Talk:Virtual world language learning/1
References to AVALON and EduNation Islands edit
Using virtual worlds in language learning and teaching is an important new development. The article covers the main features of using virtual worlds but would benefit from updating, e.g. a mention of the series of annual SLanguages conferences dating back to 2007 and the redesign of the EduNation Islands towards the end of 2010. GroovyGuzi (talk) 11:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I have added a reference to AVALON, an important and successful EC-funded project: http://avalon-project.ning.com/ AVALON now incorporates the SLExperiments Group, which has had its own wiki for some time: http://avalon-project.ning.com/group/slexperimentsteachersgroup GroovyGuzi (talk) 12:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
>>> Dubious statements compared to what is stated below!--88.130.221.184 (talk) 12:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I added the reference to AVALON once before at the same time as the NIFLAR reference, but the AVALON reference was removed by an unknown editor 88.130.222.12. I don't know why the reference was removed, as both EC-funded projects have equal importance and the people involved in the two projects are in regular contact with one another, including face-to-face meetings such as the annual meeting of the Virtual Worlds Special Interest Group at the EUROCALL (2010) conference in Bordeaux, France. Anyway, I have now restored the reference. GroovyGuzi (talk) 20:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
The reference to AVALON has been removed once again, along with a reference to the EduNation Islands. I do not want to get into an edit war and I therefore request that a Wikipedia editor intervenes. There is no reason why the references to AVALON and the EduNation Islands should be removed. GroovyGuzi (talk) 10:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC) GroovyGuzi (talk) 14:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
AVALON and EduNation Islands zapped again! Why? Someone seems pretty determined to zap references to AVALON and the EduNation Islands without giving a reason on this discussion page. Perhaps they are involved in rival projects. I am in favour of including a wide range of references to projects focusing on language learning and teaching. GroovyGuzi (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Is it reasonable to include references to the AVALON project and the EduNation Islands in the article on Virtual world language learning? GroovyGuzi (talk) 19:13, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
The Avalon project remains under EU auditing review process due to mis-administration complaints, and because of questionable and incomplete project results. Avalon project targets:
"This project aims to:
- create and test out exemplar tasks and activities designed to promote communication amongst the learning community. These materials will be based on work being carried out currently and these tasks and activities will be located in linked 2 & 3D environments and will be made available for future users. These will be accompanied by best practice guidelines for the users;
- create and pilot a training course for teachers who would like to extend their e-learning skills to include virtual teaching worlds. This course will run for the first time during the project and will be offered after the project has finished as an extension of the LANCELOT School as a separate validated and internationally recognized qualification. The materials for running the course will also be available for any other enterprise wishing to run the qualification. 2 & 3D materials will be stored for future use."
and results display significant administrative gaps, take no reference to, and are inconsistent with EAQUALS as certification and validation body. E.g., the following list of items and requirements are ignored and not complied with:
"WHEN YOU CHOOSE AN EAQUALS SCHOOL YOU CAN BE SURE OF THE FOLLOWING:
- Legal requirements: All legal requirements are scrupulously checked during EAQUALS inspections. EAQUALS members are committed to exceeding minimum standards in all areas, including client welfare, health and safety, and staff pay and conditions. All EAQUALS schools are accredited by the appropriate national agency in countries where such agencies exist; EAQUALS membership is a commitment to providing added value.
[European Level: Disregard of this item has legal ramifications with regard to bona fide operations and contract capability of Lancelot School GmbH under German Distance Learning Protection Act, EU Directive 97/7/EG Distance Sales Directive, and EU Directive 2005/29/EC Unfair Commercial Practices Directive]
[German Level: Non-compliance to German Distance Learning Protection Act has also been ruled upon by German Supreme Court making the legal base of the EU mis-administration complaint very strong. Under this ruling Lancelot School GmbH, as responsible GmbH entity for sales and execution of virtual distance learning courses, possesses no contract capability for virtual distance learning courses if compliance with this German Act is not established. Customers have the right to call any agreements void and demand their money back. Such an incomplete contractual status is not acceptable as EU project results, which is also available for any other enterprise wishing to run the qualification.]
- Truthfulness: All information published by an EAQUALS school is scrupulously checked in EAQUALS inspections. EAQUALS members are committed to providing clear, accurate and complete information about all aspects of the courses and services offered.
- Teaching: Effective, well-planned and enjoyable teaching by well-qualified, trained staff with access to extensive teaching resources. All EAQUALS members have observation and teacher development programmes. All teachers are observed and evaluated in EAQUALS inspections.
- Curriculum: A tried and tested teaching/learning system with a clearly defined curriculum. Objectives and assessment are based upon the Common European Framework of Reference. Balance and variety in the programme are assured.
- Appropriate standards: The EAQUALS quality standards that are used for self-assessment and as inspection criteria are industry-specific: they have been developed by language teaching specialists over many years. Unlike most quality management schemes, including ISO schemes, the EAQUALS scheme covers not just processes and documentation but also what happens in reality. The focus is on the school-in-action, the experience of clients – not the school-in-theory.
- External quality control: The existence of internal quality assurance systems is verified and all aspects of the school are rigorously controlled during EAQUALS inspections. All EAQUALS schools undergo a thorough two day inspection by two independent inspectors every three years in relation to very detailed quality criteria covering all aspects of the operation. The only comparable scheme, worldwide, is the British Council’s English in Britain scheme."
[External quality control is not implemented. Avalon and Lancelot GmbH are thus inconsistent with implementing a validated and internationally recognized qualification as claimed, which in turn represents Deceptive Advertising, a breach of EU Directive 2005/29/EC Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.]
Operators of EduNation Islands were/are also Avalon project sub-contractors under EU auditing and review focus.
Note: The above [comments] do not represent the full scope of the mis-administration complaint.
