
> or photocopying of
> > this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received
> this e-mail in
> > error, please immediately notify me.
> >
> > Unless explicitly attributed, the opinions expressed do not
> necessarily
> > represent the official position of Education Queensland.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: oz-teachers-bounces at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > > [mailto:oz-teachers-bounces at rite.ed.qut.edu.au]On Behalf Of Peter
> > > Macinnis
> > > Sent: Friday, 28 November 2003 8:01 AM
> > > To: Professional community for teachers
> > > Cc: Tony Webster
> > > Subject: Re: [Oz-teachers] what the ... ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Stephen is a long-standing mate, and very cluey. What he
> says carries
> > > clout.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Stephen Loosley" <stephen at melbpc.org.au>
> > > To: <oz-teachers at cobia.ed.qut.edu.au>
> > > Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 12:35 AM
> > > Subject: [Oz-teachers] what the ... ?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi all ..
> > > >
> > > > Haha .. here's a good one ...
> > > >
> > > > Remember the fanfare so long, and so many dollars, ago when
> > > > The Le at rnning Federation was announced? It was going to be
> > > > the ultimate in Australian teacher online usefullness..
> with scads
> > > > of online curriculum, and apparently all paid for by our tax
> > > dollars.
> > > >
> > > > Haha, anyone even visited their website lately? What a
> joke. After
> > > > so much time and money, all they can assist teachers in
> their work
> > > > with is one pathetic 'example of a learning object'
> called, "Give Me
> > > > a Brake" which for me appears broken. Give me a break, indeed.
> > > >
> > > > Do have a look at your taxes:
> > > http://www.thelearningfederation.edu.au
> > > >
> > > > And, even funnier? is what "The Le at rning Federation
> Steering Group
> > > > write about themselves this month, whilst pondering
> their own future
> > > as
> > > > their money runs out in 2005 ,,,
> > > >
> > > > <quote> 3.1. Demand
> > > > In establishing the Initiative, Ministers were
> providing leadership
> > > about
> > > > the direction of mainstream schooling, rather than responding to
> > > demand
> > > > for online content. The Initiative was to meet
> Ministers' demands
> > > for a
> > > > schooling sector more oriented to a digital, innovation-directed
> > > future.
> > > > The Le at rning Federation was to provide high quality
> online content
> > > that
> > > > schools would find so useful that teachers would demand more ..
> > > </quote>
> > > >
> > > > What a joke, or, after so long, perhaps a better word might be
> > > disgrace.
> > > >
> > > > One certainly hopes the various Ministers of Education are not
> > > pleased.
> > > >
> > > > Forgive my bluntness, but this is our tax dollars being
> thoroughly
> > > wasted
> > > >
> > > > Regards all ...
> > > > Stephen Loosley
> > > > Melburbs, Australia
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > oz-teachers mailing list
> > > > oz-teachers at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > > > http://lists.rite.ed.qut.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/oz-teachers
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > oz-teachers mailing list
> > > oz-teachers at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > > http://lists.rite.ed.qut.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/oz-teachers
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > oz-teachers mailing list
> > oz-teachers at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > http://lists.rite.ed.qut.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/oz-teachers
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Bronwyn Stuckey
> RITE & OTN Project Officer
> School of Maths Science & Technology Education
> Queensland University of Technology
> ph +617 3864 5517
> b.stuckey at qut.edu.au
>
>
>
------------------------------------
Andrew Dalgliesh
Senior Project Officer
ICTs and Learning
Education Queensland
Mobile 0417 751 495
Phone 07 3421 6586 Fax 07 3421 6588
PO BOX 1238 Coorparoo DC 4151
------------------------------------
This e-mail (including any attached files) is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that any transmission, distribution, printing or photocopying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me.
Unless explicitly attributed, the opinions expressed do not necessarily represent the official position of Education Queensland.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bronwyn Stuckey [mailto:b.stuckey at qut.edu.au]
> Sent: Friday, 28 November 2003 2:55 PM
> To: Professional community for teachers; DALGLIESH, Andrew
> Cc: Professional community for teachers
> Subject: RE: [Oz-teachers] what the ... ?
