Child pages
  • T&L Design Lenses, 25 October 2010
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

AGENDA

  1. Welcome and Introductions
     
  2. Notetaker volunteers? October 25 Etherpad: http://titanpad.com/L2ZZv9Hydl
     
  3. Discussion/brainstorming on the I want to discuss something minispec.

Meeting Notes

Welcome and Introductions

  • Sign in below:
  • Ann Jensen, TX State
  • Jacques Raynauld, HEC Montréal
  • Greg Hardham, CSU
  • Josh Baron, Marist College
  • Ken Romeo, Stanford
  • Salwa Khan, Texas State
  • Janice Smith, Three Canoes
  • Robin Hill, Wyoming
  • Clay
  • Sam Parker, CSU
  • David Goodrum, IU
  • Daphne Ogle, Berkeley

Discussion

Notes/Minutes

  • Need to focus on Use Cases at a high level
  • Do we need a different approaches to "commenting" on content/topics vs. discussions that are facilitated and aimed at learning
  • Do we need different minispecs for these two broad use cases?
  • A challenge is thinking about visualizing discussions in ways other then the traditional "threaded" view (e.g. thought bubbles, etc.)
  • It there research/literature on how to visualize different types of discussions? "Walls", mind maps, etc. might be options to consider
  • Two breakdowns might be "strong facilitation" vs. "weaker facilitation"
  • Alternative breakdown might be "stronger collaboration" vs "weatker collaboration"  (Many wiki users seems to shrink from editing each other's text, so that the project ends up being a sequential log of postings and comments, i.e., a threaded discussion, although this may not be the pedagogical intent.)
  • Ability to communicate both via text and audio could be powerful
  • Digital pen might be a good example
  • We seem to be discussing needs which are driving by users stories or coming up with our own goals? Should we be approaching it this way? (Ann)
  • People seemed comfortable with this but agreed it is something to be sensitive to...one way of viewing this is that we need to consider "early adopter" faculty use cases
  • Building on the "breakdown" noted above, maybe there is a spectrum for online interactions, from no collaboration to high collaboration
  • Posting a comment to a blog/wiki page might not need any collaboration (one end)
  • Collaborting on building a wiki page might represent a high level of collaboration
  • Discussion falls between the two???
  • The purpose or goal needs to be a factor in the spectrum (Ann)
  • Is there more then one minispec needed?
  • Are the user needs too broad to be covered by a small number of use cases?
  • Moderated/graded might be one and commenting might be another
  • What about more of a general "dialog"? A general peer-to-peer (private) discussion that does not have a defined end point.
  • What types of discussions take place around portfolios?
  • There are often one-on-one discussions and they generally take place around an "artifact" that has been submited to the portfolio
  • Much of these inteactions take the form of "coaching"
  • Users need to be able to move from one interaction "mode" to another seamlessly.  Often you start an interaction without knowing that it will turn into something different...you start out asking for comments on a document but some of these turn into controversial issues that need to be debated and discussed in a more facilitated mode.
  •  


  • No labels