Aaron Carpenter's blog

6790 Draft Methods

Chapter III Research Methodology

Introduction

The research study will focus upon the use of collaborative media systems such as wiki’s and intranets within the corporate environment. The primary area of interest is upon the editing capabilities that such a system has the ability to represent and whether or not such systems are used to their full potential or are disregarded. Comparisons will be drawn between wiki’s used in corporate systems and those that are open to the public, such as Wikipedia. Primary focus is upon what differences, if any, exist in how users edit documents between the two systems. Data analysis as provided by a case study will set the stage for determining the differences between usage patterns of the open vs. closed environments. An area of interest exists whether or not system users will edit company documents created by their superiors, and vice versa.

Population

A case study will be performed upon a company that currently incorporates a wiki into their information systems. The data set will focus upon all users of the system, from managerial staff to the lowest-paid workers.

Study Procedure

A mixed methods approach will be taken for data analysis. Both surveys and interviews will be utilized to best decipher the affects of wiki use in the chosen company.

A survey, which will be based off the Likert model, will be sent to all employees that use the wiki via email to gauge their responses. In order to increase the percentage of returns, the survey will be ten questions or fewer in length. The questions will range from general demographic information to set a baseline on each user, then move on to the user’s usage patterns, comfort with the wiki, pressure to use the wiki, how the wiki is actually used in the company and engagement levels.

The Likert scale is considered to be one of the most common ways to administer surveys and offers enough flexibility for the purpose of this thesis. Care will be needed when crafting the questions so bias and/or extreme questions are not introduced.

At the end of the case study individual interviews with handpicked employees will also be utilized. Interviews will focus on the management staff and the top and bottom users. A wide perspective is wanted to best gauge usage patterns and office management choices that affect how the wiki is utilized in the company.  The interview process will give more individualistic and free-flowing data than could be gathered with the more strictly focused survey. Top users will be interviewed to get the perspective of someone who is a believer in the wiki system, and bottom users will also be questioned to attempt to understand the perspective of someone who uses the wiki simply because of workplace pressures.

Possible Survey Questions

How old are you?

1. 20-29
2. 30-39
3. 40-49
4. 50+

Position in the company:

1. Management
2. Production
3. Marketing
4. Other

How familiar are you with wiki’s?

1. Very familiar
2. Somewhat familiar
3. Neither familiar nor unfamiliar
4. Somewhat unfamiliar
5. Very unfamiliar

How long have you used approximately wiki’s?

1. 5 or more years
2. 3 years
3. 1 year
4. 6 months
5. Never

How often do you approximately check the wiki on a daily basis?

1. 10 or more
2. 5
3. 2-3
4. 1
5. Never

How many times do you post content on the wiki during the week?

1. 10 or more
2. 5
3. 2-3
4. 1
5. Never

What do you use the wiki for?

1. Company news
2. Project information
3. Message board
4. Other_______________________________

Most valuable usage of wiki:

1. Keep up to date on company news
2. Project information
3. Message board
4. Other_______________________________

Least valuable usage of wiki:

1. Keep up to date on company news
2. Project information
3. Message board
4. Other_______________________________

How often do you edit other people’s documents?

1. All the time
2. Part of the time
3. Rarely
4. Never

Do you edit those above your pay grade?

1. All the time
2. Part of the time
3. Rarely
4. Never

Critiquing a Thesis

The thesis chosen for critique is titled “Wiki as a Collaboration and Information Tool in Business: Analysis and Implementation” by Filip Åsblom. As the title implies, the thesis takes a deeper look at the use of social collaboration tools, e.g. wiki’s, and their use in the business realm. Åsblom’s stance is that wiki technology differs from other new forms of communication such as instant messaging and has a different role in how we communicate and transfer data.

Introductory Material

Chapter one presents the reader with a short history of wiki’s and then heads directly towards the stated objectives of the study. Three objectives are explicitly stated then he lists his Problem statement. A Disposition is also included, which goes more in depth about what he hopes to analyze through his problem statements.

