Human Posture, Place-Based Learning, and Mobile Technologies: Some Introductory Ruminations.

In which we uncover some taken-for-granted presumptions. In addition, in which, we discover some parallels between Western and Indigenous philosophies and hence some potential alliances for each in making their respective cases and even perhaps in working together. Finally, in which we play with some cheap-and-cheerful devices and technologies in both the classroom and the field and so further complicate the boundaries between the classroom, real life, roles, and relationships.

My introduction to course work at University of Alaska Fairbanks was Ray Barnhardt’s Culture, Ray Barnhardt picture Curriculum and Community course. Ray is a fierce advocate for Alaska Native knowledge. One element of this knowledge is that it is specific to a particular place-time. I was surprised that this was not taken for granted. My assumptions arose from graduate studies in philosophy in the early Picture of David Bohm 90’s. There we read about quantum mechanics, Boehm on the holomovement for one example. We also viewed computer-generated fractal art, read chaos theory, and closer to my heart and relative sophistication I read about bioregionalism. All of these sources contributed to a rationalization of local knowledge, perhaps out of proportion to its relative size, for example, we now speak of videos, tweets, or posts that go “viral.” Then we imagined the butterfly wing flap in Brazil that caused a hurricane in Tampa. Therefore, to be in Ray’s class 25 years later and to hear people struggling to articulate place-based knowledge and struggling to legitimize it, simply set me on my heels; I took it as assumed that these arguments were already made. That said there is some fun to be had in making those arguments again and with the slant, this assignment provides, that is aimed at mobile learning and mobile technology.

John A. Schumacher in this book Human Posture: The Nature of Inquiry unpacks the privileged monolog and position of Western metaphysics and epistemology. He argues that a God-like posture, all-seeing, is an artifice, that collapses as we move through theories of relativity to quantum Picture of John A. Schumacher mechanical descriptions. Rather, now we have to include our posture and our literal location as we define our inquiries; said differently, place-time (nor are they reducible to independent terms) does not cancel out as we work our equations. (This is an oversimplification. His book takes 259 pages to make his argument.) Therefore, acknowledging these arguments, we must sacrifice our schemes for a grand and unified theory. Yet, what do we gain?

Turning to a shorter work, Design in Movement: The Prospects of Interdisciplinary Design, Bronet and Schumacher collaborate, working interdisciplinarily between philosophy, architecture, and pedagogy.

Design in movement is a complement to traditional architectural design in space. Design in movement allows us to experience, through our bodies, in a way that challenges our deeply ingrained visual culture. If we design, in this visual culture without being able to call the culture into question, we do not take advantage of the full range of design’s liberative potential: it is one thing to design so as to refuse any single authoritative reading in space, but another to discover an alternative to reading itself. We are investigating how design in movement can motivate new ways of liberative building and inhabiting that challenge the hegemony of design in space (1999, 97).

From this, we begin to learn Bronet and Schumacher’s specialized vocabulary. A vocabulary that I think is important to develop before we delve into mobile learning. Space is no longer taken for granted but vexed by these two. Movement is celebrated, perhaps privileged, over reading. Reading signifies a negative return to a taken for granted type of inquiry, an inquiry that necessarily privileges our visual culture. Bronet and Schumacher offer the Hopi as exemplary of the kind of spatial participation they are seeking to understand and employee because of its disruptive value.

…”Distance includes what we call time in the sense of the temporal relations between events which have already happened. The Hopi conceive of time and motion in the objective realm in a purely operational sense — a matter of the complexity and magnitude of operations connecting events — so that the element of time is not separated from whatever element of space enters into the operations.” ⁵ Hopi descriptions, to use Warriner’s terms, organizes movements rather than presents a tableau. (1999, 97)

Hence, one element of our critical theory is to seek moments, tools, and disruptive practices that are about organizing movements rather than presenting a snapshot, a still life, a view. As a quick summary of the tension, they are trying to create, I offer an illustration from this article.

Chart from Bronet and Schumacher

Therefore, this conceptual architecture served Bronet and Schumacher as they developed a pedagogical experiment in design and philosophy.

In our experiment with dance/design, therefore, we also tried to blur the distinction between the designers’ bodies and their movements, on the one hand, and the dancers’ bodies and their movements, on the other. In the main project, Dance Infusion, six seven-member teams of first-year architecture students were each asked to design an inhabitable installation that responded to the concept of movement determining space that is to space-in-the-making. The movements that determines the space was to be performed by dancers, who were themselves involved all along in the studio, as critics and as performers. And, finally, the students were led, through exercises, to blur the distinction between designing and building as well. (1999, 101)

My point here is not to fully summarize Bronet and Schumacher, but instead to aggressively borrow and develop a critical theory from them. For my purposes here, we will stipulate that these elements in the movement column are what I am seeking to develop in my own pedagogy of mobile learning. This is a self-conscious privileging for the sake of critical discourse. Bronet and Schumacher experimented with a first-year design course; here I will experiment with Chris Dede (and team’s) EcoMuve and EcoMobile projects.

I am at first seduced by the EcoMuve module. However, the power of strangeness that Bronet and Schumacher’s vocabulary invoke inspires me to critical reflection. The opening scene is a standard computer classroom organized in ranks and rows, each student at once isolated and visible. The classroom organized for the teacher’s convenience. The classroom is a ready-made-space, with ready-made-status. We turn to the lesson on the computer and it gives primacy to the eye, and to space (a simulated world, hence one that is read). As the student moves the mouse we have a tiny bit of vertigo, a tiny throwback to eyes-moving-with-the head, alas, a pop-up text box interrupts our wonder in the virtual world and we slip back to reading. Soon, the linear plot introduces a minor villain who inadvertently is causing eutrophication in the pond and we see political authority and ready-made-justice. Yet all the while the nerdy gamer in me is loving what Harvard has done with this program. Better game developers could raise the level making it open-ended, letting one switch roles, better graphics, and UI. Yet, I think the criticism still stands.

I suspect our program developers at Harvard felt misgivings, too, and chaffed a bit at the implicit map-territory error. Once we get past the talking head, and the classroom scene, we see a group of youngsters walking in the woods. The trip is augmented with cheap-and-cheerful smartphones keeping the hardware within the budgets of most schools. The FreshAir augmented reality software is likewise accessible, cheap-and-cheerful, costing $20.00 per month for 30 users, but also easy to use for curricula designers; finally, they have low-cost Texas Instruments NSpires with Vernier probes collection devices. Being cheap we have to imagine things not always running smoothly with the interface, and indeed the narrator tells about peer-to-peer learning. But wait, let me invoke our critical vocabulary: recall that in the virtual pond one could walk into the pond and on its bottom, the political boundaries, the artifice of a kind omnipotence, whereas in the real world, you get muddy and wet if you trespass the natural shore-water boundary. We see the young people moving their eyes with their heads, even as they insert the phone and its additional information between themselves and the world. It is easy to see the enthusiasm the learners experience as they do real science, in the real world. Certainly, the teachers have constrained the scope, but the associations the learners are making about other applications, other uses are evident. My absolute favorite moment in the video is at 3:43. This young person, lacking the vocabulary of movement is attempting to celebrate the day’s learning and to criticize previous classroom time. Spontaneously, this youngster starts to articulate the difference.

Augmented reality is frequently demonstrated in an urban landscape, showing us places to eat, or telling us about historical landmarks, and sometimes creative or subversive uses connect graffiti with interpretive and polemic.

So, yes, what possible use could this distracting, consumerist toy offer serious learners? Both Alaska’s struggles with remembering place-names and the EcoMobile team inspired me to imagine my smartphone on the tundra. Where mountains and trees, salmon and bears, become hotspots, and language, culture, and science swirled together as seductively as Spiderman beating the Hulk….

I have held the tension long enough and here it truly becomes important to define some terms. First, “place-based education” in Wikipedia, offers us this:

Place-based education seeks to help communities through employing students and school staff in solving community problems. Place-based education differs from conventional text and classroom-based education in that it understands students’ local community as one of the primary resources for learning. Thus, place-based education promotes learning that is rooted in what is local—the unique history, environment, culture, economy, literature, and art of a particular place^[2]—that is, in students’ own “place” or immediate schoolyard, neighborhood, town or community.

Certainly, ethnicity and culture bear strongly on an Alaska Native understanding of this notion and practice.

The second term I have employed without definition is “augmented reality.” So that we are comparing apples-to-apples, Wikipedia offers this definition of “augmented reality:”

Augmented reality (AR) is a live direct or indirect view of a physical, real-world environment whose elements are augmented (or supplemented) by computer-generated sensory input such as sound, video, graphics or GPS data. It is related to a more general concept called mediated reality , in which a view of reality is modified (possibly even diminished rather than augmented) by a computer. As a result, the technology functions by enhancing one’s current perception of reality.

Interestingly, implicit in each definition is an alignment with our chart above. “Place-based education” resonates with elements in the “movement” column. “Augmented reality” seems more closely aligned with elements in the “space” column. Perhaps, then our way forward is like the Buddha, a third way, the “tensive play of eye and movement” that Bronet and Schumacher summarize. Perhaps instead we employ place-based education and augmented reality in ways that each keeps the other honest. Perhaps we can avoid slipping into the excesses of either by navigating both.

In my opening, I mention reading bio-regionalist thought back in the 90’s and hence part of why I assumed the argument for place-based pedagogy was made. An excellent summary of bioregional thought is displayed in this quiz (Charles et al., 1981):

Trace the water you drink from precipitation to tap.
How many days til the moon is full? (Slack of2 days allowed.)
What soil series are you standing on?
What was the total rainfall in your area last year (July-June)? (Slack: 1 inch for every 20 inches.)
When was the last time a fire burned in your area?
What were the primary subsistence techniques of the culture that lived in your area before you?
Name 5 edible plants in your region and their season(s) of availability.
From what direction do winter storms generally, come in your region?
Where does your garbage go?
How long is the growing season where you live?
On what day of the year are the shadows the shortest where you live?
When do the deer rut in your region, and when are the young born?
Name five grasses in your area. Are any of them native?
Name five resident and five migratory birds in your area.
What is the land use history of where you live?
What primary ecological event/process influenced the landform where you live? (Bonus special: what’s the evidence?)
What species have become extinct in your area?
What are the major plant associations in your region?
From where you’re reading this, point north.
What spring wildflower is consistently among the first to bloom where you live?

Before I accept this at face value, I want to think about it in light of the vocabulary that Bronet and Schumacher provide us. I worry that this quiz could easily slip into “knowledge as a tableau.” I could Google the answers to all of these questions. We inhabit a data-rich era. However, what if instead of “trace” our water, which smacks of a pencil and paper exercise, we must literally follow our water. We begin standing in the rain. We follow the run-off, to a stream, to a lake, and because we know the answer to question three, we know how that water enters our aquifer. Because we hand-dug, or at least watched curiously while our well was drilled, and because we know how the submersible pump works, and our homes’ pressure system, we can say we followed our drinking water to its origin. To my mind, this paragraph answers the letter of the law and the activity of “following my water” fulfills the spirit of the quiz. Moreover, I think that demonstrates how this quiz operates in the tensive moment between “space” and “movement” as Bronet and Schumacher define them.

