Week 3 - Vision and way forward
Mon, 07/20/2009 - 15:04
Dear participants,
Our first week took us on a journey which started with getting a sense of who this group was and getting to know each other. We went on elaborating on the concept of University 2.0, exploring some challenges and some vision for what University 2.0 can mean for us: An open classroom, a flexible teaching and learning environment”, a “Fully developed, and equipped with store houses of knowledge and skills.”, a place for Learning without borders and Excellence learning centres.
Tony Carr’s statement invited us to re-think “boldly and creatively” the way new forms of knowledge production can transform the situation of African universities in a positive way: instead of a growing divide, this might constitute an opportunity “to take their place globally as centres of teaching and research excellence”. With the advantage of not having to “reinvent every single mistake and edutainment diversion seen in other continents”, and with the technological opportunities which are developing at a rapid growth on the continent, African universities will have to start elaborating on the abundance paradigm rather than on the scarcity paradigm and be ready to invest in creating innovative pedagogical models to harvest what these opportunities have to offer.
On the second week, we went on to explore how universities 2.0 are close or far from our reality and what possible opportunities and challenges can be associated with it.
This is when Tony Bates spearheaded our conversation towards exploring ways to reducing IT costs. Other opportunities and challenges were considered and experiences were shared in this regard: from power supply to institutional reforms, passing through the importance of attitudinal change.
The third week will give us the time to elaborate on our vision and see how this vision can be implemented in a Higher Education context.
So how shall I/We move forward?
This double pronoun reveals the essential dual aspect: We as a community and I as the individual within a community. According to your priority and your interest, you can think either at the community level or at the individual level (or both).
On a community/group level: What can we do together to help us all move towards achieving University 2.0?
On an individual level: How can I as an individual in a particular and specific context move and help my institution move towards University 2.0? What could be possible steps? How can the community here help you with this project?
Shall we follow the suggestion of Adejare from
“I am not aware that any university in
What do you see as a possible way forward?
Looking forward to your contributions!
Virginie
Mon, 07/20/2009 - 22:32
#2
Thanks Philise for this insightful post that gives prominence to OERs. Surely OERs have the potential to go a long way in changing the entire education continuum, however, a casual check on the website you have referred us to elicits the following question in me which you could kindly help clarify.
- One can clearly note that the materials are copyrighted to California State University. What steps are in the pipeline to eventually “own” these materials?
- Looks like there are limited entry points for others in your project as it presents a rigid framework that may hamper scalability. I could be wrong.
- Lastly, where do you go from here? What mechanisms exist for graceful refinement of content?
I ask this partly because all the content seems to be pdfs which may limit collaborative editing.
In my view, given that Africa is already armed with the existence of an initiative such as Philise describes and probably others, saves us the encumbrances of starting from scratch as correctly pointed out (abundance paradigm) by Virginie ,calls for a model that takes advantage of these efforts so as to foster the development of a sustainable OER ecosystem for content developers to create, share, repurpose and reuse digital content in collaboration with key agencies, institutions and technologies building on the international experiences of mass-collaboration exemplified by the wiki model.
Such an initiative could be summarized as a 3-activity process. Capacity building, tools development and community development and support.
Tue, 07/21/2009 - 15:03
#3
Thank you Vincent. I will attempt to clarify your questions:
- The site is copyrighted to the California State University but the materials are uploaded under the Creative Commons Licence – Attribution. The conditions for Attribution are stated here. What we have uploaded at the AVU Teaching Commons are samples of the materials. The materials are available in Open Distance and elearning (ODeL) formats – Text, CD ROM and Online for ease of access in any context. The materials will be used as online courses in the Teacher Education Curriculum of the participating 12 Universities, once we complete uploading them to a Learning Management System. A pilot for the integration of the materials to institutional Teacher Education Programs has been completed in 3 Universities and just to point out, Kyambogo University is currently using the materials in their Teacher Education Program.