In summary, merely handling Educational Arts without establishing Final Contractual & Commercial Capability is a half-way finished & skewed job, as well as a useless approach for EU project results. This is the strategic gap for the mis-administration complaint.
The EU project target is by far not achieved if customers can call the course agreement void and demand their money back, as well as escalate to the fining of unfair commercial practices.
Merely pushing bike pedals, without holding the handlebars and reading a roadmap, is the core of the mis-administration complaint.
The following reference also reflects the awareness of the EU Commission and their auditing commissioners:
"Online Educa Berlin 2010 e-Learning Policy Workshop Easing in a New Era: OEB-Workshop on the "European Digital Education Agenda" http://www.icwe.net/oeb_special/news171.php
According to a recent study on behalf of the European Commission, many Internet service providers do not fully comply with European law - not even in their official terms of use. This is a major hurdle for those who would like to apply such services in an educational context, in schools as well as in corporate learning, Husmann stresses: "We need fully trusted and reliable Internet services for digital education and learning use because we are dealing with highly sensitive personal information, particularly when it comes to creating personalised and lifelong learning environments.""
--88.130.195.179 (talk) 07:01, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Hmm... ...this is beginning to sound like a well-known private vendetta against AVALON and EduNation. Comments anyone?
Correction of fact (1): there used to be three EduNation Islands, each of them owned and managed by Gavin Dudeney of The Consultants-E. Gavin Dudeney has now closed EduNation II and has transferred the ownership of EduNation I and III. EduNation III has nothing to do with AVALON. It is now privately owned and managed by an American university professor. EduNation I is also privately owned and managed, and it has nothing to do with the AVALON project either.
Correction of fact (2): The period of European Commission funding for the AVALON project came to an end in December 2010. I am unaware of any public announcements by the EC about the successes and/or failures of the project. Presumably the project is still undergoing the normal auditing procedure conducted by the EC after the end of its funding period. This often takes several months and is strictly confidential, so statements about "mis-administration complaints etc" are completetly misleading. I write from experience as a former European Commission evaluator.GroovyGuzi (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've moved this block of conversation to the end of the page where it belongs - it had effectively destroyed the summary displayed on the RfC pages. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from personal attacks and rhetoric propaganda, and focus on the presented factual arguments regarding Avalon's and Lancelot School GmbH's EU Project Mis-Administration, due obligations, bona-fideness, and contract-capability, as well as the EU Directive regulated and ultimately German Supreme Court ruled customer money-back risk. Sheep-rally is not the response here either. More reverse burden-of-proof beef please, mere flat denial as rhetoric propaganda doesn't work. You need to back your arguments with concrete evidence and not with sweeping rhetoric propaganda denials.
All sub-contractors under contract of EU projects are obliged to Transparency, Integrity, and Accountability as warranted auditing principles towards EU taxpayers. Avalon and Lancelot School GmbH obligations for reverse burden-of-proof exist.
In search of integrity and accountability
The gap comparisons Target vs Actual are factually evident in front of your eyes alone in the pasted texts presented here:
- Avalon and Lancelot School GmbH (GmbH = German Limited) have no qualifications, self-authority, or self-mandate for self-proclamation of validation and international certification. Nor have any quality management schemes been provided. Do you know of any authorisations, or can you present such? Any such self-fabricated implications are Deceptive Advertising.
- Validated and internationally recognized EAQUALS provides the relevant quality scheme to be deployed, which finds zero compliance by Avalon and Lancelot School GmbH.
- Avalon and Lancelot School GmbH do not stand above the law, nor above a German Supreme Court ruling or EU directives and their according national legislation. Those distance learning courses promoted, sold, and executed by the GmbH are not registered and approved by the German authority ZFU.de as duly designated. Legal ramifications of EU Directives for promotion, sales, and execution of distance learning at European level have not been addressed either. Compliance with Telemedia regulations needs to be included too. All of these items fall into the project scope of Avalon's EU project targets, and receive zero attention, in spite of a series of information events, which were heroically and greatly self-appraised and self-backslapped.
- Avalon and Lancelot School GmbH are not bona fide and contract-capable. Distance learning customers are eligible to demand their money back. This is grossly way off-track for an EU project.
- You are wrong. The EU Commission's study empirically reflects their awareness of Mis-administration occurring even on a wider scale.
- Heike Philp is CEO of Lancelot School GmbH (registered at the company registry of the local court in Freiburg, Germany). She is resident owner within the SL EduNation Group, and designated executive manager for all of EduNation I and III.
So your correction (1) is wrong and does not reflect the actual status of authorisations.
- EU taxpayer questions MUST be answered by Graham Stanley, an employee of the British Council (who is obligated to comply with British Council quality management guidelines), and who operated as sub-contractor of Avalon from Barcelona, Spain:
Why did Mr. Stanley not refer to the EAQUALS quality management scheme in the course of the Avalon EU project (& Lancelot EU predecessor project), and introduce EAQUALS' implementation, even though the British Council - his employer - is a benchmark Associate Member within EAQUALS?
Mr. Stanley's obligations are two-fold, as British Council employee under their quality guidelines, then as sub-contractor under an EU contract. Yet, in fact, Mr. Stanley actually operates mis-administrated in both contingencies. Even your mentioned The Consultants-E from Barcelona, Spain, are Project Partners of EAQUALS, smack in the Barcelona backyard of Mr. Stanley.
- All of the above items about EU Project Mis-administration also apply to the Lancelot EU Project, the predecessor project of Avalon, and the name source for Lancelot School GmbH. Those strategic mis-administration gaps mentioned can be traced throughout a period of two EU projects 2 x 2 years = 4 years. Both projects must actually be reverse-audited accordingly. EU taxpayer question:
Why wasn't the EAQUALS quality management scheme implemented during the course of the predecessor Lancelot EU Project, even though the same sub-contractors and contingencies were involved?
