0:00

Jöran, I would like to give you the floor.

0:12

Thank you for the introduction, thank you for the invitation.

0:16

That so many people actually come on Saturday morning,

0:19

for me it's still a bit of a big irritation or a little miracle

0:23

that you invite someone from Hamburg to Switzerland for a lecture.

0:28

But maybe this look from the side is also what you promise yourself.

0:34

I definitely tried to incorporate a lot of irritations into this lecture.

0:39

It's called The Secret Teaching Plan of the Open Communities.

0:42

I will explain the terms a little later.

0:44

The question is, what will come out of it in the end?

0:47

My hope is that in the end, a part of you will say,

0:51

what he said, at least I discovered parts of it in me,

0:55

it has something to do with me.

0:57

Maybe a part of you will say, no, he said things about us,

1:00

but in this room he is probably the, how many people are in the room, 100?

1:03

Is he the 100 most competent in this room for the work here in Switzerland?

1:07

What does he already know?

1:09

Maybe that's even adequate, what I'm saying about you here.

1:12

And a third part will say, that was totally banal,

1:15

because I want to explain a lot of things on the basic level.

1:18

And then it just sounds banal at some point,

1:20

when it becomes too basic.

1:22

My hope and my goal for the next 45 minutes is

1:26

that you will discover all three parts in yourself at some point.

1:29

So say, yes, that had something to do with me.

1:31

Maybe at some point also feel a resistance and say, no,

1:34

that was almost beyond what he told about me and my work.

1:37

And in between also say, no, that's banal,

1:39

I wouldn't have to get up that early.

1:41

My invitation to you is,

1:43

keep it at least for 45 minutes possible,

1:46

that all three can occur.

1:48

After 45 minutes you can then say,

1:50

no, I can cancel, it was all banal.

1:52

But look in between for these different parts,

1:55

because my hope would be,

1:57

that we can learn something together later in the discussion,

2:00

that maybe with you these three parts are distributed differently.

2:03

And we can then come to an exchange about it.

2:05

This is a search image,

2:09

a term is being searched.

2:15

The term is nerds.

2:19

And I have now taken literary templates here,

2:22

because it is easier to find GIFs than from other target groups.

2:26

My initial thesis is,

2:28

that many of your colleagues would describe you as nerds.

2:32

Or to be more specific,

2:34

they would describe you as nerds,

2:36

if you were consistent with the term.

2:38

However, it is not significant what you would say yourself,

2:44

and not particularly relevant what you would say,

2:47

well, I would see the definition of nerds differently,

2:50

but it is about how your colleagues see you.

2:54

You are nerds in a certain area,

2:57

namely for Open Education or Open Educational Resources,

3:00

if you are at this conference.

3:02

That means, you are not just nerds,

3:04

but nerds for OER or nerds.

3:11

If you look at it now,

3:13

it has to do superficially with your personality.

3:16

But you can abstract it a bit and say,

3:18

it is not about you as a person,

3:20

but about how you work.

3:22

My initial thesis would be,

3:24

many of your colleagues think your way of working is somehow different.

3:28

If your colleagues, I don't know,

3:30

let's take ten more colleagues,

3:32

who are not here today,

3:34

and the colleagues you might have in front of you,

3:36

compare you and the others,

3:38

then you think, what makes this person you are different?

3:41

We have found an expression for this in the expert debate.

3:44

We call it, you practice Open Educational Practices,

3:48

OEP, OEP.

3:50

That means, if you make one more play on words,

3:52

then I will stop,

3:54

you could say, from the perspective of your colleagues,

3:56

you practice Nerdy Educational Practices, NEP.

4:00

Not yet a technical term.

4:02

Until today.

4:04

I will take this as a basic assumption.

4:06

And I have set up a lecture on this.

4:08

In the first part, I will explain some theoretical basics,

4:11

some terms I brought with me,

4:13

from which I would say,

4:15

this is how I understand them,

4:17

or how I would like to interpret them today.

4:19

In part two, my main thesis will be,

4:21

the way you work has a meaning.

4:24

And if there is still time,

4:26

luckily we have some time,

4:28

I will bring the parts three to six,

4:30

different perspectives on this figure of the nerd.

4:36

Part one, theory.

4:38

I have five terms,

4:40

Open Educational Practices,

4:42

the Hidden Curriculum,

4:44

the learning on the model,

4:46

and the Community Circles.

4:48

They will play a role in the presentation of my thesis.

4:50

That's why I would like to explain them first.

4:52

However, in the first part,

4:54

I will deny the definition,

4:56

because it doesn't matter what I think of nerds,

4:58

and it doesn't even matter what you think of nerds.

5:00

In my presentation,

5:02

it is about the perspective of your colleagues on you.

5:04

And the colleagues don't really care,

5:06

or they don't even know that we are having this discussion.

5:08

Some of your colleagues don't even know that you are here.

5:10

I don't know.

5:12

And maybe you only knew what to start with,

5:14

what you are doing here.

5:16

It will be different for you.

5:18

But you can see from your facial expressions

5:20

that some of you connect this with different feelings.

5:22

The perspective of your colleagues on your work.

5:26

Maybe the particularly nerdy,

5:28

from my perspective,

5:30

among you just said,

5:32

well, actually I am a geek and not a nerd.

5:34

Would you like to point it out?

5:36

Yes, okay, thank you.

5:38

Very nerdy.

5:42

A discussion that we would have,

5:44

but your colleagues don't really care.

5:46

Therefore, the definition is sufficient.

5:48

Your colleagues think you work differently.

5:52

Open Educational Practices is a term

5:54

that is being strongly pushed

5:56

in Germany in the debate

5:58

by a strategy of the German government.

6:00

And it is not really clear

6:02

what this is exactly.

6:04

In the definition of Open Educational Practices

6:06

there is a vague, diffuse definition,

6:08

or rather a lot of definitions.

6:10

It has many advantages.

6:12

Everyone can start with it.

6:14

It has many disadvantages.

6:16

For example, three people may speak

6:18

of this term, but mine have four different things.

6:20

I have now brought the Cape Town

6:22

Open Education Declaration from 2008

6:24

for my definition,

6:26

in which this term does not exist at all,

6:28

interestingly.

6:30

But in which the basic idea is described for me.

6:32

In the Open Education Declaration

6:34

from 2008 it says

6:36

Open Education is not limited

6:38

to just open educational resources.

6:40

It also draws upon open technologies

6:42

that facilitate collaborative,

6:44

flexible learning

6:46

and open sharing of teaching practices

6:48

that empower educators

6:50

to benefit from the best ideas

6:52

of their colleagues.

6:54

It may also go to include new approaches

6:56

to assessment, accreditation

6:58

and collaborative learning.

