What is Peter Scott thinking about technology?

Previously I have done some posts about the MOOC and Peter Scott and/or Guardian reporting on the MOOC idea in general. about half way through last year he wrote that he did not want to write about the MOOC and so far he has stuck to this.

I get the impression that much of what he writes is in code. Several words are in quote marks. Maybe people in universities have an understanding of what he is getting at.

This week in the Guardian a take on the worsening terms and conditions for most academics and the need for a stronger trade union. 

One thing I notice is that while the online version includes this explanation of why universities are still well off

the main reason is that they underpay their staff. For the best part of a decade now, salaries have failed to keep pace with inflation. As universities spend most of their money on employees, this underpayment has helped them avoid financial crises and even indulge in the odd "landmark" building.

In the print version this remark about "landmark" buildings has been cut.

In Exeter we have the Fourum and I notice a lot of building on the Lancaster campus also. Some of this has been funded by grants or gifts but maybe there is some debt involved. In general the investment in buildings has paid off in ratings but I wonder if there is the same sort of investment in MOOCs or related tech.

A while ago Peter Scott was part of two books about Mode 2 knowledge but there has not been an update recently. Possibly there is some "mode two" activity around online learning but I don't know how this would be described. There has also been papers about "design science" but I can't find anything about recent "impact".

As mentioned previously the Guardian is selling loads of courses from their Kings cross campus so this may continue for a while. They may not need to cover alternatives. 

Peter Scott continues to write about the finances of universities and the situation of academics without looking at technology or change.

Maybe the Guardian will write more about the situation of newspapers. Recent history includes changes in technology. The NGA was a strong union but some issues continue.

Graphics from #mosocoop Customer Focus workshop

These were tweeted last week but I'm not sure where the audience is. Maybe easier to follow in a blog format. Mostly Creative Commons but see comments at the end.

Model on wall poster, see http://www.thecqi.org/moso   

This one is from the book Simply Manage by Alan Clark and Terry Peterson

I am pretty sure I have permission to use all these images as tweets and / or in a blog post. But this last one remains copyright as part of a book. It adds a lot to the basic model.

Getting back to the Leuphana course on creating a "Commons" it appears that some levels of content or intellectual property are available as commons, though some refinements or detail remain with particular sources. This is probably typical of many situations.

Also, the book being promoted has a sample chapter if you look on the Leanpub website. Simply Manage has much of the content from the workshop and is another way of looking at the approach around the MOSO model. I think this is more to do with "Content Marketing" than Creative Commons. Sorry, I may be going off topic towards some ambiguities to be cleared up on the Leuphana course. Meanwhile feedback welcome on whether it has been ok to share these graphics so far. Edit of video will take a bit longer, still not sure how much to include in first version.

Leuphana on Commons Resources, as in radio / YouTube

There is a new task on the Leuphana course, to identify the resources in a situation. Roughly two weeks including a comparison with another one. My team is a bit improved with one other person definitely interested in Creative Commons and YouTube. But I am still mostly relying on conversations with people I work with on Phonic FM, two shows a week with some overlap to my YouTube channel. ( see previous posts ) By the way, explaining things on air is a great way to simplify down to basics. We have stopped trying to explain the MOOC ( some USA courses are now not massive or open, just as expensive as anywhere else and competitive to get on ) and are mostly looking at the Leuphana content as part of social media in general.

Here is a link to the YouTube intro. It is Creative Commons so there is a Remix button, nut not public. So I'm not sure about listing the others. will depend on feedback. I don't expect many people I don't know will find this blog post.

An essay by Silke Helfrich. This website has lots of other material also.

The situation that concerns me is the use of Creative Commons legal standards on YouTube ( could relate to other web sites also) . The characteristic of resources not yet mentioned is that some can be replaced by other resources with varying loss of quality in the output. So a sound recording in a studio with expensive equipment will be excellent, a recording on a phone in a cafe might be harder to listen to although an interview may be more relaxed. The basic resource is the knowledge or info of the source.

 I'm going back in time to look at previous situations, starting with last week. There was a workshop on Customer Focus from the Deming SIG at the CQI. I have some video which looks ok but the sound is not  perfect. I took a tripod but it would have been better with a radio mike or some other sound resources. There was a promo video that continues so over time the content will become better known at some levels ( still not the same as attending an actual day )

​There are various ways in which shared use of resources might improve on how this worked out. A better production might have had more display on associated websites. A conference venue might have a stock of audio visual equipment. Cloud resources may exist to create better videos as an edit from video conferences.  for example this clip from a Google Hangout

n this case the resource required is not that expensive given that Penny has a webcam anyway. We may find that Alan Clark has to revoice what he said last week before we get a video edit that many people will watch. Not sure how this will work out but the Leuphana tasks are helping to keep it moving. 

