so there was this conversation i had asking for some clarity in the ip policy of my workplace. it’s pretty standard stuff, mind you – a boiler plate sheet that’s a mandatory part of the employment contract you have to sign when joining.
and maybe because of the general maturity of the management that i’ve seen in many other regards, i had really high expectations. yes, i’m naive and stupid like that. so the conversation concluded saying we see where you’re coming from, and why you don’t fit the typical employee profile that the policy was created for, but no we can’t see a way to make any exceptions. yes it’s all grey, you’re making valid points about ip and intellectual sharing… but nada, nothing we can tell you.
it shut me down emotionally. and that’s the second time that ip has gagged me. the specter of not being able to share, of being forcibly pushed into an intellectually selfish mode simply because it’s The System’s de facto way of operating – to have whatever imagination and effort you dedicate to finding other ways being effortlessly silenced by this de facto… it gets to me. it really does.
but today i saw this news article and it gave me hope. so i thought… let me at least shake off some cobwebs here to show what i have been working on recently. i attempted (don’t even ask how much i shook in my shoes…!) to write a paper. i have requested an assortment of profs to review it and give me their opinion. if they said it was worth a damn, i was going to put it up on open source rather than the traditional paid journals. but today, in gratitude for this court ruling and since the whole deal could take ages… i’m going to go ahead and put it up here. here’s my proposal for an agentic model of instructional design.
brickbats and opinions on it are welcome. 🙂