7:00

In the middle of this definition

7:02

it says

7:04

the best ideas of their colleagues.

7:06

I only noticed that

7:08

when I prepared this lecture

7:10

for today.

7:12

I have never paid much attention

7:14

to this part of the discussion.

7:16

It says

7:18

Open Educational Practices

7:20

are about certain practices, certain topics

7:22

and the relationship between colleagues.

7:24

For example, your colleagues and you.

7:26

In this declaration it says

7:28

We encourage educators and learners

7:30

to actively participate

7:32

in the emerging open education movement.

7:34

Participating includes

7:36

creating, using, adapting

7:38

and improving open educational resources.

7:40

So far, so clear.

7:42

Embracing educational practices

7:44

build around collaboration,

7:46

discovery and the creation of knowledge

7:48

and inviting peers and colleagues

7:50

to get involved.

7:52

Again, it says colleagues.

7:54

I never noticed that

7:56

until I prepared this lecture.

7:58

Thirdly, the Hidden Curriculum

8:04

is a term I stole

8:06

from Philip W. Jackson.

8:08

He wrote a short book in 1968.

8:10

By the way,

8:12

he was not a teacher,

8:14

but a cultural anthropologist

8:16

and observed

8:18

life in the classroom.

8:24

He used the term

8:26

Hidden Curriculum

8:28

in English

8:30

because a secret curriculum

8:32

suggests that

8:34

someone might have hidden it.

8:36

The idea behind it is

8:38

that all participants

8:40

don't really know

8:42

what curriculum there is.

8:44

In Wikipedia's definition

8:46

as unofficial

8:48

school or university

8:50

implicit dissemination

8:52

of learning content and learning forms

8:54

as well as effect on socialization

8:56

and socialization

8:58

of learning.

9:00

It says below

9:02

that Philip W. Jackson

9:04

referred to this term

9:06

as a second curriculum.

9:08

It may sound a bit more

9:10

exciting than

9:12

someone might have hidden something.

9:14

The idea behind it is

9:16

that more is learned

9:18

in school or university

9:20

than is written in the curriculum.

9:22

I would like to expand

9:24

on the first point.

9:26

In theory,

9:28

it was about students

9:30

or students, young people

9:32

in this system

9:34

who learn from the society

9:36

of the previous generation.

9:38

For example, from day one

9:40

they sit in a certain order,

9:42

they listen,

9:44

they only talk when asked,

9:46

they only talk to the person

9:48

they are asked to,

9:50

they should not necessarily

9:52

talk to the person

9:54

they are asked to talk to.

9:56

It quickly became a critical theory

9:58

from a sociological perspective.

10:00

I would like to simplify it

10:02

and transfer it to another area,

10:04

to adults.

10:06

What do adults learn

10:08

from other adults?

10:10

What do your colleagues learn

10:12

from you or from your colleagues?

10:14

This is not part of the concept

10:16

of the hidden curriculum.

10:18

I am interpreting this

10:20

as a model.

10:22

Albert Bandura

10:24

developed the idea of learning

10:26

as a model.

10:28

If you want to be a little more

10:30

scientific, you say

10:32

social cognitive learning theory,

10:34

also called model learning

10:36

or learner model,

10:38

a cognitivist learning theory.

10:40

The definition is in blue.

10:42

Learning processes are understood

10:44

based on the observation

10:46

of the behavior of human role models.

10:48

Imitation learning, social learning,

10:50

identification learning, role learning,

10:52

representative learning.

10:54

Not everything is wrong,

10:56

everything is misunderstood

10:58

in the sense that we learn

11:00

as a model in German

11:02

as something normative.

11:04

That is what you should learn,

11:06

what the role model does.

11:08

This is not part of the learning theory.

11:10

Bandura also has a variant

11:12

that is inhibiting learning.

11:14

I observe a role model

11:16

and do not imitate it.

11:18

For example,

11:20

there are discussions once a week

11:22

and a colleague always arrives too late

11:24

and has social problems

11:26

in the group.

11:28

A critical look from the boss

11:30

or the bossess.

11:32

Then the others in the group

11:34

learn that they should not

11:36

always arrive too late.

11:38

The role model does not

11:40

emulate this,

11:42

but learns something

11:45

Bandura

11:47

I am now turning in two directions

11:49

that are not his.

11:51

Namely again focused on the adults

11:53

and also on the stronger

11:55

boundaries that you learn

11:57

about the conflict,

11:59

even if you do not intend it at all.

12:01

Bandura was mainly focused on

12:03

how to use this

12:05

for learning and teaching.

12:07

For this it was necessary

12:09

to make it explicit.

12:11

I would simplify it here

12:13

on an implicit level.

12:15

That means I can also learn

12:17

from others without

12:19

being aware of it.

12:21

This is implicit observation

12:23

and embracing or limiting it.

12:25

Again on the level of adults.

12:27

What do your colleagues learn

12:30

when they observe you?

12:32

The last theory term,

12:34

Community Circles,

12:36

is my name behind it.

12:38

However, if you enter it

12:40

in Wikipedia,

12:42

you will see that it is

12:44

a well-developed,

12:46

non-academic theory.

12:48

There is a blog article about it,

12:50

but apart from that,

12:52

it is mainly a model

12:54

that we use for our work.

12:56

The OER camps were just presented,

12:58

which we have been doing for 12 years,

13:00

as a description of the target group

13:02

and for the conceptualization

13:04

of our considerations,

13:06

what we did with them

13:08

and for them.

13:10

The question for the Community Circles

13:12

is, who learns from whom?

13:14

I will talk about that later

13:16

in the lecture.

13:21

Part 2, how does it work?

13:23

For those of you who

13:25

might sound a bit selective,

13:27

if you talk for 45 minutes at a time,

13:29

there is already the wood hammer animation.

13:33

That is the main thesis.

13:35

After that, there is only the bonus program.

13:41

I hope that's without carbon dioxide.

13:43

So, how does it work?

13:45

The main thesis is formulated.

13:47

Now I start to combine it

13:49

with a how-we.

13:51

First I said, you are the nerds.

13:53

Now I say, I would count myself in.

13:55

That makes it a bit easier for my method.

13:57

We, the nerds,

13:59

work more through the how of our actions

14:01

than through the what of our actions.

14:03

That is the main thesis.

14:05

I would like to describe that

14:07

using examples for the what of our actions

14:09

and for the how of our actions.

14:11

What is it that we do?

14:13

And what is the how we do it?

14:15

You can spend more time on each example.

14:17

I will do that later.

14:19

Now, on this slide,

14:21

it is important that you have an idea

14:23

of what is in my head when I say

14:25

that we can and must look at

14:27

the what and the how of our actions

14:29

separately from each other.

14:31

Let me explain that with examples.

