Webmaker/WebLiteracyMap/v2/Survey/Proposal5

Decision

On the 8 December 2014 community call we decided that we shouldn't explicitly encourage remixing of the Web Literacy Map itself, but encourage remixing of the curriculum layer for Webmaker Clubs.

Context

The community was asked the extent to which they supported the following proposal, using a five-point scale. 5 indicated strong agreement.

Proposal 5: I believe a 'remix' button should allow me to remix the Web Literacy Map for my community and context.

• en_UK: 3.89 (138 respondents)
• es_CL: 4.86 (7 respondents)
• fr: 3.57 (29 respondents)
• hi_IN: 5.00 (1 respondent)
• id_ID: N/A (1 respondent)
• ml_ML: 5.00 (1 respondent)

Comments

Positive

"If for no other reason than to gather more data on how people are using it. Would love to tie it to our OERs and curriculum making too, but that's a different problem."

"I'd love to see a remix button, but one that integrated with GitHub to include proper historical attribution and version control. Simply spinning up multiple HTML pages without knowing who changed what when would cause more confusion I think. Only a basic level of skill is needed to fork a repo on GitHub and edit text files directly on the website. We could provide guidelines on how to do that for people who want to contribute."

"I don't like the general idea beyond the wording "remix" across the whole WebMaker project (it's way to blurry and full of falls promises). But yes, being able to adjust the map for a given context is a key point."

"This has to be done. Every community or region can develop their region specific maps, which I think would be a great idea."

"Context and language is important and should be balanced with links back to the fundamentals and ideals that are developed in the map. Remix will also allow adjustment in temporal contexts. Times change, new importances arise."

"Very much yes!"

"Agree in principle but not many people will do this. I wouldn't make it a high priority. Those who like to remix will always find a way."

"Definitely! Some of the things on the map now is strictly no-go in my context, I would love to have the ability to Remix to better match my needs."

"So Mozilla!"

"Couldn't agree more! The web we want is open, and so should the curriculum and the contents. It would be super awesome to have a remix button so that we could get in more thoughts on this as well as get insights from people on what they think."

"Of course! Isn't that part of the point? These are documents that are meant to played with, changed, and evolved. The Internet is not a monolith and the more we encourage users to adapt, remix, and (perhaps most importantly) translate these to fit their needs, the better off we all are."

"Open up the possibilities for those who want to engage with the map and to use it in their own environments."

"Interesting idea!"

"With context sure, the remix Mozilla homepage was a great touch. Remixing an entire map as a novice would be frustrating and bewildering, equally - it would be great for people to be able to tweak it."

"100% yes. Primarily from the point of view that we're espousing transparency and participation."

"It just makes sense and is an example of practicing what you preach."

"Yes, I agree we need to walk the talk and make the map remixable. This is a good starter "make" project for anyone who is actively developing curriculum."

"Great idea"

"意見該被傾聽，讓此份文件更加完善" ("The opinions to be heard, so that this document is more perfect")

"To qualify - any remixed asset should always automatically have a link back to the original - WML - is this feasible in technical terms?"

"Awesome idea"

"Also a good idea, particularly if we add a license requirement to indicate it was remixed. Allows for the "forking" we were talking about, while also indicating there's an original to go back to. (Again, great work!)"

"I think it would be great if you could ""chunk"" the Literacy Map so people could use it ""as is""; just the individual strands or if they wish the individual elements of each strand - with due acknowledgement"

"Different people and institutions have different priorities. A remixing of these priorities may prove helpful"

"This would provide access for people to personalise and change fir particular audiences"

"Presenting the map as an API/json/xml might lead to different ways to explore or present it.

"Yes embed more comments in Laura's tool so if folks want to add #CCSS connections or ISTE standards they can."

"While I don't know if I would remix it... I see no harm in practicing what you preach!  ;-)"

"Remix is in alignment with our Mozilla Values. Let's do it!"

"Remix is very usable.would prefer this also"

"A great idea. I'll be fascinated to see how you could operationalise this."