- The Model for the AVU Virtual Consortium is flexible. Based on the experience and competencies acquired in the Teacher Education Consortium, the process is replicable in any discipline/program/Community of Practice that may be interested in a collaborative venture. All that is needed is for subject matter experts from different institutions to agree to work collaboratively to develop a common curriculum. We are currently exploring possibility of replicating the same process in other areas of discipline including but not limited to Computer Science, Environmental studies, Agriculture and Health. Scalability is viable in this case.
- To access the full benefits, one needs to register and be a member of the AVU Teaching Commons. This is the first time that African Academics have come together and created content that they can “own”. Once you log in, you will be able use, adapt and contribute whatever you adapt to the pool of resources.
Indeed from the AVU perspective, we believe Africa can move forward if we work together and share the scarce resources. Competition is healthy, but given the available infrastructure, and related high costs of Technology, it may be time to rethink and form supportive networks to facilitate maximization of resources . With that, we will be moving towards achieving standardization and Universities 2.0 for Africa. And just to reiterate what Tony Carr and Virginie said earlier, collaborating networks could be one of the ways that could positively transform the way in which universities can increase accessibility.
Tue, 07/21/2009 - 17:05
#4
What are we becoming?
I have gone back to the conversations from the first two weeks where there are many suggestions and implications about what we can do collectively/ collaboratively to find a way forward. Part of the challenge is whether there is an "us" after these conversations ....
After having enjoyed some stimulation, challenge and collegial support do we then go back the hard, day to day work and disappear from each other? Sometimes our normal day to day activity feels as if it requires every bit of energy and time we have ...
Right now we are a temporary learning community.... Do you see anything continuing after we say goodbye at the end of the conference?
Wed, 07/22/2009 - 20:47
#5
Hi every body,
I am really sorry to join the debate late! I had a very demanding professional commitment in
1) Coming back to the first week I would like to give the following answers:
- What is one of the sources of happiness in your life?
Sacrificing/Contributing for others' growth
- What inspires you to keep going when the road ahead looks rough?
I strongly believe to the fact that Every great accomplishment is at first impossible !
- What was the spark that made you absolutely passionate about changing education?
My personal experience: I was good in math in the primary and the first two years of secondary school. Then I met a math teacher not good at all. I was about to drop out from school because of very poor marks in math. The next year fortunately, I met a very good teacher with innovative methods, who transformed me into mathematician. You see how decisive the quality of education can be!
Wed, 07/22/2009 - 21:29
#6
Thanks Mama, its good to have you here :)
Your statement that "Every great accomplishment is at first impossible" seems very relevant here when we work towards University 2.0 in Africa !
Fri, 07/24/2009 - 00:57
#7
Definitely much could be done after these three weeks of fulfilled conference. Some issues have been raised which can be listed by the coordinators. There is need for a steering committee for this organisation to coordinate the activities. Participants could then be voluntrily grouped to commence implementation action plan on the identified issues. Each group will continue to meet online. A quarterly meeting of all the participants online could be organised where each group would present the report on its activities for the previous quarter and the action plan for the following quarter. This will drive the organisation to establish the first model University 2.0. within a specified date, for example. one year from 1st August, 2009. We need action, please.
Wed, 07/22/2009 - 20:30
#8
Contribution for the second week:
Talking about the cost of IT:
I absolutely agree with you that this can be achieved by sharing and outsourcing.
However, there still a serious need to sensitise out decision makers about the potential of IT in the improvement of quality and access to education; and consequently bring them to invest scarce existing resources on IT.
Second problem is access to existing open resources. There is a need to provide many access points for our students and lecturers: Rooms with computers connected to internet.
Here I would like to mention that the Ncomputing (http://www.ncomputing.com/) is providing efficient, affordable and simple solution for African countries (even for others!). From on PC one can connect up to 30 monitors, allowing up to 30 users to simultaneously use a single computer. Therefore you share: Software and reduce significantly the cost of electric power(energy), maintenance,...
It is worth to mention that the decision taken by our government (more than ten years ago), to waive custom taxes on the importattion of all computer equipment happen to have a great and significant impact on the development of IT in
Finally, I would like to mention that we have also to care about the cost of “IT workers”
Usually, the salaries at our universities are not competitive, therefore our IT engineers/technicians migrate to the Banks and various private Business. What can we do to keep these qualified IT workers at the universities?
