User:Hillgentleman/modes of communications

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I feel that the discussion wikiversity:scope of research is entangled partly because one issue has not been clarified. There are various modes of communications between people, according to their levels of understandings. These different modes should be subjected to different standards.

Let us consider the communications amongst three groups of people: experts, students and public.

1. Expert --> expert: conversations, letters(informal), seminars(semi-formal) research papers(formal), monographs

2. Expert --> student: lectures, courses, surveys, textbooks, monographs

3. Student --> expert: homework, questions

4. student-->student: discussion, rough work sheets, etc

4+1/2. students <--> public: usually this doesn't happen

5. Expert-->public: public lectures, books, textbooks

6. public -->expert: questions

These should belong to different places (e.g. wikipaedia, wikibooks, wikiversity, established journals) and subject to different standards. For example, informal letters between experts may not be self-contained, comprehensible to few; yet we cannot ban it from wikiversity. Similarly discussions between students may contain a lot of mistakes, yet they have their places too (albeit in a limited time interval).

There should be a discussion on the polices concerning these different modes of communications. So far I do not see one. I would suggest at least three namespaces for them, roughworks, letters and reports. They are self-explanatory. And to them we may add seminars.

User:Hillgentleman/on wiki publishing