It would appear that the general terms are well defined. For example, Åsblom spends some time explaining collaboration and how it relates to his theoretical framework. A glossary of terms is also included near the end of the thesis. In my opinion Åsblom does a fine job of making it abundantly clear what he aims to research and discover throughout the course of his thesis.

Review of Literature

Chapter 2 The Study does not seem to contain the breadth of knowledge I was expecting in a literature review. Åsblom’s section is three pages long and provides next to no sources on current research into wiki’s. He does come up with two different definitions of wiki, but does not go into very much detail. The author spends an equal amount of time in commentary upon IBM, the focus of his case study, and how they use social software, but I can’t help but feel that there are some loose ends.

Research Methods

A few different research methods were used by the author to determine the effectiveness of incorporating a wiki into use at IBM’s AIS section in Sweden. Åsblom was fortunate enough to be able to do research in the form of surveys before the wiki was instituted and was able to monitor progress and the end result. A gap analysis was also used, which gave him the ability to monitor the differences between tools. A pilot user group of ten employees were chosen to use the wiki first before rollout to the rest of the division. Employees were picked due to differing skill levels, geographic locations, profession, etc.

Near the end of the thesis the author has included his survey questions and other related materials, making it easier to reproduce in another format. I did not come across any statements referring to possible problems with bias or the fallibility of any of the research methods.

Findings

The Findings from his surveys and other analysis’s are easy to follow and decipher, but I wish that he had been more consistent in what format his charts were in. The original survey charts were in a different and simpler format and switching to another viewing method could possibly introduce confusion for the reader.

Discussion and Conclusion

In this section, Åsblom revisits some of his previous statements and theories on the use of wiki’s in the corporate environment and draws some conclusions regarding how he thinks they can be used more efficiently. In conclusion, he stresses the need for more collaboration and being open with data, and the hope that systems such as wiki’s and blogs will become more prevalent in order to benefit the greater good.

I agree with Åsblom’s stance on using wiki’s and think that they have much to offer to the corporate arena, but what is needed is a management structure that is more willing to collaborate and not hoard data. It requires a different mindset, but with the advent of social media and a growing number of users freely sharing their data, possibly that day will not be far off.

FULLTEXT01

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this study is to determine how much the E Learning field will be influenced by the increasing amount of closed Internet systems being created and instituted in the realm of E Learning training for business use. A mixed methods approach will be used to best determine what the effects of this upcoming shift in data technology will be.

Research Questions

1. What are the effects of a closed Internet on the E Learning field?

2. Will a shift towards cloud computing help or hinder the E Learning field?

3. What steps will corporations need to take to best make use of this trend?

Hypothesis

The E Learning field will be negatively affected by the changes towards greater use of closed systems in regards to Internet technologies, due to the use of proprietary software that will limit the spread and exposure of the software to the possible global audience.

I have to say I was looking forward to this assignment, mainly because I was interested in how everyone else gets his or her work done. Efficiency is a big deal to me so if someone has a quicker or easier way to accomplish tasks or stay on schedule I want to hear about it. Overall I’m relatively happy with my PLE workflow capabilities, but it was good to see some other options out there by my classmates.

A big one seems to be Tweetdeck. I’ve been using a combination of Tweetie and an app in Google Chrome for Facebook, but one program that will help me keep on track of Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn as well seems pretty valuable to me.

Quite a few are also using social bookmarking sites, which is another area I haven’t fully delved into yet. Stumbleupon looks like a great way to find odd things that I might not normally come across.

PLE’s are never fully developed and some of the resources that my classmates use will inevitably get dovetailed into mine.

After reading the article by Dai and Renzulli on environmental factors and how they affect learning I would agree that their idea is composed of many good points. Simply looking at our society proves their theories. In the slums and poverty-stricken areas it is clear that opportunities to excel are rare, but more importantly a steady home life and adults who care are usually conspicuously absent. Education is not always a top priority so the ignorance and lack of learning propagate themselves. However, this is generally not the case in higher income areas. After all, one rarely hears about individuals of a more successful social class moving down the ladder, so to speak.

