A sample text widget
Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis
euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.
Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan.
Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem,
suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.
|
I found an interesting news entry on osor.eu: “DK: Students to develop open source software for the Danish public sector”
I think this is really great. Students get involved in Free Software development and learn a lot without using “sandboxes” and get paid while at the same time public administrations get the software they really need and gain all the freedoms that come with Free Software like sharing it with other administrations and reduce costs on top of that. I’d love to see more of such projects. I found a similar one already, but if you are aware of others, please let me know!
The last qualification matches until August in our EURO 2012 in Free Software and open standards just ended. Here are the results:
| Group |
Country I |
Country II |
Score I |
Score II |
| A |
Azerbaijan |
Germany |
0 |
3 |
| C |
Faroe Island |
Estonia |
0 |
3 |
| D |
Belarus |
Luxembourg |
0 |
1 |
| D |
Bosnia and Herzegovina |
Albania |
1 |
1 |
| E |
Sweden |
Finland |
2 |
2 |
| E |
San Marino |
Hungary |
0 |
4 |
And here the latest tables:
| Group A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Germany |
7 |
6 |
0 |
1 |
25 |
9 |
16 |
18 |
| Belgium |
7 |
6 |
0 |
1 |
27 |
13 |
14 |
18 |
| Austria |
6 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
20 |
6 |
14 |
9 |
| Turkey |
6 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
11 |
13 |
-2 |
9 |
| Azerbaijan |
6 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
17 |
-17 |
1 |
| Kazakhstan |
6 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
17 |
-17 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group B |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Russia |
6 |
6 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
4 |
12 |
18 |
| Macedonia |
6 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
11 |
6 |
5 |
15 |
| Slovakia |
6 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
7 |
7 |
0 |
10 |
| Republic of Ireland |
6 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
8 |
-3 |
5 |
| Andorra |
6 |
1 |
0 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
| Armenia |
6 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
1 |
10 |
-9 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group C |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Estonia |
7 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
23 |
4 |
19 |
16 |
| Italy |
5 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
17 |
7 |
10 |
13 |
| Slovenia |
6 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
4 |
0 |
9 |
| Serbia |
5 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
10 |
-8 |
4 |
| Nothern Ireland |
4 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
-5 |
2 |
| Faroe Islands |
7 |
0 |
2 |
5 |
0 |
11 |
-11 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| France |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
4 |
16 |
15 |
| Romania |
6 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
12 |
9 |
3 |
15 |
| Albania |
5 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
8 |
| Luxembourg |
6 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
6 |
10 |
-4 |
7 |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina |
6 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
11 |
-5 |
3 |
| Belarus |
6 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
11 |
-11 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Netherlands |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
21 |
6 |
15 |
15 |
| Hungary |
6 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
18 |
6 |
12 |
15 |
| Sweden |
6 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
15 |
8 |
7 |
10 |
| Finland |
6 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
12 |
5 |
7 |
10 |
| Moldova |
6 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
17 |
-17 |
1 |
| San Marino |
7 |
0 |
1 |
6 |
0 |
21 |
-21 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Israel |
7 |
6 |
0 |
1 |
17 |
5 |
12 |
18 |
| Croatia |
6 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
11 |
4 |
7 |
15 |
| Latvia |
6 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
10 |
10 |
0 |
9 |
| Malta |
6 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
7 |
9 |
-2 |
8 |
| Greece |
6 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
11 |
-6 |
5 |
| Georgia |
7 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
0 |
10 |
-10 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Switzerland |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
5 |
6 |
15 |
| Bulgaria |
5 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
6 |
5 |
1 |
7 |
| Wales |
4 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
4 |
4 |
0 |
5 |
| England |
5 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
7 |
8 |
-1 |
5 |
| Montenegro |
5 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
7 |
-4 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group H |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Iceland |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
14 |
8 |
6 |
15 |
| Norway |
5 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
14 |
11 |
3 |
10 |
| Denmark |
5 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
12 |
12 |
0 |
7 |
| Portugal |
4 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
12 |
14 |
-2 |
3 |
| Cyprus |
3 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
5 |
12 |
-7 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group I |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Spain |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
2 |
14 |
12 |
| Czech republic |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
4 |
12 |
| Scotland |
4 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
-3 |
4 |
| Liechtenstein |
5 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
-4 |
2 |
| Lithuania |
5 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
11 |
-11 |
1 |
The most significant changes of the last three days are that Germany and Belgium switched positions in group A and Bulgaria with England in group E.
The next match will take place on August 10, 2011.