14:33

I wrote down a few examples for the what.

14:35

Making with cardboard,

14:37

information competence,

14:39

Docs as code with AsciiDoc,

14:41

interactive exercises with Moodle,

14:43

augmented reality,

14:45

prompt engineering,

14:47

data competence,

14:49

CC licenses, and so on.

14:51

If that seems familiar to you,

14:53

it is because I wrote down your program

14:55

for today's conference.

14:57

I have to make the first short remark.

14:59

When I say that we underestimate

15:01

the how of our actions,

15:03

that should not in any way

15:05

break the what.

15:07

My lecture has nothing to do with that.

15:09

It is just as important for me

15:11

as when I wrote the lecture

15:13

the what of these contents.

15:15

My view is on the how,

15:17

in the sense that we are not looking

15:19

at that enough yet.

15:21

And the how of doing something

15:23

are, for example,

15:25

such slogans as the culture of sharing,

15:27

that you somehow provide these things,

15:29

sometimes even provide them

15:31

when they are not yet finished,

15:33

sometimes even provide that others

15:35

can simply use it,

15:37

that peer-to-peer learning,

15:39

for example,

15:41

in such forms as barcams,

15:43

this whole idea

15:45

that you always want to do things yourself,

15:47

the DIY approach,

15:49

that you reinvent things,

15:51

but also often build on others,

15:53

with the reuse approach,

15:55

that you really want to understand things,

15:57

not just want to know where to click

15:59

so that something falls out of the machine,

16:01

but want to understand how this machine works,

16:03

that you have an approach

16:05

that you like to solve problems

16:07

This is one of the approaches

16:09

where I would say

16:11

that you work a bit differently

16:13

than some of your colleagues,

16:15

or vice versa,

16:17

if your colleague looks at your way of working

16:19

and then puts another colleague next to her

16:21

who she does not say is a nerd,

16:23

then you differ in the way

16:25

you work.

16:29

Now I take the theory.

16:31

This on the left side is the visible curriculum

16:33

and on the right side

16:35

is the hidden curriculum.

16:37

Your colleagues

16:39

who learn something from you

16:41

don't just learn something from the left side,

16:43

they don't just learn making with cardboard

16:45

and information skills,

16:47

they also learn something about

16:49

how you work there.

16:51

For example, that you didn't make the instructions

16:53

for something with cardboard yourself,

16:55

but copied them from somewhere else.

16:57

Is the person there who offers the workshop?

16:59

I'm just preparing the workshop.

17:05

That means there is a hidden curriculum

17:07

a collection of

17:09

content,

17:11

of learning goals,

17:13

which may be more or less

17:15

explicitly implicit,

17:17

but I would say

17:19

it's worth looking at

17:21

more than we do so far.

17:23

And the way

17:25

how it is learned

17:27

is on the left side,

17:29

they have thought about it didactically,

17:31

how they prepare it,

17:33

we call it didactics

17:35

or methodics.

17:37

But there is also the learning on the model,

17:39

that your colleagues

17:41

observe you,

17:43

see how you do something

17:45

and actually learn something from it.

17:47

Not necessarily explicitly,

17:49

it may be that they do it implicitly,

17:51

the person does it this way and that way.

17:53

And to remind you of the theory part,

17:55

it doesn't have to be positively framed.

17:57

It may also be that

17:59

they learn something and say,

18:01

no, I don't want to do it that way.

18:03

Or they say,

18:05

it seems too complicated to me,

18:07

I won't even touch it.

18:09

But it can also be positive.

18:11

That's the main slide I have.

18:13

It doesn't get more important.

18:17

Now there are additions.

18:23

In summary, this slide

18:25

of my main thesis,

18:27

you or we, the nerds,

18:29

work more through the how of our actions

18:31

than through the what of our actions.

18:33

We work through a hidden curriculum

18:35

and through model learning.

18:37

We look at it from the point of view

18:39

that the peak doesn't have to be up there.

18:41

It doesn't have to be more than

18:43

the how than the what.

18:45

It's enough if we say

18:47

it's more worthwhile to look at the how.

18:49

And it's different in different scenarios

18:51

how it's weighted.

18:53

But I would say

18:55

we definitely look much more

18:57

at the what of our actions

18:59

than at the how.

19:05

A few additional highlights

19:07

from different directions.

19:09

The dark side of the nerds,

19:11

the bright side of the nerds,

19:13

the position of the nerds in the overall picture

19:15

and maybe the mission of the nerds.

19:17

What do they need?

19:19

What is their special role

19:21

when it comes to improving education?

19:24

An important note.

19:26

This is not rocket science.

19:28

It's not even science.

19:30

How did I come up with this

19:32

that I'm telling you about

19:34

which I think your colleagues

19:36

and I don't know any of your colleagues

19:38

are quite naïve about.

19:40

A triangulation of introspection.

19:42

I looked at how it is with me.

19:44

Secondly,

19:46

I invited them to a session

19:48

at a bar camp.

19:50

I said all the people

19:52

who are seen by their colleagues as nerds

19:54

can come to a self-help group.

19:56

At least that's how it ended up.

19:58

Come to an experience exchange.

20:00

And I asked them this question.

20:02

What do your colleagues observe

20:04

as the bright side or the dark side?

20:06

What do they point out to you?

20:08

An exploratory process, I would say.

20:10

Where they gathered.

20:14

Thirdly,

20:16

I sent people voice messages

20:18

for a few special questions.

20:20

And they sent me back voice messages.

20:25

This is supposed to represent the dark side.

20:29

Now it's getting a bit tricky with the method.

20:31

If they say

20:33

it's not supposed to be about them,

20:35

then imagine it's about me.

20:37

That's why

20:39

I didn't wear my jacket.

20:41

I wore my nerd jacket.

20:43

I brought a few quotes.

20:47

Of course it's exaggerated.

20:49

And it's okay if they say

20:51

it's not supposed to be about them.

20:53

It's only about me.

20:55

Down in the corner

20:57

is the little smiling figure.

20:59

So you don't have to take everything so seriously.

21:01

Especially for the dark side

21:03

it's not that easy.

21:05

One characteristic of nerds

21:07

is that they tend to be more

21:09

knowledgeable and paternalistic.

21:11

A typical quote for me

21:13

would be

21:15

if people would just do it

21:17

as I say it,

21:19

then they would see it's good.

21:21

That's a starting point.

21:23

I've seen it all.

21:25

My colleagues haven't.

21:27

But you can trust me.

21:29

Another possible quote would be

21:33

I hate to say I told you so.

21:35

If something didn't work,

21:37

then I would say

21:39

well, I said it before.

21:41

And I think it's not just me.

21:43

Maybe some nerds

21:45

love to hate to say I told you so.

21:47

It's a bit of a joy

21:49

that you knew it before.

21:51

Another example

21:55

would be

21:57

why should we do it differently

21:59

if other people

22:01

also have their own thoughts?

22:05

There's a characteristic

22:07

I didn't find a good one

22:09

I called it uncompromising.

22:11

It's more like

22:13

compromising

22:15

and holding back.

22:17

A typical quote would be

22:19

if we don't do it right

22:21

we don't have to start.

22:23

At the beginning of a process.

22:25

Or

22:27

why don't we do it

22:29

differently now?

22:31

It won't be easier if we

22:33

do it slower or later.

22:35

That's a typical attitude

22:37

of uncompromising.

22:39

There are other things

22:41

beyond my shyness.

22:43

Nerdy shyness.

22:45

We can do it differently

22:47

but in the end it's the same

22:49

and we'll get there faster.

22:52

There's a characteristic

22:54

I'd call missionary.

22:56

You can judge it differently

22:58

if it's good or bad.

23:00

Of course I could

23:02

take away the concrete

23:04

and do it for you

23:06

but let me explain.

23:08

You understand it

23:10

and you can do it yourself.

23:12

If someone asks for help

23:14

they just want to know

23:16

if they have to push a button

23:25

on the left or right

23:27

but I want them to understand

23:29

what's going on in the machine.

23:31

Or on a bigger level

23:33

open for all

23:35

even though all didn't ask

23:37

for it.

23:39

Open for all

23:41

everyone should do it now.

23:43

I hope I'm not stepping on the

23:46

feet of the organizers.

23:48

We'll write it down.

23:52

Another point

23:54

that's hard to describe

23:56

and diverse

23:58

is a strong male

24:00

dominance in many areas.

24:02

You can see it clearly

24:04

but it's also true

24:06

that diversity is not always

24:08

represented.

24:10

I brought a short example

24:12

from a research project

24:14

a year ago

24:16

to see if

24:18

this observation

24:20

can be found in numbers.

24:22

For that I used

24:24

open educational resources

24:26

and gender balance.

24:28

On the right

24:30

you can see a list

24:32

of authors

24:34

in the OER designation OERSI.

24:36

Behind it

24:38

are the indexed resources

24:40

and I used

24:42

a method called

24:44

binary gender

24:46

based on pronouns.

24:48

It's a strong simplification.

24:50

Give me four slides

24:52

to decide

24:54

if the simplification is okay.

24:56

Because it's not about the person

24:58

I just used color bars.

25:00

A male name

25:02

I used red bars

25:04

and a female name

25:06

I used blue bars.

25:08

This is limited to all entries

25:10

where people

25:12

indexed more than 100 resources.

25:14

This is

25:16

what it looks like.

25:18

On the first place

25:20

is a database question.

25:22

These were not defined authors.

25:24

We can think of them

25:26

a bit further away.

25:28

In this example

25:30

red is a male

25:32

pronoun.

25:34

On the far right is the number

25:36

of resources and on the left

25:38

are the blue bars.

25:40

Can you understand the logic?

25:42

Okay.

25:46

Now I'll show you the right result.

25:48

You can search further.

25:56

I used all entries

25:58

with more than 100 entries.

26:00

Then I weighed

26:02

the number of resources

26:04

on the right.

26:06

In OERSI, indexed resources

26:08

one year before

26:10

the strongly simplified method

26:12

96.04% of the resources

26:14

come from

26:16

high schools

26:18

with male pronouns.

26:22

Maybe

26:24

I was wrong

26:26

about 3 or 4 factors.

26:28

In one direction.

26:32

This is one example

26:36

where I would say

26:38

we don't represent everyone

26:40

when we talk about our work areas.

26:42

Fortunately,

26:46

this is the bright side

26:48

of the nerds.

26:52

This is a catchphrase.

26:54

The culture of sharing.

26:56

Has it become so popular

26:58

in the Swiss-German debate

27:00

to talk about the culture of sharing?

27:02

In Germany, it is very popular.

27:04

Everyone likes the culture of sharing,

27:06

even on a political level.

27:08

This is probably due to the fact

27:10

that the culture of sharing

27:12

is easy to promote

27:14

and I don't know exactly

27:16

why it is so popular.

27:18

But there are specific things behind it.

27:20

For me, it is about

27:22

cooperation as a term.

27:24

From a concrete level

27:26

to a very abstract level.

27:28

For example,

27:30

I can research in OERSI

27:32

and use materials.

27:34

This is also a form of cooperation.

27:36

Maybe even a joy of sharing.

27:38

A joy of openness.

27:40

A joy of exchange.

27:42

Whether it is software,

27:44

resources,

27:46

or publications.

27:48

The whole idea

27:50

that I can build on it,

27:52

use it,

27:54

change it,

27:56

combine it with

27:58

Reuse, Revise, Remix

28:00

or other things.

28:02

If you think about your colleagues

28:04

and imagine how they think about you

28:06

and other colleagues

28:08

that you would not call nerds,

28:10

there are probably some characteristics

28:12

that suit you more than others.

28:14

This is your way

28:16

of doing things.

28:18

Again, it is not about

28:20

what you do.

28:22

Whether you do rocket science

28:24

or education

28:26

for the teacher's office

28:28

or with insects or something like that.

28:30

It doesn't matter.

28:32

It is just about the level

28:34

how you work.

28:36

Second slide

28:38

about the bright characteristics

28:40

of nerds.

28:42

The culture of learning.

28:44

A lively culture of mistakes.

28:46

A great joy of finding mistakes

28:48

in yourself, but also in others.

28:50

A joy of giving feedback.

28:52

Sometimes it tilts a little bit.

28:54

But also being open to not knowing.

28:56

Maybe a stronger awareness

28:58

of not knowing.

29:00

A joy of critical thinking as a method.

29:02

An openness for new things,

29:04

for learning.

29:06

To be able to understand things.

29:08

To be able to look behind things.

29:10

To be able to look at the ground.

29:12

Not only to be able to use the surface.

29:14

I would describe this

29:16

to you as something

29:18

that differentiates you

29:20

in your way of working.

29:22

And then a culture of doing things.

29:24

A strong orientation towards solutions.

29:26

This whole DIY approach,

29:28

that you constantly want to do things yourself

29:30

and build things.

29:32

As I said before,

29:34

that you want to do things

29:36

just because it works.

29:38

That this is a motivation.

29:40

For me, this is a very striking feature.

29:42

Sometimes what you do

29:44

in your way of doing things

29:46

may differ from others.

29:48

A certain consistency

29:50

and stubbornness in things.

29:52

Very partial, of course.

29:54

But maybe you can think of

29:56

counter-examples.

29:58

Then it's easiest to see

30:00

how far you can go

30:02

than some others.

30:04

And then a culture of being serious.

30:06

This may not be uncommon in these circles.

30:08

A bit more than others

30:10

with irony or humor.

30:12

Sometimes even with games.

30:14

If you're looking for an example,

30:16

go to the exhibition aisle over there.

30:18

The tables all look like playgrounds.

30:20

A few examples.

30:25

Where do you see

30:27

that you do things differently?

30:29

This format of barcams.

30:31

This format of hackathons.

30:33

The idea of Open Educational Resources.

30:35

The idea of DIY initiatives.

30:37

If you come from hacker circles

30:39

like the Congress of the Chaos Computer Club

30:41

or the camp.

30:43

These are things

30:45

where you can see it purely culturally.

30:47

For example,

30:49

you can see something like

30:51

doing something just because it works.

30:53

Does any of you know

30:55

the Congress of the Chaos Computer Club?

30:57

Okay.

30:59

For example,

31:01

you build a pipeline

31:03

just because it works.

31:07

Coding initiatives.

31:09

Things to do with tinkering.

31:11

But also concrete initiatives

31:13

like learning the archive

31:15

or, if we're already in Switzerland,

31:17

Beat's BiblioNet.

31:19

These are initiatives

31:21

where you do things a bit differently.

31:23

More openly.

31:25

More nerdy.

31:31

A quick story.

31:33

I'm in Switzerland

31:35

so I can use this

31:37

to tell something about him.

31:39

He wrote yesterday

31:41

that the weather here is better

31:43

than in England.

31:45

Which I find strange.

31:49

17 years ago

31:51

I was in your situation.

31:53

I was in Hamburg

31:55

and invited someone from Switzerland

31:57

for a lecture.

31:59

I thought he had to tell

32:01

about Beat's BiblioNet.

32:03

It's the biggest in the world.

32:05

17 years ago I thought

32:07

it would be called Beat's BiblioNet.

32:09

And Beat came to Hamburg

32:11

for a lecture.

32:13

It was an event

32:15

at the Faculty of Education

32:17

at the University of Hamburg

32:19

and lured seven people into the audience.

32:21

Seven of these people

32:23

had a foldable computer.

32:25

Beat said

32:27

it was the highest nerdiness

32:29

he'd ever seen.

32:31

Seven of these people

32:33

had a foldable computer.

32:41

Part 5. The position of the nerds.

32:43

I tried to explain

32:45

the status of the nerds.

32:47

Where is he in the overall context?

32:49

How do nerds react

32:51

to the rest of their environment?

32:53

How are they a part of it?

32:55

I have to go back

32:57

to the fifth part

32:59

of the theoretical basic concepts.

33:01

The community circles.

33:03

This is what's in the funding applications.

33:05

This is one part of the funding applications

33:07

that are really important.

33:09

This is where we assign our organizers

33:11

according to this model.

33:13

The community circles

33:15

start as circles.

33:17

And in the center,

33:19

as a starting point,

33:21

is a group called

33:23

Open Educational Resources.

33:25

These are the nerds

33:27

who know a lot about OER,

33:29

who are interested in it,

33:31

maybe even involved in it.

33:33

And there is a number

33:35

for how many of them

33:37

there are in the German-speaking area.

33:39

The important thing is

33:41

how many zeros there are at the end.

33:43

It depends on how you

33:45

define it.

33:47

It's about the dimensions

33:49

when I make more circles.

33:51

First, a circle of friends.

33:53

A circle of friends also uses OER,

33:55

understands OER,

33:57

explains OER to other people,

33:59

but they also have something else

34:01

to do with OER.

34:03

There are thousands of them

34:05

in the German-speaking area.

34:07

Then there is a circle

34:09

of sympathizers.

34:11

They know it,

34:13

maybe they've used it before,

34:15

but it would be difficult

34:17

if they had to explain it to third parties.

34:19

They generally like it.

34:21

That's why

34:24

a much larger circle

34:26

is about hundreds of thousands.

34:28

These are interested people.

34:30

They don't do it,

34:32

they don't really know it.

34:34

In our work, we often say

34:36

they would like it

34:38

if they knew it.

34:40

And on the outside,

34:45

there is a circle of peripherally interested people,

34:47

because everything else

34:49

would be a negative formulation.

34:51

That means

34:53

you can neglect it,

34:55

but you have to see

34:57

that there are more people out there.

34:59

But they may never be able

35:02

to understand it.

35:04

This model is very important

35:06

for us in two ways.

35:08

We've been working on it

35:10

for the last six years.

35:12

What is very important

35:14

is that with the shift

35:16

to the outer circles,

35:18

two things change fundamentally.

35:20

One is obviously the size.

35:22

The size order is getting bigger

35:24

and the interest is decreasing.

35:26

But on a deeper level.

35:28

The size is not getting bigger,

35:30

but the interest is decreasing.

35:32

This means that such models

35:34

of rolling out

35:36

have to take into account

35:38

that it's not that easy

35:40

to get thousands of people interested

35:42

and then ask the next thousand

35:44

and the next thousand

35:46

and the next thousand

35:48

because you would stay relatively close

35:50

to the outer circle

35:52

until you have reached the outer circle.

35:54

So it's important

35:56

that there is a zero behind it.

35:58

This should be visualized

36:00

in this graphic

36:02

that the interest is getting

36:04

less and less.

36:06

In my opinion,

36:08

this was a direction for me

36:10

around 2008,

36:12

that I thought,

36:14

if I explain it to others,

36:16

then they will know everything

36:18

I know and want to do

36:20

just like I do.

36:22

There are people out there

36:24

who just want to know

36:26

and they don't want to be taught

36:28

what the difference is

36:30

between a CC license

36:32

in the ported and the generic version.

36:34

I would even say

36:36

that no one wants to know

36:38

in the circle of sympathizers.

36:40

This means that these circles

36:42

are different

36:44

not only because of their prerequisites

36:46

but also because of the objectives

36:48

that can be associated with them.

36:50

What do you want to achieve

36:52

when you want to expand these circles

36:54

to people who have a special interest?

36:56

At the beginning I said

37:02

that there is this level

37:04

of what adults learn from each other

37:06

and how adults learn from each other.

37:08

I said that they learn

37:10

through a hidden curriculum.

37:12

They learn from each other

37:14

by observing how they do something.

37:16

They learn through observation

37:18

and not because they taught them.

37:20

They wrote on their training

37:22

that it's about interactive exercises

37:24

in Moodle and not

37:26

that they work out their own materials.

37:28

In the rare cases

37:30

it says

37:32

that today it's about the format

37:34

and today it's about the way we work.

37:36

They write down the what

37:38

and implicitly

37:40

the how plays a role.

37:42

If it's implicit,

37:44

people do it by observing them

37:46

and observing how they do it.

37:48

This is the third point.

37:50

Who do adults learn from?

37:52

It's getting more complex

37:54

when two adults

37:56

learn from each other.

37:58

If we say

38:00

there are two people

38:02

and one is in the nerd circle

38:04

and the other is also in the nerd circle,

38:06

the complexity is relatively manageable

38:08

except that they are humans.

38:10

It's also relatively manageable

38:12

when someone from the nerd circle

38:14

talks to someone from the circle of friends.

38:16

But we have to say

38:18

that if someone from the nerd circle

38:20

talks to someone from the circle of interest,

38:22

they learn different goals.

38:24

This model

38:29

can be transferred

38:31

because there are other things in the world

38:33

than OER.

38:35

Sometimes the nerds don't know that.

38:37

The nerds with OER in the middle.

38:39

But you can be a nerd

38:41

for open source questions,

38:43

for maker questions,

38:45

for Apple devices.

38:47

Also in other areas like marathon running.

38:49

There are marathon nerds.

38:51

I'm only interested in the periphery

38:53

but that's what people said in the session.

38:55

There are Lego nerds.

38:57

There are H5P nerds.

38:59

There are podcast nerds.

39:01

There are thermomix nerds.

39:03

Is there such a thing in Switzerland?

39:06

There are barcamp nerds

39:08

and many other things

39:10

with different focus and orientations.

39:12

Accordingly, you can call

39:14

this model of the circle

39:16

a multidimensional one

39:18

depending on which topic

39:20

you focus on.

39:22

In which topic area

39:24

do we sit in these circles?

39:26

For example,

39:28

I'm a barcamp nerd.

39:30

I sit in the inner circle.

39:32

I can hardly imagine

39:34

that there are people

39:36

who don't like it.

39:38

With thermomix,

39:40

I'm interested in the periphery.

39:42

With podcasts,

39:44

I'm somewhere in between.

39:46

This is my interest,

39:48

my starting point

39:50

and if someone approaches me

39:52

and says I should learn something

39:54

about thermomix,

39:56

I'll bring in a different

39:58

setting than if someone

40:00

wants to talk to me

40:05

and I should learn something

40:07

about podcasts.

40:09

I told you earlier

40:11

that I asked 20 people

40:13

in this barcamp session

40:15

and one main statement

40:17

that I understood

40:19

was the relativity of nerdiness.

40:21

Nerds are always the others.

40:23

Almost all 20 people

40:25

in this room,

40:27

I guess 17,

40:29

said my colleagues

40:31

are nerds, but I think

40:33

the ones in the back are the nerds.

40:35

People say they know about technology,

40:37

but the people at the congress

40:39

know about technology.

40:41

I think that's because of

40:43

the different circles

40:45

and communities

40:47

where you can use the circles.

40:49

There are people who deal with it

40:51

even harder, there is

40:53

an even more inner circle

40:55

that is even more nerdy.

40:57

Or because I know a lot about

40:59

technology, I know that it has

41:01

nothing to do with OER,

41:03

it's more about

41:05

technical infrastructure.

41:07

That's why I would say

41:09

I know a lot about OER,

41:11

but there are real nerds

41:13

for technical infrastructure.

41:15

The explanation is a bit

41:17

that people who know a lot

41:19

about OER don't know

41:21

where there is even more

41:23

special knowledge and engagement.

41:28

The position of the nerds,

41:30

I'll do it quickly

41:32

because I hope

41:34

you can add it to the discussion

41:36

or that we can talk about it.

41:38

You have a lot of expertise

41:40

and engagement in this system.

41:42

You are, whether you want it or not,

41:44

a role model.

41:46

It doesn't matter if you are

41:48

a nerd or not.

41:50

You are a bridge builder

41:52

and a connection builder

41:54

because you are more

41:56

in the inner circles,

41:58

maybe in your environment,

42:00

so you know people

42:02

who are further out in the circles,

42:04

but you also know people

42:06

who are further in the circles,

42:08

people who are in other circles

42:10

and you can create connections

42:12

because you know, for example,

42:14

that there can be a connection

42:16

between you and the nerds.

42:18

You are often in the lead,

42:20

not everyone has to be there.

42:22

You are the ones who often

42:24

want to do things differently

42:26

and show that it can be done differently

42:28

and deliberately put point by point

42:30

in the sense that I hope

42:32

you will add something.

42:34

The last point is closely

42:36

connected to this.

42:38

What do the nerds need

42:40

in the educational field?

42:42

I wrote down a few points.

42:44

You need it for a better education

42:46

because you can bring in

42:48

your expertise and your commitment

42:50

because you can act as a role model

42:52

because you can go ahead

42:54

as a pioneer

42:56

because you can create

42:58

these connections between the circles

43:00

but also between the communities.

43:02

I know that people have more knowledge

43:04

and more interest,

43:06

I know that people out there

43:08

don't want to know everything

43:10

and I know that there are

43:12

a lot of nerds out there

43:14

who don't want to know

43:16

everything.

43:18

Conceptually, it has always been

43:20

a big challenge for us

43:22

how to make adjustments

43:24

for external circles,

43:26

how to water it down

43:28

in the blurry graphics.

43:30

What do other people have to learn?

43:32

What is critical if it is not

43:34

the difference between the generic

43:36

license and the locally adapted

43:38

license version?

43:40

People like to argue a little bit

43:42

more than the average rational person.

43:44

Maybe that is another

43:46

point that is important

43:48

in the mission of the nerds

43:50

in the question of how we can

43:52

improve education.

43:54

What do you need for that?

43:56

I hope that you can say something

43:58

in a moment.

44:00

What I would like to say to you

44:02

is that you need to have

44:04

an awareness of how

44:06

it doesn't matter how I do something

44:08

because sometimes people learn

44:10

directly about how I do something

44:12

even though I always thought

44:14

it was important what I do.

44:16

To reflect on it,

44:18

to have an exchange about it

44:20

and to say, what is your idea?

44:22

How do people perceive what you do?

44:24

How do they learn about observing

44:26

and looking away

44:28

from what you do?

44:30

It needs something like patience

44:32

or maybe a humility

44:34

towards other circles and communities.

44:36

Having the same nerd knowledge

44:38

as I do, not the same nerd status as I do,

44:40

helps to change perspectives.

44:42

What would also help

44:44

would be a bit more recognition

44:46

from other circles or communities.

44:48

I hope for your contributions

44:50

in addition to that.

44:56

Those were six parts of the lecture

44:58

or six plus one.

45:00

Now it is 45 minutes

45:02

so that we actually have

45:04

some time for discussion.

45:06

Thank you for listening for so long.

45:08

Let's go.

45:22

Thank you very much, Juran,

45:24

for the exciting lecture.

45:26

We will open the round

45:28

to the audience for questions.

45:30

But first I have one or two questions for you.

45:32

You often spoke

45:34

from the perspective of we.

45:36

You also said,

45:38

don't refer to yourself,

45:40

I am this.

45:42

Did you say that to be nice

45:44

or did you actually refer to yourself as a nerd?

45:46

I said it here

45:48

to make myself less vulnerable

45:50

and to be nice.

45:52

Otherwise I actually learned a lot

45:54

about this Barcamp session

45:56

about this relativity,

45:58

that nerdness is relative.

46:00

And I would say,

46:02

somehow I am a nerd in the perception

46:04

of many others,

46:06

but there are many more nerdy people

46:08

and this is perhaps an area

46:10

that has been added

46:12

to my knowledge.

46:14

I think I am one of the lowest

46:16

in the nerd status,

46:18

of 17,000 or so.

46:20

It depends on the context.

46:22

As you said,

46:24

nerds are always the others.

46:26

What was the starting point

46:28

for your considerations?

46:30

Was there a trigger?

46:32

We have been doing these OER Camps

46:34

since 2012.

46:36

And the what of these measures

46:38

are Open Educational Resources,

46:40

where people come together

46:42

to learn about OER.

46:44

And then over the years

46:46

we started to doubt

46:48

whether this is really the main thing

46:50

that people take with them,

46:52

what they learn.

46:54

We as a team, as an agency,

46:56

our managing director,

46:58

Blausch Fabry,

47:00

sits in the front row.

47:02

If you want to ask later

47:04

if everything I said is true,

47:06

you have to ask.

47:08

Today we think

47:10

that people have learned

47:12

just as much about the format

47:14

as about the content.

47:16

We published the materials

47:18

that we had for ourselves,

47:20

made a book out of it,

47:22

with a guide to the Bar Camp,

47:24

and so on.

47:26

But you have to say

47:28

that they are downloaded

47:30

much more often

47:32

than all the things

47:34

we have published about OER.

47:36

We made peace with the Bar Camp

47:38

and found a good mode.

47:40

What we are working on

47:42

as an agency right now

47:44

is that in recent years,

47:46

perhaps because of Corona,

47:48

we have noticed that people

47:50

from outside are interested

47:52

in our way of working

47:54

or are irritated by it.

47:56

The agency is relatively manageable.

47:58

There are 13 people working

48:00

and it is relatively hierarchical.

48:02

There are two bosses

48:04

and you can't write e-mails.

48:06

This is actually

48:08

what we have experienced in recent years.

48:10

When people work with us,

48:12

they don't work with us

48:14

on the topic of the SDGs.

48:16

We have developed concepts

48:18

but most of the questions

48:20

were not about the concepts

48:22

but how we have developed them

48:24

and whether this is exactly

48:26

about the comment function

48:28

and the reviews.

48:30

This is our current construction site.

48:32

When I started working with OER

48:34

a few years ago,

48:36

I thought the opposite of open

48:38

is closed and there is nothing in between.

48:40

Very uncompromising.

48:42

Now I think

48:44

the opposite of open

48:46

is open-ish,

48:48

if I don't associate

48:50

with other nerds.

48:52

I think the movement needs

48:54

more access ramps.

48:56

I would even say

48:58

in the inner circle

49:00

we don't always find

49:02

each other

49:04

without being willing to compromise.

49:06

I am interested in

49:08

what you think about this.

49:10

Let's see if I can work with this.

49:12

I will try

49:14

to keep it under one minute

49:16

so that we can have more questions.

49:18

For me,

49:20

a big starting point

49:22

is the tension

49:24

or the opposite of open and closed

49:26

or what is in between.

49:28

I think the tension

49:30

is much more interesting

49:32

when it is not only about

49:34

free licenses and proprietary approaches,

49:36

but about principle openness

49:38

and factual openness.

49:40

Apple is

49:42

not open at all

49:44

but my mother

49:46

got into the online world

49:48

through Apple devices.

49:50

Other approaches

49:52

are like,

49:54

I don't know,

49:56

someone says

49:58

these GIFs are not open.

50:00

No.

50:02

Nevertheless, the foils are more beautiful.

50:04

Or

50:06

to draw a connection

50:08

to the question

50:10

how open is it and

50:12

do people learn from the model?

50:14

At some point I put these stickers

50:16

on my computer

50:18

because I had the feeling

50:20

that no matter what I said,

50:22

people would come afterwards

50:24

and I was irritated

50:26

because I didn't know

50:28

if the Apple logo was helpful or not.

50:30

After I had to remove it

50:32

several times for videos

50:34

because there should be no Apple logo,

50:36

I removed it.

50:38

It is a tension

50:40

between principle and pragmatic openness

50:42

and a question

50:44

who needs how much openness

50:46

for which goals.

50:48

Is it necessary

50:50

that all gold standards

50:52

can reach people?

50:56

I have already spotted

50:58

the next question.

51:00

What do you think?

51:04

No comment.

51:06

Thank you very much

51:08

for your super exciting talk.

51:10

I have also

51:12

found myself again

51:14

several times.

51:16

I have a question

51:18

about financing.

51:20

The business models

51:22

of the proprietary world

51:24

are a lot easier.

51:26

You just sell licenses

51:28

or access codes

51:30

versus open and everything is great.

51:32

At the end of the day

51:34

we have to earn some money

51:36

and maybe a team of people

51:38

that you want to employ.

51:40

What are your experiences

51:42

with the business models

51:44

around these open topics?

51:46

I will try

51:48

to make a new speech.

51:50

The simplest perspective

51:52

is when it comes to public money.

51:54

We had

51:56

a market mechanism

51:58

that is easier to structure.

52:00

If it is paid as public money

52:02

it is about

52:04

the quality of materials

52:06

and infrastructure and so on.

52:08

We already have mechanisms

52:10

before all these open ideas

52:12

how it can be secured

52:14

and I would say

52:16

that we have enough examples

52:18

from other countries

52:20

where you can say

52:22

that this is not yet

52:24

an established practice

52:26

that you have good business models

52:28

for open things,

52:30

but you already have enough approaches.

52:32

I find it more difficult

52:34

when it is a strong

52:36

supply-demand market

52:38

where you have to decide

52:40

how to do it.

52:42

This is not only the case

52:44

in the educational sector.

52:46

Many actors have to decide

52:48

how to make a business model

52:50

when people no longer

52:52

pay for their content

52:54

but for something else.

52:56

With open source

52:58

it depends on

53:00

how well I know myself.

53:02

I think that this strategy

53:04

of principle openness

53:06

when it is not

53:08

publicly funded

53:10

would be a good way

53:12

to make the situation

53:14

much better.