>
>
> Thanks Andrew for the fullsome response and for putting us
> clearly in the
> picture about the birth phase of these 'babies' as Peter
> would have them :-)
>
> I hope that EQ is fielding some robust research while
> conducting out these
> pilots (not just anecdotal stuff and rubbery figures/stats).
> I think you are
> in a brilliant position to really contribute to the field
> from these online
> pilots and the teacher and student practices that might
> evolve around them.
>
> One issue though - surely copyright was on the table from the
> beginning as
> these were to be custom designed objects (ie no third party
> material). What IP
> should be attached?
>
> Wasn't this developed with public moneys who will be paying
> licensing? I am
> confused here? Will people get to see them before that - why
> so darned
> secretive? Isn't this supposed to be in the spirit of sharing?
>
> Bronwyn
>
> PS the fact that kids love a silly frog or a gecko does not
> mean it is
> appropriate to dress a frog in clothes nor for me as a
> teacher to use such a
> banal actvity. A 2 year old could dress a doll for the right weather.
> Such activities make Maths Blaster look pedagogically sound.
>
> BIG QUESTION Who is "your audience" in a learning object? Is
> it the teacher
> who chooses to adaopt/adapt it or the student who uses it or both?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting "DALGLIESH, Andrew" <Andrew.Dalgliesh at qed.qld.gov.au>:
>
> > Hi everyone
> >
> > I have today rejoined this list after a couple of years
> absence and I believe
> > I can add to this discussion. By way of background, I am
> the Contact Liaison
> > Officer on The Le at rning Federation initiative for Education
> Queensland. That
> > means I work for EQ and my role is to help prepare staff in
> EQ to get the
> > most from this initiative, and keep the heirachy informed
> about the sucess or
> > otherwisee of our investment. It isn't my aim to be an
> apologist for the
> > initiative - I have to take a critical view of it to ensure
> my department
> > gets good value. But I am glad to see more informed debate
> around this and
> > hope I can contribute.
> >
> > As a result of my role, I get a huge amount of feedback
> from a wide range of
> > people in the field, as well as getting to find out a lot about the
> > background and progress of the initiative. So I have put
> together some
> > comments that I hope will put a lot of this issue into
> perspective...
> >
> > 1. At this stage, content release from The Le at rning
> Federation (TLF - because
> > everything has to have an acronym!) is only being done on
> the basis of
> > trialling. This is because intellectual property and
> licensing issues are
> > still being negotiated and jurisdictions are keen to get a
> good balance
> > between their rights as end-users, and their interests as
> investors. For this
> > reason, the learning objects will only be made available
> for distribution to
> > schools as part of trials. In Queensland, we have about 60
> schools involved
> > in such pilots and expect to get more on for the new year
> (please contact me
> > if you are interested!) I am hoping licenses will be
> finalised early next
> > year and we can start to move to wider distribution then.
> >
> > 2. The TLF website contains one object available for
> viewing (Give me a
> > Brake) and it runs fine with the right techincal specs. The
> full range of
> > specs (which are constantly being updated and include specs
> on educational
> > soundness and accessibility) can be found at:
> > http://www.thelearningfederation.edu.au/tlf/newcms/view_Page.asp?
> Men_Id=72&page_id=8519
> > Further objects are not being made available beyond the
> trialling process but
> > I can tell you that we have already taken delivery of 111
> objects in Science,
> > Mathematics & Numeracy, and Literacy for Students at Risk.
> >
> > 3. There are a lot of issues about delivery of learning objects that
> > jurisdictions will have to work out. In Queensland we are
> delivering through
> > the Curriculum Exchange, with CD's as a supplementary form
> of access. We are
> > keen not to see all our networks and servers fall over so
> our pilots and
> > releases will be incremental to minimise risk and maximise
> continuity of
> > service. Other issues relate to deployment of content once
> it arrives in the
> > school and helping schools minimise bandwidth issues with a
> balance of online
> > and local solutions.
