Wikiversity talk:Scope

From Wikiversity
(Redirected from Wikiversity talk:Scope/En)

Hi, in the chapters topic Learning and Wikiversity:Scope/En#Using_wikis there is mentioned a user "WiseWoman". I assumed now this is this user from English Wikiversity, correct? Anyway, when we referrence a single user in article, this is not so appropriate, we should generalize more. OK? I will contact the user and hope (s)he can clarify the issue. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 16:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

contacted - ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 17:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The correct user was found. I copy-pasted the answer below (from here), so that everyone can participate. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 19:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How should wikiversity develop?[edit]

Yup, that's me. That is I page I participated in on Meta, when we were discussing the Wikiversity. I am very disappointed in how the Wikivesity is turning out. We worked so hard to describe why we were NOT reinventing traditional universities, but going back to the old traditions of a university or academy being a place where people teach - learn - think - create - discuss topics. We just barely got started when an army of well-meaning but clueless people steamrolled the entire construction, setting up "departments" and "faculties" and "curricula" and "suggested courses" and setting up the "one true way to do X" when we were interested in having the MULTIPLICITY of views and materials collectd. Sigh. I do not have the energy to keep fighting the tide. I will go away and do was I was planning to so somewhere else and make a name that people do not understand to keep this folks out until it gets going. So many people who attend university do not really understand the point of a university education, which is to learn to think, not to get a degree or party or get a good job. The page you are referring to no longer makes sense when you look at what has evolved into the Wikiversity. So you can remove my name, or link to me, or call me the cynical old professor, or whatever. It's a Wiki. --WiseWoman 11:39, 29. Dez. 2006 (CET)

  • Thank you. It makes me think. This is highly relevant for us. And highly relevant for our people who are trying to start the zh:wikiversity. I left a message at the Benutzer Diskussion of WiseWoman in de:wikipedia.--Hillgentleman| 07:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm curious about what sort of steamrolling you were talking about here with Wikiversity? While there may have been some heated discussion on Meta (and boy, they got heated at times), it is also important to remember that Wikiversity was also a very active sub-project of Wikibooks during the whole discussion period as well, where the concept of "departments", "faculty", and "curricula" were widely talked about and discussed. In fact, it became widely integrated within much of the infrastructure of Wikibooks, including being added to much of the other content of Wikibooks with Wikibook textbooks being "sponsored" by Wikiversity departments (or more correctly termed being "advertised" on those Wikibooks, but that is another story). The very first edit that I can find for Wikiversity on Wikibooks (deleted BTW, but it is still there), dated January 19th, 2004 (nearly 3 years ago) clearly had "schools" and "courses" as a part of its organization. This was added on about the 10th edit of the main Wikiversity page on Wikibooks based on all of the page moves and everything that I can find. The Wikiversity page forked a few times, so the exact order is a bit confusing. If this isn't the history or the individuals you suspect as steamrolling everything, I don't what you are talking about.

    I do agree that there may be more than one way to approach Wikiversity as a philosophy, but unfortunately there are many people who have "grown up" in the traditional university system to avoid having all of that approach completely filtered out. Some very radical ideas about Wikiversity certainly have evolved over the years, and I hope that at least some of your ideas do get incorporated. --Robert Horning 12:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Many people can only think as far as this: "let's copy the structure of a conventional university into a set of wiki pages and create a free online university". However, that approach to developing the Wikiversity project was blocked by the Board of Trustees. Yes, Wikiversity now has many content development projects that correspond to conventional academic subject areas and editors are free to call these "departments" or "centers" or anything else that suits them. At Wikipedia the content development projects are all called "wikiprojects", but we need to get past the names and think clearly about the fundamentals of how people collaborate at wiki websites. What is a Wikiversity department? It is not a conventional university department. Wikiversity departments are places for people with similar interests to come together and collaborate online. It takes time to get people to think in terms of collaborative content development projects that will be the engines for producing Wikiversity's educational content and learning environment. It took years for such communities to form at Wikipedia. Should we throw our hands in the air and walk away because of the fact that we face a challenge in getting people to change the way they think? No. We have to get to work. Here is the way our situation was described at the launch of Wikiversity, "..... the idea here is to also host learning communities, so people who are actually trying to learn, actually have a place to come and interact and help each other figure out how to learn things. We're also going to be hosting and fostering research into how these kinds of things can be used more effectively." (source) Wikibooks, with its narrow scope, has been described as a 20-year-long project. Wikiversity, with a much broader scope, is not the kind of project that can be expected to look very polished in a short time. It is not in the spirit of wiki to, "keep folks out until it gets going". --JWSchmidt 15:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See also: en:Rebooting Wikiversity, ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 16:54, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

about degrees[edit]

