Monthly Archives: March 2010

Technology Sources and Standards

Posted on by

An important consideration when selecting a given technology is the source of that technology and the standards that it adheres to. With respect to software, there is a common distinction between “open source” and “closed” or “proprietary” source. Open source refers to software that is distributed with its source code completely open for anyone to read and modify. Source code here refers to the collection of files that contain all the “instructions” or code that programmers have written that are the source of a given software’s features and functionality. Open source is often contrasted with proprietary or “closed” source technologies, those which restrict access to source code and can only be changed by the vendor. Open source technologies are usually available for free, proprietary technologies usually require a licensing fee to use.

Open standards refer to publicly available specifications that provide a common method of achieving a particular goal. These standards are usually free to use and are often defined by formalized committees that are open to participation by any interested party. These are often coupled with open source code that provides a reference for how the standard is implemented. Open standards are contrasted with “closed” or proprietary standards that require licensing to implement and are usually defined by individual companies or organizations.

With respect to technologies used for teaching and learning, Middlebury Library and Information Services (LIS) has had a strong commitment to both open source and open standards. In 2001 the LIS Curricular Technology group began to develop database-driven web applications using the Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP (LAMP) open source web platform. Segue was developed at Middlebury and released as open source software in 2003. Segue v2 implements a set of specifications developed by the Open Knowledge Initiative (O.K.I.) that continue to be promoted as open standards. Other open source technologies in use at Middlebury include Moodle, Drupal, MediaWiki and WordPress.

Thus the Curricular Technology team favors open source technologies because they allows LIS designers and developers to integrate such technologies with other systems on campus including other open source projects. Segue itself builds upon a number of open source tools including the CKEditor. The Curricular Technology team also favors technologies that use open standards because they help to prevent lock in to a given application or vendor.

There are exceptions to these rules. For example, proprietary technologies can certainly be good candidates for selection when they implement open standards. While the Microsoft Exchange server is a proprietary system, it implements a number of open standards such as LDAP, IMAP, and SMTP that allow LIS to integrate data from the Exchange server into other applications such as Segue, WordPress, Drupal, and your favorite non-Outlook email clent. Google Apps for Education are another proprietary platform that can be fairly easily integrated with existing platforms and infrastructure.

Thus this historical commitment to open source and open standards does not preclude the use of proprietary software, but it does favor open source solutions when these solutions offer comparable functionality. The use of proprietary formats may be necessary and supported, but only if such formats adhere to open standards, can be edited by more than one application or offer unique functionality not replicated in other formats.

Technology Selection Strategies

Posted on by

Over the next few weeks, the Curricular Technology team will be posting our thoughts on strategies for choosing curricular technologies in general and for finding alternatives to Segue in particular.  In describing these strategies, we will do our best to list various options available and then articulate our position, the selection criteria we think are most appropriate for LIS to adopt when evaluating technologies for use by the Middlebury community.

We hope these strategy posts will be informative and at times provocative and will spark some discussion of educational technologies and technology in education.

Usage Analysis: Audio Capture

Posted on by

A number of programs of study make use of technologies for recording audio.  Some faculty have recorded their lectures, others  have recorded class discussions.  Language faculty have recorded samples of the language they are teaching for students to listen to and reproduce in their own recordings or have required students to record themselves reading words, phrases or passages from various texts.  Some faculty teaching writing courses have asked their students to record themselves reading their own writing.  Finally faculty in various departments have had their students produce podcasts.  For more details, see:

Curricular Technology Usage Analysis » Audio Capture

We invited others to send us more examples of the use of audio capture at Middlebury or comment on any of the case studies included in this usage analysis.  We also invite anyone in the Middlebury community interested in or knowledgeable about this topic to participate in our focus group sessions later this month.

Segue from Segue Advisory Group

Posted on by

A Segue from Segue advisory group (SAG) has been formed that includes of the following participants:

  • Amy Morsman (Associate Professor of History)
  • Claudia Cooper (Director Education Studies Program, Visiting Assistant Professor of English & American Literature & Education Studies)
  • Sasha Woolson – (Visiting Lecturer in Spanish)
  • Ray Coish (Professor of Geology)
  • Erik Fendik ’12
  • Andy Cohen ’11

The purpose of this advisory group is to provide input and guidance to the Curricular Technology team that will help identify stakeholders and engage the college community in the process of selecting one or more replacements for Segue.