Model for Thinking about Web 2.0Tools

One of the challenges with all the Web 2.0 tools is to understand the functions behind the various tools and how they fit together. Kyleen Burgess provides a very nice overview and conceptual picture that provides perspective about how the various Web 2.o tools fit together and how they can be used to carry out the functions of a teacher and provider of information. Burgess' slideshare on this topic also suggests various tools behind each of these areas and how they can be used to improve productivty and effectiveness.

Sharing Slides/Data One slide at a Time:

The Kaiser Family Foundation has a nice slide sharing set up in which other's can quickly download or build slideshows using their data. This Fast Facts structure is useful in thinking about how to distribute research information in a customizable fashion.

There are many cases of "slide sharing" sites, but the Kaiser set up allows a user to easily select specific slides and put together a unique slide show that serves the particular purpose of the user rather than conforming to the original presentation. This is a good example of the application of David Weinberger's Everything is Miscellaneous ideas.

As we think about various ways of sharing educational materials in open source educational repositories, this seems like a powerful model.

Good Perspectives on Digital Natives

Siva Vaidhyanathan and Mark Bauerlein are engaged in a very thoughtful conversation about digital natives and educational issues. Although they have been set up on opposite sides, they are more in agreement on many issues than not.

Despite all the talk about young people being savvy about technology, this has never been the case. In a brief article in the Chronicle for Higher Education, Siva Vaidhyanathan provides important information about what young people often know and what they do not know. Bauerlein is more concerned about the ways in which the web contributes to a "skimming" type of reading style that limits students' ability to do big picture thinking (and reading of longer and more complicated texts).

Vaidhyanathan reminds us that there are a wide range of digital skills among young people and that much of the time young people spend doing things "digitally" is often limited to a very narrow range of entertainment activities-- watch YouTube videos, trading pictures and comments with friends and listening to music. Although it is possible for some of these skills to translate into using this technology for learning, this is not necessarily the case. Vaidhyanathan cautions the creation of online teaching strategies that are built on an incomplete understanding of the skills and interests of students. Likewise, Bauerlein reminds us that that there is still a place in learning for pencils, blackboards and books which "still play a critical role in the formation of intelligence, as countermeasures to information-age mores."

A third article in this issue of the Review is by Thomas Workman in which he provides a brief summary of how young people view the Internet. His number one finding is that young people view the Internet as a source of "play." This is an important insight because it means that young people in general are not necessarily approaching the Internet as a source of learning which may be how their teachers are using the web or the way their teachers want them to use the web. Likewise, when learning on the web is just has hard as learning in the classroom and not as entertaining as YouTube, then you can can begin to see where we will have difficulties using the web as a teaching platform.

These three articles provide a good overall summary of the important issues and challenges we face in using the web for education with young people.

This Facebook thing-- Boundary Ambiguity

Ok, so now I have a Facebook entry. The first person who I told was my 18-year-old son who immediately closed his FaceBook entry so I couldn't see it. His comment was, "If old people like you are on this, I need to move on!"

So there my entry sat for a week or so and then someone asked me to be a friend. Hmmm.... I thought so how did they find me. I hadn't really told anyone and the truth is I didn't look for anyone I knew.... so this made me curious. Are there people I know out there. Yes, I found six people from my high school graduation class of about 800. I recognized one name.

So now others have begun to ask me to be friends. Mostly colleagues.... so here is my uncomfortable part. For most people Facebook is this mix of personal and professional stuff. In real life I keep alot of my personal and professional parts of life separate. So on Facebook it seems like this stuff begins to cross between personal and professional. This makes me uncomfortable and seems unfamiliar.

I mentioned this to students and they are not worried. They don't seem to think about boundaries in these ways. Perhaps they will later on, but perhaps not. What should and shouldn't be private?

