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

Team: Chris B, Hunt, MJ, Curt

** **

Value Propositions definitely good; what value propositions work for each constituency, where do they conflict vs. align?

Team also wants to include incentives that support behaviors toward the value propositions. Need to resolve overlap with Sustainability + Incentives group.

Definitions of Open, not worth working on - use the Budapest Open Access definition? (ask Nicole, Peter S)

Who is missing? Keep it from being too elite

• Meetings not just at MIT and Hewlett. MJ will help arrange Meeting #2.
• 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:

• Higher ed only, or include high school also?
• Expand beyond US-centric to a global perspective? How might that happen given time and resources?

Work products:

• Map of incentives: key places, groups, and people