Open letter to Daryl Katz -- Build your own arena
Dear Daryl,

Daryl, you've gathered a lot of support for a new arena but unless you
build it yourself, it's not going to be built. There are a number of
reasons. The first, the Edmonton Oilers no longer appear to be a
community team. Although the team has always been privately owned, the
previous owners were perceived to be community based. Second, Rexall
Place is a good venue for the Oilers and well connected to
transportation corridors. Third, Rexall Place is a valuable asset (
guess $100 million as it stands) and probably worth more without the
Oilers lease -- it is not going to be closed. Fourth, without Rexall
Place closing, the economics of a competing arena may not support the
investment. Fifth, the citizens of Edmonton realize that current tax
dollars, future tax dollars, and foregone tax dollars are all tax
dollars. Sixth, you want the city to build you an arena, let you use it
for free, and then give you all the revenues generated from the
building. Would you want to be on the other side of this deal?
Seventh, the only reason this project is being proposed is to increase
Oiler revenues. A renovated Rexall Place would allow this and probably
be available with appropriate contributions from the Oilers and a
suitable lease arrangement. Eighth, other projects (convention centre)
could anchor down-town development and provide more sustained use that
would encourage other developments. Finally, the best way to improve
Oiler revenues is to put a successful team on the ice. Without a
competitive team, it won't matter what the arena looks like.
- posted by Larry @ 1:40 p.m.

 
Let's get serious -- What we need to do to be safe in the air.
The recent changes to airport security follow the tradition of adding
more stringent inspections to respond to security threats.
Unfortunately, they only make check ins more annoying and don't do
anything to make flying safer. It is time to recognize that weapons can
be hidden anywhere and people themselves can be weapons. Airport
security is already moving towards the necessary rules to make travelers
safe. The process needs to be speeded up.

First, passengers need to remove and dispose of all clothing, including
diapers (they can be deadly without explosives). This will create a new
market in disposable clothing which would be a boost to the economy.
Just to make sure weapons aren't concealed where the sun don't shine, a
cavity search is a needed. After the search, passengers would be
escorted to their seats and strapped in. This will prevent passengers
from overpowering the crew. This still leaves the possibility of
noxious emissions. Perhaps cabin crews will have fewer bed pans to
empty and the atmosphere will be more pleasant if passengers are
required to fast for three days before boarding. There is still the
threat of infectious diseases that may be caught by a medical before
boarding; however, it would be safer not to let passengers on the plane.
- posted by Larry @ 1:37 p.m.

 
Great Ongoing Debate -- No Zero's
Mr. Enright,

Unfortunately your program regarding no fail policies did not meet
current standards for fair and unbiased reporting. Also, the focus of
the report was assessment and not student learning, which is the purpose
of the school system. When you submit a revised program, I suggest you
consider the following:

First, acknowledge that there are a wide variety of assessment practices
used by teachers and schools across Canada. These practices are revised
continually with the current focus "assessment for learning".

Second, the tenor of the program was "O MY GOD - There are no
standards". Admittedly, there was a token defender of the no zero
policies; but, his views were not understood or ignored. When you
revise the report you should focus on the many changes that are being
tried to improve student retention and learning. These changes were
made in part because of concern over drop out rates and achievement test
results. Change is necessary to improve retention and learning.

Third, you might include the truly innovative ideas about assessment.
Talk to Alfie Kohn. He will explain the decades of research showing
grading reduces the depth and scope of learning and should be avoided.
In addition, he can explain how an ungraded classroom works.

A report about how assessment is being used to improve learning and
focusing on the future would be more useful for your audience. As a
minimum, assessment should be considered in the context of learning.

I'm looking forward to your revised report. I hope you will take
advantage of this opportunity to improve your understanding of the role
of assessment in learning.
- posted by Larry @ 1:35 p.m.