I think this insight is important because this coursework, this assignment is aimed at training me to be an instructional designer focused on the online environment. We are already predisposed to visual tropes, to the artifice of an all-seeing, all-knowing epistemology. Our information technology with its graphical user interface seduces us further in this direction. How can we design our curriculum and our learning modules to interrupt, self-reflexively, to make learners aware of themselves and their devices moving in the real world? How can we write lessons that scale learners into the roles they are seeking to take on – scientist to Scientist, perhaps? Since this was exactly the work that Bronet and Schumacher were involved in, though not online, it seems worthwhile to circle back to their article and see how the first-year design students fared with this challenge. We recall that they divided the class into six seven-member teams. Each team was charged with designing an “inhabitable installation that responded to the concept of movement determining space.” The test, as it were, (actually a feedback cycle, with opportunities for revision) was that groups of contact improvisation dancers then inhabited the installations. Wikipedia defines “Contact improvisation” in this way:

Contact improvisation is a dance technique in which points of physical contact provide the starting point for exploration through movement improvisation.^[1] Contact Improvisation is a form of dance improvisation and is one of the best-known and most characteristic forms of postmodern dance.^[2]

Therefore, in this case, the mobile technology is this form of dance improvisation; the reality is augmented or designed by our aspiring design students (the boundary violation is reversed bringing the outside inside). At the end of the article Bronet and Schumacher review and evaluate each group’s (or perhaps report on these) relative success with the assignment. For our purposes here I am most interested in the groups that struggled in the middle, not those that failed or succeeded. Here we will review one of those projects called the Dichotomy Project.

The Dichotomy Project, which was most impressive visually in terms of form, lighting, and so on, could be read all at once. It consisted of two amorphously shaped, stretched-fabric-over-wood forms seated on electronically triggered ramps that responded to pressure by lighting up specific quadrants of the set…. The location of the audience and the stage like configuration of the elements immediately set up a scenario of viewing all-at-once. This scenario was consistent with the dancers’ interpretation of the space and the difficulty they had developing sequences that were not spatially predictable; we could anticipate how they would use the forms. (1999)

As a lifelong student, I recognize the damning death-knell of grading in the phrase “a scenario of viewing all-at-once.” I know that we failed. However, it seems these learners failed-forward. So, as an aspiring designer of online learning, what can I learn from them? They did not vex the roles of audience-participant sufficiently but rather, at a glance, I can recognize the performance space. That error forces roles and predictability on and within the performance. Perhaps, they did not test their installation sufficiently with the dancers and audience, both in practice and in mind. We see this in the phrase, “dancers’ … the difficulty they had developing sequences that were not spatially predictable.” However, it is the “electronically triggered ramps… {and} lighting…” that salvages this installation for the learners and the dancers and ultimately for the audience.

The person-bodies were quite independent of the architectural bodies. The minimal manipulation of elements on site during layout, construction, and test-inhabitation may have contributed to the predictability of movement…. For example, when the performers figured out the triggers for the lights they began to use those, and found rhythms with one another between their feet on the ramps and the lights going on and off. The props and the bodies referred to one another, with an in-the-making quality that began to establish them as aspects of an order of movement rather than as aspects of a ready-made space. (1999)

The praise is evident when Bronet and Schumacher say that: “the bodies referred to one another, with an in-the-making quality…”(1999). Therefore, as a designer, I want my mobile technology and augmented reality to rupture the boundaries between class and community. However, imagine an EcoMobile learner at the pond and a passer-by asks her what she is doing and as a result together they engage in learning. The roles are negotiated, as the youngster explains the smartphone and augmented reality assignment and some facts about the pond. Imagine the passer-by asking a question that the youngster cannot answer, but through logic and troubleshooting they together work out the answer. Our EcoMobile narrator seems unflustered and poised yet we know that on a field-trip with technology that we, as the “teachers,” are going to have to “wing-it.” If we are open to a permeable boundary (we are comfortable with our own role as learners) then exchanging roles with the younger folks as we-together-step in the co-making of mobile learning will become a contact improvisation.

As a designer, I am also looking for the unpredictability of movement. For example, learners using the TI probes to sample other water sources, adjacent puddles, or a home water source. I need to ask questions about the smartphone and the software used out of context. Will the AR recognize a bear, for example outside the linear narrative I have imagined? If I am viewing a landscape, 2 miles to the west, will the AR still recognize the shape of the mountain and offer the correct indigenous place-name? What happens when I imagine an AR that is modifiable perhaps like Wikipedia, where the content grows out of the users’ interactions? How can the functions and features of the hardware/software create opportunities for online interactions? How does the onboard GPS help us to refine and develop both content and potential interactivity? What happens to our content when mobile devices are in proximity and “recognize” each other?

I am merely touching the surface of these topics however, I am unconvinced that simply using mobile technology will inspire a radical learning experience. Rather, the assumptions which we approach a course design and instruction have to be called into question, perhaps even mugged and left in history’s back alley. I think Bronet and Schumacher provide us a vocabulary and they have piloted a fruitful route. However, the work is not all done. In 1999 they did not imagine the ubiquity of mobile devices, nor the pressures on higher education to move towards online education. So, it remains for us to move this critical theory into our practice as designers and architects of learning.

References

Augmented reality. (2016, Oct. 18). In Wikipedia. Retrieved October 18, 2016, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality

Bohm, D., (December 1971) Quantum theory as an indication of a new order in physics. Part A. The development of new orders as shown through the history of physics. Foundations of Physics , Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 359–381.

Bohm, D., (June 1973) Quantum theory as an indication of a new order in physics. B. Implicate and explicate order in physical law. Foundations of Physics , Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 139–168.

Bronet, F., & Schumacher, J. (1999). Design in Movement: The Prospects of Interdisciplinary Design. Journal Of Architectural Education, 53(2), 97-109. doi:10.1162/104648899564475

Charles, L., Dodge, J, Milliman, L., and Stockley, V., (Winter 1981) Where You At? A Bioregional Quiz. Coevolution Quarterly 32: 1.

Contact Improvisation. (2016, Oct. 20). In Wikipedia. Retrieved October 20, 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_improvisation

Place-based education. (2016, Oct. 18). In Wikipedia. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Place-based_education

Schumacher, J. A., (1989), Human Posture: The Nature of Inquiry, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Initial Exploration of Structures and Boundaries in Creating a Web Presence

In which, a doddering old guy takes insight from a couple of young men. And, in which we explore dualisms and speculate on more fruitful x-y-z coordinates.

Rather than seek out pre-existing definitions I would like to struggle a bit in order to formulate, abductively, my own definitions. In order to establish a point of reference, first I want to develop a couple of case examples. Perhaps these represent fully developed web presences. Accordingly, I offer Jon B., at Fishing the Midwest on YouTube and Brennan (several YouTube channels actually) at GoldGloveTV and on Twitch. These two are not alone, nor are they the most successful; however, they offer good cases. We are broadly familiar with YouTube. Twitch, however, is more of a niche social media, and bears some additional introduction. Twitch is a platform that allows computer gamers to broadcast live and real-time their game-play. Frequently there is a social component to the game-play, either through the game being a massive-multiplayer-online (MMO) or through a co-op element to otherwise single player games. Twitch facilitates the creation of online communities and potentially a revenue stream for successful “hosts.” Content creators can monetize their accounts by permitting advertising, and promoting subscriptions.

The two young men I have chosen to review as case examples here are self-employed, full-time, by and through their content creation. They have created recognizable personal brands, defined business models, and are executing on their plans. Their participation in social media also intentionally blurs boundaries of identities – this blurring is seen clearly in “vlogging” content offered by both. “Vlogging” is a “journalistic documentation of a person’s life, thoughts, opinions, and interests” (ZMD, 2005).

Jon B. is in his early 20’s. He recently dropped out of college in order to work full-time on his YouTube content. He has been creating YouTube content since 2009; he was 12-13 years old at that time. He participates in several additional social media, such as Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. Jon B. is attentive to the details of his camera, audio work, and editing and he seems as passionate about them as his fishing. Recently Jon B. has traveled, fished, and created content with a cohort of YouTube channel hosts. These people might be seen as competitors; however, they are working as collaborators driving traffic to each others’ sites and appearing in each others’ videos.

Jon B, Logo

Brennan O’Neill is 25 and has likewise been on YouTube since 2009. Among gamers, he is well known and widely subscribed as well. He and his personal information are more indiscriminately available online. In addition, he is well known for his drunken live streaming and for his unfiltered, sometimes inappropriate, game commentary. His social media includes Twitter, Facebook, Twitch, and a number of game related sites. Brennan employs a Video Editor to assist with the creation of videos. He likewise has a cohort of friends with whom he games and creates content.

GolgGloveTV Logo

In the language of this assignment, we encounter several classic binaries. For example, public: private, personal: professional, and active: passive. The “passive” and “active” aspects of online activity reinforce the definition (Christenson, 2014) stipulated in this assignment “the intentional and unintentional traces left when participating online.” Of the active and passive traces, we tend to fear the passive, the notion of big data, and the Orwellian or Kafkaesque paranoia that comes with it, haunts us. Wikipedia (Digital footprint, 2016) offers examples of privacy issues that do raise serious concerns. Interestingly, I served on a jury that examined a child pornography case. The evidence showed a huge library of video and imagery. However, what trapped the defendant was not the collection of the images (abhorrent but a relatively passive set of traces was left by that activity) rather it was setting up a file sharing system and making some of the collection available for download. The transition to “content creation” or “distribution” was a movement towards an “active” digital footprint, as it were, that tripped up the defendant. A tiny bit of “passive” evidence was used in court; however, the telling evidence was the “active” footprint.

That distinction brings us back around to the case examples above. These two young men really vex a traditional notion of these categories — public: private, personal: professional, and active: passive. Brennan, for example, clearly drinks on the job. Moreover, both Jon B. and Brennan appear to be role models since their primary market segment is 13-17-year-olds. Both employ vlogging sometimes discretely and sometimes woven into their specific content. It is a challenge to speculate on their concerns about the passive elements of their digital footprint; however, their active content creation is plainly visible. Jon B. challenges the boundaries include the virtual: real boundary. He maintains a post office box and takes fan mail there and then videos the unboxing as channel content. Going the other direction he takes fans fishing or attends real world “meet ups.”

I have really only ever worked with post-secondary young people. Our two case examples fit this demographic as well, perhaps revealing my affinity for them and selection of them as case examples. Nonetheless, it seems that many Millennials are self-conscious of both their web presence and their digital footprint (Eddy, 2015). I have heard colleagues in higher education speak poorly of these young people’s judgment and attitudes, broadly, but also specifically regarding their online sophistication. Given the two case examples, I suspect this reflects a superficiality in my colleagues thinking. One frequently touted truism is that Millennials learn first from each other. Given the case examples participation in a cohort of channel hosts and their apparent status as role models, we see some evidence for this truism. I also suspect these two case examples are acutely aware of both their active and passive footprints. Hence, I wonder precisely what I might “teach” their cohort about this topic. Brennan and Jon B. are living it in full color and at top speed and certainly, have more credibility than I. Instead, I might offer examples, open a discussion, and facilitate the conversation along the lines of the tensions we are exploring here — risk: reward, personal: professional, public: private and active: passive.

