Oneville Wiki - User contributions [en]

Why a network?

2010-05-21T17:36:45Z

Mica:

We propose to start a Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity to help the public investigate ways of increasing young people’s opportunities to learn. The people who interact with young people on a daily basis need to share and debate ideas for improving young people’s educational pathways. Policy efforts alone cannot “fix” education from above; nor does knowledge on “what works” automatically trickle down from universities and get shared across localities. Instead, educators, mentors, families, and students themselves need direct access to the best knowledge available about improving and increasing learning opportunities for young people. Educational researchers, other stakeholders, and young people need a place to pool and debate knowledge about everyday ways of enhancing opportunities to learn. The Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity will be that place.

We argue that a national network is needed not just to disseminate research knowledge to the public, but even more importantly to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in supporting the learning and development of young people. The Network would allow people to share knowledge on efforts that support young people not only to acquire fundamental academic skills and graduate college-ready, but also to become intellectually invigorated, creatively inspired, confident, socially competent, and healthy people who are prepared to be innovators and problem-solvers in 21st-century communities.

We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding).

Network users would be able to engage these examples and discuss and deliberate them with one another; the Network would not simply be a space to store examples. a Network needs to be an alive exchange between people about what is working and being explored, rather than a storage site (which is what schoolvictories feels like and in a way how the original Ford proposal read).

We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public to engage and consider a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Why a network?

2010-05-21T17:31:11Z

Mica:

We propose to start a Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity to help the public investigate ways of increasing young people’s opportunities to learn. The people who interact with young people on a daily basis need to share and debate ideas for improving young people’s educational pathways. Policy efforts alone cannot “fix” education from above; nor does knowledge on “what works” automatically trickle down from universities and get shared across localities. Instead, educators, mentors, families, and students themselves need direct access to the best knowledge available about improving and increasing learning opportunities for young people. Educational researchers, other stakeholders, and young people need a place to pool and debate knowledge about everyday ways of enhancing opportunities to learn. The Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity will be that place.

We argue that a national network is needed not just to disseminate research knowledge to the public, but even more importantly to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in supporting the learning and development of young people. The Network would allow people to share knowledge on efforts that support young people not only to acquire fundamental academic skills and graduate college-ready, but also to become intellectually invigorated, creatively inspired, confident, socially competent, and healthy people who are prepared to be innovators and problem-solvers in 21st-century communities.

We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

a Network needs to be an alive exchange between people about what is working and being explored, rather than a storage site (which is what schoolvictories feels like and in a way how the original Ford proposal read).

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Audience

2010-05-21T14:26:32Z

Mica:

Current efforts attempt to engage narrow groups of participants to collaborate towards shared topics. A complete network would engage all potential participants around the topic of education and allow them to organize and structure evidence along many divergent topics and goals.

Various stakeholders in education have said that they need a Network allowing them to share and gain ideas for improving the lives of young people. Community organizers need ideas from people who have successfully reduced suspensions in their communities; principals need to hear from other principals in similar demographic situations, or from teachers who have experienced approaches they are considering implementing. Parents need ideas about what is possible and happening in schools elsewhere, and examples of what children and youth are *able to do* in other educational environments, so that they can become fully engaged and informed advocates for their children's educational possibilities. Teachers need to see success stories from teachers elsewhere who have grappled with shared issues or initiated creative approaches to shared dilemmas.

While each of these folks currently can go to Google or other websites, such searches return masses of undigestible and unranked information about 'what works,' particularly from the perspective of researchers; it is hard to learn "what works" from the perspective of various stakeholders (parents, youth, or teachers) who have experienced the effort, or to start up dialogue with similarly situated people. Existing networks on Ning or elsewhere also track users into silos (e.g., only other teachers), making it harder for people to access stakeholders in other "roles" (e.g., teachers may have trouble finding parents, young people, or principals who have experienced particular programs or approaches). Finally, young people themselves are almost never invited to weigh in on educational approaches they themselves experience. All such "users" are our intended audience, because they all are stakeholders in children's educational fates.

We also imagine people in community A sharing ongoing successes and struggles with people in community B, so that a running dialogue evolves about place-based constraints and possibilities (not everything that works in 2010 San Diego might work in 2010 Austin, but a running dialogue can keep both communities informed of innovations and struggles in the other place.)

COMPARISON TO EXISTING NETWORK ATTEMPTS:

DO SUCH NETWORKS ALREADY EXIST? MARK AND SETH, THIS IS WHERE I NEED YOU. I HAVE THIS (edited slightly) FROM THE FORD LANGUAGE. THINK IT'S TRUE?