 
End the First Time Home-buyers Program
The city is moving forward with the First Time Home-buyers Program even
though there is no reason to continue. When the program was conceived,
housing inventories were at a record low and an argument could be made
to create affordable housing. Given that a selection of houses and
condominiums that were available, the argument that relatively well off
Edmontonians needed subsidized housing was weaker. However, currently
housing inventories are at record high levels and there is is a wide
variety of condominiums and single family homes available for less than
the $300,000 ( min 2 bdr-MLS and Comfree under $300,000 2609 units;
under $200.000 321 units) the city is planning on charging for their
units. The only purpose this program will achieve is to transfer public
property (parks) to private ownership.

The loss of public parkland is significant when viewed in the context of
council's stated goal of increasing community density and its
willingness to ignore zoning and neighbourhood plans to allow high
density developments. As a practical matter there is no zoning in the
city and preserving parkland is the only guarantee that communities will
be remotely liveable in the future. Picture your favourite park 20
years from now surrounded by high density developments, all using it to
meet open space requirements.

In addition to the loss of public space, the structure of the program
sets the home buyers up to lose their homes. The idea that people who
can barely afford to buy the condo units will be able to increase their
mortgages to buy the land a few years later is similar to the schemes
that led to the housing crisis in the US and the home grown market
collapses in the early 80`s. If the first time home-buyers are to keep
their homes, their income and property values will need to increase
substantially. Although, if prices rise and incomes don't the first
time home buyers will have an excuse to become first time flippers.

There is no justification for the First Time Home-buyers Program. There
is no shortage of affordable housing and middle income earners don't
need subsidies to buy homes. It is a program whose time has past and it
should be ended.
- posted by Larry @ 1:33 p.m.

 
Betrayal Leads to Low Voter Turnout
Commentators are explaining the massive Conservative majority and the
poor voter turnout by suggesting there weren't alternatives to the
Conservatives. This explanation is only available if the two results,
Conservative majority and low voter turnout are considered to have the
same cause.
Clearly, there were credible candidates and alternatives. More than 40%
of Albertans felt strongly enough about the candidates and the issues to
vote. The silliest argument for the outcome is that Taft and Mason
lacked charisma. I challenge anyone to find a description of Stelmach
as charismatic before the vote was counted. Candidates, platforms, and
campaigns don't explain the voter turnout.

The logical explanation for the low voter turnout is the belief that
voting is a pointless exercise. Decades of betrayal of the electorate
by winning parties suggests that those who stay home are the rational
citizens. My memory only goes back to Stanfield's defeat over wage and
price controls and Trudeau's rapid introduction of the same. There is
the Liberal Red Book; the Conservative mandate to implement free trade;
eliminating the GST. I'm sure everyone has their favourite promise
broken or surprise mandate. There isn't a government elected in the
last 30 years that hasn't broken promises or claimed electing them gave
a mandate to implement obscure and unpopular policies. How many
Albertans voted conservative because they wanted electrical
deregulation, private health care, to be shut out of regulatory
hearings, or the environmental disaster in the oil sands.

After decades of governments telling citizens what they want to hear and
then governing and interpreting being elected as a mandate for any
action it chooses, sane people stop participating. The most effective
thing that the Conservatives and Ed Stelmach can do to improve voter
turnout is to keep their promises to Albertans and govern on behalf of
all Albertans, not just the 22% who elected them.

However there are signs that this won't happen. Despite assurances that
a variety of user groups would have expenses covered to appear before
the Alberta Utilities Commission, made to assure opponents of Bill 46
the practice would continue, the Utilities Consumer Advocate has already
written to the Board saying that UCA should represent all user groups at
the Board hearings and don't expect to be welcome at pipeline and
transmission hearings unless you own the land in front of the bulldozer.
Despite being told the Third Way is dead, Ron Liepert is citing the
Mazankowski and Graydon reports, which advocated market solutions and
reduced coverage, as the basis of his proposed health care solutions.
Despite promising to raise royalty rates beginning in 2009 there are
signs (fine tuning needed, the Syncrude contract) that increases will be
less than promised. And despite promises to eliminate health care
premiums and fund the teachers pension liability and memorandum, Iris
Evans is saying there is not enough money to fund the promises made
during the election campaign.