Wed, 07/22/2009 - 21:42
#9
Thanks Mama, I agree with all the points that you have made here. Its quite amazing that the government of Cameroon decided to waive import duties on computers - a good example for other African countries to follow :)
I think the most difficult issue that you raise is how African universities can retain skilled technical staff when their wage levels are so uncompetitive. Lets hear about strategies for retaining high level technical staff from other colleagues across Africa and across the world :)
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 00:36
#10
The universities 2.0 could have a pool of service providers whose services will be procured on competitive basis, covering renewable period of time. Such service providers could include ICT engineers/technicians. Such staff are not on universiies 2.0 payroll.
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 21:13
#11
I can see that contracting out has some advantages. I also wonder what level of capacity is required within the university in the form of full and part-time employees. Any thoughts?
Fri, 07/24/2009 - 00:38
#12
A list of services currently provided to the universities could be compiled, with a grid of different levels of staff. Analysis could show which services and staff grades have relevant and positive impact on qualitative and quantitative graduates expected from University 2.0. Thus services and staff levels will be categorised and graded to determine which could be retained on full time, part-time, contract, or scrapped. Since the cost of education will be reduced with University 2.0 on the long run, using ODeL and open source materials, the burden of running the universities could be removed from the government. Universities will then be run by entrepreneurs and private organisations, with the government remaining as regulatory body and providing subvention to the institutions on competitive performance basis, with conducively empowered environment.
Those staff whose job could not be retained could be retrained, if retrainable, and assigned to other jobs relevant to their qualifications and skills.
In the past, services such as catering, hostel, security,for example, were carried by the university, some of them have been contracted out recently, to the benefit of all stakeholders.
Right now, education activities have been paralysed in the public universities in Nigeria through the industrial action embarked upon by various trade unions in the higher institutions for improved emolument among others. Most of those departments on the strike action do not have much value added to the qualitative and quantitative graduates expected.
Those staff whose job could not be retained could be retrained, if retrainable, and assigned to other jobs relevant to their qualifications and skills.
In the past, services such as catering, hostel, security,for example, were carried by the university, some of them have been contracted out recently, to the benefit of all stakeholders.
Right now, education activities have been paralysed in the public universities in Nigeria through the industrial action embarked upon by various trade unions in the higher institutions for improved emolument among others. Most of those departments on the strike action do not have much value added to the qualitative and quantitative graduates expected.
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 09:34
#13
Retention of skilled staff
This has not been easy for us specifically considering the general Socio-Economic situation in Zimbabwe. However, we can never be faulted for lack of trying. Here are some of the issues we have noticed and tried (my 2-cents worth):
This has not been easy for us specifically considering the general Socio-Economic situation in Zimbabwe. However, we can never be faulted for lack of trying. Here are some of the issues we have noticed and tried (my 2-cents worth):
- Continue making it technologically interesting for them to stay: We experiment a lot with new technology and we let our guys really drive the projects they are invoved with. Our role is to try and make sure that at least the delivery within the projects continues being "acceptable".
- Consultancy services: We have what we call a controlled consultancy service. This is where the whole unit is involved in external projects for the purposes of raising the remuneration levels of the persons in the department. Of course this has also been significantly erroded by the prevailing Socio-Economic situation. It has started picking up though in the last few months.
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 21:09
#14
Thanks Gilford, If you can retain good technical staff at University of Zimbabwe with all the challenges you have faced over the last several years then the rest of us should learn from your strategies!
