Black web? How about Black-borg?
Michael Rees has pointed out "Blackweb" as a new name for Blackboard that has been suggested in light of their over-the-top legal activities. A trekkie-minded colleague has suggested "Black-borg", which I think is my favorite so far.
Silliness aside, I've cooled down a bit, had a few days to absorb the media and commentary and have boiled it all down to three things that really have me fuming over this situation.
1) I've worked with Blackboard at client universities for almost 5 years now. I've seen the product go through numerous upgrades, experienced the challenge of overcoming academic and student perceptions after a massive product failure, and more recently gained an insight into the corporate culture of Blackboard as a company. I'm used to being known as "the Blackboard person" while in differing roles (although I do try to correct this view). There has been discussion about how this move by Blackboard will impact on how academics perceive Blackboard as a product. I love the challenge of opening academics' eyes to the possibilities and opportunities educational technology can provide them. It's what I'm passionate about and what gets me up in the morning. It can also be tough. By behaving in a manner which I think is in opposition to many academics' educational ideals, I believe Blackboard has just made my job a whole lot harder.
2) I really don't like the way Blackboard has handled this in terms of communication. I generally receive an official email every 2 weeks or so from Blackboard, advising of everything from conferences to new appointments in my region. The only official communication I've seen from Blackboard regarding the patent and resulting legal action is an email from Michael Chasen, CEO which was sent to a single US usergroup and then forwarded to a global community listserv. This is not how you go about keeping your clients in the loop. Part of the email reads:
3) Which leads me to the third thing that really gets me about all this. I have no problem with patents on technology. I have no problem with capitalising on innovation. Everyone needs to make money somehow and Blackboard has already managed to make an awful lot of money in support of something great. I do have a problem when capitalist activity such as this stumbles a little too far into the sacred three of Education, Health Care, and Religion. I realise that education is already far more of a commodity than it has been in the past, especially in Australia, but there need to be limits on how far this trend can go.
Silliness aside, I've cooled down a bit, had a few days to absorb the media and commentary and have boiled it all down to three things that really have me fuming over this situation.
1) I've worked with Blackboard at client universities for almost 5 years now. I've seen the product go through numerous upgrades, experienced the challenge of overcoming academic and student perceptions after a massive product failure, and more recently gained an insight into the corporate culture of Blackboard as a company. I'm used to being known as "the Blackboard person" while in differing roles (although I do try to correct this view). There has been discussion about how this move by Blackboard will impact on how academics perceive Blackboard as a product. I love the challenge of opening academics' eyes to the possibilities and opportunities educational technology can provide them. It's what I'm passionate about and what gets me up in the morning. It can also be tough. By behaving in a manner which I think is in opposition to many academics' educational ideals, I believe Blackboard has just made my job a whole lot harder.
2) I really don't like the way Blackboard has handled this in terms of communication. I generally receive an official email every 2 weeks or so from Blackboard, advising of everything from conferences to new appointments in my region. The only official communication I've seen from Blackboard regarding the patent and resulting legal action is an email from Michael Chasen, CEO which was sent to a single US usergroup and then forwarded to a global community listserv. This is not how you go about keeping your clients in the loop. Part of the email reads:
We hope that you will come to see that our patent and law suit are not a dramatic change for the industry, but a fair course for us to protect our investments in our technology and your investment in Blackboard. Our aim is to build an organization that will endure and be there to support you as your needs evolve.
3) Which leads me to the third thing that really gets me about all this. I have no problem with patents on technology. I have no problem with capitalising on innovation. Everyone needs to make money somehow and Blackboard has already managed to make an awful lot of money in support of something great. I do have a problem when capitalist activity such as this stumbles a little too far into the sacred three of Education, Health Care, and Religion. I realise that education is already far more of a commodity than it has been in the past, especially in Australia, but there need to be limits on how far this trend can go.
posted by Kate at
1:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home