Family Life Education Model Updates

The four stages of creating an effective family life program start with selecting accurate and useful content. This includes research, theory, information about the context in which families or others live and clinical and practical information about effective program delivery. A central activity in this process is learning how to translate research into practical information for people. ("research into practice."). Another important aspect I have labeled "knowing the public mind" which is particularly relevant in programming on the web. It is increasingly critical to know what the public is reading on the web, what issues are being raised and what concerns are being expressed. For those family life educators who are interested in developing web-based programs it seems essential for them to be tracking various commentators on the web who are being read by the public, using a news/blog aggregator to monitor topics and issues from multiple sources and other alert tools (e.g., Google Alerts) to follow topics on the web.

The second stage of program development is creating instructional processes. In the past this meant creating various written documents and F2F workshops. These are still essential skills, but increasingly family life educators will have to be adept at understanding elearning strategies and how to create content on the web.

The third and fourth stages of program development are implementation and evaluation. These too change in the the web environment. Implementation on web means attending to issues of optimizing your work for search engines, integrating various web-based delivery systems effectively-- websites, email, blogs, wikis, etc. Some new strategies must be used in evaluating web-based material. One useful tool is for evaluating work on the web is using web analysis tools such as Google Analytics that tracks the activity on the website including search terms used to find the webpages, search engines on used to find the site and the number of visitors to the site. These data can provide a picture of how the site is being used. The biggest challenge with web-based family life education is measuring impact. Most F2F programs have a somewhat "fixed" dosage of the program (six 1-hour sessions about a topic), this is a less common strategy in web design so different people are getting differing dosages. Likewise, brief visits or encounters with web-based material is unlikely to have any significant impact on a person. There is still much too develop in the area of learning about the impact of web-based programs.

Linking Program Development to Web 2.0 tools

The biggest challenge in teaching family life program development has been re-thinking how Web2.0 tools and activities fit with my ideas about program development. In 1994 I wrote a paper describing a model of program development that has been the basis of my thinking since then about how to create educational programs for families.

Trying to teach program development and incorporating Web 2.0 tools and strategies has made me re-think this model. I am still not sure I have this figured out, but here is the model that is guiding my thinking at the moment. I begin by identifying the basic roles/functions that a program developer must engage in: translating research into practice, knowing the public mind (that is, following topics and discussions in the Web 2.0 space), effective elearning and creating web content. Next I have tried to link this to the major skills what one needs to have to perform these roles, then identifying the general and finally specific tools to perform these roles.

Teaching Family Life Education 2.0

I am teaching a course of program development for the first time in ten years. In the past students in this course were expected to create workshops and printed materials for children, youth and families. We barely introduced the idea of web-based material and the tools to create web-based programming was complicated and limited..... this semester I am focusing directly on developing students skills in putting together the tools of Web 2.0 with the skills of working with families.

The challenge in this course is that I am trying to teach three domains of knowledge and then trying to help them put this together.

The three domains are:
learning specific information technology tools that can be used to teach,
learning how to think about elearning, and
learning about designing programs for families.

Here is what I am teaching in each of these areas.

Information technology tools
1. Tools to find, save and organize scientific research
2. Tools to find, save and organize useful web-based information
3. Tools to create web-based content (mostly text this time)
4. Tools to teach in elearning environments.

(I have posted the specific tools I am using here.)

eLearning topics & issues
effective web design
online collaboration
monitoring issues and information of interest to families
Learning 2.0 design

Basic Program Development
Needs assessment of a target audience
Translating research into practical information
creating teaching activities
recruiting and engaging clients into programs
evaluating the effectiveness of programs

This is a lot of information to put together in a single course and I am not sure I have the timing and sequence of these different domains put together in the right sequence.

Good answers to FAQs

Writing brief answers for the web is different from writing academic papers. Your audience is the general public. They will not know technical jargon or theory. Their primary interest is in understanding an issue, finding out something or solving a problem.

Below are some guidelines to guide you in writing. There are also a set of references at the end to provide additional information and examples.