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 00:57
#15
The following reports may be useful as reference for the university 2.0 project :
1. Survey of ICT and education in Africa
www.infodev.org/en/publication.353.hmtl
2. Survey of ICT and education in Africa Vol.2 53 Country reports
www.infodev.org/en/publication.354.hmtl
3. Knowledge Maps : ICTs and Education
www.infodev.org/files/2907_file_knowledge_maps_ICTs_Education_infodev.pdf
4. Survey of e-learning in Africa
www.elearning-africa.com/pdf/survey/elareport_timunwin.pdf
1. Survey of ICT and education in Africa
www.infodev.org/en/publication.353.hmtl
2. Survey of ICT and education in Africa Vol.2 53 Country reports
www.infodev.org/en/publication.354.hmtl
3. Knowledge Maps : ICTs and Education
www.infodev.org/files/2907_file_knowledge_maps_ICTs_Education_infodev.pdf
4. Survey of e-learning in Africa
www.elearning-africa.com/pdf/survey/elareport_timunwin.pdf
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 06:12
#16
UNIVERSTY 2.0 - PORPOSED VISION
Through this forum, it has been established and recognised that the university is a system which is people oriented and not the bricks and mortars. The people include all the stakeholders in the university system. These are the candidates for admission, students, graduates, lecturers, administrators, parents, civil societies, service providers, community, employers, religious organisations, government, and other friends of qualitative and quantitative education system.
The university 2.0 (U2.0) should recognise that the education system is made up of three units, namely, inputs, processing unit, and output, similar to a manufacturing system. The focus should be on the output or the product, which is the qualitative and quantitative graduates. The inputs are provided by other above listed stakeholders. These inputs must be qualitative and quantitative too, before they can be processed into qualitative and quantitative products. Since what you feed into the processing unit determines the quality and the quantity of the product obtained. This is confirmed by the computer system users' popular quote “garbage in is garbage out”.
There is also the common saying “the university must pass through the student and not only for him/her to pass through the university system”. The various operating and control systems built into the processing system pass through the processed input to make the qualitative and quantitative output (product). In effect the student should collaborate with other stakeholders through the operating and control systems in the University 2.0, designed to make him/her to be qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative and quantitative education processing unit machinery (tool) is ICT oriented in all dimensions. This is made up of ODeL and other “Open eManagement Information System (OeMIS)”. Most current education systems in Africa and some other parts of the world concentrate on eMIS, and most essentially epayment, for what reasons???. The University 2.0 will contract out all services to external service provider organisations, and concentrate on production of qualitative and quantitative gratuates.
Just as the manufacturing system requires energy to power it, so it is for education system. This forum has established and recognised that solar energy is the only power system that can guaranty the production of qualitative and quantitative education product (graduate) in Africa.
Since the product of a manufacturing system is designed to serve some purpose(s), the product (graduate) of the U2.0 should be prepared and be self prepared to meet and solve the developmental challenges of the open market (environment) he/she is going to serve.
The qualitative manufactured product has market acceptability and value which is to the benefit of all the stakeholders involved in its production, so also is expected for quality graduate from University 2.0. All the stakeholders will be prosperous and get out of the current rat race in Africa and the rest of the developing world. Consequently the MDG’s and other developmental programmes will be achieved much earlier than scheduled.
Above is a description of the vision I envisage for University 2.0, which I submit to Virginie, Tony B, and Tony C, to paraphrase, with due respect, since this is part of their recognised expertise in this forum.
Thank you all.
Through this forum, it has been established and recognised that the university is a system which is people oriented and not the bricks and mortars. The people include all the stakeholders in the university system. These are the candidates for admission, students, graduates, lecturers, administrators, parents, civil societies, service providers, community, employers, religious organisations, government, and other friends of qualitative and quantitative education system.
The university 2.0 (U2.0) should recognise that the education system is made up of three units, namely, inputs, processing unit, and output, similar to a manufacturing system. The focus should be on the output or the product, which is the qualitative and quantitative graduates. The inputs are provided by other above listed stakeholders. These inputs must be qualitative and quantitative too, before they can be processed into qualitative and quantitative products. Since what you feed into the processing unit determines the quality and the quantity of the product obtained. This is confirmed by the computer system users' popular quote “garbage in is garbage out”.