Another day in our EURO 2012 in Free Software and open standards. I won’t comment on the matches today and just provide the results and the remark that Armenia will not make it into the finals. You may want to read yesterday’s posting for more info.
| 04.06.11 |
B |
Macedonia |
Republic of Ireland |
2 |
1 |
| 04.06.11 |
B |
Russia |
Armenia |
3 |
0 |
| 04.06.11 |
B |
Slovakia |
Andorra |
1 |
0 |
| 04.06.11 |
F |
Latvia |
Israel |
1 |
2 |
| 04.06.11 |
F |
Greece |
Malta |
1 |
1 |
| 04.06.11 |
G |
England |
Switzerland |
1 |
2 |
| 04.06.11 |
G |
Montenegro |
Bulgaria |
1 |
2 |
| 04.06.11 |
H |
Iceland |
Denmark |
4 |
2 |
| 04.06.11 |
H |
Portugal |
Norway |
3 |
4 |
Here are todays results of our EURO 2012 in Free Software and open standards.
Turkey vs. Belgium was difficult. I don’t know what happend in the meantime, but I feel that having developed an own distribution and have it installed on every school computer plus making Free Software part of the official curriculum should have been counted more than it had in the past. I let Turkey win this time.
I complained about Germany after they foreign ministry decided to re-migrate to proprietary software and saw no chance for them to make it into the finals, but since there were so many municipalities that were added to the wiki, they might be still in the race.
The top teams of group C, Italy and Estonia had a tight match today. I decided for a draw. Please have a look at the data in the wiki and let me know if you’d decided otherwise. The better goal difference keeps Estonia on top for now.
And as I wrote in the last euro2012 posting, today, it becomes clear for some countries that they will definitely not make it into the finals. If nobody vetoes the results below within the next 3 days, the following countries are out:
- Kazakhstan
- Georgia
- Liechtenstein
- Lituania
To save me some time, I won’t update the tables in the wiki until June 7.
| Group |
Country I |
Country II |
Score I |
Score II |
| A |
Austria |
Germany |
3 |
4 |
| A |
Belgium |
Turkey |
2 |
3 |
| A |
Kazakhstan |
Azerbaijan |
0 |
0 |
| C |
Italy |
Estonia |
4 |
4 |
| C |
Faroe Islands |
Slovenia |
0 |
1 |
| D |
Belarus |
France |
0 |
4 |
| D |
Romania |
Bosnia and Herzegovina |
3 |
1 |
| E |
Moldova |
Sweden |
0 |
3 |
| E |
San Marino |
Finland |
0 |
3 |
| F |
Croatia |
Georgia |
1 |
0 |
| I |
Liechtenstein |
Lithuania |
0 |
0 |
 Surveying Prism Reflector (cc-by 2.0) The OSS Watch Research Technologies Service published their bi-yearly “National Software Survey 2010”.
I haven’t heard about it before and I didn’t even had the chance to read it thoroughly, but it looks as if it contains a lot of useful information. It would be good to have such a valuable resource in every European country. Does anybody know of similar projects? Another thing I like about it, is that it is licensed under CC-by 2.0 which allows me to quote rather extensively without a guilty conscience :). And the results are quite encouraging:
It sees
“an everincreasing awareness of the possibility of using open source software. There has been another big increase in the number of institutions that include the consideration of open source in their procurement policies, both in Higher Education and Further Education.”
For the first time they conducted a separate background survey:
“the most striking results of the background survey was the responses to the question of whether they contributed to open source software. A much higher proportion of the respondents indicated that they contribute to open source software compared to the main survey (figure 8).
This is also especially true on the departmental level. When IT directors are unaware of their staff’s contributions, they have no knowledge of or control over these IP assets generated in their institution. This disconnect needs to be addressed in order to ensure copyright is being correctly managed in these contributions. While there are more contributions than directors know about, there are fewer policies that encourage and manage these contributions.”
I think it’s great news that educational institutions contribute to Free software even though they are not even encouraged to do so.
Although the authors of the report spoil that joy with a valid concern:
“This indicates a lack of policy towards managing open source engagement. How do we know the staff member is allowed to contribute to an open source project? Who owns the copyright in these cases? Is the staff member liable when there is a dispute? Lack of a managed contribution policy can expose institutions to legal risk.
On the other hand, respondents are expecting more deployments of open source software on their IT infrastructure (figures 16 and 30). This makes it even more urgent that engagement with open source projects is addressed by the IT management. This needs to be done both in the job description of the IT staff as well as in the day-to-day management of their work.”
Very interesting are the reasons why institutions don’t migrate to Free Software. The often mentioned TOC do not appear among the top 5 of reasons, instead ‘interoperability and migration problems’ are. A subject FSFE has been working on for years.