The conservatives were given a mandate to meet Alberta's infrastructure
needs; improve the health care system (not shift costs to individuals);
ensure Albertans a fair share of resource revenues; improve and maintain
the opportunities for citizen participation; and maintain and improve
public education. So far it looks like promises are just that, the
smoke and mirrors needed to get elected. If Albertans are expected to
vote, that vote must have meaning.
- posted by Larry @ 1:30 p.m.

 
Do Albertans Benefit From Oilsands Development?
Alberta is currently reviewing the royalties assessed on oil and gas
production. This review has come about because ordinary Albertans feel
the royalties charged on oil sands production is not sufficient. The
sore point is the 1% royalty charged while capital costs are being
recovered. This is a particular problem for the oil sands because
capital costs are always being incurred because of the nature of the
operations. This extends the time before 25% royalties are paid. It
isn't the same as drilling a well and hooking it up. The nature of the
operation is different and a different approach to royalties is needed
if Albertans are to get a fair return on their resources.

An indicator that the royalty returns favour industry is the multiple
oil sands projects being built and planned. The current regime is so
attractive that companies are willing to pay inflated prices for
workers, plants, equipment and mineral rights. (Why wouldn't they, they
don't pay royalties until they have recovered the inflated costs).
Meanwhile, Albertans are paying inflated prices for roads, schools, and
housing, if they are built at all. For example, Edmonton city council
just agreed to move forward with the 23rd Avenue interchange. The cost
overrun is over $130 million. Albertans are paying an outrageous price
to give away our resources. It is time to curb our generosity and make
oil sands development less attractive. Projects are now importing
labour; plan to import plants built in Asia; and exporting bitumen to
the US. All Albertans are receiving is inflation and pollution.

In addition to the royalty rates, the review committee should be asking:
What is included in capital costs?
Is the definition such that capital costs are never recovered?
After considering the inflation related to the oilsands, do Albertans
receive any net benefit?
- posted by Larry @ 1:28 p.m.

 

School funding

It's spring, when the Alberta government demonstrates its commitment to public education by announcing funding increases that don't begin to cover real costs increases or inflation. It doesn't matter that the government will respond to reports of large class sizes and other problems with additional funds - still insufficient - in the fall, the damage is done. Spring is when school boards pass their budgets. Spring is when schools decide how many teachers they can keep, what courses they can offer, and set student time tables. Money allocated in the fall, perhaps in schools by spring, can alleviate crisis situations. However, it comes too late for the students. For the most part they are stuck with large classes and courses they didn't want or need. Core subjects may be taught in summer school, but the options which keep students in school will be missed.

Longer term, the government has promised smaller class size, minimum amounts of physical activity, mandatory second language instruction, and improved retention rates. Rather than fund these initiatives the Alberta government has made real cuts to education funding.

The biggest cut came when the government failed to fund increases in teacher salaries after agreeing to binding arbitration. Consequently, school boards have been forced to reduce the number of teachers to balance their budgets. Parents are being assured that class sizes won't exceed targets; but class sizes have increased. In addition, the variety of courses and classroom support have been reduced. Students who need extra help, students who need a course to graduate, and students wanting general interest courses are out of luck.

The government may have thought they could fix the funding problem by provoking a strike and legislating teachers back to work with an imposed contract, just like British Columbia. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has ruled imposed contracts unconstitutional. It is time for the Alberta government to stop playing games with teachers at the expense of public education and provide funding that matches their avowed commitment to educating Alberta's youth. They need to remember, an educated labour force is an Alberta Advantage that can be lost.

Labels: school funding education

- posted by Larry @ 7:36 p.m.

 
Royalty Review

Alberta is currently reviewing the royalties assessed on oil and gas production. this review has come about because ordinary Albertans feel the royalties charged on oil sands production is not sufficient. The sore point is the 1% royalty charged while capital costs are being recovered. This is a particular problem for the oil sands because capital costs are always being incurred because of the nature of the operations. This extends the time before 25% royalties are paid. It isn't the same as drilling a well and hooking it up. The nature of the operation is different and a different approach to royalties is needed if Albertans are to get a fair return on their resources.