There is also the common saying “the university must pass through the student and not only for him/her to pass through the university system”. The various operating and control systems built into the processing system pass through the processed input to make the qualitative and quantitative output (product). In effect the student should collaborate with other stakeholders through the operating and control systems in the University 2.0, designed to make him/her to be qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative and quantitative education processing unit machinery (tool) is ICT oriented in all dimensions. This is made up of ODeL and other “Open eManagement Information System (OeMIS)”. Most current education systems in Africa and some other parts of the world concentrate on eMIS, and most essentially epayment, for what reasons???. The University 2.0 will contract out all services to external service provider organisations, and concentrate on production of qualitative and quantitative gratuates.
Just as the manufacturing system requires energy to power it, so it is for education system. This forum has established and recognised that solar energy is the only power system that can guaranty the production of qualitative and quantitative education product (graduate) in Africa.
Since the product of a manufacturing system is designed to serve some purpose(s), the product (graduate) of the U2.0 should be prepared and be self prepared to meet and solve the developmental challenges of the open market (environment) he/she is going to serve.
The qualitative manufactured product has market acceptability and value which is to the benefit of all the stakeholders involved in its production, so also is expected for quality graduate from University 2.0. All the stakeholders will be prosperous and get out of the current rat race in Africa and the rest of the developing world. Consequently the MDG’s and other developmental programmes will be achieved much earlier than scheduled.
Above is a description of the vision I envisage for University 2.0, which I submit to Virginie, Tony B, and Tony C, to paraphrase, with due respect, since this is part of their recognised expertise in this forum.
Thank you all.
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 10:48
#17
Hello everyone, thank you all for the great posts, its great to be here and here is my small contribution of where we are coming from, where we are and where we need to go plus some pointers on how we can get there.
Ever since the start of the industrial age, different areas of society have adopted a similar approach to Henry Ford’s assembly line, the education systems are designed and operated like an assembly line with different grades of products (qualifications) the best ending up in the world of Academia, and the rest, well, if they are lucky their talents often take them to the highest levels of their different careers. This is the reason why for a long time, critics of the traditional university (and by inference proponents of University 2.0) have been quoted as referring to the traditional set up as diploma mills. The problem has not just been the universities themselves but society in general since many students pursue the credentials conferred upon them and not necessarily the knowledge that the credentials represent. Due to this state of affairs, the universities have inadvertently produced people whose knowledge comes from their work life and day to day affairs as opposed to the classroom setting. Many students study hard for exams and hence exercise their memories more than their minds. In addition the problem so far has been compounded by market dictates since hiring organizations often apply pressure for us to produce the right mix of credentials be it in IT, management or accounting as the market requires and since this message is resonated in society, budgetary pressure and in the case of my country competitive pressure has resulted in University 1.0 playing to the pipers tune and not in a good way.
In my view, the onset of university 2.0 Africa both conceptually and practically marks a reawakening of our purpose, we should be striving to structure and guide our knowledge community to ensure that those holding credentials from this institution can hold their own against the best innovators, thinkers and entrepreneurs in the world. Universities in Africa have a plethora of resources that can educate the multicultural and multidisciplinary society of the future. Under the new vision, and as has already been explained in this forum, our biggest challenge thus far is that our resources are often either not fully utilized or isolated in ways that eventually limit the capacity of the institution to optimize its delivery both in education or research quality. The University 2.0 should strive to remedy this by promoting collaboration.
The university 2.0 is a culmination of the realization that it is neither feasible nor desirable for us to operate alone, education should be highly customizable and although personally I am a proponent of a new university based on the university 2.0 principles, I am cognizant of the fact that in practice, our universities will have to take incremental steps to get to the level of university 2.0. The only way that this can be accomplished is through different aspects notably;
Governments need to create the proper enabling environment for university 2.0 to thrive. In this regard ay guiding principle would be the realization that although jurisdiction is geographic, knowledge is universal.
The people; at the individual level, people need to acknowledge that everyone is a collection of knowledge resources and thus we should design a set up where sharing this knowledge is made feasible as we all strive to make additions to the body of collective knowledge. The community will thus be attracted to partake in the issues and areas that concern them. Unlike the current assembly line approach, the university 2.0 should be premised on the information society approach where knowledge is guided to grow. In reality, University 2.0 will be providing a centre of excellence for the global economy and this should be manifest in its mission, vision and structure.
