Feedback thoughts and suggestions on the high-level logic model
If you have any thoughts, feedback or suggestions on the high-level logic model, please post these by clicking on the reply link below.
Are there any gaps?
Any pressing questions which are not answered in the logic model summary?
You will need to be logged in with your WikiEducator account to post to this thread.
The logic model is now well explained and illustrated. Great work!!
Would like to suggest the following as well:
In the section Participating inistitutions : at the end of the sentence The project aims to recruit one institution from each of the major regions of the world the word initially may be added to indicate that it is not a closed-group.
Under the category OER university open collaboration, shall we need one more initiative as given below?
Management of volunteer services
• Upkeep of verified resgistry of volunteers
• Co-ordinate volunteer opportunities
• Co-ordinate volunteer services
Regards
Anil Prasad 04:52, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Anil,
Appreciate the feedback. Well spotted -- participating institutions are not limited to the "anchor partners". I fixed this oversight. Thanks.
I agree, the management of volunteer services is a key activity for future success. We see volunteer services and the management thereof as strategic activities within two of the initiatives:
- Open business models -- That is, volunteers helping to build and plan for the sustainability of the OERu -- I've modified the initiative to make this clear.
- Open student support -- where volunteer help the OERu with tutoring support.
So already included in the logic model -- but now clearly specified.
Good feedback -- the logic model has now been refined with your astute observations :-)
There are two outputs - undergraduate and postgraduate credentials, which I understand to be BS and post-doc level. Right? Where is "graduate"?
The words are repeated in the diagram, in particular, the word "open." I trust it's a conscious design decision to repeat it (10 times)? How about the word "credentials" twice - is it for emphasis, as well?
The differences between outputs, outcomes and impact can be stronger. Right now outputs are credentials, outcomes are "credible qualifications" (is it different from "credentials"?) and impact contains pathways for "credible credentials" (a combination of "credentials" and "credible qualifications"?) I think these three have to be phrased in a more distinctive manner.
Hi Maria,
Thanks for the feedback -- the terminology is based on that typically used in Commonwealth countries (just because the three initial anchor partners reside in Commonwealth Countries.)
- Undergraduate would for example be a Diploma or Bachelors Degree.
- Postgraduate would include Honours, Masters, PhD and Post-doc.
However, this eludes to the importance of a transnational qualifications framework so the level of qualification and corresponding nomenclature in different countries is clear.
Yep -- conscious design to repeat open with every initiative.
I agree the differences between ouputs and outcome statements must be specified more clearly - -which will come in the subsequent phases where the KPIS, measurable outcomes etc are specified.
The major distinction between outputs and outcomes is timing (i.e. short term and longer term). For example, initially the OERu aims to develop two credentials (Outputs). Students will enrol, study and complete these qualifications (Outcome). The ultimately this experience will contribute to the overall impact of providing free learning for all students worldwide.
In this context, credentials and qualifications are used interchangeably.
Terminology[edit]
We need to provide a semantic mapping, or if you prefer, translation, between Commonwealth English terms and what is used elsewhere.
I believe that we agree on pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary. The confusion seems to be on graduate and post-graduate degrees and study. Some use these terms to mean anything past the BA or BS, while some seem to confuse them with post-doc.
Impact[edit]
I would extend Impact to include
- the ability of graduates of these programs to get jobs
- the ability of society to solve problems, including at least economic growth, strengthening civil society, human rights, the Millennium Development Goals...
- the development of tools and techniques of collaboration over the Internet, leading to advances in multidisciplinary problem-solving, to many more multinational small businesses, and to a new kind of grassroots international NGO
and doubtless much more.