It is precisely through the introduction of the risk: reward binary that my thinking became more complicated and richer. This sparked my recollection of White, & Le Cornu, (2011) who offer a criticism of the binary digital native: digital immigrant. However, they do not stop there but rather they develop a theory of visitor: resident as a continuum of participation in their article Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement.

In this video, White complicates our thinking in several key ways; first, he calls into question the importance of “generation” in our thinking about web presence. In this essay, I persist in using the demographics of “Millennial” and “Gen X” and this is predominately a contrivance of convenience – but it is not without self-consciousness. White’s video further complicates our thinking by introducing the model of continua in contrast to binaries. White also introduces the importance of motivation in propelling a persons’ relative residency or visitor status. Taking these notions together allows me to sketch a framework to review our case examples and to reflect on my own web presence.

There is a lot of money to be made by enterprising content creators. Obviously, in the cases here revenue comes directly from online enterprises. However, I have observed young people working to develop their LinkedIn personas, for example, in order to facilitate their more traditional job search, hence to generate revenue just as real as our two content creators make. So, can we say that the reward, or potential reward, outweighs the risk? Conversely, perhaps not participating, not creating, and not managing a web presence is a greater risk? Therefore, if the simple binaries do not adequately open the conversation, what other possible models do we have at hand? Perhaps instead if we imagine the binaries as the ends of ranges and we imagine a node at which these several spectrum intersect, then we can plot our “location” or comfort in the online environment — a multidimensional map. White indeed has mapping one’s participation as a goal of his method. I mention above risk: reward, and White talks about motivation in relative participation as a key element. Yet “participation” calls into question “presence” too. “Presence” suggests a product, perhaps, whereas “participation” suggests a process.

It seems that our content creators actually create drama around these boundaries and along these continua in order to increase traffic. Interestingly, both of these content creators have crossed the boundaries of public versus private. We followed Brennan’s relationship with a young woman, also a content creator. First, as they became housemates, and then later when they broke up. Jon B. has engaged his critical commenters directly calling out boundary violations, almost as though he was taking on the role of an etiquette coach. These two seem to set public: private on a continuum rather than a dualism and they slide back and forth on that continuum to manage their traffic and personas. They are gauging this based on some risk: reward calculation that they instinctively or consciously invoke. It seems that they navigate these issues — risk: reward, personal: professional, public: private and active: passive — self-consciously and with a keen eye toward maximizing their profits.

Copyright and intellectual property are intensely important issues to these two YouTube entrepreneurs. They are acutely aware of copyright as their channels and hence livelihoods can be shut down due to copyright claims. This and the fact that most serious YouTubers routinely mention this threat in their commentary starts to put the lie to the claim that “kids these days” are pirates. Moreover, as these two make their living from their content creation, their understanding of intellectual property is key to the enterprise. I am inclined to think that some young people are more sophisticated regarding these matters than some of us older folks.

Certainly, in the case of our young men, they are their employer, at least for now, and their web presence is their business. Jon B. has moved back and forth between his full-time content creation and working for Mystery Tackle Box.

Mystery Tackle Box Logo

I interpret that to mean he is mindful that he may not always be self-employed. His web presence, while youthful and exuberant, reflects a more conservative approach. Brennan, on the other hand, seems fully committed to his enterprise and his style. In addition, his style does blur the boundaries. The traces he is leaving may well influence his future employability if he chooses to seek work that is more traditional.

So, based on that, it is time for me to become self-reflective and to consider my own engagement with risk: reward, personal: professional, public: private and active: passive online activity. I need to address the questions from our assignment:

Can you effectively manage your web presence? Can you maintain both a private and a public web presence? Is it necessary to separate your public and private web presence? How might your employer’s interests or policies affect your personal web presence?

I am personally less comfortable on the private-public continuum and more comfortable on the professional-personal continuum, hence, my choices in social media. I am moderately active on LinkedIn but not Facebook. Moreover, this reflects my choices around content creation. I am inclined to be more deeply cautious about what content I actively create. This caution is reflected in my participation in LinkedIn, or Twitter. I am content to share, like and retweet. I tightly manage my rendering of opinion in these venues. This caution slices the definition in a different direction. It is increasingly challenging to make sense of “public” and “private” in the online environment. Rather, I make more sense of the “personal” and “professional” distinction. For myself, I am and have been acutely aware of not violating these kinds of boundaries. In part, this is a personal value, but it also derives from the fact that my employers have always been intensely brand-conscious and protective. Trashing them either directly or indirectly through inappropriate boundaries seemed too risky for my taste.

I have maintained a blog logging my exercise for many years, though using a pseudonym. I have not promoted it and, as such, it has no traffic. Rather it served me as a journal and a way to be accountable. However, my thinking about it and my relationship to the hundreds of workouts logged there is more in line with notions of an open web. My thinking was indifferent and vaguely generous regarding the content. This indifference towards “property” and “copyright” differentiates me (and probably many) from the two case examples. I lacked the vision that personal branding and content creation could open a door to the fitness industry for me. In contrast, these young men clearly grasped their opportunities.

I have observed of late a blurring of my boundaries and a willingness to own my authorship. This in part inspired by these two young men who are passionate about both the form and content of their online creations. I find Jon B.’s excitement split equally between photography, video editing, and fishing to be rejuvenating and motivational. There is much for me to learn.

Therefore, yes I do think it is possible to manage my web presence but the calculations need to be more complex than simple binaries. I find the notions of “visitor” and “resident” valuable constructs for thinking about web presence (White, & Le Cornu, 2011) and yet I felt discomforted by these concepts, too. I am not certain that I ever will be a resident, and at home in the same way that Brennan and Jon B. appear to be. Though I wonder if that has anything to do with the internet at all, perhaps that reflects myself in any social situation, introverted, and intently observing from the margins. Nevertheless, such calculations do include a risk: reward calculation. At this time, for me, the reward is less about revenue and more about audience; in truth I suspect many content creators start with that goal.

References

Christensson, P. (2014, May 26). Digital Footprint Definition. Retrieved 2016, Sep 29, from http://techterms.com/definition/digital_footprint

Digital footprint. (2016, Sept. 22). In Wikipedia. Retrieved September 29, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_footprint

Eddy, N., (2015, December 23). Millennials Worry About Their Digital Footprints. Retrieved September 29, 2016, from http://www.eweek.com/it-management/millennials-worry-about-their-digital-footprint.html

White, D. [jiscnetskills]. (2014, March 10). Visitors and Residents. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/sPOG3iThmRI.

White, D., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). Retrieved October 4, 2016, http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049

ZMD, (2005, January 6). Vlogging. In Urban Dictionary. Retrieved September 29, 2016, http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=vlog

Research Proposal, ED 601

What are the type, level, and volume of — Alaska Native participation — in online learning and online learning communities? What are the constraints or conversely the propellants for participation: access, gender, skill, and preference? To clarify, I am not asking about Alaska Native participation in formal online schooling or workplace training. Rather, I am asking about organic, self-motivated participation in online learning and online learning communities and therefore our first task is a series of definitions.

Online access, ethnicity, bioregion, and gender will all be seen as important details in answering these questions. Likewise, it is necessary to refine an understanding of both “online learning” and “online learning communities.” However, starting from an emic perspective, this question shifts radically, especially when we consider this interview with John Seeley Brown:

…It turns out that my neighbor turns out to be a 20-year-old kid, moderately world-famous in the surfing world named Dusty Payne. And what got interesting to us is that Maui has never produced a world-class champion before. They basically come from Oahu, from the North Shore and so on and so forth. But all of a sudden four kids make it big, big time here in Maui. You say “What Happened?”
And it turns out that if you kind meet these kids they have all come together very much like a guild in World of Warcraft, and what they do is they compete with each other and they collaborate with each other incredibly intensely. They think up a new move, they dash down the hill, they try it out, they take their video cameras with them. They’re videoing each other. They dash back up here. They start kind of analyzing what worked, what didn’t work, build new ideas, dash down the hill again, try it out. And then what they start doing is they start looking at, of course, all the other people surfing around the world, which they get from YouTube. They have all this kind of stuff. They start picking up new moves like that. That’s a kind of interesting way that digital media has enhanced the ability of these surfing kids to pick up all kinds of new tricks. And I can actually show you how a particular move now on a surfboard takes about 48 hours to propagate around the world before all the key surfers of the top edge are trying it out themselves, okay? And of course any time something changes they’re the first to try it out and to appropriate it, so these kids live for picking up something new. They live for trying out something new. And some of this stuff, by the way, is moderately dangerous. So these are high-cost mistakes, but the passion that they have to do this is really awesome.
Well, guess what. The passion that I see in the World of Warcraft of the high-end high performers is also awesome, but it doesn’t stop there. If you look at the artists, if you look at the musicians, if you look at the dancers, if you look at athletics in general and to the extreme edge what you have is kids that are turned on. And when they get really turned on in the right context there’s almost no stopping.
Any interest that any kid has, I am sure there’s already existing out there a passionate community of interest group or a community of practice that you can try to join…. (Brown, 2013)

In the current terminology, I am interested in “open online learning.” This type of learning is about identity, about curiosity, about real compensation. I think these definitions of online learning and online learning community is substantially different from the online learning in which universities or human resource departments engage. To understand better, the process that Brown describes includes the following elements:

Shared passion
Face-to-face cohort
Practice capture technology
Play/practice (elements of gamification)
Online cohort
Published/peer reviewed (open)
Failure has a real cost (injury, financial loss)
Practice refinement and improvement (lather, rinse, repeat)
Success has potential for compensation/recognition in both real and virtual world

This is learner/passion centric. Inquiry originates with passionate individuals following their dreams. That is, less frequently, how we describe school learners though staff development in the workplace can have aspects of passion. More often-in schools our starting assumption is that learners are deficient in knowledge we also assume that they need development across a broad curriculum. This approach to learning puts identity, curiosity, and real compensation at the far end of learning. Alas, for many Alaska Natives that abstraction and that decontextualizing of life/learning/self are related to struggles with school and professional success. Yet my emphasis in this research is on what people do for themselves and with others when they are in control of their own learning. It is precisely a process that I can see appealing to Alaska Native values and practices; moreover, the ambiguous space of the internet can be a space Indigenous peoples may populate in their own way.

Let me return to my project of the definition of terms. In “online learning” we seek activities whose practitioners are passionate, that oscillate between face-to-face and virtual cohorts, that include a cycle of practice/practice capture, publishing and review and practice refinement. The passion is reinforced through status and remuneration (though one can fail, really fail, and such failure puts the passion at risk – said differently, these stakes are real). Implicit in this definition is the embeddedness of communities of practices, both face-to-face and virtual.