"Having a remix button will always encourage the people to dig deep into the Web."

"Might be useful ..."

"yep. if nothing else as a point of principle."

"I think this could be useful for educators/facilitators but is perhaps not necessary. We reference/are inspired by the Web Literacy Map already but a remixable option may be helpful as well!"

"Yes, and truly, it can already be remixed if one wanted to, with xray goggles. But ya, I think it could be a great way to give educators & community leaders a starting point for a learning journey but allow them to swap out or build in more modules."

"Absolutely, but perhaps this could be more than just an opt-in button, it could be a stronger, more immediate and appealing action from the very beginning."

Neutral

"let's make the map actionable - but not definitively only webmaker."

"Less valuable to have a remix button than case studies of how other partners/constituents have modified the map to meet their own needs. Could be seen as additional layers / views of the map, but we don't need map remix cancer. Instead, more valuable to have curated, high quality adaptations of the map."

"In some contexts remixing it would be good to relate to situations better "

"Yes, I think this could be really awesome. As then you can highlight a compensity and focus on this area within the map. "

"you'd probably want a way to have standards though"

"Completely torn on this one. On the one hand it would embody the open principles on which both the map and Mozilla is built. It is also useful to be able to adapt tools for contexts. However, it could also potentially lead to mixed messages and dilution of the core 'literacy' principles that are in the map."

"I leave this to the experts"

"I guess... not sure why it is needed if it is already open? Certainly if you do a fancy-schmancy graphical version then all of the assets need to be available to download and use..."

"Well yes people should be abL to adapt - are you suggesting a simple drag and drop functionality? How would you encourage other versions to be openly licenced and shared? Think this is more than a button "

"this is a little over my head"

"Time and motion, nice to do but easy then to depart from the community of practice"

"Pas d'opinion. Je ne connais pas assez l'utilisation du manuel pour avoir une opinion." ("No opinion. I do not know enough about the use of the manual to have an opinion.")

"Quel en serais l’intérêt?" ("What'd be the point?")

Negative

"Maybe. I believe that pushing for broader adoption and more conversation around a unified taxonomy is more useful than adding more taxonomy to the mix. A remix button could be nice as a tool for research and process to explore new options, but should not be a primary feature imho."

"Perhaps if the name is required to be changed. But much better to get these people to help make the core map work for them."

"do people outside of mozilla know what remix is in this context?"

"I personally think, this might break the purpose of defining a map (standard). A lot of thought is put into this while creating it. Adding a Remix button makes it more open but venerable"

"As I think the Literacy Map should basically be some sort of *standard* as an enabler for an open web and don't reailly see the need for adding a remix button. You can end up in a situation where different communities introduce things that have nothing to do with an Open Web/Literacy."

"I like the idea of a remix button, but also feel the map is not going to be a static resource and allowing remix could take away from the community-building aspect. The benefit of using GitHub is that updates to the original will be available to the forks and forks can do pull request for changes they want to recommend to community. Seems like we need a teaching kit on using GitHub to customize a map."

"Anyone wishing to remix it can fork it via github and can deploy it on his own."

"This seems like another marketing tool, designed to increase adoption, and needs validation. Is it fair to hope that someone familiar enough with the literacy map to repurpose it would have the skills to remix without a button?"

"The license already allows remixing. I am not sure a "remix" button is necessary."

"The whole point is that the Web Literacy Map is remixable. If the suggestion is to have it on Github for the possibility of forking and remixing, then yes. If the suggestion is to have this happen on webmaker.org then the answer is no—because we want people diving into the effort with both feet and not just hitting a button to see how else it might shake up."

"I think it needs to have an owner, who oversees transitions from 1.0 to 2.0 etc (as in this exercise). You could then encourage 'localisation' - remixing to me sounds like ceding too much control over something that needs coherence and stability for credibilty."

"May be +1"

"I think remixing is good, but I think we also have to figure out how to preserve the Mozilla branding if we're going to convince others that our web literacy skills are robust and credible. "