Knowledge and Resources[edit]
A great deal of research on computers in education, going back to the 1960s, is roundly ignored in educational practice. Some leading examples
- Omar Khayyam Moore's Edison Talking Typewriter (plus human assistant) for teaching two-year-olds to read and write
- Ken Iverson's APL used as a first-grade arithmetic language on IBM Selectric terminals, as described in his book Arithmetic, followed by his books on algebra and calculus with computer support
- Seymour Papert's Logo and Turtle Art, as described in Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas
- Alan Kay's Smalltalk work, extending from Xerox PARC to the present Squeakland
It should be noted that Turtle Art and Smalltalk are both included in the OLPC XO Sugar education software, and are thus available to more than two million children today.
These examples are derived from elementary education, but they require us to ask what level of preparation for college-level work is possible in the future.
We should find out why so little of this research has been put to use, and determine whether the same obstacles apply to OER. The initial evidence from OLPC is that they can be completely bypassed under favorable circumstances.
Much more research is required. We have very little idea of the ways in which a computer acts as a mental amplifier in education, even though we have vast information on ways it assists engineering, politics, and other areas of endeavor. We have even less information on the effects of computers on collaboration in education, in spite of the application of substantial resources to this question, notably in Doug Engelbart's work on Enhancing Collective Intelligence at SRI in the 1960s, and the resulting Smalltalk/Dynabook group at Xerox PARC in the 1970s.
ICT Infrastructure[edit]
It is vital to address the needs for renewable electric power and for broadband Internet connections worldwide. We need to investigate
- Solar
- Wind
- Microhydro
- Biofuels (NOT corn ethanol)
- Animal
- Child
power, for every inhabited combination of terrain, climate, and ecology on the planet where would-be college students live, which is co-extensive with the locations where elementary-school students live.
The most important broadband lack right know is in Africa, western China and some other parts of Asia, and various island nations. All of the continental countries have fiber optic cables (some quite recent, as in Africa) or plans to get connected to their neighbors quite soon, and all of them are building out their networks as fast as they know how and can afford. WiMax systems now in early stages of rollout promise coverage of 90-95% of populations (depending on terrain and population densities) at about $10 per person. The remainder of the population may need to rely on satellite dishes or some form of enhanced Wide Area Sneakernet, that is on carrying flash drives, CDs and DVDs from place to place by whatever transportation services are available. In the most extreme cases, documented by Gordon Mortenson in Three Cups of Tea and in Stones into Schools, Sneakernet now means travel by horseback or even on foot.
One Laptop Per Child addresses this last problem through local mesh networking and school servers, so that students in an area cut off from the Internet can share a fairly capacious content server, and communicate directly with each other from house to house and sometimes from village to village. OERu students should be able to tap into the same networks.
Hi Mokurai,
Thank you for your detailed feedback -- this is very useful.
Regarding semantic mapping, we will inevitably end up using international conventions, like those used by UNESCO. We will also consult with agencies like the International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) who work with these frameworks on a daily basis.
We are using a logic model framework -- which with most things in life have their advantages and disadvantages. Logic models can be a tad mechanistic and not widely used in the education sector. However, the do provide a useful framework with sufficient flexibility to accommodate the wide range of activities needed for a project of this complexity and scope.
I can see that the detail you have provided will be incorporated into the respective activities for each initiative. With reference to the impact bullets listed, this will need to be specified at the next level of detail of the logic model, i.e the KPIs for the impact level of the project. How will we know when we have achieved success and your impact bullets are what's needed for the next tier of detail. The current page is a very generic high-level summary - -we must still fill out the detail.
You have also identified the need for an activity in the logic model focusing on renewable electric power (possibly under the Open ICT Infrastructure initiativ)e. At the activity level of the logic model we will unpack the detail, outputs, KPIs, milestones and outputs for each activity.
Valuable feedback - thanks. -We will need to identify champions to convene the development of all the activities required for moving forward.
Your high level logic model is comprehensive -- and this is what we need most at this point. There are a lot of specifics that can be addressed as people volunteer to work in the different areas that are described here. There are no major gaps that I could spot. Congratulations on presenting all the areas that need to be addressed! :) Pheo