The scholarly literature on this topic is limited, and when I define online learning and online learning communities in light of Brown’s description, then the literature does not exist. This is true particularly when we remember to limit our search terms to include “Alaska Native.” The existing literature coalesces into three categories that touches on this question first are topics/projects that are not school-based rather communities based, and have elements of online practice:

Cueva, K., Revels, L., Kuhnley, R., Cueva, M., Lanier, A., & Dignan, M. (2015). Co-Creating a Culturally Responsive Distance Education Cancer Course with, and for, Alaska’s Community Health Workers: Motivations from a Survey of Key Stakeholders. Journal Of Cancer Education: The Official Journal Of The American Association For Cancer Education.

Eisner, W. R., Cuomo, C. J., Hinkel, K. M., Jelacic, J., Kim, C., & Alba, D. D. (2012). Producing an Indigeounous Knowledge WebGIS fo Arctic Alaska Communities: Challenges, Successes,and Lessons Learned. Transactions in GIS, 16(1), 17-37.

Wexler, L., Eglinton, K., & Gubrium, A. (Eisner et al., 2012; Wexler, Eglinton, & Gubrium). Using Digital Stories to Understand the Lives of Alaska Native Young People. Youth & Society, 46(4), 478-504.

Changing the search terms to “social media” and elements of open learning, for example, “MOOC” though always limited by “Alaska Native” — did yield some additional limited results. However, these were medical or behavioral health studies and not studies of learning. I felt that this pulled the research too far from the core topic. While the following articles are all school-related, there are elements of autonomy or self-identity that weaving through them that again border on my research topic. The following articles are school-centered rather than learner-centered.

Hahn, S., & Lehman, L. (2005). The Half-Million-Square-Miles Campus: University of Alaska Fairbanks Off-Campus Library Services. Journal Of Library & Information Services In Distance Learning, 2(3), 5-24.

This article touchs on the role of technology and its availability in rural Alaskan in schools and communities, as well as the use of school-based online learning. In the end, this article describes the work and priorities of a university, hence not really on target with the questions I have in mind. Yet, this suggests a potentially fruitful place for research. What does information literacy mean in an information rich online environment for Alaska Natives? What does it look like when they answer their own questions, in their own way? As above, broadening the terms to include, “computer use” or “information technology” did yield additional scholarly research; alas, all of it was embedded in the medical or behavioral health literature.

Berkshire, S., & Smith, G. (2000). Bridging the Great Divide: Connecting Alaska Native Learners and Leaders via “High Touch-High Tech” Distance Learning.

Fleming, A. B. (2005). A phenomenological study of the lived experiences of Alaska Natives who persist in one program of higher education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66, 1715.

Odasz, F. (1999). On the Frontier of Online Learning, in Galena, Alaska. Multimedia Schools, 6(2), 42-45.

Subramony, D. P. (Winter 2007). Understanding the Complex Dimensions of the Digital Divide: Lessons Learned in the Alaskan Arctic. The Journal of Negro Edutaion, 76(1), 57-68.

Two of these articles are quite old, demonstrating that not only research breadth is limited but so also is the depth. Two are interesting, though in ways only adjacent to the inquiry I am making. Subramony uncovers some interesting questions around gender and computer aptitude. He shows how young women succeed in school including in computer proficiency, more than young men. Young men practice subsistence skills. I mentioned above that online access, ethnicity, bioregion, and gender, would all be seen as important details in trying to understand the type, level, and volume of Alaska Native participation in online learning and online learning communities. Fleming is again focused on school learning and school success, but at least the inquiry is about Alaska Native lived experiences.

My original intent in developing a research proposal was to engage with a community in developing online learning resources, in conjunction with an already developed educational, cultural, or youth program. I am hampered in the scope and reach of my network and by the fact that I do not live in Alaska. At this point, I am uncertain I can develop the rapport quickly enough to support such a project. That in conjunction with the sparseness of existing research caused me to step back and begin to rethink my approach.

This project will consist of interviews with individuals who are both active content creators online and members of Alaska Native ethnic groups. Five to ten interviews will be done, two with members from each of these major ethnic groups, Iñupiaq, Yu’pik, Gwitch’in, Alutiiq/Sugpiaq, and Tlingit/Haida/Tsimshian. Thus far, snowball sampling has generated five potential interviewees from three ethnic groups. Interviews will consist of nine to ten questions (see Appendix B to read them). These questions cover matters of online learning, cultural preservation/cultural innovation, and intellectual property/cultural property.

The research will be connected with required coursework for the degree program. Therefore, for example, the summer of 2016, I will be taking ED 654 Digital Citizenship, Internet Legal Issues, Digital Copyright, Fair Use, interviews will be conducted, and preliminary results reported on. This allows me to create and get IRB approval early in the program. This approach has several benefits, first of which is several smaller projects may be combined and built into a final project. Smaller focused projects help me build my Alaska network and may open unanticipated opportunities. Having the project approved and on the record allows me to get underway and to modify the project moving forward, based on fortuitous opportunities. To accomplish this I will need to complete the CITI human subjects’ certification and submit successfully an IRB Research Protocol for this project. Accordingly, I have begun drafting the IRB Research Protocol (see below in Appendix A). I will also need to create an informed consent permission form (see below Appendix C).

In conclusion, little is written, perhaps known, about Alaska Native participation in creation and in open online learning and online learning communities. Yet evidence exists that Alaska Natives participate in online content creation. The aim of this inquiry is to interview participants in order to understand better, how content creators view themselves, and the role of their content in fostering online learning and online communities. This is to explore some of the tensions and restrictions of technology use and online access felt in rural communities of Alaska. In addition, I aim to begin to explore tensions between cultural preservation, innovation, and issues of intellectual property rights for individuals and communities in the context of online learning and learning communities.

Additional aims for this inquiry include scaling into research in terms of both learning the IRB protocol, using qualitative research tools and practices, and building trust and rapport with Alaska Native communities. Having a project on file with the IRB allows me the flexibility to modify an existing project through the coursework rather than doing that simultaneously with the final project, hence easing deadlines. This approach may also open additional opportunities for projects and research through building network with community members. Scaling into the research builds practice and iteration into the process along the way to the final project. This increases my skills and techniques as a researcher as I work towards the final project.

IRB Research Protocol

Application

Application Information:

Title:	Alaska Native Digital Citizenship: Online Learning and Online Learning Communities
Proposed Start Date	May 23, 2016
Anticipated Completion Date	August 12, 2016

Principal Investigator Assurance Statement: IRB protocols may only be submitted by individuals who are eligible to serve as a Principal Investigator (PI) under UAF policy #05-003 (http://www.uaf.edu/research/faculty/policies-and-regulations/Principal-Investigator-Eligibility.pdf).

By submitting this protocol application, I certify that the information provided is accurate and complete. I agree to and will comply with the following statements:

Abide by all regulations, policies, and procedures applicable to research involving human subjects.
Accept responsibility for the scientific and ethical conduct of this research.
Accept responsibility for providing personnel (collaborators, staff, graduate students, undergraduate students, and volunteers) with the appropriate training and mentoring to conduct their duties as part of this research.
If this IRB Protocol Application is for Graduate Student Research, the student’s graduate advisory committee has reviewed and approved this research protocol.
Obtain approval from the IRB prior to amending or altering the research protocol, consent/assent forms or initiating further correspondence with the research subjects,
Immediately report to the Office of Research Integrity any complaints from participants or others, all serious adverse reactions, and/or any unanticipated problems or issues related to this study.
Comply with requests of the IRB regarding Continuing/Final Review and assessment in a timely manner.

I realize that failure to comply with the above provisions may result in suspension or termination of this project by the IRB and, if appropriate, restricted access to funding and notification of sponsor, and referral to the appropriate UAF administrative official(s) for disciplinary action.

C. Funding Information: Place an “X” in the first column to indicate which type(s) of funding will be used to support this project.

Type of Funding	Sponsor or Source	UAF proposal (S#), Grant (G#), or Account (fund-org)
Internal Competitive	N/A	N/A
Internal Non-Competitive	N/A	N/A
External	N/A	N/A
Other	N/A	N/A

Justification of Multiple Awards: The ORI and IRB are required to match the work described in the funding proposal/award to that in the IRB Protocol. In nearly all cases, the same work cannot be funded under multiple awards; therefore, additional justification is required if the work described in this Protocol will be funded by more than one source. Clearly explain why it is not appropriate to file separate IRB Protocols and indicate which portions of the work will be covered by each funding source.

N/A

Classification of Project: Place an “X” in the first column to indicate which of the following best describes this research project.

	Type of Project	Description (if needed)
	Faculty Research
	Doctoral or Master Degree Research	This research is first associated with the final project in ED 654. However, it may, depending on this pilot project grow into a section of Robert Heath’s final project for his M.Ed. ONID program.
	Undergraduate Research Project
	Other – Please describe.	<<Overwrite Here>>

Additional IRB Requirements (Review required other than UAF IRB): If this research is subject to the review and approval of another IRB or similar committee provide the following information. Please contact the Office of Research Integrity PRIOR to submitting applications to multiple review committees, so that we can assist in determining the order of review and, if needed, negotiate with other institutions to determine which has primary responsibility for oversight. If review by more than one non-UAF committee is required, copy and paste the following two tables as many times as needed.

Required Information	Response
Name of Committee	Robert Heath, Graduate Student Advisory Committee, M.Ed. ONID
Institution	University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Contact Person	Sean Topkok
Email Address	stopkok@alaska.edu
Phone Number	(907) 474-5537

	Review Status	Explanation (if needed)
	Application has not been submitted.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	Application is currently under review.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	Application has been approved. Note: Submit a copy of the application packet and final approval letter with your UAF application.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	Other – Please explain.	<<Overwrite Here>>

General Objectives and Methodology: Briefly explain as though speaking with a non-scientist, the specific objective(s) of this research project or program. Clearly state your hypothesis, study focus and your methodology: how each of your proposed procedures will address the hypothesis. Limit your response to approximately 500 words; other project details will be requested in later sections.

<<Overwrite Here>>

Literature Search (References): Provide a list of no more than five (5) references that support the need for this research and/or for the use of the methods proposed for data collection and analysis. References should typically be peer reviewed scholarly articles, but may include discussions with colleagues or other subject matter experts. At a minimum, identify the database(s) searched, the keywords used, and provide a summary of the results.

<<Overwrite Here>>

Research Population: The following section addresses the researcher’s commitment to the justice of this protocol in the sense that it fulfills the obligation to equitably distribute both the burden and benefits for the research participants.

Required Information	Response
1. Maximum number of research participants to be enrolled.	10
2. What are the selection criteria for research participants?	Active production of online content, and member status in one of the five major ethic regions of Alaska, Iñupiaq, Yu’pik, Gwitch’in, Alutiiq/Sugpiaq, and Tlingit/Haida/Tsimshian
3. Discuss which populations are specifically excluded from the research.	Only Alaska Natives will be interviewed.