Existing web hubs, like the “What Works Clearinghouse” or “Edutopia,” house useful but undistilled knowledge, and they are hard for the public to search and easily use; most sites also allow for no public input into defining or naming “what works” in local places. While the Network will link the public to these existing knowledge “hubs,” it will focus on linking the public to examples that both researchers and the public find particularly useful for increasing young people’s opportunities to learn.

REVIEW OF OTHER NETWORK ATTEMPTS:

Schoolvictories.

Our review: This site may be useful but it isn't getting much use and doesn't have many catalytic functions designed in. Doesn't help groups join forces to pool resources around a common nationwide event day.

It's not very inspired or imaginative. The "feel" and personality are more institutional than lively warm community in nature. I don't think, as a media specialist, that this site is designed to spark interest and cross-cutting partnership. It's mostly listing driven. Plus it seems text-driven rather than graphically driven; more Internet-past than Internet-present or future. It would be interesting to compare a search here to a search in the standard google window or in the edutopia site.

Based on the sparseness of entries, I'm guessing the site is not actively scraping other sites and aggregating and tagging that info here. Nor are there tools of emergent awareness: a tag cloud, for example, of entries and activities and group missions.

Edutopia.

Why a network?

2010-05-21T14:24:32Z

Mica:

We propose to start a Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity to help the public investigate ways of increasing young people’s opportunities to learn. The people who interact with young people on a daily basis need to share and debate ideas for improving young people’s educational pathways. Policy efforts alone cannot “fix” education from above; nor does knowledge on “what works” automatically trickle down from universities and get shared across localities. Instead, educators, mentors, families, and students themselves need direct access to the best knowledge available about improving and increasing learning opportunities for young people. Educational researchers, other stakeholders, and young people need a place to pool and debate knowledge about everyday ways of enhancing opportunities to learn. The Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity will be that place.

We argue that a national network is needed not just to disseminate research knowledge to the public, but even more importantly to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in supporting the learning and development of young people. The Network would allow people to share knowledge on efforts that support young people not only to acquire fundamental academic skills and graduate college-ready, but also to become intellectually invigorated, creatively inspired, confident, socially competent, and healthy people who are prepared to be innovators and problem-solvers in 21st-century communities.

We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Audience

2010-05-21T14:23:42Z

Mica:

Current efforts attempt to engage narrow groups of participants to collaborate towards shared topics. A complete network would engage all potential participants around the topic of education and allow them to organize and structure evidence along many divergent topics and goals.

Various stakeholders in education have said that they need a Network allowing them to share and gain ideas for improving the lives of young people. Community organizers need ideas from people who have successfully reduced suspensions in their communities; principals need to hear from other principals in similar demographic situations, or from teachers who have experienced approaches they are considering implementing. Parents need ideas about what is possible and happening in schools elsewhere, and examples of what children and youth are *able to do* in other educational environments, so that they can become fully engaged and informed advocates for their children's educational possibilities. Teachers need to see success stories from teachers elsewhere who have grappled with shared issues or initiated creative approaches to shared dilemmas.

While each of these folks currently can go to Google or other websites, such searches return masses of undigestible and unranked information about 'what works,' particularly from the perspective of researchers; it is hard to learn "what works" from the perspective of various stakeholders (parents, youth, or teachers) who have experienced the effort, or to start up dialogue with similarly situated people. Existing networks on Ning or elsewhere also track users into silos (e.g., only other teachers), making it harder for people to access stakeholders in other "roles" (e.g., teachers may have trouble finding parents, young people, or principals who have experienced particular programs or approaches). Finally, young people themselves are almost never invited to weigh in on educational approaches they themselves experience. All such "users" are our intended audience, because they all are stakeholders in children's educational fates.

We also imagine people in community A sharing ongoing successes and struggles with people in community B, so that a running dialogue evolves about place-based constraints and possibilities (not everything that works in 2010 San Diego might work in 2010 Austin, but a running dialogue can keep both communities informed of innovations and struggles in the other place.)

COMPARISON TO EXISTING NETWORK ATTEMPTS:

Schoolvictories.

Our review: This site may be useful but it isn't getting much use and doesn't have many catalytic functions designed in. Doesn't help groups join forces to pool resources around a common nationwide event day.

