[Open-education] open-education Digest, Vol 5, Issue 10

• Previous message: [Open-education] Open Education South Africa
• Next message: [Open-education] Interactive Open Educational Resources: A Guide to Finding, Choosing, and Using What's Out There to Transform College Teaching
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Marieke - Great idea to translate the Open Education Handbook

It looks like Booktype has people working on ways to facilitate 
localisation of the content of the manuals created with open source 
software.

It says on their page: "Content can be forked and marked for 
translation. A translation version of a book will provide link backs to 
the original material, be placed in a translation work flow, and edited 
in a side-by-side view where the translator can also see the original 
source. We are considering a World Wide Lexicon Extension to add machine 
translation to the work flow"

It might be worth asking the user base or wider Booktype community what 
tools are available for use for localisation currently?
Link: http://booki.flossmanuals.net/booktype/features/
Also see: 
http://wiki.sourcefabric.org/display/Booktype/Translation+memory+plugin+proposal

Daniel James at the parent company Sourcefabric, might be able to advise 
on ways of tackling this problem effciently within Booktype. See below:

http://blog.lingohub.com/industry-updates/2013/12/localization-business-cases-sourcefabric/

Seeing as the content seems to be stored on a github repo then you can 
use github and transifex for the translation. You have created a 
repository on github with the content for the book, (or at least the 
page cited above suggests this) which will be unchanged and then fork it 
and set up teams to work on localisation with language localisation 
volunteers.

Then good idea to set up language teams to have a reviewer of the work 
for quality control and someone to coordinate volunteers across teams. 
It might be possible to recruit langugage localisation volunteers from 
the different chapters of the open knowledge, open education, wikipedia, 
Mozilla communities.