Characteristics of a Good Answer to a Question in a Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) format:

The first sentence should answer the question. In writing on the web you have to assume your reader will scan the document and look for evidence that they are going to find what they are looking for. They are unlikely to read the whole answer, so the first sentence of a good answer should provide a complete idea that generally answers the question that is being asked.

The complete answer should be no longer than 200 words. Web writing needs to be brief. If an answer requires more than 200 words, it may not be read. If the question is complex and has several parts, break up the answer into sub-questions.

Sentences in addition to the first sentence should provide examples and additional clarification. Don’t waste your sentences. Provide clear examples or suggest things someone can do in each sentence.

Write at an 8^th grade reading level or even lower. Academic writing is often written at the 12^th grade reading level. Assess the reading level of your writing in Word using the settings on the “Spelling and Grammar” tool. You can also paste your text into this online site http://www.editcentral.com/gwt/com.editcentral.EC/EC.html to get a check on the reading level. The reading level can be lowered by shortening the length of sentences, reducing the amount of jargon, and using fewer words with 3+ syllables.

The length of sentences should be 15 words or less. Good web and popular press writing has short, clear sentences. Look for words you can eliminate.

Limit the use of technical jargon. Academics use a large number of technical terms, acronyms, etc. that rarely make any sense to the general public. It is best to avoid these terms. If you have to use a technical term, provide a definition.

Answers should be written in the active voice. Avoid using the passive voice in writing answers as these sentences are usually more complicated. In the active voice the subject performs the action expressed in the verb.

Active:

Parents make a difference in the lives of their children.
Harsh or punitive discipline can cause long-term problems for children.

Passive:

Children’s lives can be affected by their parents.
Long-term problems of children can be affected by a parenting style that involves harsh or punitive discipline.

Avoid using phrases such as “research indicates” or “research has found”. In general, you do not need to use tell your reader the source of the information in an answer. This is implied. They should be able to find out this information (if they care) by some other place in the website such as the “about” section that explains the sources of information on the website. If for clarity or variation in the sentence structure you want to indicate the “source” of an idea, then use generic terms such as: “scientists have found…” “clinicians recommend….,” “parent educators suggest…, etc.”

Moral imperatives should be avoided. The tone of an answer should not suggest or imply that a parent or family member who does not do something is deficient or fundamentally wrong. Avoid using words like “should or “ought.” Likewise, it is better to suggest what people should try to do rather than focus on something they ought not to do.

Answers should be based on scientific evidence or best practice. This is the hallmark difference between good answers to questions and the usual material that you find on the web. Good answers should be based on current theory and research. Our scientific understanding is still limited and so there is not research evidence regarding all the questions and practical issues that people encounter. This requires extrapolation from existing evidence, best practice from clinicians and others who work with children, youth and families. Our knowledge from both science and practice is limited. The answers to questions will change as new information is discovered. When possible, acknowledge the limitations and weaknesses in our scientific understanding in your suggestions and recommendations .

Answers should be dated and should identify the author and the author’s affiliation. Since there is continued growth in our knowledge and understanding it is important to have material dated. This reminds us to continuously update material and why some answers may be different. It is good practice to identify authors and their affiliations as this is a way to indicate to people the source of information. Credibility is at least in part conveyed through identification with trusted (or not trusted) sources of information.

Answers should include links to additional resources or related ideas. Good answers to FAQs are short answers so there is always more to learn or related ideas that may extend someone’s understanding. Good answers should provide links to related topics or to more in-depth information.

Answers to questions that include potentially dangerous behaviors or complicated issues need special handling. Providing short answers is not always appropriate to every question or at least the answer should not encourage the reader to limit themselves to mere information sources. For example, when questions imply dangerous or potentially dangerous situations, it is important to address the real danger.

Here are some examples of dangerous or complicated questions:

• My mother lives two blocks away so when I take my baby to visit her, I just put the infant carrier on the car seat next to me. My mother says I need to buckle her into the car seat, what do you think?
• I have heard that vaccines cause autism, so my friends are refusing to have their babies immunized, what should a parent do?
• My 6-month-old seems to look at me less, stares off into space, and doesn’t smile or make sounds like he was a couple of months ago. My pediatrician says I shouldn’t worry about this, but I am worried. Any advice?
  