An indicator that the royalty returns favour industry is the multiple oil sands projects being built and planned. The current regime is so attractive that companies are willing to pay inflated prices for workers, plants, equipment and mineral rights. (Why wouldn't they, they don`t pay royalties until they have recovered the inflated costs). Meanwhile, Albertans are paying inflated prices for roads, schools, and housing, if they are built at all. Albertans are paying an outrageous price to give away our resources. It is time to curb our generosity and make oil sands development less attractive. Projects are now importing labour; plan to import plants built in Asia; and exporting bitumen to the US. All Albertans are receiving is inflation and pollution.

In addition to the royalty rates, the review committee should be asking:
What is included in capital costs?
Is the definition such that capital costs are never recovered?
After considering the inflation related to the oilsands, do Albertans receive any net benefit?

Labels: oil royalties Alberta

- posted by Larry @ 12:13 p.m.

 
Which Vision?

The Edmonton Journal editorial “Arena verdict too hasty” June 6, 2007 chastises voters for shooting down any politician who raises his or her head above the pot holes. We do want politicians with vision; however, we want that vision to reflect Edmonton and Edmonton's needs. We don't need features of other world class cities foisted on us because the politician thinks they will make Edmonton world class. Edmonton will become world class by meeting the needs of all of its citizens now and in the future. Edmonton has a stadium. What Edmonton needs is affordable housing.

Edmonton Northlands is an integrated stadium, exposition, entertainment complex with room to expand its facilities. Over the years Northlands has demonstrated a willingness (supported by Edmonton taxpayers) to bend over backwards to accommodate the Oilers real and perceived needs. There is no reason (other than setting the groundwork for negotiations) to expect Northlands to change. Further, Northlands is well integrated into the transportation system. As to the impetus a stadium would provide for economic development, look at Northlands. What you see is what you will get.

The city could use the land it wants to use for a new stadium for housing. Not only would this provide a permanent population downtown, it is environmentally and fiscally sound. Increasing the population density near the center of the city reduces the load on roads and provides a core ridership for public transit. Further, care could be taken to make the development people friendly, incorporating parks, playgrounds and services to create a liveable area. Perhaps low income housing could be incorporated into this “vision”.

In contrast a stadium creates dead space in the city center. Crowds surge in for events causing traffic and parking problems and then surge out. Edmonton can have a dead space in the center of the city whose patrons only need parking or it can have a vibrant community that needs all urban services. The “vision” can be of a world class blight or a vibrant downtown community that is active day and night. Edmonton doesn't need visionaries whose vision is limited to cloning features of other world class cities; it needs visionaries who can see what Edmonton needs to be a liveable sustainable city for all citizens.

Labels: Stadium vs. Housing

- posted by Larry @ 12:07 p.m.

 
Global Assessment - Evaluating Learning Systems

This is an excerpt from a recent job application. I'm not sure it was
the proper forum for sharing my views about global assessment :) , but
maybe the letter will sneak past Human Resources and reach someone who
cares. Comments are welcome.

I’m one of the few people who has examined whether school based
management facilitates school improvement or improvement of student
achievement. I suspect I am the only person who has done this from
either a school perspective or using Alberta schools. The web version of
my study “School-based Management, Expectations and Outcomes: Edmonton
Public Schools 15 Years Down the Road” can be found at
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/thesisweb/index.html. I created
the following articles and presentations based on the study:

Locally Managed Schools: What Do They Do? at
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/edarticles/localschools.htm and

Students and Standards at
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/edarticles/studstand.htm

One of my concerns is that the information to do the study was only
available from Edmonton Public Schools and that Edmonton Public Schools
no longer collects this information. Since the study was done
comprehensive reporting has been reduced to reporting on a modified list
of provincial goals and expectations. Admittedly, comprehensive
reporting was onerous and killed a lot of trees, but it allowed schools
to include site specific goals.

