Wikiversity talk:The original learning model

Edit war?

 * Noting that User:JWSchmidt reverted a series of my edits, including casing corrections. If User:JWSchmidt is acting in good faith, perhaps he could explain below his reasons. --McCormack 17:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm still editing the page. Why are you so quick to complain? --JWSchmidt 17:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We use the Template:underconstruction to mark temporary states of a page. In any case, page revamps rarely start with a systematic removal of another user's recent edits. --McCormack 17:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Your comment "return useful content from the 18 August version" seems to mean retaining merely my casing correction and removing everything else I added. Or are you still editing? --McCormack 17:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * McCormack: This is a "the cup is half empty" comment: "This page explores the original Wikiversity learning model, which was put forward as a general approach to learning in the earliest days of Wikiversity, before it was known how an educational wiki might work." In the context of the tag, it seemed intended to imply that the approved e-learning model for Wikiversity is some kind of historical fossil. I suggest that you limit you use of  . --JWSchmidt 17:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Being constructive

 * Hi JWS. Perhaps you could reflect on Human Genetic Uniqueness Project (just an example) and whether or not you have changed any of your views about appropriate learning models in the light of experience? Just as what makes a novel interesting is "character development", likewise it could make Wikiversity interesting to see how your views on elearning have changed in the last couple of years. --McCormack 17:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The main thing I've learned during the past two years is how hard it is for a new Wikimedia sister project to throw off the dead weight of Wikipedia. --JWSchmidt 18:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Model singular?
Just wondering ... could Wikiversity support multiple models of learning including the lone student in "self-learning" mode, groups of people collaborating in peer-production/social construction, progressive inquiry, ...? Ktucker 20:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, why not ? We are limited only by our imagination ("No, we can not do that"; "it is impossible", ...) and the technics (see also: Technical needs) - one way to overcome this is using additional technology besides this wiki e.g. Sandbox Server (see a small, working experiment at Topic:Sandbox Server 0.5). It would also be interesting to review how individuals, real world institutions (School and university projects), ... used WV so far: Learning models. Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 20:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * This is the problem. I have been trying to move in the direction of multiple learning models, but encounter resistance from a particular user. I've also been trying to examine how concepts of learning models have evolved at wikiversity, but one user does not wish this kind of examination to be undertaken. One of the reasons I have been slowly compiling pages such as Examples and Featured is to create an orderly set of data from which we can draw conclusions about the evolution of multiple learning models. Of Wikiversity's current 8500+ pages, I have examined and catalogued about 3000 in the last few months - probably the most important 3000. --McCormack 08:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * McCormack: I doubt if there is anyone at Wikiversity who fails to accept the idea that Wikiversity is open to many types of explorations of how to use wiki technology to support online learning. The original Wikiversity proposal was based on a conventional model for online courses and was rejected by the Wikimedia Foundation. This page is about the alternative learning model that was requested by the Board of Trustees and approved by the Board of trustees, allowing Wikiversity to be launched. How does having a page to describe this learning model cause a problem for Wikiversity? How does it cause a problem for Wikiversity participants who want to explore other models? Just link from this page to the other models. --JWSchmidt 14:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not true that the board approved a particular "alternative learning model" - nor that they rejected an earlier learning model. Wikiversity's learning model(s) has/have always been one of the fundamental things that the Wikiversity community were tasked with exploring, experiencing, and researching. I regard this page as a significant step in proposing how learning works here, and I regard Learning models as a significant step in surveying what kinds of models have been proposed and/or used. So I can't see - or don't understand - the "problem" here - except with perhaps viewing this page as "historical". Cormaggio talk 14:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Please see Wikiversity participants who choose to leave - we can collect here cases we know and analyze based on this further. What do you say ? Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 11:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)