Regards,
Sam
Ever since the start of the industrial age, different areas of society have adopted a similar approach to Henry Ford’s assembly line, the education systems are designed and operated like an assembly line with different grades of products (qualifications) the best ending up in the world of Academia, and the rest, well, if they are lucky their talents often take them to the highest levels of their different careers. This is the reason why for a long time, critics of the traditional university (and by inference proponents of University 2.0) have been quoted as referring to the traditional set up as diploma mills. The problem has not just been the universities themselves but society in general since many students pursue the credentials conferred upon them and not necessarily the knowledge that the credentials represent. Due to this state of affairs, the universities have inadvertently produced people whose knowledge comes from their work life and day to day affairs as opposed to the classroom setting. Many students study hard for exams and hence exercise their memories more than their minds. In addition the problem so far has been compounded by market dictates since hiring organizations often apply pressure for us to produce the right mix of credentials be it in IT, management or accounting as the market requires and since this message is resonated in society, budgetary pressure and in the case of my country competitive pressure has resulted in University 1.0 playing to the pipers tune and not in a good way.
In my view, the onset of university 2.0 Africa both conceptually and practically marks a reawakening of our purpose, we should be striving to structure and guide our knowledge community to ensure that those holding credentials from this institution can hold their own against the best innovators, thinkers and entrepreneurs in the world. Universities in Africa have a plethora of resources that can educate the multicultural and multidisciplinary society of the future. Under the new vision, and as has already been explained in this forum, our biggest challenge thus far is that our resources are often either not fully utilized or isolated in ways that eventually limit the capacity of the institution to optimize its delivery both in education or research quality. The University 2.0 should strive to remedy this by promoting collaboration.
The university 2.0 is a culmination of the realization that it is neither feasible nor desirable for us to operate alone, education should be highly customizable and although personally I am a proponent of a new university based on the university 2.0 principles, I am cognizant of the fact that in practice, our universities will have to take incremental steps to get to the level of university 2.0. The only way that this can be accomplished is through different aspects notably;
Governments need to create the proper enabling environment for university 2.0 to thrive. In this regard ay guiding principle would be the realization that although jurisdiction is geographic, knowledge is universal.
The people; at the individual level, people need to acknowledge that everyone is a collection of knowledge resources and thus we should design a set up where sharing this knowledge is made feasible as we all strive to make additions to the body of collective knowledge. The community will thus be attracted to partake in the issues and areas that concern them. Unlike the current assembly line approach, the university 2.0 should be premised on the information society approach where knowledge is guided to grow. In reality, University 2.0 will be providing a centre of excellence for the global economy and this should be manifest in its mission, vision and structure.
Regards,
Sam
Thu, 07/23/2009 - 19:55
#18
VISION AND WAY FORWARD
Iam back to line after a few days of commitment and sorting out. At one time there were no modern information and communication technologies, thus there was no need for IT Technicians, but now that the world is being driven by IT, there is high demand for IT Technicians. The experts or skilled IT Technicians and Software Engineers we have today may not continue to exist forever or even for as long as the system will, but whatever skills they are able to pass on to the younger ones will continue to the future generations. The introduction of unique scheme of Vocational or Technical Education and Training in this IT area will help a great deal in stepping up the supply system of Skilled IT Technicians that are in high demand today. It is a general phenomena that where the skilled persons are in short supply, their services and even accessibility become exorbitant and or scarce to the common person in the room or on the street with his/her systems requiring simple maintenance. But when “the pipeline continues to supply competent skilled IT personnel in mass”, the high demand will be reduced or even met, and the service cost would be drastically cut down. My view is that in every secondary/vocational school or Technical college, let there be (if it is not already in place), a curriculum modification which will integrate some of these concepts of IT facilities appreciation, repairs or maintenance right from the basic levels. Then at the Polytechnics, Technical Institutes or Universities, these ideas are broadened and the skills training enhanced so that on graduation there can be a lot of skilled IT technicians, Engineers or Technologists to meet the desired needs. Just like we have motor mechanics all over, thus car maintenance is not as much a problem as IT and general electronic systems maintenance in some countries. I think revisiting and boosting this aspect of the educational system will help in addressing the situation, of course in addition to other strategies proposed by other members of this forum. Thank you.
