If students cannot have access to their work after leaving an institution, then the material must be in a form that students can download onto their computer. If the issue is about giving access to outsiders so that they may participate, then I don’t see the difficulty in setting up a discussion outside of the LMS.

For many institutions, providing storage to hold students’ assignments and e-portfolios long after students have left is ideal, but cost prohibited over the long run. (Yes, the cost of disc place is declining, but maintenance and broadband access is still required.) Perhaps the files should be held for a reasonable amount of time, say two years in which students could download their materials, but then the institution would need to give access to those who are no longer students. If institutions thought that they may be able to encourage more alumni to donate funds by keeping student files, I am sure that they would consider it. If there was a suitable business case for keeping student files for lengthy periods of time and keeping LMSs outside of the garden, I am sure institutions would consider it. The belief in lifelong learning may not be enough.

Clayton Wright

At the University of Aveiro we’re currently developing a project called SAPO Campus (http://labs.sapo.pt/ua/sapocampus). Our approach is to provide an institutional solution that relies on a mixture of “Hosting in the Front Yard” and “Hosting in Someone Else’s Yard”. We’re trying to avoid the disadvantages that you mentioned on the two scenarios and, of course, take the best from the advantages.

Best Regards!
Carlos

I think the issues you raise go beyond formal institutional practice and culture and reach down to the understandings and values of faculty as well. I liked your last sentence as I think it can offer a more reasoned approach to the balance of the multiple interests that are invoked in your blog.

I work with many faculty who fundamentally believe that we need to tie down everything and these same faculty appear to get quite twitchy when the institution talks about opening things up a little more. There are huge control issues and I better understand some of the institutional concerns than I do the concerns of my faculty peers.

Web 2.0 and the flood of social software that is being used by students needs to be understood and valued and managed to the advantage of all instead of being seen as something inappropriate. We expect students to become capable and independent learners and so don’t we (faculty and related institutions) need to offer opportunities within these ever evolving worlds to offer a more egalitarian learning environment.

This may not be exactly what you were thinking of in your post but when I think of institutional issues I think of faculty values and how they ultimately influence a more common garden approach.

In my view, as a virtual attendee of the Moot, it looked as a complete failure of online event and distance education — just from my very limited scope and impression I had by our being separated online from F2F.

Terry