One challenge in evaluating learning systems is to encourage student
centered objectives while evaluating system performance. When I was a
trustee at Edmonton Public Schools, I proposed a district goal of
students improving their level of knowledge by one grade each academic
year. At the time I was told it couldn’t be measured. Subsequently, EPS
implemented Highest Level of Achievement tests, which provide some of
the data, needed to measure individual student learning. In addition
some schools have used the Canadian Test of Basic Skills to measure
incoming and outgoing grade level of achievement. There are problems
using these instruments, but they do address the measurement of student
learning.

Another challenge is ensuring evaluation tools encourage innovation in
teaching and the development of relevant curriculum materials.
Personally, I am appalled that schools are using 10 to 20-year-old texts
to teach about other cultures. Further, I am appalled that Japan and
Brazil are the only societies considered suitable for the study of
Societies and Culture. This occurs because the flexibility built into
the curriculum is negated by the curriculum content covered by the
achievement test. To develop self directed learners, the evaluation
systems used must support the development of self directed learners.
Ultimately, this will require system measures that are aggregates of
measures of individual learning.

I have used a community perspective of education to develop a purpose of
education that is student and community centered – “One Child -- Many
Communities: Recasting the Purpose of Education” at
http://www.clubwebcanada.ca/l-pphillips/edarticles/onechild.htm . One my
goals as manager would be to develop measures that support the following
purpose of education:

"The purpose of education is to help students reconcile the
expectations, attitudes, and values of the communities to which they
belong and to help the students acquire the skills, knowledge, and
attitudes expected by those communities in which they will satisfy their
vocational and avocational needs."

Most educational mission/goal statements address one or more components
of this purpose of education. The difference is comprehensiveness and a
theoretical basis.

- posted by Larry @ 11:17 a.m.

 
What Education Can Learn From Open Source

I'm passing this on from the OLDaily
(http://www.downes.ca/news/about_old.htm), Online Learning Daily not OLD
aily, newsletter. *

What Education Can Learn From Open Source
http://educationaltechnology.ca/couros/356

Short article summarizing a slightly longer article that outlines three
major lessons education can learn from open source: the use of OS
technology, the value of 'amateur' work, and the nature of 'bottom-up'
knowledge and development. Best quote: "At this point, anyone proposing
to run Windows on servers should be prepared to explain what they know
about servers that Google, Yahoo, and Amazon don't." By Alec Couros,
Couros Blog, August 7, 2005

- posted by Larry @ 11:00 a.m.

 
Re: ITC Vision -- Open Source Revisited -- What to teach?

" Basically he felt that if it was on the Internet, it must be free for
the taking."

This can be one of the things we need to teach the little angels now
(see post The world has changed - What do we teach the little angels
now?). There is and always has been an expectation on the internet that
services are exchanged. Programmers share code, down-loaders upload,
users trouble shoot and market. The expectation to participate was
seldom explicit (some bulletin boards had upload/download ratios);
however as anyone who only posts questions to a newsgroup soon finds
out, the responses to their posts will rapidly decline. There isn't an
accounting system: you share what you know, do what you can. The
expectation evolved from people working together to solve common
problems. Participants contributed to a body of knowledge.

With the exponential expansion of the web, a significant portion of the
participants aren't aware of the values and expectations that supported
the pre-web internet. However, many have adopted the values even though
they aren't explicitly aware of them. Also, the ways to contribute have
expanded. But, there are some who take what is freely available without
any thought or intention of participating in the community. As Philip
points out, if the overriding value shifts from giving to taking, the web
will wither and die.

For the web to continue as a central meeting place to share knowledge,
technology, and our stories, our young need to understand: how it works,
what it does, and what they can do to maintain it.

EDTECH Editor-Eiffert wrote:

> From: Philip Hess <pjh@zoominternet.net>
>
> Hello,
>
> Several months ago I mentioned this in passing to a tech-savvy
> superintendent. His response was telling of his attitude towards open
> source software. Basically he felt that if it was on the Internet,
> it must be free for the taking. The danger is that while school
> districts see the need to buy software from vendors like Microsoft
> that they have a hard time making a donation to an individual or
> company that makes/markets open source software. While open source
> software may be a bargain compared to the offerings of larger
> companies, without compensation (motivation) open source software
> will wither and cease to be a viable option.