>>> As long as due and warranted EU taxpayer questions remain unanswered, there is no clearance for EU Avalon project/Lancelot School GmbH and EU Lancelot project. --88.130.206.225 (talk) 09:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Your correction (2) is incomplete too, the relevant peer EU Commissioners for Auditing, Inclusion, and Education, and ZFU.de have received according e-mails. This path was chosen to circumvent the EU Ombudsman. Transparency International also has offices for complaints. Please support the Stop Corruption Petition and EU debarment (blacklisting) measures.
ZFU.de http:///zfu.de
Contact the Commissioners (2010-2014) http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/vassiliou/contact/commissioner/index_en.htm
The European Ombudsman investigates complaints about mal-administration in the institutions and bodies of the European Union http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/home.faces
Transparency International in Brussels http://transparency.org/regional_pages/europe_central_asia/brussels_office
EU Public Contracting http://transparency.org/regional_pages/europe_central_asia/brussels_office/eu_public_contracting
--88.130.214.144 (talk) 04:15, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
In spite of the negative comments above on AVALON, the project is going from strength to strength and maintains a large and active Ning (over 500 members) at http://avalon-project.ning.com/
The EduNation Islands comprise a varied number of properties leased to educational institutions and professional associations that focus on the use of virtual worlds in language teaching and the delivery of training to language teachers.
Both AVALON and the EduNation Islands will feature in workshops and presentations at the forthcoming CALICO conference (17-21 May 2011) and EUROCALL conference (1 August to 3 September 2011) - along with many other projects dedicated to virtual world language learning. CALICO and EUROCALL maintain a joint Ning dedicated to virtual worlds: http://virtualworldssig.ning.com/
The article as it stands on 28 April 2011 is strong on virtual worlds technology but lacks up-to-date references to resources on virtual worlds language teaching pedagogy and methodology.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 09:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
As to legitimate and warranted commercial dis-appraisal (Geschäftlicher Tadel in der Wahrnehmung berechtigter Interessen, gesetzliche Tatbestände greifen), reverse burden of proof EU AVALON and LANCELOT project obligations with direct reference to the warranted factual matter listed remain without due response... those EU project objectives and their scope go beyond mere pedagogy-art bike-pedaling, as anyone can read and follow-up on. EAQUALS and the British Council are clear quality benchmarks, ZFU.de is an authorized public agency, EU Directives are in place, a valid Supreme Court ruling for immediate implementation has matured. Avoidance attempts are also outlawed. Due diligent bona fide-ness and contract-capability remain to be lacking. Demand your money-back. Playing a blind eye is not a competent response...
Thus, in the course, CALICO and EUROCALL hardly have any benchmark ranking. If things are off the brim of your teacher's hat, it doesn't mean those things don't exist. Your teacher hat and thinking are not a law of nature. ERIC Database provides 1206 hits for "Consumer AND Protection" http://eric.ed.gov/
As encyclopedic resource, Wikipedia quality requirements demand more than the limited viewpoint of some obscure Groupthink-driven in-group.
OECD > Consumers in a Digital Economy
>>> Econsumer.gov > Consumer portal to Report Complaints about Online & Related Transactions with Foreign Companies http://www.econsumer.gov/english/
OECD Consumer Policy Toolkit http://www.oecd.org/document/34/0,3746,en_2649_34267_44074466_1_1_1_1,00.html
PDF http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/browseit/9310011e.pdf
OECD proposes 12 approaches for consumer protection: Consumer Education & Awareness, Information Disclosure & Other Measures, Contract Terms Regulation, Cooling-Off Approaches, Moral Suasion, Codes of Conduct & Trustmarks, Standards, Licensing & Accreditation of Firms or Providers, Financial Instruments, Prohibitions, Dispute Resolution & Redress Mechanisms, Enforcement Strategies.
EU AVALON and LANCELOT projects are far away from achieving clearance... Fooling people with grand wizardry, un-authorized self-backslapping and self-certification, and cherry-picking is not going to do it... Endorsing operations without the required business license and supporting illegal deceptive advertising also encompass opportunity costs such as fining.
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
James, all you ever do is point people to irrelevant websites and pepper your postings with weird jargon ("pedagogy-art bike-pedaling", "off the brim of your teacher's hat", "groupthink", etc") that you and you alone understand. I know all about EAQUALS, I have worked as a consultant to The British Council on many occasions, and I have evaluated around 75 EC-funded projects. Why don't you just admit that you dislike AVALON and Lancelot for personal reasons? As for EUROCALL and CALICO, these are two long-established professional associations that set the highest standards in terms of acceptance of conference papers and publications. EUROCALL was initiated with the aid of EC funding in 1993 and CALICO goes back a further 10 years. BTW, I am not a teacher and have not been a teacher since 1993.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 11:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Legal and warranted factual matter is evident and listed... How about due reverse burden of proof to these factual items, instead of the usual rhetoric and avoidance propaganda. We haven't seen a shred of such due diligent proof.
No ZFU.de business license for Lancelot GmbH means money-back to clients... that means not licensed, not bona fide, not contract-capable... clearly backed by a Supreme Court ruling... any other type of advertisement is commercially deceptive and illegal. Consumer protection regulations go into effect. That's not how 4 year durating EU projects (LANCELOT, AVALON) go through the finish line and are properly administrated... No EU taxpayer is amused, no EU auditor is amused... Send the flopped EU tax-payer money back...
Groupthink is a professional term well-described here in Wikipedia and stems from the area of Organizational Development OD.
