Thursday, September 27, 2007

On the drupa2008 blog I have suggested that the London College of Communications do their Futures conference in reverse order, putting print in a web context. The publishing bit in the middle could link to discussion at Online Information. I don't understand how the courses are organised at LCC but for some reason the issues for the panel at Online Information seem slightly distinct from the Digital Print World conference.

So in a mild attempt at time travel, here is my question for the panel. In real life this will be asked around lunchtime on December 6th towards the back of the hall in Olympia.

What to make of the London printed reviews of "Everything is Miscellaneous" by David Weinberger. So far as I know there have not been any. There is no UK publisher but the book is available from Amazon UK. Is there something about books such as Andrew Keen's "The Cult of the Amateur" that appeals more to the sort of people who edit review pages? Since David Weinberger gave a keynote two years ago for the Online Information conference with similar content, is the lack of book reviews evidence that the conference is of very little interest for the world of London literature?

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

My impression is that the Swicki is working ok. So the idea that there is a link between learning and quality could be valid. I will try out putting that more definitely. Quality systems work as people learn from them or in them, maybe it is more about learning design or the learning is accidental. So I will arrange other blogs and claims as if this is a reasonable assumption for a while.

I have just done a search on "learning quality" in the Learn9 Swicki. The results are ok. I am not surprised that a European project turns up. The continental universities are serious about online learning and using quality ideas as part of this. The concern is quality in support of learning but this is probably as good a context as any to find out about learning within quality, the concern I started out with. Of course "non-learning" and system failure are just as easy to study. There may be more data.