“Other reasons given are largely issues of education and supplier availability.”
which goes hand in hand with
“The survey shows that there is now a real opportunity for open source suppliers to build offerings suitable for the sector.”
That’s good news, too! Is there anywhere a list of companies that offer support for educational institutions using Free Software? If not, we could start one in the Fellowship wiki.
Here is again a list of things I came across over the last two months:
There is an article on techlearning.com (warning: terrible commercial blocker!) which answers 8 claims that are often brought agains Free Software solutions in education:
- Open source is way too expensive. We can’t afford to change everything!
- Our teachers won’t use open-source software. They are accustomed to the products they already use.
- There’s no tech support for open source.
- The tech department will have to learn a new way of doing things.
- Open-source products aren’t as good as their mainstream counterparts.
- But no one uses Open–Office! Our students and teachers will learn useless software.
- There aren’t any opensource administrative or management products.
- We’re about to launch a one-to-one program. We can’t do that and go with open source.
Aleix Pol reported on the kde-edu list, that “Flávio Moringa, from the project that deployed KDE in Portugal schools (…) sent him the usability reports they prepared to see what’s needed to deploy properly KDE in education environments for young children” The report in Portuguese is being translated into English so that they can take actions to improve the KDE-edu suite. A really nice approach!
The Gleducar project published a comic about Free Software (totally made using FS tools). It’s available in Spanish, French and English. More translations are welcome.
Update: the comic is available in Portugese, Croatian, Russian, and German as well! (Thanks to mdim for letting me know)
The Free Software University has being launched. The comments are also interesting.
Nice interview with Frederic Muller, president of Software Freedom International (Softwarefreedomday.org), about educating with Free Software.
There was another posting “Get OS into your classroom” by David Trask. I liked this part:
Then you hear, “If it’s free how can it be any good? I know–I’ve heard it too. I then ask, how many of you enjoy water? Air? Love? The best things in life are truly free.
It might be interesting for people teaching Free Software to have a look at the Libre Graphics Magazine. If your school or university wants to subscribe to it, even better!
René Mérou reported about a recently published Free Software catalogue (spanish).
Bulgaria
Varna Free University from Bulgaria joins the FTA
Finland
missed in February, but here it is: EduKemix – mind blowing approach on IT at schools.
France
We found out about a Master in Free Software that one can study in Caen, France.
Germany
A recently published study provides info about the current status of e-learning in Germany (pdf in German) and which stakeholders are pushing it.
Greece
The OpenFest 2011 took place on April 9+10. One theme was the “Implementation of open source in the education and public sectors”. There seems to be some movement in Greece lately.
Italy
Our Fellow Federico Bruni took the time to translate an interview to Raffaella Traniello, a “libre” video maker who uses Free Software to make video clips with kids in primary school. Really worth reading!
Poland
School curriculum to be modernised with courses on free software
Switzerland
In February, the State Councilor in charge of the Department of Education, Culture and Sport of the Canton of Geneva, Charles Beer, approved the Structural Plan for Media, Imaging and Information and Communication Technologies of the Department promoting the use of open standards in education.
Outside Europe:
US: Open Education 2011 – Call for proposals
Australia: ICT in the Australian Curriculum. A debate worth discussing in Europe, too.
Distros:
Edubuntu 11.04 Beta 2 Released. You can even try the latest release in your browser.
Upcoming events:
“The summit’s main objective is to strengthen the free educational
software developers community, with focus on Latin America and the
Sugar and OLPC communities. The event will feature discussions around
future directions and strategy, hacking on specific projects, and
exchange of experiences among different deployments.”
Every Uruguayan student uses an OLPC XO laptop running Sugar – that’s
half a million free software users 😉
That’s about it for this time frame. I most likely drop the two months interval in the future and post less info more frequently. After all, this is a blog and not a magazine 🙂 Please keep me informed if you come accross something that might fit in these edu postings!
 razor's edge by kholkute (cc-by-sa) The last matches in March took place today. Things can change quickly and as we just learned a few days ago, a former “loser” can turn into a group winner. As of today, every single country still has the theoretical chance to make it into the finals. But after the next day (June 3rd), some teams will definitly be out even if they turn into a Free Software paradise after that. So, if you know something that could help a country, please feed the wiki accordingly.
