[OSGeo-Edu] "OSGeo Teach-in" event proposal

Mon Jun 23 21:15:51 EDT 2008

Quoting Daniel Ames <amesdani at isu.edu>:

> I don't like the proposed phrase, "has not been reviewed by anyone at
> OSGeo." Presumably Gary is "at OSGeo" if that is to be taken to mean an
> OSGeo member (by this definition:http://www.osgeo.org/membership). So drop
> that phrase and the disclaimer seems pretty good. - Dan

Good point Dan... perhaps

"This tutorial is part of a general effort by the OSGeo foundation to create a
global, open access repository of educational material related to open source
geospatial theory and technologies. However, this tutorial has not been FORMALLY
PEER_REVIEWED WITHIN THE OSGEO ORGANIZATION. Any mistakes, misrepresentations,
or inaccuracies are the authors' alone."

But this might have legal implications that I am not aware of. Tyler? Others?
Could something like this allow people to post the OSGEo logo on tutorials?

FINALLY, A COMMENT ON THE PEER-REVIEW ISSUE:

In the tutorials I put up, we have a section heading of "Reviewed By" which
lists a student in my shop who did this. It might be a good social norm to do
this in any tutorials we host, following the user-driven innovation concept:
Let peer-review happen simply when someone uses the tutorial. Tutorial
maintainers should try to incorporate any errors they find (or let the new user
do this as a new derivative), and add have that "user-reviewer" add their name
to a Review list embedded in the tutorial source?

I see this as the only realistic way of undertaking peer-review. We could try to
set up a formal system, but I am not confident people will have the time to
undertake a close look at something (this relates to the idea of "granularity"
Yochai Benkler talks about -- how long it takes to do a task).

If others agree on all of this perhaps I should bring these ideas up for a vote?
Not sure of protocol here.

Cheers
Charlie

>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:20 PM, <cschweik at pubpol.umass.edu> wrote:
>
> > Quoting "Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo)" <tmitchell at osgeo.org>:
> >
> > > Without digging through the whole thread about Gary's material, can
> > > anyone summarise where we left this?
> > >
> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/edu_discuss/2006-August/000175.html
> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/edu_discuss/2006-August/000212.html
> >
> > Here's my blurry recollection:
> >
> > - Gary wanted to put an OSGeo logo on his material.
> > - There was some concern (can't remember who was involved here) that
> > anything
> > with the OSGeo logo should go through some review process.
> > - We didn't have a review process, and there may have been a question on
> > the
> > license to be used. We didn't have an agreed upon license.
> > - Gary waited, but had to proceed, and he consequently dropped the request
> > and
> > moved forward.
> > - It was an example of what I personally thought we didn't want to have
> > happen.
> > Here was a very active developer of open source geo educational content
> > wanting
> > to connect, and my sense was he got frustrated and just dropped it and
> > moved on
> > (I think Gary may be still on this list though... Gary?). I can't really
> > blame
> > him.
> > - Up until now, our take as a group has been that we need to build a larger
> > database of tutorials -- any kind at this point. So we have a statement at
> > the
> > top of the wiki saying that none have been officially reviewed or something
> > like
> > that.
> >
> > - So THESE QUESTIONS REMAIN
> >
> > A) Can people put OSGeo logos on their tutorials?
> > B) Is there some process we need to go through to make a tutorial or edu
> > material tagged "OSGeo"?
> > C) Do we need to come up with a recommended license for content?
> >
> > My personal view on this is that
> >
> > 1) OSGeo logos on tutorials are free marketing (a good thing). One idea
> > might be
> > to develop some kind of statement that authors should use if they did use
> > the
> > logo that says something like: "this tutorial is part of a general effort
> > by the
> > OSGeo foundation to create a global, open access repository of educational
> > material related to open source geospatial theory and technologies. This
> > tutorial has not been reviewed by anyone at OSGeo. Any mistakes,
> > misrepresentations, or inaccuracies are the authors' alone." I'm not a
> > lawyer,
> > so if someone on this list has a better suggestion -- go for it! Or Tyler
> > or
> > others might object for valid reasons I don't understand. But this seems
> > one
> > possible way past this impasse.
> >
> > 2) I think licensing should probably be left to the original author. I
> > personally see no reason why we shouldn't allow the opportunity for funds
> > to
> > flow around educational workshops just as open source software groups are
> > doing
> > by providing services around software. So I would hope if there was some
> > agreed
> > upon license that it wouldn't stop that from happening. So there might be
> > some
> > advantages to deciding on a "recommended" (but not mandated) license for
> > new
> > authors.
> >
> > Hope that helps and apologies if my memory confused something.
> >
> > Charlie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I think the current curriculum collection process touches this too,
> > > as we gather pointers to material we recognise as applicable.  But
> > > what about in cases where the curriculum content is not necessarily
> > > "open" but funding can come back to OSGeo and relevant courses can be
> > > delivered to the broader communit.  That's probably what it will boil
> > > down to from an Edu committee angle.
> > >
> > > Please share any thoughts on the conference mailing list:
> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> > >
> > > Tyler
> > >
> > > On 23-Jun-08, at 5:00 AM, Arnulf Christl wrote:
> > >
> > > > Edu, the discussion around creating an "OSGeo Teach-in" brand or
> > > > OSGeo-coordinated event may be interesting to this committee. If
> > > > you are interested please feel free to join the discussion that has
> > > > currently been taken on by the conference committee. I suggest you
> > > > join the conference mailing list for the time being to avoid lots
> > > > of cross mails.
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> > > >
> > > > It was initially discussed a little too hotly (my bad) and we are
> > > > now trying to find a way how to decide which option works best for
> > > > OSGeo and any interested businesses and to subsequently develop a
> > > > policy on how to do it. Until now Edu has not been addressed
> > > > directly but as tutorials, educational material, teaching courses,
> > > > etc. are concerned I could imagine some interest here.
> > > > In case you don't know what I am talking about I have compiled some
> > > > links to explain the background:
> > > >
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2008-May/002444.html
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2008-June/000578.html
> > > > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Licenses_for_Education_Material
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2008-June/000580.html
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2008-June/002555.html
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2008-June/000595.html
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2008-June/000605.html
> > > >
> > > > Best regards, Arnulf. _______________________________________________
> > > > Edu_discuss mailing list
> > > > Edu_discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/edu_discuss
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Edu_discuss mailing list
> > > Edu_discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/edu_discuss
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Edu_discuss mailing list
> > Edu_discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/edu_discuss
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel P. Ames, PhD, PE
> Geospatial Software Lab
> Department of Geosciences
> Idaho State University - Idaho Falls
> amesdani at isu.edu
> www.hydromap.com
>