<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Teachers&#039; Unions Should Demand Support for the IMS Common Cartridge Standard</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mfeldstein.com/why_teachers_unions_should_demand_support_for_the_ims_common_cartridge_stan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mfeldstein.com/why_teachers_unions_should_demand_support_for_the_ims_common_cartridge_stan/</link>
	<description>What We Are Learning About Online Learning...Online</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 04:42:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Feldstein</title>
		<link>http://mfeldstein.com/why_teachers_unions_should_demand_support_for_the_ims_common_cartridge_stan/#comment-613</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Feldstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://923658061#comment-613</guid>
		<description>To begin with, I would think that encouraging the creation of more educational content that is easily usable in the platform of their choice would be attractive to universities. Beyond that, there&#039;s the issue of platform migration. As painful as it is, sooner or later most universities will go through a migration from one LMS to another. Content migration is often a huge part of the pain and expense involved in that migration. So Common Cartridge reduces vendor lock-in for them.&lt;br /&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To begin with, I would think that encouraging the creation of more educational content that is easily usable in the platform of their choice would be attractive to universities. Beyond that, there&#8217;s the issue of platform migration. As painful as it is, sooner or later most universities will go through a migration from one LMS to another. Content migration is often a huge part of the pain and expense involved in that migration. So Common Cartridge reduces vendor lock-in for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://mfeldstein.com/why_teachers_unions_should_demand_support_for_the_ims_common_cartridge_stan/#comment-612</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2007 20:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://923658061#comment-612</guid>
		<description>What is the incentive for a unviersity to sign on to the CC initiative? I understand it lowers costs for publishers, and teacher (as you mention) can bring their content accross platforms, and students can have access to potentially better online course content...but where does that leave the benefit for a university?any thougths would help. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is the incentive for a unviersity to sign on to the CC initiative? I understand it lowers costs for publishers, and teacher (as you mention) can bring their content accross platforms, and students can have access to potentially better online course content&#8230;but where does that leave the benefit for a university?any thougths would help. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: mfeldstein.com @ 2012-02-09 13:12:36 by W3 Total Cache -->