Iam back to line after a few days of commitment and sorting out. At one time there were no modern information and communication technologies, thus there was no need for IT Technicians, but now that the world is being driven by IT, there is high demand for IT Technicians. The experts or skilled IT Technicians and Software Engineers we have today may not continue to exist forever or even for as long as the system will, but whatever skills they are able to pass on to the younger ones will continue to the future generations. The introduction of unique scheme of Vocational or Technical Education and Training in this IT area will help a great deal in stepping up the supply system of Skilled IT Technicians that are in high demand today. It is a general phenomena that where the skilled persons are in short supply, their services and even accessibility become exorbitant and or scarce to the common person in the room or on the street with his/her systems requiring simple maintenance. But when “the pipeline continues to supply competent skilled IT personnel in mass”, the high demand will be reduced or even met, and the service cost would be drastically cut down. My view is that in every secondary/vocational school or Technical college, let there be (if it is not already in place), a curriculum modification which will integrate some of these concepts of IT facilities appreciation, repairs or maintenance right from the basic levels. Then at the Polytechnics, Technical Institutes or Universities, these ideas are broadened and the skills training enhanced so that on graduation there can be a lot of skilled IT technicians, Engineers or Technologists to meet the desired needs. Just like we have motor mechanics all over, thus car maintenance is not as much a problem as IT and general electronic systems maintenance in some countries. I think revisiting and boosting this aspect of the educational system will help in addressing the situation, of course in addition to other strategies proposed by other members of this forum. Thank you.
Fri, 07/24/2009 - 01:17
#19
Hi All,
Sorry I almost forgot this point. I have also been thinking of how possible the Virtual Learning environment and Fora such as this (ScienceConnect) will be used to contribute towards building the capacity and practical skills of potential IT Technicians for the future University2.0 for Africa and beyond. By this I mean, practical experiments in some real life or simulated activities such as servicing or repairing a PC or similar IT facilities could be presented to interested persons via the virtual platform. If well planned and implemented on a continuous basis, I am confident it will assist in improving further the technical skills of learners on the job, on training in Vocational/technical schools or colleges provided they can have access to such virtual lab presentations. My thinking is that, in the face of scarce personnel, the virtual environment/labs could complement in training more IT technicians for the system. Perhaps someone could shade more light on this. Thanks.
Fri, 07/24/2009 - 05:59
#20
Proposal for a mass capacity building and training for ICT personnel of all categories, using virtual learning resources, is a brilliant idea. It is necessary to extend it to solar energy mass capacity building too. Curriculum, syllabus, and course materials should be developed on solar enegy knowledge and skills covering from basic education through technical/vocational institutions to higher education level in Africa for University 2.0 and other applications, using virtual learning resources.
Fri, 07/24/2009 - 12:11
#21
Vision and Way Forward: Summary
Virginie introduced Week 3 as " time to elaborate on our vision and see how this vision can be implemented in a Higher Education context." She asked
1) On a community/group level: What can we do together to help us all move towards achieving University 2.0?
2) On an individual level: How can I as an individual in a particular and specific context move and help my institution move towards University 2.0? What could be possible steps? How can the community here help you with this project?
AVU and OER: Philise shared the experience of the African Virtual University in the development of Open Educational Resources in several disciplines for use across African universities. Vincent asked for clarification on copyright issues, opportunities to join the project and the scope for refining of content. Philise explained the licence conditions and the flexibility of the model. African academics can join the AVU Teaching Commons.
What are we becoming? Tony asked whether there is an "us" after these conversations. Do we have the energy and time to continue this initiative after these conversations?
Catching Up: Mama from Cameroon came in and caught up with several postings. Some of the gems in his messages included:
1) "Every great accomplishment is at first impossible !"
2) Ten years ago the Cameroon government decided to waive import duties on computers.