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 11:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree that "As encyclopedic resource, Wikipedia quality requirements demand more than the limited viewpoint of some obscure Groupthink-driven in-group". Is this the reason why you were blocked by Wikipedia in 2007 from contributing to the article on Translation? As for EAQUALS and the ZFU, you could pick on dozens of language schools in Germany that are not registered with EAQUALS or the ZFU, but you single out just two projects, AVALON and the Lancelot School. AVALON is, in any case, coordinated by the University of Manchester's School of Education and therefore outside the ambit of the ZFU. The University of Manchester has a long-standing reputation in the delivery of distance-learning courses: http://www.education.manchester.ac.uk/postgraduate/taught/courses/
The Lancelot School is just one of AVALON's ten project partners, so wny don't you just censor the lot? Whether or not the Lancelot School is a distance-learning school in terms of the ZFU's definition is a matter of debate, as it does not supply distance-learning materials but delivers language teaching live online in real time - as do many unregistered schools and private individuals who use a a variety of tools such as Skype, Adobe Connect and Second Life.
EduNation III Island in Second Life is managed by Randall Sadler, a professor at the University of Iowa, but in your infinite wisdom you have decided that he is a persona non grata too because Lancelot manages the payment and collection of his rent as a matter of convenience - in the same way as my business (Camsoft) manages the payment of rent for the HQ of the School of Oriental and African Studies on EduNation III Island.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 13:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Your rhetoric avoidance propaganda doesn't address the legal and warranted items mentioned.
A. If you know EAQUALS, then you can only validate that none of EAQUALS' scheme was/is actually implemented in LANCELOT & AVALON project results, nor within Lancelot GmbH. You may please validate this evidence, indeed...
B. The German Distance Learning Protection Act FernUSG defines things about the required business license process very clearly. Upon (1) duly obligated registration, only the public body ZFU is authorized to perform a (2) legal assessment and (3) issue a proper public letter of approval (öffentlich-rechtlicher Bescheid), or any other publicly deemed response.
C. Painting a different picture other than the issues A and/or B is deceptive, and has further-going competitive and consumer protective ramifications.
Your responses are not duly authorized anyway. These contingencies need authorized response from an EU project officer of LANCELOT and AVALON, and even of Lancelot GmbH, and such response must pertain to the legal and warranted factual matter listed.
Any sideline baloney and flame talk with you is useless...
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 13:17, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
So "sideline baloney talk", is it? You should know all about that... And what do you mean by "duly authorized"? ANYONE can contribute to this Wikipedia discussion.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 14:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Those EU project partners who have performed their signature to a legally binding EU project contract and its terms are authorized. Lancelot GmbH is registered at a commercial registry and those authorized officers are also entered into that registry. These officers can relay and issue authorization to their according representatives. Such due authorizations must be produced upon demand.
Evidently, you are not acquainted with any legal basics regarding authorization and willingness requirements, which could make a difference to the legal and warranted items listed. So you can repeat rhetoric avoidance propaganda as long as you want here, I don't see how you can really make a due diligently qualified contribution though.
If you have fun poking around in fog and painting sideline pictures, that's your problem. At this point, tangible response about A, B, and C is required.
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I am quite sure that if the European Commission or legal entity calls the AVALON project coordinator or the Lancelot School to task they are perfectly capable of dealing with the situation. This discussion forum is in any case not the appropriate place for arguing legal niceties. You brought the legal aspects into this discussion - not me. If you look at the start of this discussion I wrote:
Using virtual worlds in language learning and teaching is an important new development. The article covers the main features of using virtual worlds but would benefit from updating, e.g. a mention of the series of annual SLanguages conferences dating back to 2007 and the redesign of the EduNation Islands towards the end of 2010. I have added a reference to AVALON, an important and successful EC-funded project: http://avalon-project.ning.com/ AVALON now incorporates the SLExperiments Group, which has had its own wiki for some time: http://avalon-project.ning.com/group/slexperimentsteachersgroup
Your response was a bombardment of legalese rather than a measured discussion of why or why not the AVALON project deserved a mention.
If you have a grudge take it to the EC or take it to court in Germany and see how far you get.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 15:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Wrong... OECD has consumer protection interests > OECD Consumer Protection Toolkit
A. Proclaiming internationally recognized trainings by mere self-proclamation, without any valid quality scheme and without 3rd party auditing EAQUALS, is rogue and fraud. This is the presently documented and published status.
B. Distance learning contracts closed without a ZFU business license are void, thus making money-back demands from clients eligible. Operations without business license can be fined.
C. These contingencies represent EU project mis-administration, and incomplete compliance with binding EU project targets.
D. Further, any other pictures painted other than items A, B, and C represent deceptive advertising. Fining is also possible.
E. Under EU contract, LANCELOT, AVALON, and Lancelot GmbH officers are bound to reverse burden-of-proof obligations in order to comply with EU transparency, integrity, and accountability requirements.
Wikipedia doesn't need a reference to rogue service providers, mock & fake certificate mills, or any other limited value arrangements.
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 15:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, cut out the legalese and tell us about the achievements or failures of the AVALON project in terms of the pedagogical and methodological innovations that the project has made in the context of teaching foreign languages in virtual worlds. Tell us about the sim. Is it a well-designed learning environment? If not, what is wrong with it? Tell us about the EduNation Islands, especially the innovative work that has been done on creating holodecks for different learning scenarios. Do you think this approach works or are they on the wrong track? Forget about this legal stuff. It's of no interest whatsoever to me or to most teachers and students.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 15:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
As consumer protection interests rank way down, the same gap consistently applies to the elicitation of educational requirements, a grotesque lack of educational deliverables, and according metrics and validation (hand-in-hand with the removal of Teen SL, blindness to Opensim development - Video: New Aurora features, 256 standard sims in one, 4 times faster).
>>> No adoption of European language levels for job application (EU Language Passport) and CV (resume) knowledge, skills, and experiences employ a Self Assessment Grid.