Protected Groups: The human subject protection regulations require special consideration be given to the recruitment and participation of certain groups of individuals. Place an “X” in the first column to indicate which of the following groups you are specifically seeking to include as participants in this research.

	Protected Group
	Children (individuals under 18 years of age), No
	Pregnant Women (in projects where there is the potential for fetal harm/impact), No potential for fetal harm.
	Prisoners, No

Recruitment: This section should describe all methods that will be used to contact participants; fliers, mailings, phone calls, word-of-mouth, etc.

Required Information	Response
1. Discuss the recruitment process. Note: You must include copies of any proposed recruitment materials with your IRBNet submission package.	Five individuals from three ethnic groups have been identified for initial contact. Part of the interview process will be to ask them for additional contact leads.
2. Discuss how you plan to encourage the participation of women and minorities.	The entire focus of this research is on minorities.

Benefits, Costs, Risks, Compensation: This section addresses the researcher’s responsibility to beneficence, which requires balancing risk (potential harm to participants or groups) against benefit (potential advances gained by the research).

Question	Response
1. What are the potential benefits to an individual research participant?	A modified sense of the impact their online content is having.
2.If applicable, what are the potential benefits to the culture or society that is the subject of the research?	A wider sense of Indigenous participation in online learning communities.
3. Will compensation (cash, gift cards, non-monetary gifts, etc.) be offered to research participants? If yes, describe the compensation, how it will be distributed, and what receipts or records will be kept.	No
4. What are the costs (monetary or time) to an individual research participant?	Time taken for interview.
5. Describe any potential risks of harm or discomfort (physical, psychological, or sociological) to an individual participant.	No more risk than having a conversation or sitting at their desk.
6. What will be done to minimize or mitigate potential harms or discomfort that may be experienced by an individual research participant?	Questions, like the consent form will be phrased at Eighth grade level. Since the subjects will choose their locations for the interviews and interviews will be conducted remotely, little can be done beyond limiting the duration and encouraging participants to pick a comfortable site ahead of time.
7. If applicable, what are the potential risks to the culture or society that is the subject of the research?	Variations in self-identity/cultural identity and personal knowledge/cultural knowledge and themes around intellectual property rights will be explored. This may uncover unasked or incompletely explored questions hopefully that will have the opposite effect and strengthen the cultures.
8. If applicable, what will be done to minimize or mitigate potential harms to the culture or society that is the subject of the research?	Member checking of paper drafts will occur. It is unlikely that this research, due to its limited scope, will have large impacts nonetheless, we are happy to share the results with tribal governments and educators.

Participant Consent / Assent: The informed consent and assent process form the cornerstone of the Human Research Protection Program. The following section addresses the researcher’s responsibility to demonstrate “respect for persons” by ensuring potential participants understand what they are being asked to do, what will be done with the data and/or samples, and that their participation is voluntary. Although the IRB’s review will focus predominantly on the consent and assent forms or scripts you will utilize, you must also describe the following :

Requests and alternatives: Place an “X” in the first column to indicate which of the following you are requesting for this research project. You must provide justification for any request made in this section.

	Request	Justification
	1. Waiver of informed consent. Note: The IRB will only consider this if you can demonstrate that obtaining informed consent will impact the quality of the research data; a waiver will not be granted for researcher convenience.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	2. Waiver of the requirement for documentation (written, audio or video) of informed consent: Note: The IRB will only consider this in instances where it would culturally inappropriate or if the documentation is the only way to link the participant to the project and disclosure of their involvement may result in harm.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	3. Greater than 8^th grade reading level for consent or assent materials. Note: Project documents and assent forms for children must be at an age appropriate level. Documents for general population adults should not exceed an 8^th grade reading level. If you are having problems achieving that level, contact the Office of Research Integrity (uaf-irb@alaska.edu or x7800) for assistance.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	4. Inclusion of participants whose primary language is not English. Note: The IRB regularly approves this request, but you must provide an explanation of the translation services that will be provided This may include providing the IRB with both English and non-English versions of consent, assent and other project documents.	<<Overwrite Here>>
	5. Inclusion of adults with diminished mental capabilities. Note: You will need to determine whether or not these individuals are able to give informed consent. If not, you will have to obtain consent from a legal guardian in addition to the individual’s assent.	<<Overwrite Here>>

Consent/Assent Process: Discuss the process to be used to explain the study to potential participants and solicit their voluntary participation. If your participants are children (<18 years of age) or adults with diminished mental capacity you must describe both the parental consent and participant assent processes. If you intend to have ongoing interactions with participants, include a description of how you will ensure their participation continues to be informed and voluntary.

<<Overwrite Here>>

Research Methodology: The following section addresses the researcher’s responsibility to demonstrate “beneficence” (to above all do no harm and to provide for the greatest possible benefit to the individual, society, or culture that is the subject of the research).

Research Plan: This section asks you to provide information about your collection and use of research data. Your answers to these questions will help ORI and the IRB determine the level of risk to participants and the appropriateness of your research location given the research questions you plan to ask.

Required Information	Response
1. What is (are) the specific questions that the research seeks to answer?	Please see the attached interview protocol.
2. How will the data be used? Include all planned uses (i.e. presentation at scholarly meetings, journal articles, dissertation or thesis, agency reports, presented at public meetings, etc.)	presentation at scholarly meetings, journal articles, ED 654 blog site, thesis
3. Where will the project be conducted? Provide the specific physical location. Note: For research that will not be conducted on the UAF campus or in at a public venue you must provide evidence of formal permission to use the location. For the purposes of this question, K-12 schools are not considered public venues.	Interviews will be conducted through Skype or Google Hangout.

Research Tools: Place an “X” in the first column to indicate which of the following data collection methods or instruments will be used to conduct the proposed research. Research tools for adults must be written at no higher than an 8th grade reading level without justification. Research tools for children must be written at an age appropriate level.

	Data Collection Methods or Instruments
	Questionnaires. Note: Copies of questionnaires must be included in your IRBNet submission.
	Interviews. Please see the attached interview protocol for both procedure and question content.Note: An interview script or outline must be included in your IRBNet submission.
	Observations. Note: A description of the nature of the observations and the researchers role in the activity(ies) being observed must be included in your IRBNet submission.
	Focus Groups. Note: A script, list of questions, outline, or instructions to the group must be included in your IRBNet submission.
	Collection of Identifiable Private Information.
	Collection of Biological Specimens.

	Review of Archived Data / Records / Samples. Note: A description of the data or records to be accessed, including why they were originally collected, must be included in your IRBNet submission. Evidence of official permission to access the materials must be provided for data or records that are not in the public domain.

Potential Conflicts of Interest or Commitment: This section addresses the issues that may affect the research team’s objectivity related to the conduct of this research. Answer the following questions by placing and “X” in the appropriate column; yes (Y) or no (N) and providing an explanation for each “yes” response.

Y	N		Explanation (required for all yes answers)
		1. Does any member of the research team have a proprietary interest in the project that may result in patents, trademarks, or licensing agreements? If so, the researcher will need to work with the Office of Intellectual Property and Commercialization to protect these rights.	N/A
		2. Does any member of the research team have any equity / financial interest in the research? This would include incentive payments, but not regular salary or stipends.	N/A
		3. Does any member of the research team have a power relationship with any or all of the research participants? A power relationship is one that may influence the perception of voluntariness of participation (e.g. employer/employee, counselor/client, or teacher/student)?	N/A
		4. Does any member of the research team have any other potential or actual conflict of interest or commitment relative to this research?	N/A

Data Storage and Retention: This section addresses the researcher’s responsibility to be open with participants regarding what will be done with the collected data, records or samples. This section also demonstrates the researcher’s commitment to protecting the integrity of the research record. Original research data must be stored/maintained at UAF. The IRB has drafted guidance regarding the secure storage and handling of human subject research data. Please download the guidelines here.

Required Information	Response
1. What is the form in which the data/samples will be collected or recorded? (Examples: paper instruments, electronic records, field notes, audio recordings,biological samples, etc.)	Audio/visual digital files
2. If identifying data is collected, how will participant confidentiality be maintained?	<<Overwrite Here>>
3. Where will the data/samples be stored during the life of the project?	Files will be stored, encrypted, on a password protected external hard drive.
4. What will be done with the data/samples at the end of the project?	Archived to encrypted CD/DVD read/write disc.
5. If the data/samples will be maintained after the end of the project, where will it be stored and who will be responsible for maintaining and securing it?	CD/DVDs will be stored in the Primary Investigator’s locked office.
6. If the data/samples will be maintained after the end of the project, how long will it be stored or archived?	Data will be stored until 2021 at that point the CD/DVD’s will be shredded.
7. Who will be responsible for maintaining or ultimately disposing of the data?	Primary Investigator has final responsibility for data destruction.
8. How will data be transferred or shared among research team members? (Examples: data will be maintained on a secure server that is only accessible to research team members, data will be transferred to non-UAF collaborators on encrypted CD/DVDs sent via Federal Express, etc.) Note: Please try and anticipate all ways that you may need to transfer participant data. Your response should take into account both participant confidentiality or privacy and data integrity.	Transferred between collaborators (because this research is part of an online/distance program there is several thousand miles between collaborators) on encrypted CD/DVDs sent via Federal Express
9. Do you have or plan to apply for a Certificate of Confidentiality from the National Institutes of Health? Note: This is not required, but may be beneficial depending on the type of information you plan to collect; for more information contact the Office of Research Integrity.	N/A

Interview Protocol Form

Project: Alaska Native Digital Citizenship: Online Learning and Online Learning Communities

Date ___________________________ Time ___________________________

Location ________________________ Interviewer ______________________

Interviewee ______________________ Release form signed? ____

Notes to interviewee: Thank you for your participation. I believe your input will be valuable to this research and in helping grow all of our professional practice.

Confidentiality of responses is guaranteed
Approximate length of interview:
Purpose of research:
Methods of disseminating results: Preliminary results will be published on the ED 654 Digital Citizenship, Internet Legal Issues, Digital Copyright, and Fair Use course blog site. Later versions may become part or whole of my final project for degree requirements.

How do Alaska Natives participate in online learning and online learning communities?
- Watch the JSB interview clip.

With this new definition of online learning and online learning communities, does your answer change?

What do you believe are the main themes or important elements for successful online learning unique to Alaska Natives?

We sometimes hear someone taking an online class at the public library, as they do not have Internet access at home or a laptop. How problematic is this, or should we be commending their diligence and motivation?

How does issues of connectivity and bandwidth effect online learning in Alaska Native communities?

You participate in online communities. How does your experience as a digital citizen/ Alaska Native differ from your experience as an American citizen/Alaska Native?

As a content creator, do you experience tension between cultural conservation and cultural innovation? Do you experience this tension most in the real or virtual life?

How does participation in online learning and learning communities’ impact, positively or negatively, creation of new cultural knowledge? How does this learning transfer between virtual and real world?

What online learning and online learning communities can exist openly online, what learning and knowledge needs to occur behind password? Finally, what learning should be reserved only for face-to-face transmission?