It's not very inspired or imaginative. The "feel" and personality are more institutional than lively warm community in nature. I don't think, as a media specialist, that this site is designed to spark interest and cross-cutting partnership. It's mostly listing driven. Plus it seems text-driven rather than graphically driven; more Internet-past than Internet-present or future. It would be interesting to compare a search here to a search in the standard google window or in the edutopia site.

Based on the sparseness of entries, I'm guessing the site is not actively scraping other sites and aggregating and tagging that info here. Nor are there tools of emergent awareness: a tag cloud, for example, of entries and activities and group missions.

Edutopia.

Use cases

2010-05-20T01:33:35Z

Mica:

Imagine one parent asked to weigh in on improving her child's school. "Things seem fine," she says. "I can't think of what I would change." Then she goes to a Network that shows her examples of children speaking two languages throughout kindergarten; of youth doing media-centered internships allowing them to prepare for 21st century careers; of teachers and 3rd graders learning mathematics through the arts. Suddenly she has a sense of what is possible. She comes to the parent meeting with links to examples.

Imagine another parent struggling with a Special Education policy in her district that seems to put Latino students, like her own son, disproportionately in restricted classrooms. What is done elsewhere? she wonders. Through a friend, she hears about the Network and logs on in her public library. She connects for the first time to parents who have learned their civil rights; they connect her to a local branch of a national disability advocacy organization that assists her with advocating for an IEP affording her children in-class special needs services.

Imagine these two parents finding one another when searching for a school that successfully serves children with disabilities, through the arts. Imagine them sharing struggles and successes, and questions.

Imagine a community organizer in one city finding a school board member in another, to share his ideas for lowering suspensions districtwide; imagine a young person reporting out his own experience of the charter school association getting media attention in his large urban district; imagine a teacher, frustrated with the level of math teaching in his suburban building, finding and approaching a principal in another suburb who has successfully implemented a program that engaged an entire faculty in enhancing their math instruction. Imagine many young people, organizers, and educators finding each other to discuss shared experiences of improving education. Imagine researchers dialoguing with all of these stakeholders, and with one another, as they share out worked examples of struggles and successes in local places.

Since much “what works” knowledge from research and practice never makes it to the public at all, stakeholders who could inspire young people’s learning or motivation on a daily basis too rarely get access to tried ideas for doing so.

LIFTED/TWEAKED FROM FORD, LIKE THIS? The Network will engage professors, graduate students, and independent researchers along with practitioners, families, and youth in collaborative inquiry.

Such inquiry could be issue- or locale-specific. For example, specific sections of the Network would be organized for pointed discussion, designed to help clarify participants’ thinking about particularly complex interactions affecting young people’s everyday lives. The Network could also serve to connect researchers and practitioners who share localities. Finally, the Network could also support national collaborative analysis by researchers working together to clarify fundamental educational issues by simultaneously studying local educational systems across the country, and engaging targeted questions simultaneously in those multiple sites.

The Network would thus serve to link people to “what works” knowledge from across the nation, to researchers with particular expertise, and to people across the country who are inquiring into related issues in their localities.

USE THIS? WAS FROM FORD, TWEAKED SLIGHTLY Finally, we imagine that such a Network could spark users to convert particularly compelling ideas from research or practice into public tools, like online lesson plans for teachers or YouTube posts designed to spark inquiry between peers on neighborhood streets.

Use cases

2010-05-20T01:26:04Z

Mica:

Unit of analysis

2010-05-20T01:24:37Z

Mica:

One member of our group advocates towards having the educational experience of the child as the primary unit of analysis. Clearly understanding all of the multiple competing forces on a child's education would be an ideal.

Efforts of interest will include school-based efforts, but also learning interactions in extended learning programs, homes, and neighborhoods.

The Network would allow users to share successful everyday interactions (e.g., an example of a successful motivational conversation between a teacher and student), and examples as large as a "program" serving many youth in a school or city.

A more likely goal is to attempt to normalize the introduction of a specific worked example in many cases and across multiple demographics to truly compare a method's value in application.

[**DO WE STILL BELIEVE THIS? LANGUAGE IS FROM ORIGINAL FORD DOCUMENT] Rather than focusing only on supporting people to share "programs" that "work," the Network would focus on helping the public to understand, discuss, debate, and improve the full range of everyday interactions that contribute to young people’s educational outcomes -- interactions between parents and children, educators and children, social service providers and children, young people and peers, families and educators, parents and district administrators, community activists and legislators, and other combinations of stakeholders whose actions contribute to young people’s educational pathways.]]