Answers to these questions should include the information about child deaths in cars without car seats and the frequency of accidents near people’s homes. The autism question is very complicated, but this is probably a question that should include the danger of contracting various childhood diseases, encouragement to take to a pediatrician and links to more in-depth sources of information about the link between vaccines and autism. When particular symptoms or behaviors are reported, good answers should encourage people to seek professional help (in this case) another professional who may do more in-depth development assessments. Answers to dangerous or complicated questions should usually include suggestions for additional sources of help including telephone hotlines, local professionals or services. An answer can include information about why professional help is important and what to expect from professionals.

Additional sources of information about writing:

Kendall-Tackett, K. A. (2007). How to write for a general audience. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Nielsen, J. (1997). How users read on the web. Retrieved July 16, 2008, from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050314.html

Nielsen, J. (2005). Low literacy users. Retrieved July 16, 2008, from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050314.html

Nielsen, J. (2008). Writing style for print vs. web. Retrieved July 16, 2008, from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/print-vs-online-content.html

Learning about your online clientele

One of the challenges of online delivery of information is that you seldom know who is "hitting" your website. A variety of techniques have been tried for feedback involving monitoring web logs and using brief "did you find what you wanted" surveys, but these techniques have limited value.

At Oregon State, Pat Herring and her colleagues developed an "ask the expert" system in which people who had questions about agriculture, horticulture and family and consumer issues could ask specific questions. In addition to answering the questions, they recorded information about the topics people asked about and their email addresses. Later they sent surveys to these individuals to find out more about their experience. Their survey was short and did not ask very intrusive questions. They asked the following questions:

• age group,


• size and location of their community,


• How familiar they were with Extension before they contacted us online,


• How satisfied they were with the information they received online, and


• If they would recommend Extension's online resources to others.

They obtained a 40% return rate with their follow-up survey. This is a very respectable return rate for an online survey. Another recent paper reported a mean return rate across numerous surveys of about 50%.

This several aspects of this strategy that are notable. First, it reminds us to use data and information that we already obtain in the normal course of conducting online activities to create new information. Second, they developed a short, non-intrusive survey. This is a reminder that a little bit of information is better than none at all which might be the case with a longer survey. A series of repeated surveys with randomly selected users may be a better strategy that a long survey. Third, this work reminds about why interaction with users rather than passive participation may lead us forward. Had this group not developed an "ask the expert" system it is quite likely they would have never gotten the email addresses in the first place. Interactivity is at the heart of engaging online clientele.

Reading Social & Behavior Research for Application

In our efforts to translate scientific findings into useful applications and information for the public we need to translate "research information" into useful bits for the public. In preparing for an upcoming graduate course on program planning, I have been trying to recollect how I read research in order to apply it. Here are the questions I find myself asking when I read research for application. I would welcome comments, revisions, etc.

Research Findings

What are the main findings in this article?

How important are these findings? Major new idea? Contributes to what is generally known?

What implications do each of these findings have for individuals, families, schools, etc.?

Who would be interested in these findings or who would benefit from learning about these findings?

How do these findings fit in with other research findings in this same area? Similar? Contradict? Add new information?

What is the general theoretical or conceptual rationale underlying these findings?

How robust are these findings? Are the methods and results adequate and appropriate?

Are the findings qualified/limited in any ways? (For example, by specific population characteristics, age group, setting, etc.)

Application Possibilities

How could these findings be taught or communicated?

Are there any special/unique ways that these findings could be taught?

Are there any data collection methods or other procedures that could be converted into a teaching tool?

For quantitative studies are there specific data, charts, or graphs that could be included in the teaching or presentation of the material?

For qualitative studies are there quotes, stories, or examples that could be included in teaching or presentation of the material?