What issues around intellectual property do you experience as an individual participating in cultural innovation/preservation and online content creation? Reflection by Interviewer

Closure

Thank you to interviewee, reassure confidentiality, ask permission to follow-up ______

Informed Consent Form (for participation in)

Alaska Native Digital Citizenship: Online Learning and Online Learning Communities

Description of the Study:

Participants will engage in interviews. Interviews will be conducted online, though programs like Skype or Google Hangouts. Interviews will be recorded. Recordings will be transcribed and ATLAS.ti will be used to facilitate qualitative review.

Risks and Benefits of Being in the Study:

There are no major risks to you if you participate in this study. Your participation in this program will help us create a better understanding of Alaska Native online content creation. As a participant, you may receive benefits such as education about the online learning communities, but there is no guarantee that you will benefit directly from taking part in this study. This study may be beneficial to other Native groups studying their own cultural heritage through; and a source of identification and cultural strength in knowing what others have identified as important. Preliminary results will be published on the ED 654 Digital Citizenship, Internet Legal Issues, Digital Copyright and Fair Use course blog site.

Confidentiality:

Because I am conducting this study as a part of my research through the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), the results will be available to other people. However, I will not collect any identifying information about you in this study, and will make every effort to protect your identity. Any information about you as an individual that you reveal in conversations or interviews will be kept strictly confidential and secure in a locked office at UAF. This signed release form will be stored securely and separately, making it difficult to link you to this study. Only I will listen to any recordings that I make, and I will transcribe the parts that I need, and then erase the recordings after completion of my degree. You may request any copies of recordings of you for your own use. Given the small number of participants and the type of content creation, your identity may be guessed.

I would like to include your name or other identifiable information in my research crediting results from my research project. I want to identify you for attribution and explanatory purposes. However, you have the option to not have your name used when data from this study are published; if this is the case, please indicate so on this form.

Voluntary Nature of the Study:

Your decision to take part in the study is voluntary. You are free to choose not to take part in the study or to stop taking part at any time without any penalty to you.

Contacts and Questions:

If you have questions now, feel free to ask me. If you have questions later, you may contact me at or or my faculty sponsor at…. If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research subject, please contact the Research Coordinator in the Office of Research Integrity at 474-7800 (Fairbanks area) or 1-866-876-7800 (outside the Fairbanks area) or fyirb@uaf.edu.

Statement of Consent:

By signing this form, you agree that you understand the procedures described above, your questions have been answered to your satisfaction, and you have been provided a copy of this form. You agree to participate in this study in the specific activities initialed below.

_______ I consent to being recorded while being interviewed.

Signature and Printed Name of Subject & Date

______________________________________

Signature of researcher, Robert Heath & Date

______________________________________

Please indicate whether you agree to have your full name used alongside your comments in the final dissertation that results from this research.

__YES (If you change your mind about this at any point, please let the researcher know)

__NO

__ALTERATION:

Name or pseudonym to be used:_________________________________________

Works Cited

Berkshire, S., & Smith, G. (2000). Bridging the Great Divide: Connecting Alaska Native Learners and Leaders via “High Touch-High Tech” Distance Learning.

Brown, J. S. (Producer). (2013). John Seely Brown on Motivating Learners (Big Thinkers Series). Retrieved from https://youtu.be/41pNX9-yNu4

Fleming, A. B. (2005). A phenomenological study of the lived experiences of Alaska Natives who persist in one program of higher education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66, 1715.

Odasz, F. (1999). On the Frontier of Online Learning, in Galena, Alaska. Multimedia Schools, 6(2), 42-45.

Pember, M. A. (2011). Making Their Own Way. Diverse: Issues In Higher Education, 28(3), 19.

Subramony, D. P. (2007). Understanding the Complex Dimensions of the Digital Divide: Lessons Learned in the Alaskan Arctic. The Journal of Negro Edutaion, 76(1), 57-68.

Wexler, L., Eglinton, K., & Gubrium, A. (2014). Using Digital Stories to Understand the Lives of Alaska Native Young People. Youth & Society, 46(4), 478-504.

Research Terminology Dictionary, ED 601

Research Terminology Dictionary

Characteristics of Quantitative Research

O’Leary offers a tightly packed summary of the “quantitative tradition” in figure 8.1, page 121:

Paradigm/assumption: positivism, empiricism

Methodology: scientific method, hypothesis driven, deductive, reliable, valid, reproducible, objective, generalizable

Methods: large scale, surveys, random control trials

Data Type: generally quantitative

Analysis: statistics

This is so well done there is very little to add. “Positivism” is defined as: “The view that all true knowledge is scientific, and is best pursued by scientific method” (O’Leary, 2014). “Empiricism” is defined: “The view that all knowledge is limited to what can be observed through the senses. The cornerstone of scientific method” (O’Leary, 2014). Unpacking data type, “Data represented through numbers and analyzed using statistics”(O’Leary, 2014).

Characteristics of Qualitative Research

O’Leary (2014) offers an equally tightly packed summary of the “qualitative tradition” in figure 8.1, page 121:

Paradigm/assumption: subjectivism, interpretivism, constructivism

Methodology: ethnomethodology, phenomenology, ethnography, action research, inductive, subjective, idiographic, intuitive

Methods: small-scale, interviewing, observation, document analysis

Data Type: generally qualitative

Analysis: thematic exploration

“Subjectivism emphasizes the subjective elements of experience and accepts that personal experiences are the foundations for factual knowledge” (O’Leary, 2014). Oddly, O’Leary’s glossary does not provide definitions for “interpretivism” or “constructivism” nor does she define these in her main text. Essentially both are versions of anti-positivism, each with its own genealogy. The “data type” is unpacked this way: “Data represented through words, pictures, symbols, videos, or icons” (O’Leary, 2014).

Research Ethics and Institutional Requirements

“Ethics refers to a professional “code of practice” designed to protect the researched from an unethical process, and in turn protect the researcher from legal liabilities. Key ethical considerations include informed consent, causing no harm, and a right to privacy” (O’Leary, 2014). A number of key incidences have sensitized lawmakers and education policymakers to standardize and enforce ethical standards in research. Most colleges and universities will have Institutional Review Boards and standardized policies for reviewing research proposals. Similarly, other types of organizations like tribal government may also have IRB types of policies and functions, though sometimes they follow or accept university standards and reviews. Hence, a project will always need university review and may require additional review at the site of study.(Creswell, 2015)

Considerations for Research Involving Children and Vulnerable Populations

These populations, when identified for research, are even more stringently protected. Both parent and child need to give permission. Moreover, Bartholeme offers some additional guidelines:

Help the child “achieve a developmentally appropriate understanding of the nature of her condition.”
Disclose to the child “the nature of the proposed intervention and what she is likely to experience.”
Assess the child’s understanding of the information provided.
Secure “the child’s willingness to accept the proposed intervention” (Bartholome, 1996).

As well, some sort of ongoing dialog with parents and participants along with the signed documentation can be helpful in maintaining trust and respect and protections for all parties.

Research Paradigms

For the dominant culture, positivist, anti-positivist and critical theory are perhaps most broadly accepted paradigms. Certainly, another aspect we have explored extensively in this class is ethnic identity. Two additional paradigms gaining credibility include subtle realist and feminist. Implicit in aligning with a paradigm is a resonance with a research approach: for example, positivist approaches are quantitative, anti-positivist are qualitative, and critical theory approaches are participant-action research based. Feminist, subtle realist and ethnic paradigms seem to employ mixed method approaches. Ethnic identity and postmodern feminism paradigms may have further resonances because they are both addressing oppressive contexts and incomplete fields. Emphasizing that knowledge is lost or incomplete through language extinction, or genocide, ongoing stories/dialectics of oppression/liberation. A subtle realist paradigm is informed by ideas from quantum mechanics or cybernetics, and so offers a different approach to both hard and social sciences (Cohen & Crabtree, 2006).

Research Methodologies

The broadest brush of methodologies flows from ones research paradigm. Hence, from positivistic paradigm experimental and quantitative methods are expected. From an interpretivist paradigm, interviewing, observation and textual analysis and qualitative methods are expected. From critical theory paradigm, action research methods, such as observation, planning, doing or making, and assessment cycles are expected. Postmodern and subtle realist paradigms of necessity employ mixed methods and this likewise has reflected back on interpretivist and critical paradigms (Cohen & Crabtree, 2006).

Research Methods

These are the specific data gathering activities (O’Leary, 2014) and examples include, surveys, interviews, focus groups and micro-ethnographies.

Theory in Research (sometimes referred to as a theoretical framework)

“A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint [framework] that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered. It also facilitates the understanding of concepts and variables according to given definitions and builds new knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions” (Labaree, 2016). Six approaches to the work include: examine the thesis, brainstorm variables, review literature, list and map constructs, and variables, review relevant social science theories, and discuss assumptions (Labaree, 2016).

Correlation is not necessarily Causation

“’Correlation’ is a statistical technique that can show whether, and how strongly, pairs of variables are related (O’Leary, 2014). What this analysis cannot do is order the correlated variables in a causal sequence. Discovering a correlation may lead to the creation of a hypothesis (null or alternative) the selection of a multi-level independent variable to test follows with a focus on manipulating levels. If this is done well, systematically, repeatedly, and results follow from predictions then the study is moving towards identifying causation (Creswell, 2015).

Sample Size and Population

“In quantitative research, we systematically identify our participants and sites through random sampling: in qualitative research we identify our participants and sites on purposeful sampling based on places and people that can best help us understand our central phenomena” (Creswell, 2015). Simple random sampling offers the preferred approach for statistical studies after that systematic and stratified sampling, multistage cluster sampling, convenience sampling and snowball sampling (Creswell, 2015). Sample size depends in part on the desired outcomes, experimental group size, at least fifteen, correlational study of thirty or more participants, and for a survey study, 350 participants (Creswell, 2015).

Student t-Tests

“Student’s’ t Test is one of the most commonly used techniques for testing a hypothesis on the basis of a difference between sample means. Explained in layman’s terms, the t test determines a probability that two populations are the same with respect to the variable tested.”(Caprette)

Only if there is a direct relationship between each specific data point in the first set and one and only one specific data point in the second set, such as measurements on the same subject ‘before and after,’ then the paired t test MAY be appropriate.
If samples are collected from two different populations or from randomly selected individuals from the same population at different times, use the test for independent samples (unpaired).
Here’s a simple check to determine if the paired t test can apply – if one sample can have a different number of data points from the other, then the paired t test cannot apply (Caprette)

Ethnography

“The Study of cultural groups in a bid to understand, describe and interpret a way of life from the point of view of its participants” (O’Leary, 2014). Creswell identifies ten types of ethnographies: realist, confessional, life history, auto-ethnography, micro-ethnography, case study, critical, feminist, postmodern and novels, in table 14.1, page 468 (Creswell, 2015) This proliferation of methods is a reaction to the book:

Clifford, J., Marcus, G. E., & School of American Research (Santa Fe, N.M.). (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography: a School of American Research advanced seminar. Berkeley: University of California Press.