- posted by Larry @ 7:28 p.m.

 
The world has changed - What do we teach the little angels now?

I found the link to this article in OLDaily By Stephen Downes July 28, 2005

The article

*We Are the Web

*
*The Netscape IPO wasn't really about dot-commerce. At its heart was a
new cultural force based on mass collaboration. Blogs, Wikipedia, open
source, peer-to-peer - behold the power of the people.*
*By Kevin Kelly*

Is found in Wired Magazine *Issue 13.08
<http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/>* - August 2005 at
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/tech.html?pg=1&topic=tech&topic_set=

Mr. Kelly points out that the explosive growth in web content is the
result of individuals and social networks. In his future everyone
produces and consumes web content. People will participate in social
networks as part of their daily existence.

If Mr. Kelly is correct, technical education needs to go well beyond
using computer applications to include the skills, knowledge, and
attitudes needed to participate in social networks. The Wikipedia About
page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About describes one such
social network and the expectations for participants.**
<http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/tech.html?pg=2&topic=tech&topic_set=>

- posted by Larry @ 9:21 p.m.

 
[Fwd: Re: ITC Vision -- Open Source Revisited] - Miguel Guhlin comments

Larry:

Thanks for sharing your comments regarding open source software. I've
shared similar points with others, especially in regards to replacing
costlier programs in school districts' tech toolbox--namely, programs
like MS Office ($75), Inspiration Graphic Organizer software ($12),
Macromedia Fireworks ($3500 per campus, or $12)--with free, open source
software. As a matter of fact, since we are facing budget crunches
(especially in Texas where state legislators are into a 5th special
session to figure out funding, and districts are worried that there
won't be any money except federal funds and what was left over from last
year), open source software may be our only alternative.

Allow me to share an example of a real school district issue. Three
years ago, we developed a high tech, grade 6-8 curriculum that
incorporated Macromedia Studio MX. The curriculum focused on information
literacy approaches (such as Big6) that focused on problem-solving at
higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. We provided Macromedia Studio MX
licenses to 15 campuses for around $45K-$50K. We also provided extensive
professional development.

In analyzing the work done so far, after 2 years and multiple
professional development sessions, campus visits, etc., it's clear that
some teachers are working at the higher levels of Bloom's. Yet, others
are still not moving beyond computer literacy. This is not unusual and I
appreciate that it takes time to make the transition from computer
literacy to information problem-solving.

But what worries me is that neither teachers or student were using the
computer software that we paid so much money for to its full capacity,
whether they were teaching information problem-solving or computer
literacy. As I look back now, I feel I made the wrong decision. I should
have started with open source software FIRST. After all, upgrades on
that software are free and we could have saved a LOT more money that
could have been used for other purchases.

School districts just do not have the money to keep upgrading year after
year, or even waiting two-three years, all their proprietary software.
We can't keep spending loads of dollars in schools, providing the very
best when students aren't even going to use a fraction of the
power...let's be even more blunt about the truth, the software power our
students and teachers may actually use may not tap the depths of the
open source software we get for "free" much less the proprietary
software we go into debt for.

In my district, we're going to introduce open source options. Here are
the options...instead of...

...MS Office, suggest Open Office
...Inspiration, suggest Cmap Tools
...Fireworks/Photoshop, suggest THE Graphics Image Manipulation Program
(GIMP)

When you consider the cost of these programs--let's say $99 for Office,
Inspiration, Macromedia Studio--and multiply that by the total number of
computers in a district (18,000 in mine), imagine the savings. There are
also free anti-virus alternatives (Clamwin.com instead of Symantec
AntiVirus), the savings increase.

Multiply $99 x 18,000 computers, and we save $1.8 million---now, did you
know that my District's total tech allotment now is $1.2 million for 56K
students? Wow, we could double funding for technology if we only took
advantage of open source.

Total cost of ownership? What is against open source software initiative
in schools? I honestly believe it's our comfort level. We don't want to
try new tools and would rather continue to pay...we pay for expensive
tools but then fail to use all but their most basic features.