LIFTED THIS TOO FROM FORD. Unlike MacArthur's platform, which is designed to share out very "worked" examples, the Network will also support users to distill core ideas and approaches from research or practice that people have found particularly useful for improving young people’s educational pathways. These syntheses might contain hyperlinks linking the viewer to full research works and programs, but the point of each synthesis will be to distill one core concept or approach for public use.

Unit of analysis

2010-05-20T01:22:04Z

Mica:

One member of our group advocates towards having the educational experience of the child as the primary unit of analysis. Clearly understanding all of the multiple competing forces on a child's education would be an ideal.

A more likely goal is to attempt to normalize the introduction of a specific worked example in many cases and across multiple demographics to truly compare a method's value in application.

[**DO WE STILL BELIEVE THIS? LANGUAGE IS FROM ORIGINAL FORD DOCUMENT] Rather than focusing only on supporting people to share "programs" that "work," the Network would focus on helping the public to understand, discuss, debate, and improve the full range of everyday interactions that contribute to young people’s educational outcomes -- interactions between parents and children, educators and children, social service providers and children, young people and peers, families and educators, parents and district administrators, community activists and legislators, and other combinations of stakeholders whose actions contribute to young people’s educational pathways.]]

LIFTED THIS TOO FROM FORD. Unlike MacArthur's platform, which is designed to share out very "worked" examples, the Network will also support users to distill core ideas and approaches from research or practice that people have found particularly useful for improving young people’s educational pathways. These syntheses might contain hyperlinks linking the viewer to full research works and programs, but the point of each synthesis will be to distill one core concept or approach for public use.

Taxonomy vs Folksonomy

2010-05-20T01:19:50Z

Mica:

Folksonomies allow for emergent behavior.

The Network would also help to categorize knowledge. Researchers pump out countless ideas about improving single aspects of children’s educational pathways, while successful practitioners keep thinking up successful programs and interventions. These ideas are rarely organized into systemic frameworks that help stakeholders support children’s learning across homes, schools, and neighborhood streets.

DO WE WANT TO KEEP THIS AS AN EXAMPLE OF ORGANIZING KNOWLEDGE? I'VE EDITED IT A BIT FROM ORIGINAL FORD PROPOSAL. To facilitate public understanding of the everyday interactions that affect young people’s educational pathways, the Network will offer organize some of the knowledge we collect into The Interaction Map, a graphic diagram that will visually display the people whose acts affect students’ learning experiences inside and outside of schools (e.g., parent-child, caregiver-child, child-child, youth-youth, teacher-child, administrator-child, neighbor-child, parent-teacher, parent-principal, parent-superintendent, mentor-child, social worker-youth, community organizer-legislator, etc.). Clicking on any link will allow viewers to investigate more fine-grained aspects of each WORKED EXAMPLE (e.g., to access ideas for improving student-teacher interactions across lines of race or class, or ideas for improving interactions between administrators and immigrant parents).

LIFTED THIS FROM FORD PROPOSAL TOO Viewers will also be allowed to sort for information about particular demographic populations or ideas from particular locations. Posts will be categorizable along multiple dimensions, allowing Network users to search easily for ideas for serving young people in particular situations (for example, ways of lowering school suspensions for boys of color in cities).

Taxonomy vs Folksonomy

2010-05-20T01:18:27Z

Mica:

Folksonomies allow for emergent behavior.

The Network would also help to categorize knowledge. Researchers pump out countless ideas about improving single aspects of children’s educational pathways, while successful practitioners keep thinking up successful programs and interventions. These ideas are rarely organized into systemic frameworks that help stakeholders support children’s learning across homes, schools, and neighborhood streets.

DO WE WANT TO KEEP THIS AS AN EXAMPLE OF ORGANIZING KNOWLEDGE? I'VE EDITED IT A BIT FROM ORIGINAL FORD PROPOSAL. To facilitate public understanding of the everyday interactions that affect young people’s educational pathways, the Network will offer organize some of the knowledge we collect into The Interaction Map, a graphic diagram that will visually display the people whose acts affect students’ learning experiences inside and outside of schools (e.g., parent-child, caregiver-child, child-child, youth-youth, teacher-child, administrator-child, neighbor-child, parent-teacher, parent-principal, parent-superintendent, mentor-child, social worker-youth, community organizer-legislator, etc.). Clicking on any link will allow viewers to investigate more fine-grained aspects of each WORKED EXAMPLE (e.g., to access ideas for improving student-teacher interactions across lines of race or class, or ideas for improving interactions between administrators and immigrant parents).