Best

Tom Salmon

On 16/12/2013 11:18, open-education-request at lists.okfn.org wrote:
> Send open-education mailing list submissions to
> 	open-education at lists.okfn.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-education
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	open-education-request at lists.okfn.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	open-education-owner at lists.okfn.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of open-education digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re: [OER] Pearson Foundation / Pearson: in trouble (Jacky Hood)
>     2. New Year Plans: Working Group Calls (Marieke Guy)
>     3. Best way to translate Open Education Handbook (Raniere Silva)
>     4. Re: Best way to translate Open Education Handbook (Marieke Guy)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 07:21:16 -0800
> From: "Jacky Hood" <jacky.hood at opendoorsgroup.org>
> To: "Cable Green" <cable.green at gmail.com>
> Cc: "OPENEDSIG at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <openedsig at jiscmail.ac.uk>, Educause
> 	Openness Constituent Group <openness at listserv.educause.edu>, "Open
> 	Educaton @ OKFN" <open-education at lists.okfn.org>, OER Advocacy
> 	Coalition <oer-advocacy-coalition at googlegroups.com>,
> 	"OER-DISCUSS at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <oer-discuss at jiscmail.ac.uk>, Open
> 	Educational Resources - an online discussion forum
> 	<oer-forum at lists.esn.org.za>
> Subject: Re: [Open-education] [OER] Pearson Foundation / Pearson: in
> 	trouble
> Message-ID:
> 	<7ef354539b4d86bc9a69287b0256a23e.squirrel at webmail.opendoorsgroup.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Thanks for the clarifications Cable. I am glad to hear that Creative
> Commons does seek to work with educators everywhere, including those at
> Pearson.
>
> The $3M grant from Gates was given to Pearson Foundation to enable FOUR of
> the 24 courses to be provided free. This set a cost basis for each course
> at $750,000. So the $15M Pearson Education paid for the other 20 courses
> was exactly correct. All 24 courses were not developed using Gates
> Foundation funds. By the way, I know that Creative Commons has long
> advocated that tax-funded resources should be open licensed; I agree with
> this stand except to the extent that it encourages ever more government
> interference with education. However, your message is the first I have
> heard about CC advocating that Foundation-funded materials be
> open-licensed. Foundations have an obligation to their funders and some
> obligations to the public because of their tax-free status; open-licensing
> their creations is a very long stretch of the latter obligation.
>
> There is a much larger concern about the Pearson/Gates Common Core effort.
> Bill Gates has said that Common Core is a standard, not a curriculum. Now,
> Pearson and others are creating curricula. There is a reason, avoiding
> federal government control of education, that a few states have had the
> backbone to avoid Common Core. They did this at the cost of bypassing the
> return of money they have sent to Washington, the carrot/stick that the
> federal government often uses to curtail state and local control of
> education and other aspects of society.
>
> Thousands of individuals and dozens of organizations are mounting a strong
> opposition to this assault on education freedom. See
> http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-11-04/news/fl-nmcol-common-core-oped1104-20131104_1_common-core-standards-core-opponents
>
> It is interesting that Susan Neuman, a former Education Department
> official in the George W. Bush administration who is now a professor at
> the University of Michigan, worries about Pearson dominating the
> curricula:
> ?Pearson already dominates, and this could take it to the extreme,? she
> said. ?This could be problematic for many of our kids. We could get a one
> size fits all.? Ms. Neuman is wrong; there are hundreds of individuals,
> organizations, and companies developing Common Core resources. The
> organization she should be concerned about is the federal government that
> has no competitors and is the real advocate of one-size-fits-all.
>
> Regards,
> Jacky
>
>
> ---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
> Subject: Re: [OER] [Open-education] Pearson Foundation / Pearson: in
> trouble
> From:    "Cable Green" <cable.green at gmail.com>
> Date:    Sat, December 14, 2013 6:30 pm
> To:      "Jacky Hood" <jacky.hood at opendoorsgroup.org>
>           "Open Educational Resources - an online discussion forum"
> <oer-forum at lists.esn.org.za>
> Cc:      "OER Advocacy Coalition"
> <oer-advocacy-coalition at googlegroups.com>
>           "OPENEDSIG at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <openedsig at jiscmail.ac.uk>
>           "OER-DISCUSS at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <oer-discuss at jiscmail.ac.uk>
> "Educause Openness Constituent Group"
> <openness at listserv.educause.edu>
>           "Open Educaton @ OKFN" <open-education at lists.okfn.org>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comments inline below.
>
> Cable
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Jacky Hood
> <jacky.hood at opendoorsgroup.org>wrote:
>
>> Cable's posting is very disturbing. The opening salvo is "The next time
> Pearson comes after your good work, keep this in your back pocket."
>
> By "come after" I do not mean: acquire, steal, collect, annex.
>
> I mean: belittle, disparage, smear, deprecate...
>
> I mean: the next time Pearson takes a swing at OER as being low quality,
> poor quality - as costing tax payers more money, as being a waste of
> time... it may be useful to remind them, in a public forum, that they are
> not playing by the tax laws of the United States and their actions appear
> to value profit over access to educational resources.
>
>
>> Unless I am reading this incorrectly, the implication is that Pearson
> Education has in the past and will in the future 'come after' (steal?)
> the
>> good work done by each and every member of six OER communities. Does
> simply belonging to an OER community mean that a person produces good
> work? If Pearson is indeed stealing people's work, then it should be
> prosecuted, not simply reminded of a court decision of which it is
> already
>> well aware.
> No - see above for clarification.
>
>> Pearson appears to have made mistakes in keeping a wall between its
> corporation and its foundation. It has paid dearly for those mistakes:
> $7.5M in fines, $15M for the intellectual property, and its employees
> forbidden to attend Pearson Foundation Conferences. To find joy in this
> situation is lamentable.
>
> No joy - just facts.
>
>
>> I suggest that we reach out to Pearson Education employees and welcome
> them at other education conferences. Recently I was privileged to serve
> on