High School Diplomas[edit]

Here is some thing about high school diplomas, which I post here, so that people find it easier, since on this page there is also talked about degrees (because the original discussion at English Wikiversity gets archived after a while):


I was rumaging through Wikibooks today, and came across this note on the Study Help Desk:

Will there be an opportunity for people to earn a high school diploma with Wiki....? I am Assistant Superintendent for the Rochester NH public schools and am interested in access to course materials, GED service and high school diploma opportunities for non traditional students. 13:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)Kent Hemingway65.175.134.16 13:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC) 603-332-3678

Please, please would some people here interested in developing formal academic "diplomas" or "degrees" get in contact with this individual. I feel very sheepish that I didn't catch this before, as this is an incredibly generous offer, particularly as this school district is very much interested in working with Wikimedia projects to develop a high school curriculum for non-traditional students.

It is individuals like this that would go a very long ways to getting "accredited" status for some Wikiversity projects, or at least prove that the idea of Wikiversity has some very strong merit. Don't let this pass by without further comment or letting this educator know what Wikiversity has to offer. --Robert Horning 08:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Robert,
this can help:
In order to earn a degree, a certain amount of credit must be earned with an accredited organization, that is, some body of experts must determine that the program and the coursework make sense in the context of the degree to be conferred.
Wikiversity will not be a degree granting institution, although the materials available at Wikiversity can definitely be used by students and instructors at accredited institutions as a basis for the partial fulfillment of examination requirements for an accredited course.
What Wikiversity is not
  • We do not run traditional courses
  • We do not grant degrees
  • We are not out to get accreditation
there are some dangers, which could happen e.g.: how can you prove, that the user is really the user and not an expert, who (s)he hired?
But, if Mr. Hemingway wants to do this on behalf of his school I think he can do this, by using material from Wikiversity and then his organization (Rochester NH public schools) can certify, when they have found a way to do this.
But Wikiversity does not give degrees. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 10:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was not aware that this was considered a settled question, but rather something put forth for future review after Wikiversity was well established. Yes, I know that Wikiversity does not grant degrees or diplomas, but there certainly have been many Wikiversity participants over the years (yes, years) that have strongly suggested that at some point in the future that such sort of diploma or degrees might indeed be granted. I was strongly suggesting that if such a course of action were to take place, that it would be with educational institutions just as this educator has suggested.
The standards for accreditation of a High School program aren't nearly as strict as what is needed for university type accreditation as well, which is also why I brought this up at this time. For those Wikiversity participants who want to follow this line of thought and try to establish such a program, this is an opportunity to do so. Establishing a GED program would IMHO be a very good first step in that direction.
BTW, the main reason for the "No degree" clause in the Wikiversity charter is to make it clear that Wikiversity hasn't achieved anything even resembling accreditation that would be necessary in order to grant those degrees, and that the WMF isn't going to directly finance and support any such effort to gain accreditation. That is something that must come from within the Wikiversity user community first if it is ever going to happen. There has also been some very significant resistance on the part of the WMF board of trustees that the topic even be broached, but it has and it is consistant that the topic is talked about. --Robert Horning 11:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Robert, you are fully right with, that this may get changed in the future, so I put this idea also at Wikiversity_talk:Scope/En#about_degrees beta-Wikiversity on the relevant page, so in the future this idea/contact of person does not get lost. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 12:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would be great if Wikiversity had a project to support people who are trying to pass the GED tests. See Wikihigh. --JWSchmidt 15:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Samething for all the other standardized tests, AP exams, and specialized licenses... hmm I wonder if I can set up a how to get a ham license course.--Rayc 01:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Something that would be useful if someone could set up a page for each type of test, and then links to resources about that test.

Roadrunner 03:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created a portal for test preparation Test preparation and a Study guide:GED stub. If someone can go through the portal and add every test and certification they can think of, we can then create the pages

Roadrunner 03:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


This thread will get updated, when the original discussion gets updated! ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 12:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

German Wikiversity courses can get certificate by Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt[edit]

A catholic university gives certificates for courses from the German Wikiversity, see here. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 18:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

might be interesting to see, how this evolves in the future. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 18:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Earning Degrees[edit]

I disagree with the entire "Earning Degrees" section. I think the door should be left open. Jade Knight 11:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]