> >
> > 4. Ultimately, it would be good to combine online services
> to allow teachers
> > an easy-to-use interface to search for, select and
> integrate a range of
> > digital resources, including learning objects, into online
> courses and other
> > e-learning experiences. Bronwyn makes a good point about
> the tension between
> > an open-source style teacher publishing and sharing model,
> and one that
> > emphasises quality control, digital rights etc. Ultimately,
> there is no
> > reason we cannot have, and benefit from, both. Good content
> and digital
> > rights management should accommodate, through metadata,
> tracking of use based
> > on IP and Licensing attributes. A good repository (I think)
> should allow
> > teachers to take an obejct and modify it (or build a new
> one from scratch)
> > and upload it to a wider audience, after which some kind of
> metadata editing
> > would occur as a result of use, nomination and referral by
> teachers. In other
> > words, the more teachers find, use and recommend a new
> object, the further up
> > the chain it goes and to a wider audience. There are a
> range of ways this
> > might work (coneptually as well as technically) and I would
> love to hear
> > people's ideas.
> >
> > 5. The quality of some early TLF objects, particularly from
> Science 1 (the
> > ones Brownywn described are from this release) has been
> questioned by a
> > number of people and I know that the TLF has changed its
> content procurement
> > processes to address some of these issues. In particular,
> instead of having
> > multimedia developers supply their own educational
> partners, TLF now takes a
> > more active role in finding and developing the education
> writers and linking
> > them to the developers.
> >
> > 6. My first exposure to TLF learning objects was last year
> when I trained as
> > an In-School Evaluator, to go into schools and get feedback
> from students
> > about content in development. I remember seeing some of the
> objects Bronwyn
> > described and thinking exactly the same as she did. I too,
> believed these
> > were "...amateur, simplistic and twee..." and I also hated
> the voice of the
> > Gecko who was one of the characters. Most of the other
> people in the room
> > felt the same. Later that year I had the pleasure of
> visiting Mistake Creek
> > State School where I was surprised at how engaged the
> students were with the
> > objects. The styles I thought were simplistic, they loved.
> The concepts I
> > thought would confuse them, they understood. They even
> liked the damn Gecko!
> > I have since received similar stories from other
> jurisdictions and it
> > confirmed for me the importance of connecting with your
> audience early on in
> > the development process. We have worked very hard at
> impressing on TLF the
> > importance of this.
> >
> > 7. I realise that it is early to start making assumptions
> about quality on
> > tha basis of our trials to date, but I can tell you that
> 87.5% of respondents
> > so far in our pilots have said they would "certainly"
> recommend the TLF
> > learning objects to colleagues, and 12.5% said they
> "probably" would. (0% for
> > "possibly" and "not at all"). At this stage, the main
> issues seem to be
> > around delivery and deployment of the content rather than
> its quality or use
> > in curriculum contexts and professional development is an
> area we are keeping
> > a close eye on. My view at the moment is that PD will work
> best when it is
> > integrated into PD about online learning and ICTs generally
> rather than being
> > separated out too far.
> >
> > 8. The whole concept of the "learning object" model is an
> interesting one and
> > you should read some of Stephen Downes comments on this.
> TLF is generally
> > regarded as a leader in the development of online content
> partly because of
> > the huge amount of work being done around standards and
> interoperability, but
> > also because of their emphasis on constructivist pedagogy.
> Many other
> > countries are developing collections of LO's but they are
> often very linear
> > and assume a more traditional pedagogy. Of course, there is
> always a fairly
> > rigourous debate about what a LO is, and what it should do.
> Some believe it
> > should be a sophisticated digital experience that embeds
> good pedagogy.
> > Others believe it should be small, repurposeable and not
> imply particular
> > approaches to teaching or learning. A question that often
> arises, and
> > reflects this kind of debate, is whether a digital photo
> can be regarded as a
> > "learning object"?
> >
> > 9. One more thing TLF is doing you may be interested in is
> approaching a
> > range of public institutions to capture their extant
> content for packaging
> > and distribution through the TLF Exchange. I have heard
> some very interesting
> > sound files, including a radio broadcast by
> Kingsford-Smith, and seen some
> > great digital photos that teachers would love to be able to use.