- Causa efficiens was all you could really see (pushing bike pedals)
- Causa finalis had no weight (holding handlebars, reading a roadmap, mis-administration, crossing the EU project finish line).
So, it was easy to see that this arrangement was like the Titanic... Self-backslapping, self-proclamation, grand wizardry, cherry-picking...
Even Aristotle said, Causa finalis ranks above Causa efficiens... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#Causality.2C_The_Four_Causes
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I haven't a clue what you are talking about and I suspect most other readers are equally confused. I am heading for our local pub to enjoy a pint or two of excellent draft Spitfire real ale, brewed by Shepherd Neame. Over and out!
GroovyGuzi (talk) 16:19, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I didn't expect you to have a clue... watch out that your bike doesn't fall over when you pedal to the pub... Inquire about the business license required to sell that stuff...
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 16:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I am a bit clueless. That's why I have Professor in front of my name. Just checked Wikipedia for a reference to Shepherd Neame. Yup, it's famous!
GroovyGuzi (talk) 16:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Read this... your Grand Wizardry approach doesn't impress me... pay the EU money back
The Objective of Education is Learning, Not Teaching http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2032
Teacher Preparation is near Impossible as Currently Conceived: The path to teacher accountability & results-justifiable tenure
The Role of the Educator
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-downes/the-role-of-the-educator_b_790937.html
Crossing the EU project finish line and achieving the agreed upon deliverables and targets was/is the objective of the EU project contract... not just pocketing the money and making the finish line in any cherry-picking costume... You still need to cut out the avoidance behavior and get back to the items A-E above... in order to have a credible contribution...
>>> As long as clients face a lack of business license, a void training contract, and are eligible to demand their money back, something is grossly wrong... you don't stand above the Supreme Court ruling... and you don't stand above consumer protection... Professor Illusion won't change these facts... there is no cut-out of legalese, mister mis-administration.
In 4 years of project duration things didn't happen as specified, pointing to the nice design of holodecks is no substitute for graver items, like deceptive advertising and lack of business license & consumer protection at EU LANCELOT/AVALON project and Lancelot GmbH... ERIC Database, THE EDU DATABASE WORLDWIDE, provides 1206 hits for "Consumer AND Protection" http://eric.ed.gov/
Wikipedia now knows what you stand for... the old-fashioned way of ripping off grant and EU projects, then composing deceptive outreach...
--88.130.205.35 (talk) 16:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
James wrote "Wikipedia now knows what you stand for... the old-fashioned way of ripping off grant and EU projects, then composing deceptive outreach..."
Wikipedia knows very well what I stand for, and so do you - or you would if you read my CV. The above statement borders on libel. You know fully well that I am a retired university professor, living on his pensions and who indulges in Second Life as a hobby. I have no commercial interest whatsoever in any Second Life activities. I am EUROCALL's designated (unpaid) representative in SL, charged with the task of maintaining a presence in SL in order to disseminate information about our association. EUROCALL has no commercial interest in SL either, not does CALICO, with whom we share the HQ. You appear to be pretty good at dishing out abuse, referring to me as "Professor Illusion" and "Mister Mis-administration" and describing what I have written as "sideline baloney talk". This underlines the fact that you have run out of arguments. I have reported your behaviour to Wikipedia. Over and out (totally).
GroovyGuzi (talk) 18:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Stop avoiding due reverse burden-of-proof response to A-E, and legally and warranted resources & links:
- "The Objective of Education is Learning, Not Teaching", and
- "The Role of the Educator", and
- those ERIC Database 1206 references about "Consumer Protection".
Commercial dis-appraisal based on warranted legal references is legitimate... you haven't responded to these grave items.
(Geschäftlicher Tadel in der Wahrnehmung berechtigter Interessen)
>>> You don't blush to write "cut-out the legalese"... You do not stand above valid democratic legislation and legal rulings! Anything else is illusion and mis-administration... some others have rogue and criminal intent... Apparently you keep losing focus to your EAQUALS' background and EAQUALS' quality scheme...
WHEN YOU CHOOSE AN EAQUALS SCHOOL YOU CAN BE SURE OF THE FOLLOWING:
- Legal requirements: All legal requirements are scrupulously checked during EAQUALS inspections. EAQUALS members are committed to exceeding minimum standards in all areas, including client welfare, health and safety, and staff pay and conditions. All EAQUALS schools are accredited by the appropriate national agency in countries where such agencies exist; EAQUALS membership is a commitment to providing added value.
Those provided links of mine are all capable for reverse burden-of-proof. Other than rhetoric propaganda, I don't see a shred of due evidence on your part.
I have tangible arguments indeed, you have no response to these and no reverse burden-of-proof.
You are not consistent with the scientific community! Thumping your chest with Grand Wizardry does not substitute tangible and deductive raw data!
CALICO and EUROCALL are blind to "Consumer AND Protection", in spite of 1000s of ERIC Database resources, and blind to implementing EAQUALS' quality scheme! This is not Wikipedia quality policy as encyclopedic resource!
- Cambridge University Press: From Teacher to Manager This is a handbook for managers of language teaching organizations... In spite of accordingly specified contractual EU requirements and obligations, after 4 years of EU project duration and according pointers, EU LANCELOT/AVALON project results and Lancelot GmbH are mis-administrated and blind to this, CALICO and EUROCALL as well.
- OECD: Consumers in the digital economy http://www.oecd.org/document/49/0,3746,en_2649_34267_43281905_1_1_1_1,00.html
- The following reference also reflects the awareness of the EU Commission and their auditing commissioners:
"Online Educa Berlin 2010 e-Learning Policy Workshop Easing in a New Era: OEB-Workshop on the "European Digital Education Agenda" http://www.icwe.net/oeb_special/news171.php
According to a recent study on behalf of the European Commission, many Internet service providers do not fully comply with European law - not even in their official terms of use. This is a major hurdle for those who would like to apply such services in an educational context, in schools as well as in corporate learning, Husmann stresses: "We need fully trusted and reliable Internet services for digital education and learning use because we are dealing with highly sensitive personal information, particularly when it comes to creating personalised and lifelong learning environments.""