Here are the results:
| Date |
Group |
Country I |
Country II |
Score I |
Score II |
| 29.03.11 |
A |
Belgium |
Azerbaijan |
5 |
0 |
| 29.03.11 |
A |
Turkey |
Austria |
2 |
3 |
| 29.03.11 |
C |
Estonia |
Serbia |
4 |
1 |
| 29.03.11 |
C |
Nothern Ireland |
Slovenia |
1 |
3 |
| 29.03.11 |
D |
Romania |
Luxembourg |
2 |
1 |
| 29.03.11 |
E |
Netherlands |
Hungary |
4 |
3 |
| 29.03.11 |
E |
Sweden |
Moldova |
3 |
0 |
| 29.03.11 |
F |
Israel |
Georgia |
2 |
0 |
| 29.03.11 |
I |
Czech republic |
Liechtenstein |
1 |
0 |
| 29.03.11 |
I |
Lithuania |
Spain |
0 |
5 |
And the current standings:
| Group A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Belgium |
6 |
6 |
0 |
0 |
25 |
10 |
15 |
18 |
| Germany |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
18 |
6 |
12 |
12 |
| Austria |
5 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
17 |
6 |
11 |
9 |
| Turkey |
5 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
8 |
11 |
-3 |
6 |
| Azerbaijan |
4 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
14 |
-14 |
0 |
| Kazakhstan |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
17 |
-17 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group B |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Russia |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
13 |
4 |
9 |
15 |
| Macedonia |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
9 |
5 |
4 |
12 |
| Slovakia |
5 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
6 |
7 |
-1 |
7 |
| Republic of Ireland |
5 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
6 |
-2 |
5 |
| Andorra |
5 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
| Armenia |
5 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
7 |
-6 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group C |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Estonia |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
16 |
1 |
15 |
12 |
| Italy |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
13 |
3 |
10 |
12 |
| Slovenia |
5 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
-1 |
6 |
| Serbia |
5 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
10 |
-8 |
4 |
| Nothern Ireland |
4 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
-5 |
2 |
| Faroe Islands |
5 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
7 |
-7 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| France |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
4 |
12 |
12 |
| Romania |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
9 |
8 |
1 |
12 |
| Albania |
4 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
7 |
| Luxembourg |
5 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
10 |
-5 |
4 |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina |
4 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
7 |
-3 |
2 |
| Belarus |
4 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
6 |
-6 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Netherlands |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
21 |
6 |
15 |
15 |
| Hungary |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
14 |
6 |
8 |
12 |
| Sweden |
4 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
10 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
| Finland |
4 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
7 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
| San Marino |
5 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
14 |
-14 |
1 |
| Moldova |
5 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
14 |
-14 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Israel |
6 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
15 |
4 |
11 |
15 |
| Croatia |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
10 |
4 |
6 |
12 |
| Latvia |
5 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
9 |
8 |
1 |
9 |
| Malta |
5 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
6 |
8 |
-2 |
7 |
| Greece |
5 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
10 |
-6 |
4 |
| Georgia |
6 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
9 |
-9 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Switzerland |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
9 |
4 |
5 |
12 |
| England |
4 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
6 |
0 |
5 |
| Wales |
4 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
4 |
4 |
0 |
5 |
| Bulgaria |
4 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
0 |
4 |
| Montenegro |
4 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
-3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group H |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Iceland |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
6 |
4 |
12 |
| Norway |
4 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
10 |
8 |
2 |
7 |
| Denmark |
4 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
10 |
8 |
2 |
7 |
| Portugal |
3 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
9 |
10 |
-1 |
3 |
| Cyprus |
3 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
-1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Group I |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Pld |
W |
D |
L |
GF |
GA |
GD |
Pts |
| Spain |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
2 |
14 |
12 |
| Czech republic |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
4 |
12 |
| Scotland |
4 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
-3 |
4 |
| Liechtenstein |
4 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
-4 |
1 |
| Lithuania |
4 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
11 |
-11 |
0 |
The qualification season continues on June 3rd, 2011.
As always, if you have anything to add, please leave a comment, drop me a note or edit the Fellowship wiki page about FS in public administration or write a dent to the euro4fs group at identi.ca.
 Baltic Sea waterfront / Ventspils, Latvia (cc-by-sa by anjči) After the EURO2012 in Free Software continued yesterday, we have twelve other matches to look at today. Israel vs. Latvia was especially interesting because Latvia caught up just recently and was able to beat the best country in this group so far. Thus, chances are high that they can lead the group in the end and qualify for the finals. At least that’s my view. If you come to a different result, please let me know. Here is what our wiki says about the two countries:
Israel
Latvia
In Group F, Greece caught up, too. In February there was the news about a free Linux system for teachers and pupils at elementary schools and in March the First migration of a Greek Public Organization to Free Software was announced. But that’s not enough to make that much of a difference in that group yet.