Program Design (Program Logic or Change Model)

How do these findings fit into a theory of change or into a logic model for a particular issue or problem?

Do these findings change your understanding of the major or minor causes or contributors to a problem or issue?

Do these findings modify the behaviors or conditions that you plan to affect with your program?

Do these findings suggest additional conditions or contexts to consider in your program model?

Program Evaluation

What outcome variables from this research study might be used in evaluating your program?

What measurement techniques or tools from this research might be used in evaluating your program?

Web 2.0 Tools for Educators

In the fall I will be teaching a course to graduate students on developing programs for children, youth and families. I first taught this course 10 years ago and the emphasis was on designing effective workshops, newsletters and factsheets. It was dominated by print and face-to-face teaching activities. In more recent years it has included more ideas about using information technology, but this has always been treated as "one more delivery" option.

This fall I have decided to make make the whole course focused on Web 2.o tools as the basis for delivery and not emphasize any of the face-to-face or print types of tools. So I have been trying to figure out what Web 2.0 tools to include. This course is for graduate students who are mostly in the behavioral sciences-- family studies, human development, psychology, social work, educational psychology, and so forth. I realize that I have no idea if they use Web 2.0 tools so the first day of the course I will do a short needs assessment to see if they are familiar with these tools. I also plan to devote two class sessions to making sure that they can do basic activities. So here is the basic list:

Tools for Finding, Storing and Organizing Scientific Research

• Research abstract databases, e.g., PsychInfo, ERIC. --- this is a basic tool for finding the published scientific literature on topics that would be relevant to the content of programs. Students will not only learn to effectively search these databases, but to set up notifications on keywords, find electronic copies of the articles in journals and download the references into bibliographic tools such as RefWorks and Endnotes.
• Bibliographic tools, e.g., Endnotes, RefWorks.-- Gone are the days of notecards to keeping track of references. These tools provide an easy way for scholars to keep track of key references and build a knowledge base of the current scientific literature. Students will learn how to share references so that work teams can share information and resources.

Tools for Finding, Storing and Organizing Web-based Material

• Aggregators of Information on the Web, e.g., Google Reader, etc.--- This is a basic tool for assembling information from a variety of blogs, wiki, websites, news, etc. These tools are designed so that the student can subscribe to various information feeds, tag material, organize it in folders, etc. I think it is particularly important to learn how to create standing web search strategies that allow a person to continually track information published on the Web.
  
• Tagging tools, e.g., Del.cio.us-- Strategies for organizing information is essential to keeping track of ALL the information that is available. There are particular tools to create tags, comments, etc., but it is also essential to be able to work collaboratively with others to share information through tagging.
  

Tools for Creating Web-based Content

• Content-creations tools, e.g., blogs, websites, wikis, etc.-- There are lots of tools for creating content. My focus will be primarily on the use of blogs and wikis since these are among the simplest tools. My emphasis will be on developing new blogs and wikis, commenting on other's, creating links, and so forth. Website development tools such Frontpage and Dreamweaver are two complicated to include in this course, but students will understand the basics of these tools as well.
  

Tools for Teaching

• Learning Management Systems, e.g., Moodle, WebCT, Blackboard, Sakai, etc.-- These learning management systems (LMS) are a current necessary evil even though they are very limited and are generally awkward systems that model the "lecture-multiple choice test" instructional design. Lots of good teachers have learned how to use these tools to foster student engagement, discussion and collaboration, but there are still some big limits with some of these tools.
  

Tools I have left off the list

There are many tools I have not included on the list that I will save for the last class in which I will talk about "future" tools. This is clearly a misnomer because these are today's tools, but there is too much to cover in one course. Here is my working list of future tools--

• Social Network Instruction-- See B.J. Fogg's Facebook work
  
• Video creation-- YouTube-- Teaching on YouTube
  
• Illustration and animation creation--
• Mobile learning
• Immersive learning--Second Life
• Games, simulations
• Stories-- Roger Schank's Story-Centered Curriculum