Let's stop believing in proprietary software and put the money back into
our children's education. Asked another way, how many more teachers
could we hire with $1.8 million?

Thanks again for bring the subject up...I hope someone will point out
the errors in the points raised in this email.
;->

Wishing you well,

Miguel Guhlin
Director, Instructional Technology
San Antonio, Tx
mguhlin@yahoo.com
http://www.mguhlin.net
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/mguhlin/

Miguel Guhlin's blog Mousing Around has several posts on open source
issues and options. It can be found at
http://www.mguhlin.net/blog/archives/cat_freeopensource.htm

- posted by Larry @ 7:46 p.m.

 
ITC Vision -- Open Source Revisited

My ICT Vision page generated a couple of comments on the use of Open
Source. One reiterated the impact of support cost on the total cost of
ownership (TCO). The other reminded me that people can benefit from
using commercial software packages.

First, I used "Open Source" as a place holder for freeware, shareware,
and the multitude of "digital learning objects" (lesson plans, content,
tutorials etc.)found on the internet. Also, my comments are general in
nature and allow for exceptions.

Second, the TCO argument doesn't address the nature of the expenses.
Proprietary software entails high initial costs which reduce the need
for local development and support. Open Source software MAY have a
steeper learning curve and require local customization and higher levels
of support. However, switching a 100 processors from Microsoft Office
to Open Office, would pay for most of a technician. Chances are that
technician would be available to do more than keep Open Office running.
In addition, the argument ignores the work being done in the open
source community to improve the user interface and the community support
model associated with the software. This report Edubuntu Summit: Eat
your heart out! at
http://www.schoolforge.org.uk/index.php/Edubuntu_Summit:_Eat_your_heart_out%21
reports on linux based software being used in or developed for
individual computers, schools, and school districts. If you visit the
site, note the comments on user interface, the ranges of projects, and
the support communities.

Third, I don't object to commercial solutions or products. Many of
these were more technologically advanced than freeware or integrated the
capabilities of several programs. Currently, there is no reason to
assume commercial software is better or easier to use than open source
software. Major corporations and software development communities are
developing sophisticated easy to use (sometimes expensive)open source
software solutions. Consequently, open source should be considered when
making purchase decisions. Further, reasons for purchasing commercial
software instead of open source software should be clearly documented.

Finally, my focus is classroom resources. I teach computer applications
and I use internet resources. A search finds the resources I need to
prepare a module. Students find tutorials that match their skill level
and vocabulary. If I don't want to prepare my own lessons, lessons and
assessment rubrics are on the the internet. When it comes to content, I
can find information 10 minutes to 100 years old. Best of all students
can participate in international learning communities, sharing,
creating, and modifying information. Suddenly, learning has purpose and
relevance.

- posted by Larry @ 2:35 p.m.

 
Politics of Fear - Hearing the message

I had breakfast with a friend today. Both of us advocate for social
change and the discussion turned to why our message doesn't register
with other citizens. My friend suggested the problem was with the
messenger or the message. I suggested at least part of the problem was
the recipient. Each of us put forward a variety of excellent arguments
supporting our views, but came to no real conclusions.

In response to my claim that recipients believe the messages they want
to hear, I was asked why recipients would want to believe messages of
fear. Examples would be: health care is failing; our children aren't
learning; gay marriage threatens heterosexual marriage; and government
spending is bad. The problem I had and have responding is not all the
messages people chose to hear are messages of fear. Not having a good
answer I procrastinated -- mulled over my response.

Proving that procrastination is an effective strategy, I came across
this quote from J.K. Galbraith's "Affluent Society":

"To a very large extent, of course, we associate truth with convenience
- with what most closely accords with self-interest and individual
well-being or promises best to avoid awkward effort or unwelcome
dislocation of life."

The entire section on "The Conventional Wisdom" can be found at
http://www.uefap.co.uk/reading/exercise/ess1/galbraith.htm

Clearly, my friend and I aren't the only people who have addressed this
issue. :)

- posted by Larry @ 11:42 a.m.