You support the avoidance of implementing EAQUALS' quality scheme, even in CALICO and EUROCALL - in tangible real life and in virtual worlds on AVALON and EduNation Islands! You support the mis-administration of EU project results! You support distance learning operations without a due business license, you support the lack of due diligent consumer protections, and you support deceptive advertising! Your rhetoric propaganda ploys are not supported by Wikipedia policy!
But remarkably in contrast, you do indeed support nice holodeck designs, and you also drink and promote beer brands here, under a pub business license... yet, I do not intend to pursue this sideline baloney talk...
Deliverable: So ultimately, how do your efforts contribute and tangibly correlate to higher European language levels for job application (EU Language Passport) and CV (resume) knowledge, skills, and experiences, which employ a Self Assessment Grid?
--88.130.208.2 (talk) 01:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
So, are you in effect saying that AVALON, the EduNations Islands, Lancelot School, CALICO and EUROCALL should be avoided like the plague?
Szekesfehervar (talk) 14:32, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, what happens to rogue distance learning service providers, mock & fake certificate mills, limited-value arrangements, where no quality schemes exist, who don't have a business license, where distance learning contracts are legally void via established Supreme Court ruling, and where clients are eligible to demand their money back, and the risk of fining exists due to lack of business license and deceptive advertising? Other than grotesque attempts of rhetoric propaganda and group dynamic exclusion, they haven't produced a shred of reverse burden-of proof, to which they are due diligently obliged too!
Do you still want to play the BLIND EYE towards EAQUALS' quality scheme and consumer protection? That's up to you... if you merely like nice holodeck designs, go ahead... I think your preferences, requirements, use cases, and demands will outstrip that service level fairly quick... Virtual Cave – an OpenSim mashup, New Aurora-Sim features, 256 standard sims in one, 4 times faster
All those business risks exist if I write them down or not, because the according warranted legal requirements and rulings are in place anyway... I am providing due continuity and risk management for you... According risk study cases exist, and you can find lots of stuff in the ERIC Database...
AVALON, the EduNations Islands, Lancelot School GmbH, CALICO and EUROCALL are far from being up-to-date after 4 EU project years of oh-so-fun grand wizardry, self-backslapping, self-celebration, and cherry-picking... Groupthink-driven blindness and internationally-outlawed Education Exclusion was the name of the game in these circles... (booooo don't rock the boat, or the grand wizards will come and get you)... Well now, the protected space of public grant money stroking has terminated, and the competitive rules of the commercial domain count... You can't play cry-baby if some feedback wind of legitimate commercial disappraisal blows in your face...
UNESCO Education Inclusion Policy Guidelines
http://www.scribd.com/doc/37626440/UNESCO-Education-Inclusion-Policy-Guidelines
Econsumer.gov is a portal for you as a consumer to Report Complaints about online and related transactions with foreign companies
http://www.econsumer.gov/english/
OECD Consumer Policy Toolkit
http://www.oecd.org/document/34/0,3746,en_2649_34267_44074466_1_1_1_1,00.html
The 6 Snares Fake Schools Set
http://distancelearn.about.com/od/choosingaschool/a/6snares.htm
Meanwhile, all I can say is that SL is proprietory space, and in open source Opensim the rogue risk level increases, because the grid operator role reduces to that of a utility provider, and content creators have more requirements with regard to content licensing, the risk mix is different, for a start... If I limited myself to researching the self-backslapping hat brim service level of those consumer protection fakes & mocks, I couldn't report the following...
Meta7 to shut down, citing trademark issues
http://www.hypergridbusiness.com/2011/04/meta7-to-shut-down-citing-trademark-issues/
>>> Yes, people shut down if they don't get their ducks lined up properly in the commercial domain!
At the Second Life tipping point – Hypergrid Business
http://www.hypergridbusiness.com/2011/04/at-the-second-life-tipping-point/
Content Piracy and Opensim Based Grids
http://shenlei.com/2010/12/03/content-piracy-and-opensim-based-grids/
Content Protection in OpenSim
http://treet.tv/shows/designingworlds/episodes/opensim-content
Li Hongchen v. Beijing Arctic Ice: the Virtual Policy Network
This is generally is regarded as the first instance of ‘virtual theft’ being recognised by a court.
The case concerns virtual items taken from a player’s account through some form of account hacking. The case was brought by the victim of the theft against the game company (rather than the other player) as the company refused to re-instate the virtual items. While the details of the case are slightly complex, the final judgment (over turning an appeal) found that the game publisher has a duty of care to its players, and specially that in this case its security systems were insufficient to ensure that virtual items could not be transferred out of players account through hacking and that this act constitutes theft.
http://www.virtualpolicy.net/arcticice
19th Consumers International World Congress, Hong Kong, 3-6 May 2011
http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/world-congress-2011
Issues include:
> Consumer Rights and Corporate Social Responsibility
- Why genuine corporate accountability holds the key to public trust, and how international CSR standards can empower the consumer to support sustainable business.
> Consumers in the Digital World
- How new forms of creative content are blurring the lines between producer and consumer, and how these challenge access and ownership in the Internet age.
http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/world-congress-2011/congress-information
--88.130.215.12 (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, Mr 88.130.215.12, I have not understood a word of what you have said in you last posting. I am just a postgraduate student trying to find the best resources of information about language teaching in virtual worlds. I was at the EUROCALL 2008 conference in Szekesfehervar (hence my ID) and it was probably the most inspiring conference I have ever attended. The presentations by Luisa Panichi and Bryan Carter on the Kamimo project were particularly good.