The upshot is this book demonstrated the end of the “canon” and a crisis of representation a classic deconstruction during a particularly post-modern moment (Creswell, 2015). Observation, interviews, document analysis, and surveys are the basic sources of data used in writing ethnographies (O’Leary, 2014).

Phenomenology

Is first a philosophical methodology accordingly, its foundational literature is dense and focused on abstract examples and explanations. Hence, it is less available to scholars and more difficult to practice. That said, Husserl, and Heidegger had bold visions for the value and impact of these approaches. Phenomenology makes two distinctive moves at the outset: the first is to address the phenomena over and before all else, the second, an aspect of the first, is to give primacy in inquiry to the embodied self. The first move silences metaphysics and epistemology giving priority to the object of inquiry. The second shows the inquiry to be necessarily an aspect of embodiment and lived experience. Obviously, it is incredibly challenging to stop and silence our explanations and experience the phenomena directly. Indeed one of the grounding an assumption in this course is that that is not possible and in the case of Indigenousness methodologies perhaps strategically ill advised. Nevertheless, it is a recurrent struggle in the history of inquiry; logical positivism tried to do it and tried to set mathematics as a common language of inquiry, for example. Another example from our course is grounded theory that waits for the explanatory theory to come from patterns in the data. We see Buddhism engaging in a version of it in their meditative practices.

This first step referred to as “bracketing” aims at silencing preconceptions. Above I mention the importance that phenomenology places in the embodied inquiry. Ihde explains saying: “every experiencing has tis reference or direction towards what is experienced and contrarily, every experienced phenomenon refers to or reflects a mode of experiencing to which it is present” (1986)Said differently my intention and I realized together with my inquiry and my object of inquiry. Phenomenology provides several hermeneutic (interpretive) rules at the outset 1) “attend to the phenomena of experience as they appear”…, 2) “…describe don’t explain,…” 3) “… equalize all immediate phenomena,…” 4) “…{s}eek out structural or invariant features of the phenomena” (Ihde, 1986). The next step is seeking variations “sufficient examples or variations upon examples as might be necessary to discover the structural features being sought” (Ihde, 1986). In the end, the data, interviews, diaries, drawings, and video look very similar to other qualitative inquires but how the researcher manages themselves and their approach to these data is the difference that makes a difference.

Take note of the more dramatic features of the phenomenological shift.

The first shift was what the Husserlian would call the deliberate shift from the natural to a phenomenological attitude. Those first given appearance…, seemed to have a certain familiarity, a naturalness, which was take for granted and tacitly assumed to be the possibility of the thing in question. On reflection, the Husserlian epoche is a device for breaking the bonds of familiarity we have with things, in order to see those things anew. But it is a device, because Husserlian phenomenology seeing has already placed itself outside and above naïve seeing.

Phenomenological seeing deliberately looked for possibilities rather than the familiar, the taken for granted or the natural givenness of an object. Guided by this heuristic principle, phenomenological seeing pointed out strange possibilities—strange, that is from the point of view of the sedimented and strongly held natural attitude. The first distinct perceptual possibilities appeared as dramatically different, surprising, and in some cases perhaps initially difficult to attain. This break with sedimented …beliefs was necessary to clear the field for phenomenological, contrast to empirical, investigation.

Once broken, the… beliefs were reshaped so that a new level of familiarity emerged, the level of essential seeing, or eidetic investigation in Husserlian language. Now the sense of phenomena was opened, and their possibilities seen to be multiple, complex and perhaps indefinite…. The sense of the phenomena changed, and the sense of seeing changed, both being open textured…. The movement is a paradigm shift, which moves the investigator from one set of concerns, beliefs, and habits of seeing to another. It also contains a value claim that the new paradigm is better then the familiar one, at least theoretically and philosophically, because (a) new discover were made, (b) the previous point of view is shown to be inadequate in perceiving the field of phenomena and in its theoretical insights, and (c) it allows the development of a depth ordering of the new wider field of phenomena (Ihde, 1986).

Case Study Research

This is the thorough and deep study of a single situation relevant to the topic, cases may be about individuals, institutions, cultural groups, and events (O’Leary, 2014). Selecting the right number and type of cases is important. Selection can result from pragmatic considerations like availability, and access, specific cases may further making an argument either by showing the typical or the atypical, or finally based on the cases specific interest (O’Leary, 2014). Case study is a type of qualitative research and accordingly the specific data may come from interviews, focus groups, videos, diaries, images and so on.

Participant Observations

O’Leary offers two types of observation covert observation and candid observation. Within each type, she offers two approaches: participant and non-participant. Accordingly, for participant-covert observation we are talking about “going undercover” whereas non-participant-covert might look like online lurking as another example (O’Leary, 2014). Observation offers both advantages, “opportunity to record information as it occurs in a setting, to study actual behavior, and to study individuals who have difficulty verbalizing…” and disadvantages, “…you are limited to those sites and situations where you can gain access, and in those sites you may have difficulty developing rapport” (Creswell, 2015). Creswell more fully defines the role and tasks of participant observers this way: “A participant observer is an observational role adopted by researchers when they take part in activities in the setting they observe…. This role requires seeking permission to participate in activities and assuming a comfortable role as observer in the setting” (Creswell, 2015).

Interview Techniques

Creswell offers an “interview protocol” saying: “As already mentioned, audiotaping of interviews provides a detailed record of the interview: As a backup, you need to take notes during the interview and have the question ready to be asked. An interview protocol serves the purpose of reminding you of the questions and provides a means for recording notes” (Creswell, 2015). In addition to recording, this protocol standardizes the administration of the interview. In my experience, practicing the interview prior to meeting with informants is important both to refine the questions, both, to develop flow and create coherent prompts for facilitating the conversation. Getting feedback from the practice respondents is also important. Practice with your audiotaping or screen capture before the interviews and be confident in your ability to use and troubleshoot the technology. Being systematic and professional in approaching interviewees as you set up the interviews and taking care of hygiene needs, like restrooms and offering light snacks and beverages build trust and respect. Introducing yourself and framing the procedure will also help to relax the moment (O’Leary, 2014). Clean up your notes immediately after the interview, rather than depending upon memory later. Situations that require translation will be more complicated and will require both greater preparation, more time in the interview, and more extensive note taking and review with the translator after the interview all the more reason to leave ample time. Clarify expectations about transcription as well in this situation.

Focus Groups Pro’s and Con’s

Pros:

There are several advantages in using focus group interview: It is comparatively easy to conduct. It is economically efficient. It generates opportunity to collect data from the group interaction. It gives speed in the supply of the results. It allows a relatively large sample size for a qualitative study

Cons:

There are, however, disadvantages in using focus group interview: The research is not carried out in a natural setting, and the researcher has less control over the data generated. The data may be difficult to analyze. The interviewer must have good interview skills. Assembling a group may require additional resources (Hurtado & Dey, 2003)

Quantitative Data Analysis

The first step is a well thought out research problem, a well-articulated hypothesis. The next step is a well-crafted instrument and a plan for meaningful sampling. Without that groundwork, the data analysis is probably impossible. O’Leary offers five steps: “(1) how to manage your data; (2) the nature of the variables; (3) the role and function of both descriptive and inferential statistics; (4) appropriate use of statistical tests; and (5) effective presentation” (O’Leary, 2014).

Qualitative Data Analysis

Similarly, O’Leary describes five tasks in qualitative data analysis: “(1) organize the raw date; (2) enter and code the data; (3) search for meaning through thematic analysis; (4) interpret meaning; and (5) draw conclusions…”(2014). Beyond these five tasks, O’Leary identifies six steps: “Identifying Biases/Noting Overall Impressions; Reducing the Coding into Themes; Searching for Patterns and Interconnections; Mapping and Building Themes; Building and Verifying Theories; Drawing Conclusions” (2014).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Mixed-Methods

Pros:

Strengthens the weaknesses of both quantitative and qualitative research by combining them. Two ways of thinking creates stronger theory and provides more evidence than studying a research problem than either quantitative or qualitative research by themselves. Permissions are given to allow the use all of the tools of data collection available, rather than being restricted to the types of data for each research type. Ensures the questions are answered unlike those that cannot be answered by qualitative or quantitative approaches. Encourages collaboration across between quantitative and qualitative researchers. Encourages the use of multiple worldviews or paradigms rather than the typical paradigms for quantitative researchers and others for qualitative researchers. It also creates a paradigm that might encompass all of quantitative and qualitative research. Mixed methods research is “practical” because it allows the researcher to use all or any methods possible to address a research problem.

Cons:

Mixed methods research is not easy and can be very time consuming. Collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data can also be confusing because of the amount of data. Requires clear presentation to get maximum benefit out of study. Often times researchers only are familiar with only one type of research and can only explain that one.
Requires knowledge of both forms of data collection (Werth).

Action Research

“Research strategies that tackle real-world problems in participatory and collaborative ways. Action research produces change and knowledge in an integrated fashion through a cyclical process“ (O’Leary, 2014). Creswell augments this understanding saying: “Educators aim to improve the practice of education by studying issue or problems they face. Educators reflect about these problems, collect and analyze data, and implement changes based on their findings. In some cases, researchers address a local, practical problem, such as a classroom issue for the teacher. In other situations researchers seek to empower, and emancipate individuals from situations that constrain their self-development and self-determination” (Creswell, 2015). Action research is common in business practices as well usability testing for website design, and lean waste management projects in business situations, for examples. Although communication across these two applications seems inconsistent and incomplete there is probably much researchers can learn from this different applications of similar methodologies and methods.

Works Cited

Bartholome, W. (1996). Ethical Issues in Pediatric Research The Ethics of Research Involving Human Subjects (pp. 360-361). Frederick, MD: University Publishing Group.

Caprette, D. “Students” t Test (For Independent Samples). Retrieved from http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~bioslabs/tools/stats/ttest.html

Cohen, D., & Crabtree, B. (2006, July 2006). Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. Retrieved from http://www.qualres.org/index.html

Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research : planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Hurtado, S., & Dey, E. (2003). Tools for Qualitative Researchers: Focus Groups Method. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/group/ncpi/unspecified/student_assess_toolkit/focusGroups.html#prosCons

Ihde, D. (1986). Experimental Phenomenology: An Introduction. Albany: State Univerisy of New York Press.

Labaree, R. V. (2016). Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Theoretical Framework. Retrieved from http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/theoreticalframework

O’Leary, Z. (2014). The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project (2nd ed.). Los Angelas: Sage Publications Ltd.

Werth, L. Pros and Cons of the method. Retrieved from https://mixed-methods-research-nnu-group-project.wikispaces.com/Pros+and+Cons+of+the+method

Literature Review, ED 601

The following five articles were identified in literature search using the terms, “Alaska Native,” “online learning,” or variations like “online education” and “online course.” Additionally, the inclusion of search terms identifying methodology, for examples “action research” or “grounded theory,” also helped with discoverability. Certainly using the more inclusive search term “Native Americans” combined with variations of “online learning” resulted in a broader set of studies. For the purposes of this initial survey, broader terms were not employed in the final selection. None-the-less, the point of this initial literature review was to focus on Alaskan Natives and online learning communities. Two of these articles report on the results of research teams engaged in participant action research. One article represents the work of a single participant-observer. One is a conference paper presentation. The final stands as a sharp contrast to the others in its methodologies, methods, and bias.