Leuphana Commons, back in group, recap on so far

I have had a message that I can go back to the Creative Commons group but I don't think this has actually happened yet. Deadline is tomorrow and i am busy all day including trip to London. so I am going to post this and also put it on the Leuphana site where I can.

The suggested texts to study -

Beckenkamp, M. (2012). Institutions and Trust in Commons: Dealing with Social Dilemmas. In: Bollier, D., Helfrich, S. (Eds.). The Wealth of the Commons. A World Beyond Market & State. Amherst: Levellers Press.

Gaertner, S.L. & Dovidio, J.F. (2012) Common Ingroup Identity Model. In: Christie, D.J. (Ed.). The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychlogy. Blackwell Publishing.

Paragraph on Social Motivation (pp. 503-505) in:
Gelfand, M. J., Fulmer, C. A., & Severance, L. (2010). The psychology of negotiation and mediation. In: S. Zedeck (Ed.). Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 495-554.

Kramer, R.M. & Carnevale, J. (2001). Trust and intergroup negotiation. In: R. Brown & Gaertner, S. (Eds.). Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Intergroup Processes. Blackwell Publishing, pp 431-450.

I have looked at these. They put the Commons discussion into a negotiations context. Seems to be mostly social psychology. See also the video in previous post that explores how a market approach takes over lots of situations. See previous videos on enclosure of the commons.

So all this is very relevant to how Creative Commons works on YouTube or not. When it started out there was a lot on YouTube with low production standards. Much was loaded by fans, not as piracy but promotion or sharing. at least it seemed that way. Over time arrangements have been reached between YouTube and the major labels. Details are a bit unknown and may change. My own experience has been mostly with local bands around Exeter. Cover versions are assumed ok except Prince. 

My specific interest is in why the Creative Commons option is not better known or widely chosen. It may be because of the advertising pressure that defines an alternative culture. Is it just the technology understanding required that stops people doing a Remix? If two or more videos are Creative Commons then the Remix button will allow an edit.

Putting this into the questions-

What conditions would be necessary for you to cooperate in the creation and maintenance of this particular Commons project? 

Need for some actual examples of Remix button working sometime soon. Else the advert culture will get too strong and the Creative Commons aspect will get obscured

 
Under which conditions would you not be willing to cooperate? Are there any conditions under which you would have acted in an egoistic way, using Commons for selfish reasons?

Another set of related ideas is around Content Marketing or Native Advertising. This can be quite ambiguous and can get out of hand. I might do this myself to some extent but try to be clear and to offer reasonable value. I have done some papers on Scribd that are free but will charge for later versions once some ideas are clarified.

In your opinion, how important is communication between the actors participating in the your project? Do you think that communication can help to create and maintain Commons? 

Communication is very important, especially guidance on what extent of copyright protection and /or promotion / sampler rights is expected. Some local performers are happy with creative commons on their own composition and performance. YouTube usually lets you know by refusing an upload or allocating it to some other rights holder. When things change it is very puzzling. a cover of I Wanna Be Your Lover by the Mama Stones House Band was ok for several months before Controversy Publishing objected.

How can communication help actors to solve their conflicting interests and how can you foster trust between the actors?

In the situation I am concerned with we are dealing with Massive USA Brands (MUB) . The MUB is not going to communicate anything on a one to one basis. We can only hope for some clear examples.

more later, see also Hello Spiders blog for other posts. 

Design loops, brief notes on meetings

The next few days there will be some sort of meetings around radio shows on Phonic FM. Last week we talked a bit about the workshop tomorrow on Customer Focus at the CQI. Also about Design Science and a loop such as plan-do-study-act. This is a bit marginal for a music show but some version of it turns up, the audience has to put up with the making of the show being not far below the surface.

There are now two shows, @wenotno on a Tuesday starts at 12 so the coffee is before it. On Thursday the Wild Show starts at ten so the coffee is after. There is some sort of plan / evaluation but maybe not till the week after or sometime.

Although JD tells me he thinks being a DJ is more like art than science and he works out the design as he performs it, he has suggested we change the format on Thursday so his section is in the middle and we can evaluate it closer to the time. He is getting ready for a disco so varies it only slightly to work as daytime radio.

We are also thinking about customer focus as design, @wenotno has a lot of growth scope, currently four followers. I need to rethink what Rougemont Global Broadcasting is about. Maybe it is time for a YouTube Channel or two, something to reach another level.