Szekesfehervar (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Maybe this helps to understand the core difference...
The Objective of Education is Learning, Not Teaching
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2032
Putting your Educational Use Case first, and not the Tool is another core difference...
How to Pick a Virtual Platform
http://www.hypergridbusiness.com/2011/01/how-to-pick-a-virtual-platform-revisited/
LANCELOT/AVALON/EUROCALL etc. are based on the false and legacy assumption, the Tool is a given entity, the Use Case must then adapt to the Tool. This is wrong, as Tools change and Use Cases are fairly stable, this approach ends over time topsy-turvy. Information about new and structure changing Tools and developments are combated in almost sectarian manner, so not to threaten the given entity Tool. Authentic, open, and inclusive innovation diffusion is not endorsed, anything outside the given entity Tool faces exclusion. Of course, the Use Case must be described first, your problem statement, your use case, your requirements, your specifications, then you choose a Platform and the according Tools. This is the IT way...
Tools don't look for their Use Cases... Use Cases choose their Tools. Your will experience these people in full denial about this, but you will not receive any concrete reverse burden-of-proof evidence for their hypothesis... Any other sideline explanation under the sun will emerge, also deceptive ones...
Even a study financed by Linden Lab supports this Use Case driven approach...
--88.130.215.12 (talk) 18:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
No, that doesn't make much sense either. I have visited the AVALON sim and the EUROCALL/CALICO HQ in SL. I attended a course at the EUROCALL/CALICO HQ, and we were taken on a tour of SL sims where different languages are spoken: Sardinia (Italian), Arcachon (French) and Munich (German). The tour opened my eyes to the possibilities of using authentic resources and native speakers. This is the kind of stuff I am looking for. The AVALON Ning is great for discussion. I have learned so much from its SLexperiments group. EUROCALL does not publish much on VWs in its journal (ReCALL), but the presentations on VWs at its conferences have been very good. I am looking forward to CALICO's conference later this month - can't afford to go there myself but there will be some online presentations in SL.
Szekesfehervar (talk) 19:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
... :-) It's up to you. I don't think you read that study with understanding in the short time. At some point, you will outgrow their limitations and see through that grand wizardry and sectarian culture. Meta7 with several 100 sims is shutting down, even though things looked wow and cool on the surface... I would assume that many independent presenters are bona fide, yet EU LANCELOT/AVALON and Lancelot GmbH are definitely not bona fide and not contract-capable. CALICO/EUROCALL know about EAQUALS, but don't implement it... that's not consistent :-)
Even the EU Commission is aware of the greater skewed situation and blah blah, don't assume that this won't be addressed effectively.
Those due diligent facts remain... demand your money back...
Econsumer.gov is a portal for you as a consumer to Report Complaints about online and related transactions with foreign companies http://www.econsumer.gov/english/
Well, what happens to rogue distance learning service providers, mock & fake certificate mills, limited-value arrangements, where no quality schemes exist, who don't have a business license, where distance learning contracts are legally void via established Supreme Court ruling, and where clients are eligible to demand their money back, and the risk of fining exists due to lack of business license and deceptive advertising? Other than grotesque attempts of rhetoric propaganda and group dynamic exclusion, they haven't produced a shred of reverse burden-of proof, to which they are due diligently obliged too!
Do you still want to play the BLIND EYE towards EAQUALS' quality scheme and consumer protection?
--88.130.215.12 (talk) 19:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I still find your postings very confusing, and your English is very difficult to understand - and I am a native speaker of English. What you say about EUROCALL and CALICO and EAQUALS does not make sense to me. I am a member of EUROCALL and thereby automatically enjoy some CALICO benefits too. Both are professional associations with not-for-profit status. Their members are mainly private individuals - mostly university teachers - but both accept corporate members too. Neither association teaches languages and neither recommends individual language teaching institutions, so neither can "implement" EAQUALS, as you put it. Both associations do, however, offer ICT training workshops on applications such as Moodle, Second Life, Web 2.0, Interactive Whiteboards, etc. I learnt the basics of SL in a EUROCALL workshop. CALICO's home is in the US, and EAQUALS is restricted to European institutions. I think EAQUALS is a useful scheme, and if I were looking for a school for a language student I would probably recommend an EAQUALS or British Council registered school. Anyway, that's all from me for now. This is obviously the wrong place to look for information about VW language learning. I doubt that I will be back.
Szekesfehervar (talk) 22:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Well great... the main article describes the following:
A. "EUROCALL and CALICO, two leading professional associations that promote language learning with the aid of new technologies, maintain a joint Virtual Worlds Special Interest Group (VW SIG) and a headquarters in Second Life."
and you, Szekesfehervar, write this:
B. "Neither association teaches languages and neither recommends individual language teaching institutions, so neither can "implement" EAQUALS, as you put it. Both associations do, however, offer ICT training workshops on applications such as Moodle, Second Life, Web 2.0, Interactive Whiteboards, etc."
These statements are not consistent. It seems we have 2 different messages coming from 2 different members, and your mission statements and public relation authorizations are not quite consistent. My understanding was that no non language teaching organizations were allowed to be a tenant under the new covenant rules since 10/2010 as declared by Heike Philp, executive manager of Edunation and Lancelot GmbH, at a Webheads meeting in 2010. An old legacy tenant performing legal training was even forced to leave prior to the new landscaping in order to enforce this new covenant rule.
1. So what are your registered purposes as non-profits, and who are the authorized officers?
2. Beyond this baseline issue of what you are as non-profits and what are your purposes, GroovyGuzi seems to feel he is authorized to execute public relations for Avalon and EduNation Islands, and promote their virtues. Let's question if he is authorized to do this, and if his messages are consistent with point 1.