>> a panel entitled "The Future of Digital Textbooks" with Jerome Grant,
> Executive VP, Digital Products, Pearson Education. The conference was
> sponsored by the National Association of College Auxiliary Services, an
> organization whose members are taking a major hit due to the shift from
> print to digital textbooks.
>
> I have and continue to reach out to Pearson.  I am in regular contact with
> many of their VPs... and I hold them privately and publicly to reasonable
> standards of proper behavior that supports broad and affordable access to
> learning resources.
>
> These news stories reflect poor behavior on the part of Pearson and the
> Pearson Foundation.
>
>> Mr. Grant, who once served as an Editor-in-Chief for Higher Education
> Mathematics and Statistics, said that Pearson would happily give away
> ALL
>> of its content if it could receive a per-student fee for tools. Imagine:
> instead of 1/3 of the students buying textbooks for hundreds of dollars
> and the rest trying to pass their courses with no materials, each
> student
>> would pay a single tool fee and have access to all content. This would
> be
>> a win-win for all concerned.
> I am eager to see such a proposal - and then compare and contrast it with a
> publicly funded OER solution.
>
>> Open Doors Group and College Open Textbooks have always and will always
> have a philosophy of 'no enemies, no victims'. Everyone who loves
> education must work together to increase access to high quality content
> and tools.
>
> I completely agree.
>
> Cable
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Jacky Hood
>> Alliances Director
>> Open Doors Group
>> http://www.opendoorsgroup.org
>> ---------------------------- Original Message
> ----------------------------
>> Subject: Re: [OER] [Open-education] Pearson Foundation / Pearson: in
> trouble
>> From:    "Jacky Hood" <jacky.hood at opendoorsgroup.org>
>> Date:    Sat, December 14, 2013 1:09 pm
>> To:      "Educause Openness Constituent Group"
>> <openness at listserv.educause.edu>
>>           "OER Advocacy Coalition"
> <oer-advocacy-coalition at googlegroups.com
>>           "OER-DISCUSS at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <oer-discuss at jiscmail.ac.uk> "OER
> Forum" <oer-forum at lists.esn.org.za>
>>           "Open Educaton @ OKFN" <open-education at lists.okfn.org>
>>           "OPENEDSIG at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <openedsig at jiscmail.ac.uk>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Schadenfreude
>> ---------------------------- Original Message
> ----------------------------
>> Subject: [Open-education] Pearson Foundation / Pearson: in trouble From:
>     "Cable Green" <cable at creativecommons.org>
>> Date:    Sat, December 14, 2013 12:58 pm
>> To:      "Educause Openness Constituent Group"
>> <OPENNESS at listserv.educause.edu>
>>           "OER Advocacy Coalition"
> <oer-advocacy-coalition at googlegroups.com
>>           "OER-DISCUSS at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <OER-DISCUSS at jiscmail.ac.uk> "OER
> Forum" <oer-forum at lists.esn.org.za>
>>           "Open Educaton @ OKFN" <open-education at lists.okfn.org>
>>           "OPENEDSIG at JISCMAIL.AC.UK" <OPENEDSIG at jiscmail.ac.uk>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear Open Education Colleagues:
>> The next time Pearson comes after your good work, keep this in your back
> pocket.
>>     - *Educational Publisher????????s Charity, Accused of Seeking
> Profits, Will
>> Pay
>>     Millions NYT: *The Pearson Foundation will pay $7.7 million after the
> New York State attorney general found that it had broken state law by
> helping develop products for its corporate parent.
>>        -
>> http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2013/12/12/publishing-giant-pearsons-nonprofit-arm-settles-investigation/
>>        - *Publishing Giant Pearson's Nonprofit Arm Settles Investigation*
>>     *WSJ:*
>>     -
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/nyregion/educational-publishers-charity-accused-of-seeking-profits-will-pay-millions.html
> This part of the story (in the NYTimes article) is especially troubling:
>>     -
>> *Around 2010, Pearson began financing an effort through its foundation
> to
>>     develop courses based on the Common Core. The attorney
> general????????s
>> report
>>     said Pearson had hoped to use its charity to win endorsements and
>> donations
>>     from a ???????prominent foundation.?????  That group appears to be
> the Bill and
>>     Melinda Gates Foundation. *
>>     - *???????Pearson Inc. executives believed that branding their
> courses by
>>     association with the prominent foundation would enhance
> Pearson????????s
>>     reputation with policy makers and the education community,?????  a
> release
>>     accompanying the attorney general????????s report said. *
>>     - * Indeed, in April 2011, the Pearson Foundation and the Gates
> Foundation announced they would work together
>>     <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/education/28gates.html> to create
> 24
>> new
>>     online reading and math courses aligned with the Common Core. * - *
> Pearson executives believed the courses could later be sold
> commercially, the report said, and predicted potential profits of
> tens
>> of
>>     millions of dollars. After Mr. Schneiderman????????s office began its
> investigation, the Pearson Foundation sold the courses to Pearson for
>> $15.1
>>     million.*
>> Creative Commons consistently recommends that publicly funded (and
> Foundation funded) resources be openly licensed. It's too bad these 24
> reading and math courses, funded by two Foundations (and then sold to
> Pearson for $15.1M), were not openly licensed and made available to the
> millions of teachers and students who desperately need updated learning
> resources.
>> Cable
>> --
>> Cable Green, PhD
>> Director of Global Learning
>> Creative Commons
>> @cgreen <http://twitter.com/cgreen>
>> http://creativecommons.org/education
>> * reuse, revise, remix & redistribute*
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-education mailing list
>> open-education at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-education
>> _______________________________________________
>> OER-forum mailing list
>> OER-forum at lists.esn.org.za
>> http://lists.esn.org.za/mailman/listinfo/oer-forum
>> Unsubscribe: OER-forum-unsubscribe at lists.esn.org.za
>> _______________________________________________
>> OER-forum mailing list
>> OER-forum at lists.esn.org.za
>> http://lists.esn.org.za/mailman/listinfo/oer-forum
>> Unsubscribe: OER-forum-unsubscribe at lists.esn.org.za
>
>

• Previous message: [Open-education] Open Education South Africa
• Next message: [Open-education] Interactive Open Educational Resources: A Guide to Finding, Choosing, and Using What's Out There to Transform College Teaching
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]