As the founders of two of the world's largest open-source media platforms -- Wikipedia and Connexions -- we have both been accused of being dreamers. Independently, we became infected with the idea of creating a Web platform that would enable anyone to contribute their knowledge to free and open learning resources.
Jimmy started with his popularly generated encyclopedia. Rich developed a platform for authors, teachers, and students to create, remix and share courses and textbooks.
Almost everybody dismissed these dreams.
Now, with the support of untold legions -- from Nobel laureates to junior high school kids from East Timor to East Los Angeles -- Wikipedia and Connexions have spread around the globe and today are organic, growing information bases used by hundreds of millions of people.
We want to infect you with the dream that anyone can become part of a new movement with the potential to change the world of education. This movement can redefine forever how knowledge is created and used.
Today, some community college students have to quit school because their textbooks cost more than their tuition; and today, some third graders have to share math texts because there are not enough to go around.
But imagine a world where textbooks and other learning materials are available to everyone for free over the Web and at low cost in print.
Today, language barriers prevent many immigrant parents from helping their children with their homework because the texts are only in English.
But imagine a world where textbooks are adapted to many learning styles and translated into myriad languages.
Today, Pluto remains on the list of planets in science textbooks. Who knows how long it will take for it to be removed?
But imagine a world where textbooks are continually updated and corrected by a legion of contributors.
Such a world was just a dream a decade ago. But now the puzzle pieces of the Open Education movement have come together, so that anyone, anywhere can write, assemble, customize and publish their own open course or textbook. Open licenses make the materials legal to use and remix. Technical innovations like XML and print-on-demand make delivering the output technically feasible and inexpensive.
The new development and distribution models promoted by the Open Education movement represent a natural and inevitable evolution of the educational publishing industry.
It parallels the evolution of the software industry (toward Linux and other open-source software); the music industry (recall the band Radiohead's recent "pay what you like" digital download); and scholarly publishing (the US government recently mandated online public access to all research funded by the National Institutes of Health at US$28.9 billion this year).
The exciting thing about Open Education is that free access is just the beginning. Open Education promises to turn the current textbook production pipeline into a vast dynamic knowledge ecosystem that is in a constant state of creation, use, reuse and improvement.
Open Education promises to provide children with learning materials tailored to their individual needs, in contrast to today's "off the rack" materials, together with quicker feedback loops that match learning outcomes more directly with content development and improvement.
And Open Education promises new approaches to collaborative learning that leverage social interaction among students and teachers all over the world.
Late last year in Cape Town, we joined delegates from around the world to reach a consensus on Open Education's ideals and approaches and we committed ourselves to them in the Cape Town Open Education Declaration, officially launched on Jan. 22 (see www.capetowndeclaration.org).
Everyone has something to teach. Everyone has something to learn. Together, we can all help transform the way the world develops, disseminates, and uses knowledge.
Together, we can help make the dream of Open Education a reality.
Jimmy Wales is founder of Wikipedia and Wikia. Richard Baraniuk, founder of Connexions, is a professor of engineering at Rice University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath