House of Lords Digital Skills Committee evidence
|
This page is still a draft. Feel free to edit it, and use the talk page to discuss ideas and changes. Remember to add categories and tell people where the page is so others can find it and chip in. |
Introduction
The House of Lords has established a Digital Skills Committee and has called for evidence. The investigation will explore how the UK can be prepared to compete in a global digital economy, examining issues such as whether we're developing a workforce that is appropriately skilled for the future in jobs that may not yet exist, and how we are encouraging people of all ages to choose careers which will benefit the future digital era.
Wikimedia UK should consider making a submission to this committee on this issue. Among the many groups they are asking to submit, they include four that are of relevance: technology companies [or charities], digital literacy groups, civil society and lifelong learning organisations.
The committee is tweeting on hashtag hldigi
Deadline: 5 September 2014 Submissions: Of under 6 pages preferred, if over 6 pages a 1 page executive summary should be provided
The Wikimedia Context
Wikimedia UK is an independent registered charity in England and Wales. It is the UK chapter of the global Wikimedia movement which works to support and promote Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia (in many languages). The Wikimedia projects include: An encyclopedia (Wikipedia); dictionary (Wikitionary); a quotation repository (Wikiquote); a textbook repository (Wikibooks); original, often public domain, books (Wikisource); a news site (Wikinews); a learning resource and course site (Wikiversity); a directory of species (Wikispecies); software to facilitate collaborative authoring, including all of the Wikimedia sites (Mediawiki); a machine readable structured database (Wikidata); a media repository (Wikimedia Commons); and a travel resource (Wikivoyage). The Wikimedia movement is a global movement whose mission is to bring open educational content to the world.
Wikipedia is the fifth most visited site on the internet according to ComScore, and currently receives around 21 billion page impressions a month from around 520 million unique users. It and its sister non-English encyclopedia sites are of significant importance to global education, their collaborative creation and maintenance, and open licensing should be of significant interest to the context of 21st century digital skills which is the subject of this consultation.
Wikimedia UK exists to collect, develop, promote and distribute openly licensed knowledge. We do this by supporting volunteer editors and contributors – Wikimedians – and by working in partnership with cultural and educational institutions. Wikimedia UK’s mission is to help people and organisations build and preserve open knowledge to share and use freely. Our long-term vision is open knowledge for all.
Contributors to this evidence (add yourself!)
- Simon Knight, Vice Chair of Wikimedia UK board of trustees. User:Sjgknight
- Michael Maggs, Chair of Wikimedia UK board of trustees. User:MichaelMaggs
- Martin Poulter, Jisc Wikimedia Ambassador. User:MartinPoulter
- Toni Sant, Wikimedia UK Education Organiser. User:Toni Sant (WMUK)
The evidence is (first draft) primarily adapted from:
The Wikimedia movement and Education
We have significant experience in the area of cultural and educational heritage. We regularly work with some of the UK and Europe's most important cultural and educational institutions to help and encourage them to share their resources and archives under open licences. Current and recent partners include The Royal Society, The British Museum, The British Library, The Science Museum, The Natural History Museum and The National Library of Scotland.
Educational content that is released under open licences can be used on Wikipedia and other projects, making them available to others to use, reuse, distribute and adapt for other purposes, including commercial uses. The Wikimedia projects are working to facilitate open access to the sum of human knowledge. They are widely used by other resources and the structured nature of the data has facilitated innovations in how we access and consume knowledge on the internet (including, for example, in Google's Knowledge Graph).
In addition, the movement is engaged in direct educational outreach to give greater access to the Wikimedia projects, particularly to those who would otherwise have limited access to educational resources, for example:
- Wikipedia Zero is a project in which mobile carriers agree to 'zero rate' traffic to Wikipedia, rendering such access free to the end user.
- Kiwix provides a fully downloadable copy of Wikipedia and its embedded media which can be delivered over a local wireless network, thus making available an 'offline' copy for fast access in places lacking internet access (such as rural areas, or countries with slow or uneven internet coverage), schools (where vetted copies may be provided), and prisons (again where vetted copies may be provided, and internet access is otherwise restricted).
The movement has also worked to engage students in the practices around Wikimedia projects through the Education Programme. Such programmes typically involve students learning about a subject, by creating and editing content about it (sometimes in a second language), often for course credit. There has been recent interest in Israel and Serbia around introducing the projects to school aged students and teacher education courses.
Educational context
Our responses in this section primarily relate to prompts 4, 5, 7, 8 and 14. We are interested in the digital skills required by all citizens (4), and the ways such skills can be (and are) taught (5), including with regard to lifelong learning (8) inclusive of workplace learning (14). The Wikimedia projects have a particular focus on the social element of learning (7), being a community driven set of projects, each with their own norms and practices, and each striving to release our cultural heritage as open knowledge for all.
Digital, social and creative skills for the future workforce
What makes the Wikimedia projects exciting, and an important contributor in the educational space, is not just that they provide content but that they provide practices. In the Wikipedia community, we are collaborating - often with people from different time zones and cultures - to produce, review and improve an original, high-quality work which digests the state of published knowledge across the widest variety of topics. As Wikimedia contributors, we think of wikis as both a resource and a process. Wikipedia, for example, can be thought of as a collection of millions of articles or as a community with established practices to improve the content.
The education sector is dealing with the same distinction between resources and processes. The last decade has seen a push from funders and individual advocates to open up educational resources, making them accessible and remixable with appropriate formats, licences and data. The JISC/HE Academy-funded UKOER programme is now in its third phase, and has put millions of pounds into a wide variety of OER projects, across many subjects, institutions and technology platforms. There is an appreciation that merely putting the content out there is not enough, and that to really get the benefits, education has to adopt more senses of openness. The term Open Educational Practices (OEP) has been coined to cover the context and use of OERs; the practices teaching staff, learners, institutions, and policymakers need to get right if they want to reap the benefits of open education. The Wikimedia community has a large head start in this respect and this is a major contribution to our role in education.
Wikimedia projects are charitable in two senses: they give the world a free encyclopedia, a free dictionary and so on, but they also give the world the edit button; the chance to participate in meaningful and rewarding collaboration. From the resources, we can learn the key life events of a historical figure, the source of a quotation or the meaning of an unfamiliar word. From engaging with the community and its practices, we learn about collaboration, about bias, about fact-checking, and about taking and giving criticism. The deep educational value from wikis comes from understanding the process, ideally by taking part in it. The projects have been a huge success, and there is huge educational value in them. This is particularly true given increasing pressures for online, 'always on', and lifelong learning.
The 2009-2015 PISA definition of reading indicates that: “Reading literacy is understanding, using, reflecting on and engaging with written texts, in order to achieve one’s goals, to develop one’s knowledge and potential, and to participate in society” (OECD, 2013, p. 9), recognising the importance of authentic situations, including multiple (often conflicting) documents for developing literacy – that is, that literacy is not just a matter of being able to say the words aloud. These skills are exactly those engaged in through the Wikimedia projects, practices of: finding, corroborating, synthesising and judging the significance of claims; working critically with others in a digital environment; following a set of community norms and practices.
Teaching to inspire for the jobs of the future
Despite these recent definitions of literacy, the English and Welsh school assessment systems have been increasingly returning to offline, end of year, high stakes assessments. The impact of such changes permeates the whole curriculum and pedagogy, with teachers encouraged to teach to the style of response students will be expected to reproduce in examinations.
While in Denmark to give an example, for 4 years now at least some students have had access to the internet during examinations at both the school leaver and university level, the English and Welsh systems remain largely paper based, closed book, and examination focused over problem based learning or coursework focused. There is a need for innovation in assessment, to focus on authentic problems, and the performance of knowledge practices we hope to bring our students in to.
In the Wikimedia context, “more than 7,000 students have participated in the Wikipedia Education Program[me] around the world, adding the equivalent of 45,000 printed pages of quality content to more than 10,000 Wikipedia articles in multiple languages”. In this programme, students engage in editing, often for course credit, adopting articles related to their course and improving them collaboratively or individually, towards a final assessment based on Wikipedia's article quality scales. There is a technical aspect to this – students have to learn how to use a markup language to insert images, references, headings and so on. But the more important focus is around their literacy and subject knowledge – students have to understand the practices of Wikipedia, the context of a particular subject, and write neutral, accessible material citing reliable sources while respecting copyright. In various examples, the students are not only engaging in these practices, but they are also translating material from one language to another, as a means to engage in authentic translation while making a real contribution to one or more of the language Wikipedias. This contribution to public understanding has led some organisations to encourage students in their subject areas, for example the American Association for Psychological Science (APS) runs a Wikipedia Initiative supporting university lecturers in setting psychology based Wikipedia writing assignments.
This is not to say that we think such assignments could replace all, or indeed most, assessments. Indeed, many of the lecturers who have used them have also given students other tasks, including asking them to write individual critical reflections. Moreover we would not expect a big shift to school children editing Wikipedia. But the authentic nature of the task, the strong overlap with existing good assessments, and the fact students know their work is making a real contribution – it is solving a problem – all offer wider lessons for bringing assessments into the 21st century. The Wikimedia projects provide a fantastic resource for these problems, given how widely they are used the promoting of a critical understanding of how to make best use of the projects (such as Wikipedia), and develop information literacy in general is important. Given how widespread online sharing of information and multi-media is, resources which provide lessons in how best to do interact with an online community, and respect copyright and plagiarism are important. The additional advantages of the Wikimedia projects are significant: that one can learn factual information from them; reuse their material; and various other skills including language learning through comparing multiple Wikipedias, writing in easier to understand language through Simple Wikipedia, etc.
Informal and workplace learning (NEEDS WRITING)
- The points made above apply
Potential for lifelong learning, and informal learning is great. We want OER, practices, etc. - Increasingly online
- Increasingly 'always on'
- Still a need for community (the most successful MOOCs respect that people like to learn together, they like social learning)
- Need for technical support, and copyright reform to facilitate innovations in this area
Legal and social context
Our responses in this section primarily relate to prompts 1 and 2. The Wikimedia projects have been widely used in innovative contexts in recent years including reuse of content where the innovation is a new form of content delivery, filtering, or remixing (1), and for example where the open licensing of the content facilitates data mining techniques to better understand the structure of our knowledge base and cultural heritage (1). However, there are challenges to such innovations, in particular around intellectual property which has not kept up with the pace of technological change (2). We believe that open licensing which facilitates the use, remixing, and reuse of materials (including software), and provides function for collaboration, lead to innovation and economic impact. A major goal of all of the Wikimedia websites is to create teaching materials that can be used across all borders, and many Wikimedia editors are also consumers of teaching materials. All Wikimedia websites benefit from the excellent work on cross-border licences done by Creative Commons, but editors and re-users of Wikimedia content may not be able to benefit from such consistency when they are seeking to use existing educational materials. Access to educational resources is increasingly online, and via personal devices such as tablet computers. Yet, there are barriers to such access. In order to facilitate digital innovation, digital skills, and digital skills education there are a number of legal and social challenges which should be considered. These include:
- Copyright: Open licenses facilitate collaboration, use reuse and remixing, and innovation
- Technical infrastructure: Open infrastructure through open source software facilitates collaboration, and innovative data mining potential
- Cultural change: Towards open release, particularly from public institutions
In the following examples we consider cultural and educational institutions such as libraries, museums, galleries, universities and schools. Our argument is that, through such changes, society benefits from the breadth of materials available for authors, creators and innovators to draw knowledge, research, and ultimately inspiration from, in addition to improving the situation for those who wish to learn directly from such resources.
Moving forward the UK must recognise the value of knowledge building, that we can all do more if we are not constantly re-inventing the wheel, but able to build off our existing achievements and knowledge, and collaborate widely. There are, however, a number of impediments to this vision at present, these include:
- Copyright restrictions on how and where materials are accessed
- Technical restrictions on how and where materials are accessed
- Cultural restrictions on how and where materials are accessed
Copyright: Open licenses facilitate collaboration, use reuse and remixing, and innovation
While there is an existing exception that allows institutions to make works in their collections available ‘for the purpose of research or private study, to individual members of the public by dedicated terminals on the premises’ (article 5(3)n) is extremely limited and is no longer aligned with the reasonable expectations that where individuals have lawful access to content they can access that content from anywhere. For example, this limits access for those who cannot travel (for example because they are disabled or because they lack the economic means to do so).
Educational institutions should be able to provide access to all of their collections (whether in or out of copyright) over the internet, with appropriate technical safeguards for copyright-protected content. Provision of full text search should be permissible in all cases. It should be unlawful for (publicly funded) institutions, or those that have received public funding for digitisation projects, to charge fees for digital access to public domain content over and above a reasonable level to cover their costs. It should be unlawful for institutions to require a re-user of a digital copy of public domain content to agree to use limitations by contract as a condition of providing the copy. It should be mandatory for institutions to provide public access (with technical protections against mis-use if required by the copyright owner) to digitised content that has been digitised in reliance upon a preservation or an archive-related copyright exemption.
We would like to see research produced directly by government and their agencies exempted from copyright altogether so that it falls automatically into the public domain, as is the case in the US. As a matter of principle, we believe that the results of all research financed wholly or in part by public funding should be freely available to all for all purposes (including commercial), but retaining moral right protections for the authors. The UK's commitment to the Open Government License (OGL) is an excellent start; continuing to release documents and data at all levels of government alongside a commitment to open licensing in government funded work (including research) is an important next step.
Technical infrastructure: Technical barriers prevent innovation and collaboration, reduce access to materials, and restrict the vast potential innovations in areas such as data mining
Restrictions to data mining
Our volunteers regularly attempt to mine data sources on the internet the contents of which are freely licensed or entirely in the public domain, only to find that technical measures have been put in place to prevent or hinder automated access. While this might sometimes be a proportionate response to a technical issue (for example to protect the servers from excessive queries that could affect the site's stability), we often find measures that have no apparent purpose other than to frustrate the attempts of legitimate users who wish to download lawfully-available content.
Examples include publicly funded museums and galleries that supply public domain images online but that protect them by the use of captchas, or that split such images up into extremely small tiles that are served separately in order to hinder downloading and re-use of the entire image. This is sometimes, again, an attempt to create by physical possession and by technical means new de facto rights which Intellectual Property law simply does not recognise.
Innovation is being built on mining such data sources. With increasing interest in the value of coding for students of all ages, and in social innovation through technical innovation, there is increasing need to open up access. Wikipedia and the other Websites of the Wikimedia Foundation are by design fully open to data mining, and no limitations are placed on users who wish to re-use either their contents or their data, provided the open licences are respected. Wikimedia websites are some of the most widely mined and analysed data sources on the planet. This has occurred because of Wikimedia's commitment to making this information freely available, and demonstrates that creativity and innovation are compatible with a scheme that reduces barriers to participation rather than increasing 'protection'.
Publicly-funded educational institutions, and those have have received government or EU grants to enable digitisation of out of copyright (public domain) holdings, should be required to make such holdings available to the public via the internet free of charge and free of technical restrictions on downloading (save only for technical restrictions to protect the servers, for example by limiting load).
The principle that "the right to read is also a right to mine" should be enshrined in legislation. Recent changes in the UK to permit the non-commercial mining of databases is a fantastic step forward. However, legislation should not differentiate between commercial and non-commercial activities, as such a differentiation is not proportionate in the public interest. We would like to see a repeal of the EU Database Directive. This would ensure that vast amounts of information would be broadly available to the public and to researchers, which Wikimedia's experience shows will lead to a variety of new uses and means of delivery within the EU and across its boundaries.
Restrictions to use of personal devices
As a charity, we support the rights of consumers of content to read and access information wherever they go, and to access from whatever device they would like to. Unfortunately, the existing frequent use of Digital Rights Management software to 'protect' e-lending materials cuts against all of these rights, by restricting access far more tightly than the law requires. For example, DRM frustrates the ability of users to make personal copies for educational use, a copyright exception which has been upheld repeatedly in a variety of court cases in the EU and the US. It also typically prohibits the creation of open source tools to read and create content, which further restricts access and creativity.
As it may not be technically feasible to construct DRM systems that allow for the exceptions and limitations that are necessary for an ethical and creativity-enhancing system of copyright, we believe that as an ethical and practical matter DRM should be prohibited for e-lending from public institutions like libraries.
In any event, the law should make clear that it is legal to create and distribute tools that allow educators, researchers, the disabled, and others to remove DRM when that is necessary to exercise their legal rights including using the exemptions to access material over the internet. Recent changes to UK copyright legislation go some way to addressing these issues. However, they may put a variety of artificial constraints on digitalization, such as allowing non-commercial use only. This severely limits how libraries and museums can reliably archive and publish preserved materials. It further limits the ability of Wikimedia volunteers, who aim to put all of our cultural treasures online for education and reuse by the entire world, to help such institutions unlock their collections.
The enormous potential of mass internet access is currently being held back by copyright rules that unnecessarily restrict how cultural heritage institutions can exercise their mission in the online environment. Under the current EU copyright rules, cultural heritage institutions are dependent on permission from rightholders in order to make protected works in their collection available online. This makes no sense, particularly since the majority of works held by these institutions are not commercially available because of their age or lack of commercial interest.
Cultural change: Towards open release, particularly from public institutions
A further and serious problem is the tendency of some institutions to use their physical ownership of out of copyright (public domain) material as a substitute for (non-existent) copyright protection. So, many libraries and archives will charge excessive fees for providing a digital copy of an out of copyright image or a page of text from an old newspaper, magazine or book. These fees often bear no relation to the actual costs of providing the digital copy to the user, since the actual scanning has often been done already. Not only does the user have to pay a wholly unwarranted fee, but generally a contract has to be signed at the same time confirming that the copy will be used only for research or private study.
Some institutions even attempt to apply DRM to public domain content, which means that the user cannot access material that should be freely available to all without unlawfully circumventing the DRM protection. This attempt to control access to the public domain, and to make excessive profits from public domain material, should be controlled by legislation. Legislation should ensure that public domain material is free for anyone to use, for any purpose, on payment of (at most) a reasonable copying, scanning, or reproduction fee. Institutions should be encouraged to share and collaborate on resources, but incentive systems must not penalise specific institutions as the so called Gold Access author-payment publishing route may. Competitive models between public institutions which penalise open access, and collaboration, are also problematic where they lock up cultural resources.