And really tough was to decide the result between Norway and Denmark. I made it a draw, but judge yourself and let me know:
Norway
Denmark
Here is the table with all results of today:
| Group |
Country I |
Country II |
Score I |
Score II |
| A |
Germany |
Kazakhstan |
4 |
0 |
| B |
Andorra |
Slovakia |
1 |
2 |
| B |
Armenia |
Russia |
1 |
4 |
| B |
Republic of Ireland |
Macedonia |
1 |
2 |
| D |
Bosnia and Herzegovina |
Romania |
1 |
2 |
| F |
Georgia |
Croatia |
0 |
1 |
| F |
Israel |
Latvia |
2 |
3 |
| F |
Malta |
Greece |
2 |
2 |
| G |
Bulgaria |
Switzerland |
1 |
2 |
| G |
Wales |
England |
1 |
1 |
| H |
Cyprus |
Iceland |
2 |
3 |
| H |
Norway |
Denmark |
3 |
3 |
The next matches will take place on Tuesday (March 29, 2011). I’ll update the tables on the wiki after that.
As always, if you have anything to add, please leave a comment, drop me a note or edit the Fellowship wiki page about FS in public administration or write a dent to the euro4fs group at identi.ca.
After a few months pause, the qualification for our EURO 2012 in Free Software will keep me busy for the next few days. The results of today’s matches can be found in this posting. Any comment is welcome.
 "German Michel" missing a revelution in 1848 Austria vs. Belgium again: no changes here. The funny thing was that I forgot about the previous match and not being aware that I already judged between these two countries, I came to the same result.
Looking at the table of Group A, it’s quite obvious that Belgium will make it into the finals. The second place has also a chance to make it through the play-offs. And the battle for 2nd place will most likely be between Austria and Germany. A few weeks ago, this would have been a tough match which Austria probably would have won slightly. But now as it became clear that the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs will revert its successful move to GNU/Linux, it’s clear that they’ll drop to third place. For that move, they’d deserve the last.
Here are the results of the day. I’ll update the tables in the wiki next Tuesday.
| Date |
Group |
Country I |
Country II |
Score I |
Score II |
| 25.03.11 |
A |
Austria |
Belgium |
3 |
4 |
| 25.03.11 |
C |
Serbia |
Nothern Ireland |
0 |
0 |
| 25.03.11 |
C |
Slovenia |
Italy |
1 |
3 |
| 25.03.11 |
D |
Luxembourg |
France |
2 |
4 |
| 25.03.11 |
E |
Hungary |
Netherlands |
2 |
4 |
| 25.03.11 |
I |
Spain |
Czech republic |
2 |
4 |
Time for edu news again. The draft of the mission statement for the edu team kept me busy the last two months and will continue to do so for a little while. If you have a few minutes at hand, please read it and send us any feed back you might have!
Before we come to the country specific news, I’ll start with all the rest that doesn’t fit in there:
I read an intersting article by Máirín Duffy about how she introduced Inkscape to a middle school. It includes a number of valuable tips that might come in handy for a freedroidz workshop or something similar.
I read a blog post about a nice work shop at a university in Canada to teach students how to participate in Free Software projects. One of the comments led me to a similar project in Granada. Do you know any other activities in this direction in Europe?
The posting also links to another project that aims to help people interested in contributing to Free Software, but don’t know where to start: openhatch.org.
Austria:
Not the latest, but still interesting documents for developers might be the quality criteria for e-learning in Austria. (via Bildungsserver.de in German) Even if teachers would only have to choose among Free Software tools, they face a mass of software. And they can’t try it all before using it. I guess they are likely to pick something recommended by professionals. So, knowing the criteria might help improving free educational software.
France
 les logiciels libres : à partager sans compter ! The edu folks from April created a colourful poster to promote Free Software in education and published it under various free (as in freedom) licenses.
Germany
As I read in the tarent blog, a student who participated in one of the freedroidz work shops, wrote a report about it (German).
Greece
GNU/Linux systems for teachers and pupils at elementary schools
Italy
Alessandro Rubini reported on the edu-eu mailing list that “a handful of volunteers worked hard for a few months to deliver a 48-page booklet about why and how to use free software in education. It’s in Italian, as it also collects successful experiences of local schools.”
Spain
The Department of Education in Valencia has created a software package installation for easy download of over 200 educational resources offered by LliureX for Kids version 10.09. (via OSOR). It was first presented at the Fourth Congress of Free Software.
Russia
The collection of news entries about Russia grew remarkably in our wiki. The latest entry (German) is that there’s a new release of the edu version of ALT Linux, a governmental edu distribution.
Outside Europe:
As always: Please help me with your feed-back either in the comments or per email. If you have any news to share that are somewhat related to Free Software in education, you can do so through the
|
|