I still disagree with their premise that we can disregard any kind of biological factors when it comes to determining giftedness. It seems a ridiculous argument that has been created to warm the hearts of parents whose children, precious little snowflakes that they are, and convince them they are all even when they pop out of the womb and that their DNA plays absolutely no role.

As learning designers we have to realize that when it comes to design we have to create modules that can accommodate all types of learning styles and intellectual levels. No social program can possibly put us all on an even intellectual playing field so we’ll have to do our best to make sure everyone learns to their best potential.

Oh, the Internet. What would we do without you? This simple idea of having computers be able to talk to one another has gone from the lab to being a matter of national security.  Everything seems to have the Internet involved in one way or another and the educational world is simply the latest front that is getting slowly reinvented in the web’s image.

Of course, it’s not a panacea. As our class’s lively VoiceThread debate has shown there are many varying perspectives on the effect the Internet has on the educational realm.

What’s needed is a nuanced approach. I am personally amused by some of the materials that take an extreme stance that it is either a gift from the gods and answer to all life’s problems or the worst thing to ever happen to teaching. Both of these perspectives are in need of some balance and realization that the Internet is purely a tool and can be used as a force of good or for negativity.

I believe Carr’s article makes some good points but it goes too far. I imagine if it was a more balanced piece it would not have received as much commentary, hence the inflammatory headline. But I digress.

The Internet has the power to improve how we teach and dispense information to students and some of tools that we have at our disposal now and will have in the future can make things even better. Collaboration has never been easier and this hive mind mentality where we can pool all of our resources to create will become even more advanced as more people jump on board. Conversations involving people from all points of the globe will help foster new ideas and innovations and the Internet is the thing that makes it all possible.

So how can we make sure that what we create is actually usable and beneficial? One answer is open source software. If we let people change what they think would improve the product then everyone wins. New ideas can be passed to others and sooner or later we end up with a solution that will work for everyone. This will let us design new learning tools that are flexible and able to change with the requirements for adverse groups of learners. What’s not to like?

Last week we undertook the negative side of the argument whether or not Google and the Internet are making us stupid, as based off the article by Nicholas Carr that ran in the Atlantic Monthly in 2008.

I was thankfully on the team that got to argue in favor of the Internet, which was the easier position to take. It’s hard to play devil’s advocate and argue against one’s own educational foundation. I found this project to be challenging for a number of reasons, but the biggest of all was the collaboration aspect. I’ll be honest, it’s hard enough to complete projects face-to-face and there were added difficulties with everyone working remotely.

Part of the issue was simply basic communication. When you don’t see group members on a regular basis (which is not possible with E-Learning) there is no easy way to talk about the issues at hand or drop a simple reminder. There is also the fear that sent emails might be rejected and the message wouldn’t get through. It’s a lot harder to be productive when an answer is needed right now.

Thankfully, we found a system that worked most of the time. Through a combination of GoogleDocs, email, and Skype we managed to keep in touch. GoogleDocs proved temperamental though. It was not as seamless as I had hoped when it came to getting others access to the materials. Near the end I also had issues with using Google’s Chrome web browser with GoogleDocs and even I didn’t have access to it and had to revert to Firefox.

Overall though working in the cloud was a positive experience. It was great to have the peace of mind that materials were backed up in multiple locations on different machines and we all had the ability to access and edit.

There is one major problem that I’ve noticed with online collaborative projects: There is no real way to force anyone to check their email on a regular basis. Yes, there are other ways to try and keep in touch, such as sending them tweets or god forbid, having to call them, but the fact of the matter is that if someone doesn’t want to participate or can’t, there is simply nothing you can do to change the matter. In a world full of deadlines, this makes it hard to get real work done.

Granted, in a way this is a bit of a non-argument. This has been a problem way before the Internet was invented by Al Gore. I imagine ancient Romans were getting sloshed on wine and missing votes, to the aggravation of their fellow toga-wearing public. My point is that technology was supposed to make it easier for us to get work done. Now we can telecommute in our pajamas and Skype with our bosses while wearing slippers, and no one would be the wiser.