If we don't have a clear picture about this, evidently the whole thread here is based on some hoax, and/or on one of those non bona fide actions of Avalon and EduNation Islands to launch some fake & mock "credibility message" in a completely un-authorized and deceptive manner.
Why don't you get your mis-administrated ducks lined up right first, CALISTO / EUROCALL, to whom this may concern?
After this baseline is clarified, I will surely answer feedback questions to specified items...
Among many legal and warranted issues addressed here, my main themes were Consumer Protection and Deceptive Advertising, so we are case study-wise smack in the middle of things. I'm sure Wikipedia would also like to see tangible answers here.
Thanks for your contribution, Szekesfehervar
--188.98.136.104 (talk) 23:28, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
No, Szekesfehervar is correct. Neither EUROCALL nor CALICO teaches languages. Both associations promulgate information about learning and teaching languages with the aid of new technologies, which is totally different from just teaching languages. This is quite clear from the statements at their websites - where you will also find their constitutions and the names of the officers who manage the associations. EUROCALL's HQ is at the University of Ulster and CALICO's HQ is at the University of Southwest Texas:
EUROCALL: http://www.eurocall-languages.org
CALICO: http://www.calico.org
Both associations have a strong focus on research. Articles published in EUROCALL's journal and conference paper proposals are subjected to a blind review process. The author and the author's institution are not identified in this process, so the article or conference paper proposal is reviewed purely on the basis of its merits as a report on research, development or reflective practice. Anything that looks like pure advertising of a commercial product is automatically rejected, but there are opportunities for commercial producers to display their products in exhibitions at EUROCALL and CALICO conferences. EUROCALL has a strong interest in promoting EU-funded projects: see the EURODIS website at http://camillegroup.upv.es/eurodis/
Many EUROCALL members are managing or have managed EU-funded projects and a number of members (including myself) have worked as consultants to the European Commission. EUROCALL has an excellent relationship with the European Commission. A senior EC officer, namely Gillian McLaughlin, headed a round table discussion on "Adding Value to EU-Funded Projects" at last year's conference, and she will be a keynote speaker at this year's EUROCALL conference. EUROCALL itself is the outcome of an EC-funded initiative in 1993 and regarded as a major success story insofar that it has sustained its existence for so many years after the one-year EC funding period.
All the current tenants on the EduNation Islands promote the teaching of languages in virtual worlds in a variety of ways. See the EduNation Islands wiki: http://edunation-islands.wikispaces.com
You keep using words such as "authorised" and you keep referring to legal issues - and I see that you have been taken to task by Wikipedia admin in this connection at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/88.130.205.35
In the academic world in which I operate authorisation is not an issue. I am a free agent. No one tells me what to do - I am retired. It is of no concern to me how a project is managed or whether its principal officer beats his wife and kicks his dog. If the outcomes look good then I say so, and this is the case with regard to AVALON the EduNation Islands and many other projects that I have reviewed and reported on. I receive no payment for doing what I do. I am not involved in any kind of public relations exercise. I merely report on initiatives, projects, articles and research in the sphere of new technologies and language learning and teaching. I maintain a website (ICT4LT) that embraces a wide range of topics in the area at http://www.ict4lt.org. It is a free site, initiated with European Commission funding, and I receive no payment for managing it.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 09:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
All EU projects have a signed contract and define outcomes (deliverables), rights, and obligations (like reverse burden of proof transparency, integrity, and accountability towards EU taxpayer demands), the signatures must be performed by authorized persons.
There is no limbo or "cut-out of legalese" in this. Beyond that higher-ranking legislative laws and judicial rulings apply. Anything else is false...
Europeanvoice.com: In Search of Integrity and Accountability http://www.scribd.com/doc/21462426/In-search-of-integrity-and-accountability
... and EU LANCELOT/AVALON projects and Lancelot Gmbh are in violation of a series of warranted legal matter.
The EU Commission is aware of widespread violations... it's a bit disquieting that you support a repeat Blind Eye role in this.
Again, you are way off track from due diligence, bona fideness, and the scientific community, like ERIC Database which provides 1206 hits for "Consumer AND Protection" http://eric.ed.gov/ In the course of this, transparency, integrity, and accountability are not your EU strengths...
These resources are not limited to language learning...
--188.98.136.104 (talk) 10:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You wrote: "All EU projects have a signed contract and define outcomes (deliverables), rights, and obligations (like reverse burden of proof transparency, integrity, and accountability towards EU taxpayer demands), the signatures must be performed by authorized persons."
I know this. I have worked as a evaluator for the European Commission and I have evaluated around 50 project proposals and around 25 completed projects. I have no knowledge of the EC's view of the LANCELOT/AVALON projects as I have not been asked to evaluate them. Such information is in any case confidential and is not released to the general public. EC evaluators sign an undertaking that they will keep such information to themselves. Only EC staff are permitted to release the information and it is normally released only to European Commissioners and to project coordinators, so it is a mystery to me how you have this inside knowledge. Turning a blind eye is therefore not an issue. I have insufficient information.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 11:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Lancelot GmbH has no ZFU business license after 4 EU project years... All of the violations and gaps are visible in publicly available links.
Do I have to repeat things again from above... Do you still want to play Blind Eye?
--188.98.136.104 (talk) 12:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't mention the name of the Lancelot School in any of the websites or blogs that I maintain. Not that I have anything against the school, of course. It seems to offer an interesting approach to live online language teaching - which my German colleagues tell me probably falls outside the scope of the ZFU's definition of Fernunterricht, as do the Goethe-Institut's courses in Second Life. Whether or not the Lancelot School has a business licence is of no interest to me - that's an issue for German lawyers. So in that sense, if you like, I am indeed turning a blind eye.
GroovyGuzi (talk) 12:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)