Viewers will also be allowed to sort for information about particular demographic populations or ideas from particular locations.

Taxonomy vs Folksonomy

2010-05-20T01:18:10Z

Mica:

Folksonomies allow for emergent behavior.

The Network would also help to categorize knowledge. Researchers pump out countless ideas about improving single aspects of children’s educational pathways, while successful practitioners keep thinking up successful programs and interventions. These ideas are rarely organized into systemic frameworks that help stakeholders support children’s learning across homes, schools, and neighborhood streets.

DO WE WANT TO KEEP THIS AS AN EXAMPLE OF ORGANIZING KNOWLEDGE? I'VE EDITED IT A BIT FROM ORIGINAL FORD PROPOSAL. To facilitate public understanding of the everyday interactions that affect young people’s educational pathways, the Network will offer organize some of the knowledge we collect into The Interaction Map, a graphic diagram that will visually display the people whose acts affect students’ learning experiences inside and outside of schools (e.g., parent-child, caregiver-child, child-child, youth-youth, teacher-child, administrator-child, neighbor-child, parent-teacher, parent-principal, parent-superintendent, mentor-child, social worker-youth, community organizer-legislator, etc.). Clicking on any link will allow viewers to investigate more fine-grained aspects of each WORKED EXAMPLE (e.g., to access ideas for improving student-teacher interactions across lines of race or class, or ideas for improving interactions between administrators and immigrant parents).

Viewers will also be allowed to sort for information about particular demographic populations or ideas from particular zip codes.

Why a network?

2010-05-20T01:14:21Z

Mica:

We propose to start a Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity to help the public investigate ways of increasing young people’s opportunities to learn. The people who interact with young people on a daily basis need to share and debate ideas for improving young people’s educational pathways. Policy efforts alone cannot “fix” education from above; nor does knowledge on “what works” automatically trickle down from universities and get shared across localities. Instead, educators, mentors, families, and students themselves need direct access to the best knowledge available about improving and increasing learning opportunities for young people. Educational researchers, other stakeholders, and young people need a place to pool and debate knowledge about everyday ways of enhancing opportunities to learn. The Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity will be that place.

We argue that a national network is needed not just to disseminate research knowledge to the public, but even more importantly to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in supporting the learning and development of young people. The Network would allow people to share knowledge on efforts that support young people not only to acquire fundamental academic skills and graduate college-ready, but also to become intellectually invigorated, creatively inspired, confident, socially competent, and healthy people who are prepared to be innovators and problem-solvers in 21st-century communities.

We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

DO SUCH NETWORKS ALREADY EXIST? MARK AND SETH, THIS IS WHERE I NEED YOU. I HAVE THIS (edited slightly) FROM THE FORD LANGUAGE. THINK IT'S TRUE? Existing web hubs, like the “What Works Clearinghouse” or “Edutopia,” house useful but undistilled knowledge, and they are hard for the public to search and easily use; most sites also allow for no public input into defining or naming “what works” in local places. While the Network will link the public to these existing knowledge “hubs,” it will focus on linking the public to examples that both researchers and the public find particularly useful for increasing young people’s opportunities to learn.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Why a network?

2010-05-20T01:12:36Z

Mica:

We propose to start a Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity to help the public investigate ways of increasing young people’s opportunities to learn. The people who interact with young people on a daily basis need to share and debate ideas for improving young people’s educational pathways. Policy efforts alone cannot “fix” education from above; nor does knowledge on “what works” automatically trickle down from universities and get shared across localities. Instead, educators, mentors, families, and students themselves need direct access to the best knowledge available about improving and increasing learning opportunities for young people. Educational researchers, other stakeholders, and young people need a place to pool and debate knowledge about everyday ways of enhancing opportunities to learn. The Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity will be that place.

We argue that a national network is needed not just to disseminate research knowledge to the public, but even more importantly to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in supporting the learning and development of young people. The Network would allow people to share knowledge on efforts that support young people not only to acquire fundamental academic skills and graduate college-ready, but also to become intellectually invigorated, creatively inspired, confident, socially competent, and healthy people who are prepared to be innovators and problem-solvers in 21st-century communities.