The problem is that the computer world is a virtual world, and therefore more easily ignored. It’s hard to argue about which is more important when there is a real person in front of you demanding attention right now. Suddenly everything that needs to be done on that beige box in the corner doesn’t matter. Yes, the real world should take precedence, but deadlines are still deadlines, whether they are online ones or not.

Even though online collaboration tools are useful and offer possibilities that face to face interaction can’t, there is still a time and place for actually meeting the people you are working with. A grainy webcam is a sorry substitute for being able to look someone in the eye and see what they are actually feeling. There is a disconnect in the virtual world which makes it easier to not give the attention to a subject that it really deserves. In a way, this ties in with the Atlantic article, “Is Google Making us stupid?” It’s almost as if we are overwhelmed with the huge amount of information at our fingertips and we can no longer focus on just one thing and do it well. There are too many sources vying for our attention.

Motivation is a fickle thing. Everyone knows what it is in a conceptual way, but when it comes to actually getting people interested, well, that’s the sticky part. The problem is that everyone is motivated in a different way, and this lack of a one-size-fits-all approach becomes readily apparent the instant one steps foot in a classroom. For the sake of discussion let’s center this little blog in the heart of academia, the college campus.

More often than not classrooms are populated with students who are there simply because they have to be there, not because they want to be there. Required classes, as a general rule, are not full of individuals who actually care about the material and the least they can get away with doing they will. So the problem lands on the teacher. How to motivate a room full of slackers?

Yes, we can use fear as a motivator. It’s been used by petty dictators over the centuries and it’s always failed in the long run. What we need is a more nuanced approach. Learning Design stresses the importance of creating content and an environment that is balanced and targeted for its intended audience. I believe what we need to do is remove some of the accepted throwbacks of the past era, like desks in rows. We need to get people talking again. We need to make students feel that they belong, they are more than just a number, and that we have their best interests at heart. We need to make it ok to be wrong. The best classes I ever had were those where everyone was in tune with the subject matter and cared.

It’s the job of the teacher to create this environment where learning is fostered and goals are clearly marked out. We need to make it clear to the student that they can’t afford to not hold up their end of the bargain. We need to set the bar higher than we think they can reach, so when they fail we’re happy with the results. If we can make them understand that there is a real reason for them to actually be there and care we’ll all be better off.

How can we use technology to remember patterns?

It’s a simple question. But how do we actually remember things at all? Our readings tell us about our cortex and how our brains influence our perception and capacity for thought, all the while looking for and creating patterns. It’s these patterns that matter and help us to recall. It’s an old joke on the sitcoms. The secretary will be sitting at her desk, her boss will tell her to make an appointment with someone else, and she just sits there. “I got it,” she says. “But aren’t you going to write it down?” What follows is a hopefully hilarious thought pattern relating the appointment to hippos, the war in Vietnam, and probably a bodily function or two.

Does it work? Maybe. I think the driving force in all of this, technology or no, is that someone actually has the drive to want to learn and remember. It’s all too easy in this age of data saturation to gloss over and just pick out the phrases that jump out at us.  All the smart phones and iPads in the world won’t help if the person doesn’t care.

Everyone is different, but repetition was always a successful method for me to remember. Which leads to game-based learning. I think we need to look at ways to make learning captivating and interesting. I remember being a young boy and having every move down for Street Fighter 2, but ask me a history question and I was lost. The reasons for this are twofold. I wanted to learn the moves, as they were fun. The history classes were nothing but rote learning, where the teacher would literally fill the blackboard with names and dates, erase them all, then start over. No stories, no real discussion, just the need to pump out that data and hope that our little developing minds could recall it all. No real rationale behind it all. That is the downfall of the old methods and it’s in dire need of a refresh. That’s not to say it would be appropriate to turn everything into a game, but it couldn’t hurt to teach the up and coming generations that have never known the world without computers.