does not offer degrees or accreditation of any kind. That's the right approach, at least for now. This is an open wiki - anyone can edit, which is a good thing, but it makes it a resource to be read in a critical way, not a definitive guide to what you need to know to get a high school certificate, or a degree in X.
That doesn't limit Wikiversity's usefulness, but to get the value of accreditation, a separate process of accreditation is needed. This would suggest a separate process, perhaps with independent teaching that uses open educational resources such as Wikiversity, and definitely with assessment by a credible body. That could conceivably be a body within the Wikiversity or the Wikimedia Foundation, but it might make more sense for these projects to focus on developing content, and allow others to work out how to use that in a course and provide accreditation. Wikimedia and projects like Wikiversity and other such projects.
Who is likely to do this?
- Established educational institutions have a head start, but ...
- a new group of people could set themselves up, and establish their own reputation as an accreditation body. A harder road, but they'll be less limited by traditional thinking.
Does this imply a separate set of accredited content? Not necessarily. All education in this age must
include how to critically use of information. An education of the kind we're looking at here, relying heavily on a wiki or other collaborative, user-generated content, must include a deep understanding of how to use that content.
I've deliberately neglected the topic of students generating content as part of their learning and assessment - which happens on Appropedia
as well as Wikipedia
This was prompted by a discussion led by Cormac Lawler
at Wikimania 2008
. Pardon the lack of links - this is a hasty post - I'm mainly trying to solve my Linux networking problems.