We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Taxonomy vs Folksonomy

2010-05-20T01:11:03Z

Mica:

Use cases

2010-05-20T01:09:48Z

Mica:

Unit of analysis

2010-05-20T01:08:23Z

Mica:

One member of our group advocates towards having the educational experience of the child as the primary unit of analysis. Clearly understanding all of the multiple competing forces on a child's education would be an ideal.

A more likely goal is to attempt to normalize the introduction of a specific worked example in many cases and across multiple demographics to truly compare a method's value in application.

[**DO WE STILL BELIEVE THIS? LANGUAGE IS FROM ORIGINAL FORD DOCUMENT] Rather than focusing only on supporting people to share "programs" that "work," the Network would focus on helping the public to understand, discuss, debate, and improve the full range of everyday interactions that contribute to young people’s educational outcomes -- interactions between parents and children, educators and children, social service providers and children, young people and peers, families and educators, parents and district administrators, community activists and legislators, and other combinations of stakeholders whose actions contribute to young people’s educational pathways.]]

Why a network?

2010-05-20T01:06:02Z

Mica:

We propose to start a Network for Public Knowledge on Educational Opportunity to help the public investigate ways of increasing young people’s opportunities to learn. The people who interact with young people on a daily basis need to share and debate ideas for improving young people’s educational pathways. Policy efforts alone cannot “fix” education from above; nor does knowledge on “what works” automatically trickle down from universities and get shared across localities. Instead, educators, mentors, families, and students themselves need direct access to the best knowledge available about improving and increasing learning opportunities for young people.

We argue that a national network is needed not just to disseminate research knowledge to the public, but even more importantly to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in supporting the learning and development of young people. The Network would allow people to share knowledge on efforts that support young people not only to acquire fundamental academic skills and graduate college-ready, but also to become intellectually invigorated, creatively inspired, confident, socially competent, and healthy people who are prepared to be innovators and problem-solvers in 21st-century communities.

We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Use cases

2010-05-10T19:28:56Z

Mica:

Use cases

2010-05-10T19:25:45Z

Mica: Created page with 'Imagine one parent asked to weigh in on improving her child's school. "Things seem fine," she says. "I can't think of what I would change." Then she goes to a Network that shows …'

Audience

2010-05-10T19:15:11Z

Mica:

Audience

2010-05-10T19:10:25Z

Mica:

Why a network?

2010-05-10T19:04:48Z

Mica:

We argue that a national network is needed to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in education. We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. The Network also needs to link people to researchers and program designers, but it also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. So should young people who are the target (or producers) of specific efforts to assist young people. Thus, the Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good. With more voices weighing in on "what works" in education, this Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone.

Thus, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids. It takes a local network to raise a child; it takes a national network to brainstorm the ideas for doing it.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.

Why a network?

2010-05-10T18:58:50Z

Mica:

We argue that a national network is needed to link "ordinary people" in sharing exciting successes in education, and struggles to make things better in education. We contend that in order to inquire into improving education inside their communities, people need to see examples from other places, of what is possible in education. We believe that the ultimate public network would show the public 1) examples of exciting learning going on in classrooms, museums, and libraries around the country (like MacArthur’s projects), and 2) examples of successes from community organizing, school reform, parent engagement, and service coordination efforts around the country (from projects of the kind that Ford is funding). We have suggested that a combined, collectively designed, public-facing Network launched by Ford and MacArthur might equip the public with a full range of ideas and examples for improving the lives of young people in the United States. We also argue for a public network that would engage not just academics, but people of all ages and roles in “reporting out” examples of exciting education-related initiatives in their locales.

In particular, people need a *searchable* network, enabling them to find people struggling or succeeding on similar issues in similar situations (e.g., people who have figured out ways to translate documents quickly in multilingual schools). People also need a basic space to communicate, find each other, create subcommunities, and share information about exciting efforts in education. This Network should also broaden, once again, the definition of educational improvement beyond test score improvement alone. It also needs to engage more people than just academics: people building and trying and experiencing things in their local school should have a voice in the conversation. The Network will also allow more people weighing in on what they think is good.

Finally, the Network will link local actors around kids (peers, parents, teachers, and community members who share local ecosystems with kids) into a national ecosystem of people sharing ideas about making life better for kids.

Using evidence from previous knowledge aggregation projects and making reference to the flow of history, we will argue that a shared example network around education is inevitable.

Current efforts are on the right track, but aren't sufficient to satisfy the ultimate need that a network could complete. We intend to create a set of reference documents to encourage an eventual network that we describe. In the meantime we hope to recommend to current efforts methodologies that will allow their effort to further the ultimate goals of a network.