Meeting #1: Define key questions/considerations the Open 2020 Working Group should address. Who is missing? Work products?

Team: Chris B, Hunt, MJ, Curt

** **

Group also wants to include incentives. Value Propositions definitely good, too; what value propositions work for each constituency, where do they conflict vs. align? Definitions of Open, not worth working on - use Budapest definition? (ask Nicole, Peter S)

Who is missing? Keep it from being too elite

• Meetings not just at MIT and Hewlett
• Engaging state and public ed leaders - e.g. SUNY, CUNY (Mark McBride), ASU global freshman academy
• Faculty who are actually doing it
• Norman Bier
• Richard Sebastian / Achieving the Dream, cc initiative
• Google - Jamie Casap
• Quality Matters - Deb Adair, OER process for quality control
• ISKME
• Employers - they can contribute to the content, or they'll go around higher ed
• Publishers - various types, comm'l journal, textbook, university presses, OAJournal

Metric: public ed wants access and outcomes 

Some value propositions for Open

• Cuts the tether to time and space - learn when, where, how you want
• Modularity to custom ordering to stacking into solid credential 

Questions of scope:

• Expand beyond higher ed only vs high school also?
• Expand beyond US centric to global?

Work products:

• ?