> >
> > If you are in Queensland and would like to know more about
> our pilots, please
> > get in touch with me directly. Your own education
> authorities have their
> > equivalents of me and they will be able to give you a good
> idea of how your
> > state or territory views the initiative and what your local
> issues are.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> > Andrew Dalgliesh
> > Senior Project Officer
> > ICTs and Learning
> > Education Queensland
> > Mobile 0417 751 495
> > Phone 07 3421 6586 Fax 07 3421 6588
> > PO BOX 1238 Coorparoo DC 4151
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > This e-mail (including any attached files) is intended only
> for the addressee
> > and may contain confidential information. If you are not
> the addressee, you
> > are notified that any transmission, distribution, printing
> or photocopying of
> > this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received
> this e-mail in
> > error, please immediately notify me.
> >
> > Unless explicitly attributed, the opinions expressed do not
> necessarily
> > represent the official position of Education Queensland.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: oz-teachers-bounces at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > > [mailto:oz-teachers-bounces at rite.ed.qut.edu.au]On Behalf Of Peter
> > > Macinnis
> > > Sent: Friday, 28 November 2003 8:01 AM
> > > To: Professional community for teachers
> > > Cc: Tony Webster
> > > Subject: Re: [Oz-teachers] what the ... ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Stephen is a long-standing mate, and very cluey. What he
> says carries
> > > clout.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Stephen Loosley" <stephen at melbpc.org.au>
> > > To: <oz-teachers at cobia.ed.qut.edu.au>
> > > Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 12:35 AM
> > > Subject: [Oz-teachers] what the ... ?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi all ..
> > > >
> > > > Haha .. here's a good one ...
> > > >
> > > > Remember the fanfare so long, and so many dollars, ago when
> > > > The Le at rnning Federation was announced? It was going to be
> > > > the ultimate in Australian teacher online usefullness..
> with scads
> > > > of online curriculum, and apparently all paid for by our tax
> > > dollars.
> > > >
> > > > Haha, anyone even visited their website lately? What a
> joke. After
> > > > so much time and money, all they can assist teachers in
> their work
> > > > with is one pathetic 'example of a learning object'
> called, "Give Me
> > > > a Brake" which for me appears broken. Give me a break, indeed.
> > > >
> > > > Do have a look at your taxes:
> > > http://www.thelearningfederation.edu.au
> > > >
> > > > And, even funnier? is what "The Le at rning Federation
> Steering Group
> > > > write about themselves this month, whilst pondering
> their own future
> > > as
> > > > their money runs out in 2005 ,,,
> > > >
> > > > <quote> 3.1. Demand
> > > > In establishing the Initiative, Ministers were
> providing leadership
> > > about
> > > > the direction of mainstream schooling, rather than responding to
> > > demand
> > > > for online content. The Initiative was to meet
> Ministers' demands
> > > for a
> > > > schooling sector more oriented to a digital, innovation-directed
> > > future.
> > > > The Le at rning Federation was to provide high quality
> online content
> > > that
> > > > schools would find so useful that teachers would demand more ..
> > > </quote>
> > > >
> > > > What a joke, or, after so long, perhaps a better word might be
> > > disgrace.
> > > >
> > > > One certainly hopes the various Ministers of Education are not
> > > pleased.
> > > >
> > > > Forgive my bluntness, but this is our tax dollars being
> thoroughly
> > > wasted
> > > >
> > > > Regards all ...
> > > > Stephen Loosley
> > > > Melburbs, Australia
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > oz-teachers mailing list
> > > > oz-teachers at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > > > http://lists.rite.ed.qut.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/oz-teachers
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > oz-teachers mailing list
> > > oz-teachers at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > > http://lists.rite.ed.qut.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/oz-teachers
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > oz-teachers mailing list
> > oz-teachers at rite.ed.qut.edu.au
> > http://lists.rite.ed.qut.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/oz-teachers
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Bronwyn Stuckey
> RITE & OTN Project Officer
> School of Maths Science & Technology Education
> Queensland University of Technology
> ph +617 3864 5517
> b.stuckey at qut.edu.au
>
>
>
More information about the oz-teachers
mailing list