53:22

Thank you very much

53:24

Jörn for this exciting lecture.

53:26

We at the

53:28

University of Social Work

53:30

of the FHNW are working on

53:32

implementing OER

53:34

and I would be very interested

53:36

in what you think of this strategy.

53:38

A combination

53:40

of top-down and bottom-up.

53:42

In the sense of top-down

53:44

we suggest

53:46

which modules

53:48

have to create OER materials

53:50

from the next year

53:52

together with the students

53:54

and then

53:56

also with

53:58

an incentive system

54:00

with enough resources

54:02

and enough support

54:04

to support the early adapters

54:06

who want to do it voluntarily.

54:08

I would be interested

54:10

in what you think of this strategy.

54:12

What I like about it

54:14

let's get back to the circles

54:16

if I find them so fast

54:18

I think the promising thing

54:20

is that you can

54:22

divide the work

54:24

who is responsible for what

54:26

and you can say

54:28

we can encourage you

54:30

not everyone has to do it

54:32

but we have to make sure

54:34

that it happens.

54:36

We have to have

54:38

non-nerds

54:40

who teach

54:42

and get paid for it

54:44

you can set up

54:46

certain things

54:48

and say you have to agree

54:50

to these licenses

54:52

I would say you can do it

54:54

according to ethical standards

54:56

not according to legal standards

54:58

legally other nerds would do it

55:00

but we can't encourage

55:02

everyone to understand

55:04

that it's enough

55:06

if they spend 90% of their material

55:08

and then there are other people

55:10

who get paid to make it 100%

55:12

clean OER

55:14

I think this is

55:16

a good approach.

55:18

A question from the first row.

55:24

I have a question

55:26

I think

55:28

I can almost describe

55:30

what has been written

55:32

but I think

55:34

it's a bit too narrow

55:36

you have to be aware

55:38

that the world

55:40

doesn't end in Bern or Hamburg

55:42

specifically

55:44

I set up a school

55:46

in Cameroon, Limbe

55:48

an open source

55:50

school

55:52

but with everything

55:54

I have seen

55:56

I have to say

55:58

what can we do together

56:00

what do I have to change

56:02

to change this school

56:04

because we have a big

56:06

difficulty

56:08

no money

56:10

and we work with the Raspberry

56:12

to try

56:14

I want to work together

56:16

but I don't know how

56:18

I don't have good answers

56:22

the only thing

56:24

I would say

56:26

is that it's probably

56:28

in practice

56:30

that you try to bring together

56:32

the different rows

56:34

one person

56:36

that we really know

56:38

and they need that for their work

56:40

and not all have to be able to do everything

56:42

but I don't know enough

56:44

to comment on that

56:46

Thank you

56:50

I am Nicole Krüger

56:52

from the ZHAW library

56:54

in the OER team

56:56

what you said about the gender

56:58

that so much more

57:00

is produced by men

57:02

because that wasn't the case

57:04

in my work

57:06

could you look at that

57:08

for the entire library

57:10

that maybe only the first 10%

57:12

are dominated by men

57:14

and that the field is

57:16

more balanced

57:18

yes

57:20

because my numbers

57:22

are not very reliable

57:24

I have described the method

57:26

but we have seen

57:28

that open

57:30

doesn't fulfill a promise

57:32

that more diversity

57:34

and representation comes in

57:36

we know that from the bar camps

57:38

where we count

57:40

who goes to the front

57:42

and offers a session

57:44

compared to how many people are in the room

57:46

and you have a 50%

57:48

higher chance

57:50

that the person offers a session

57:52

when we count that

57:54

also in OER camps

57:56

where you think it's progressive

57:58

this openness

58:00

this lowering of barriers

58:02

is perceived differently

58:04

we know that from the school research

58:06

boys have a more self-confident

58:08

attitude

58:10

I can say something about that

58:12

while the girls stay seated

58:14

and think

58:16

maybe there is someone else

58:18

who can explain it better

58:20

what we learned

58:22

is that openness

58:24

doesn't bring automatisms

58:26

that there is more representation

58:28

are there any questions

58:32

from the audience

58:34

I would say

58:36

one or two questions

58:38

or none

58:42

yes

58:44

I would like to come back

58:54

to the question of Matthias Stürmer

58:56

about financing of models in the OER area

58:58

Germany knows the digital pact

59:00

a lot of money was invested

59:02

in the digital

59:04

infrastructure

59:06

do you see

59:08

an influence

59:10

in the OER scene

59:12

and if so, how big

59:14

was it

59:16

what is your view

59:18

can we turn off the camera

59:20

with camera

59:22

the short answer is yes

59:24

without camera

59:26

it would be complicated

59:28

the insights I have

59:30

on the work level

59:32

it plays a role

59:34

when political processes

59:36

take place

59:38

the wisdom of the work level

59:40

plays an important role

59:42

when there is a meeting

59:44

it is said

59:46

the demands are taken into account

59:48

they get a package

59:50

and it doesn't matter

59:52

how well thought out

59:54

things are behind it

59:56

I wanted to say something

59:58

about the question

1:00:02

what is interesting

1:00:04

it is not as virulent

1:00:06

as in Germany

1:00:08

what does it mean

1:00:10

when there is more need

1:00:12

in public funds

1:00:14

because then

1:00:16

there is a movement

1:00:18

about business models

1:00:20

we can't finance it

1:00:22

or we don't want to

1:00:24

depending on the political view

1:00:26

there is a movement

1:00:28

my favorite example

1:00:30

my first blog article

1:00:32

Arnold Schwarzenegger introduced OER in California

1:00:34

Arnold Schwarzenegger

1:00:36

as governor in California

1:00:38

was a pioneer of OER

1:00:40

you can read a lot

1:00:42

about inhibiting factors

1:00:44

but Arnold Schwarzenegger

1:00:46

didn't want to improve the world

1:00:48

his school budget

1:00:50

was reduced by half

1:00:52

and he said

1:00:54

if it has to be done for all schools

1:00:56

we can get foundations

1:00:58

with publishers

1:01:00

to print as often as they want

1:01:02

that was the starting point

1:01:04

why in the USA

1:01:06

a big pioneer role

1:01:08

took place in California

1:01:10

and it is more realistic

1:01:12

world improvement is a helpful approach

1:01:14

but maybe not the only one

1:01:16

that will influence it in the future

1:01:18

let's go back to

1:01:20

Schwarzenegger 2009

1:01:22

why it didn't have a happy ending

1:01:24

there was a fixed school budget

1:01:26

no digital devices

1:01:28

thank you very much

1:01:32

if there are still burning questions

1:01:34

you are still here

1:01:36

thank you very much

1:01:38

a big applause for you