Retaining IT workers in Universities: Mama asked how we can keep IT engineers and technicians while universities pay uncompetitive salaries. Adejare suggested a pool of service providers to take on contracts. (He also thought this would get around strikes in the university sector.) Gilford shared the experience of Unioversity of Zimbabwe which used technically challenging projects and provision of external consultancy to retain staff. Simon stressed the need to work on the supply of skilled IT staff through polytechnics and technical colleges as well as through virtual training.
Vision of University 2.0: Adejare proposed a model of the university as a system including multiple stakeholders. He proposes that "the product (graduate) of the U2.0 should be prepared and be self prepared to meet and solve the developmental challenges of the open market (environment) he/she is going to serve." Samuel responded that collaboraation across and beyond African universities could address issues of underused or poorly used resources. He emphasised the role of government in providing an enabling environment and stated that "university 2.0 should be premised on the information society approach where knowledge is guided to grow."
Fri, 07/24/2009 - 17:13
#22
Hi Tony!
The way forward: I suggest that we keep this community and extend it by inviting all friends, colleagues and relatives sharing the same vision for the improvement of the quality of education in Africa to join the forum and contribute. The summary of every week or every two weeks of our discussions should be maide available and distributed widely.
We could then select some relevant ACHIEVABLE goals and try to achieve then progressively. For example, talking about sharing, it will be a good idea to organise the production of e-learning content by Universities, group of universities, countries or group of countries. A Cameroonian university would for example for fixed period produce a specific content - let's say in math-, while another one in Nigeria would produce specifi content in Physics. These content will be put online for the use of group of universities sharing some agreement or even as open source. By doing so, we will not be doing all the same thing at the same time with limited funding as it is the case currently. It is amazing to realise that we don't share/cooperate so much in Africa in the production of educational content while sharing is a great value in our continent.
Please we should continue with this forum fully as it it, it should not be stopped or subdivided for instance, we are stronger in a big group.
The way forward: I suggest that we keep this community and extend it by inviting all friends, colleagues and relatives sharing the same vision for the improvement of the quality of education in Africa to join the forum and contribute. The summary of every week or every two weeks of our discussions should be maide available and distributed widely.
We could then select some relevant ACHIEVABLE goals and try to achieve then progressively. For example, talking about sharing, it will be a good idea to organise the production of e-learning content by Universities, group of universities, countries or group of countries. A Cameroonian university would for example for fixed period produce a specific content - let's say in math-, while another one in Nigeria would produce specifi content in Physics. These content will be put online for the use of group of universities sharing some agreement or even as open source. By doing so, we will not be doing all the same thing at the same time with limited funding as it is the case currently. It is amazing to realise that we don't share/cooperate so much in Africa in the production of educational content while sharing is a great value in our continent.
Please we should continue with this forum fully as it it, it should not be stopped or subdivided for instance, we are stronger in a big group.
First my apologies for joining this forum late. I would like to thank all the participants for the past two weeks for very insightful discussions on Universities 2.0. I dedicated most of today to try and catch up and its amazing, the quality of contributions from everyone is just superb.
Being a late entry, I would not like to take us all back but would like to share the experience of the African Virtual University (AVU) with regard to what Tony Bates suggested on the "willingness of institutions to collaborate and share.. as opposed to directly competing..." as a possible way forward.
In 2005, the AVU brought together 12 Institutions from 10 countries in Africa and with the help of the African Development Bank (AfDB) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), managed to overcome all possible barriers, to agree on a quality assurance Framework that is acceptable in all the 12 institutions. Through the AfDB/UNDP funded Teacher Education Program, 73 modules for 4 Bachelor of Education curricula in Mathematics, Biology, Physics and Chemistry have been developed by African Academics using Open Content and 52 of the modules have been released as OERs through the AVU Virtual Consortium Project and can be viewed at http://oeravu.merlot.org/ . The participating institutions were willing to collaborate and share expertise in their various fields and Africa now has a pool of over 200 experts who can author Open Distance and eLearning content and peer reviewers in the 4 subjects mentioned. This may be a small number compared to the size of Africa but it is a starting point that Africa can collaborate and achieve even greater things in the future.
Thanks.