Wexler, L., Eglinton, K., & Gubrium, A. (2014)(Eisner et al., 2012; Wexler, Eglinton, & Gubrium, 2014). Using Digital Stories to Understand the Lives of Alaska Native Young People. Youth & Society, 46(4), 478-504.

The fundamental research question: “How are Alaska Native young people adopting and adapting ‘traditional’ values, roles, and practices in their everyday lives to bolster resilience?” (Wexler et al., 2014). This project grew out of a suicide prevention project between the Inupiat and University of Massachusetts. Two hundred seventy-one youth participated; fewer than ten opted out, four researchers, two with regional familiarity, and two with expertise in visual analysis. “Digital stories are 3- to 5-min visual narratives that synthesize images, video, audio recordings of voice, background music and text to create personal stories….” (Wexler et al., 2014). The team used NVivo8 to store, organize, analyze, and retrieve the collected stories. Systematic codes were applied to the stories. “Throughout this process, stories that stood out as a thematic exemplar (or, in some cases, as a thematic outlier) were tagged as “noteworthy.” By the end of the first phase, approximately 60 of the 271 videos identified as such. In phase 2, approximately half of “exemplary” digital stories were selected from the 60 noteworthy stories” (Wexler et al., 2014). Finally, thirty-one stories were selected for formal coding: “The initial coding scheme was developed through a modified grounded theory approach…” Two key techniques were used to build indigenous knowledge and values into the study. First was to incorporate the Inupiaq values into the coding. Second was to build cycles of “member checking” into the inquiry “to explore cultural resonance and inspire new interpretations.” Three key themes were recognized: “(a) perspectives on important relationships; (b) self-representations: and (c) sites of achievement.” I really appreciate that the authors wrote a section on the limitations of the research. They suggest that involving more young people, analyzing more digital stories, and doing more member checking particularly with young people could make the results better. Finally, in their conclusion, they worry about a gender divide where young men are interested in activities that do not transfer to the dominant culture, whereas young women select activities and sites that more easily transfer. They also observed the impact of the Inupiaq values in the young people’s self-expressions while still negotiating peer and self-invention between cultures. This insight inspired the recommendation that community-based practitioners build more occasions for intergenerational dialog into their programs and projects.

Six western researchers from three different institutions posed four research problems: “Is it possible to develop a geographic database that meets the needs of local “lay” communities while still providing important information to researchers? How can scientists from “outside” incorporate a particular community’s requirements in a GIS? How might a GIS become a truly integrated part of the community when outsiders maintain it? What constraints do very limited bandwidth and outdated computers impose on the design capabilities of the GIS?“ (Eisner et al., 2012). This project occurred over five years, “53 Inupiat elders, hunters, and berry-pickers from the North Slope Villages of Barrow, Atqasuk, Wainwright, and Nuiqsut were interviewed.” (Eisner et al., 2012). However, even before methodology and methods are summarized some of the background and cultural self-consciousness of the researchers needs to be highlighted. The researchers list several preceding local efforts to collect and archive indigenous knowledge similar in content to this project. The researchers also recognize both enthusiasm for and suspicion of this kind of research and online presentation, yet despite these tensions a commonality of purpose between researchers and indigenous residents allowed the project to move forward. This article does an interesting job of balancing science and participant-action research speaking to multiple audiences. Both the website and GIS created in this project are quite impressive. Out of respect for local knowledge, the majority of the data is behind password protection. Only a small portion of the collected data is publically accessible and this is to give a sense of the work. The project included creating an elaborate coding scheme to match map and narrative. The project returned to the communities demonstrating the pilot and offering training on the Web GIS. In the face-to-face environments, the community supported and valued the project. However, use of the online elements has been limited and it seems as well that Web 2.0 technologies are not a quick fix to the limited adoption and use. It appears that efforts to increase community use is ongoing and involve multiple tactics. “Strategies to ensure that the GIS is used by the community to fulfill their needs range from partnering with governments, universities’ and schools to provide K-12 teacher training, developing internships, on-site demonstrations and date collection, and hands-on, real world projects. We plan to further develop the web-based GIS into a more fully participatory process, complete with GIS training workshops, training sessions, and a user-friendly web site where the community can access the date while adding to, building upon, and transforming it” (Eisner et al., 2012). The commitment to capturing indigenous knowledge and setting it on equal footing with scientific knowledge in an interactive online learning community demonstrated by this research team is impressive. This project attempts to bridge elders and youth and is ultimately returned to the communities for their use and benefits.

Interestingly both of these articles are results of larger teams, teams of mixed academic fields, and reflect research that took years to conduct. The researcher/community collaborations are different but present in both. Both carefully define methodologies and methods and both are self-conscious of shortcomings and areas for future research. Both struggle with uneven participation in online communities and both struggle with connection youth and elders. Both engage the community and give back in some way to the local knowledge.

Subramony, D. P. (Winter 2007). Understanding the Complex Dimensions of the Digital Divide: Lessons Learned in the Alaskan Arctic. The Journal of Negro Edutaion, 76(1), 57-68.

The author proposes an interesting project: “While traditional discussions of the {digital} Divide have tended to focus inordinately on access to technology tools and the development of “consumer” level skills, this article argues that for minority groups to truly empower themselves and overcome their digital disadvantages they should make the cultural transition from technology consumer to technology “producer,” thus fundamentally changing the nature of their relationship with technology and the culture of technology itself “ (Subramony, 2007). Subramony introduces the phenomenon of digital divide briefly and then immediately moves to describe the methodology and methods. Even before that, the author moves to protect participants’ confidentiality by giving town and school system pseudonyms. The author refers to Richard Stakes’ “intrinsic case study approach,” to qualitative inquiry techniques (personal interviews, participant observations, and document analysis), and to Carspechen’s “thick record” technique to record the observation sessions in order to define methodology and methods. The author conducted the original case study during 2003-2004; the author interviewed forty-six informants, twenty-five Inupiat, educators, students, parents, and community leaders, twenty-one Westerners, administrators, teachers, and staff for this project. Six participant observation sessions occurred in, classes, community sites, and events. Documents collected included enrollment records, surveys, syllabi, lesson plans, student work, and school policy documents.

Subramony then defines the role of the research and the personal motivations, beliefs, and values. The parameters of participant observation are defined. The author writes thoughtfully about bias and makes an interesting point, saying: “Also, his study observation in Borealis {pseudonym} provided numerous indication of Western educators appearing to be sincere, culturally sensitive, and responsive toward the Inupiat. Meanwhile, many of the Inupiat this researcher encountered saw him as being not much different from the Westerners since anyone who was not Inupiat was an invader, and thus, unwelcome” (Subramony, 2007). Subramony believed that insight contributed to some of his more formal strategies perhaps limiting bias.

Through data analysis, the author surfaces three important themes: comfort, and proficiency with technology tools, culturally appropriating a technological lifestyle according to gender, finally is evolving from consumer to producer of technology. With an interesting turn of phrase, the author compliments the Inupiat as providing lessons for other cultural minority communities. I think the heart of this lesson is this: “…in the preceding account of Arctic Alaska, it was shown that improved access to technology infrastructure does not automatically lead to increased proficiency at all levels of technology use, but rather achievement of the latter is also contingent on a host of other contextual factors, such a user’s gender, cultural traditions, peer expectations, role models, perception of needs, and opportunities to apply their proficiency”(Subramony, 2007). Another key observation is the author’s encouragement for cultural minority communities to move beyond technology consumption to production.

While this paper represents the ethnographic work of a single scholar it is in many ways as significant as the first two. Particularly when struggling to understand key aspects of online learning in relation to Alaska Native communities. These three articles combined raise issues of content production and reverse mentoring as additional elements of successfully creating online learning communities for Alaska Natives. Between Subramony and Wexler et al., we learn some interesting things about schooling, computer use, and gender. From these first three articles the struggle for cultural preservation across generations is noted, but Subramony and Wexler et al hint at a divide between genders as well, with girls’ schoolroom success pulling them away from boys’ interests in snow machines, and subsistence hunting, fishing and trapping.

Cazden, C. B. (2003). Sustaining Indigenous Languages in Cyberspace. Paper presented at the Nurturing Native Languages, Bozeman, MT.

Distance Education: More Data Could Improve Education’s Ability to Track Technology at Minority Serving Institutions: GAO-03-900. (2003). GAO Reports, 1. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=18210025&site=ehost-live

This paper was read in 2002, published in 2003, and much of the literature it draws on comes from the late 1990s. Accordingly, much of what we take for granted about online learning and schooling had yet to be imagined. Nonetheless, the author raises some important cautionary concerns and provides anticipatory insight into some of the strengths of online learning communities that are bearing fruit now. The author begins recounting the arrival of TV in a Gwich’in community in 1980 and its negative impact on cultural identity, particularly language use. She next mentions some of the technologies that anticipate our current online environment, computer programs, CD ROMS, touching on e-mail and early chat, and points out how these cannot substitute for face-to-face interaction. Some of these technologies like TV are largely consumptive or not networked. Some like e-mail and chat were not ubiquitous and not optimized at that time. That said, her concerns about computer language practice and instruction are important then and now, particularly context, community and natural environment, and lack of literal translations, which might point back to these contexts.

However, in anticipating some of the power of online learning communities, the author offers a brief, interesting case study drawn from Rosie Roppel’s work with a Tligit youth. The young man was deeply engaged with his culture and equally unengaged with his western schooling. “The teacher’s answer came in a request on the electronic network of the Bread Loaf School of English from student in the Laguna (Pueblo) Middle School in New Mexico, requesting responses to their stories about their elders. An electronic exchange of student writing developed between the two classrooms. Roppel concludes, ‘I didn’t know it at the time, but the Laguna students would turn out to be the audience that would motivate some of my students to do their best work’”(Cazden, 2003).

This paper is dated; however, it is prescient in identifying online learning communities and reverse mentoring as important elements for creating online learning communities for Native Americans and Alaska Natives. The reverse mentoring in this case is across cultures but it occurs nonetheless between the Tlingit youth and his teacher Rosie Roppel.

Page, G. A., & Hill, M. (2008). Information, Communication, and Educational Technologies in Rural Alaska. New Directions for Adult and Continueing Education(no. 117), 59-70.

The authors define their project, saying: “This chapter provides insight into the issues surrounding the diffusion of information and communication technologies into rural Alaskan communities. A contemporary analysis of the impediments that challenge rural Alaskans and the implications of change from the adoption of innovation is provided” (Page & Hill, 2008). This article appeared in the journal “New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education.” Closer reading of the journal shows that the editors select themes for issues; “rural education” was the theme for this one. In that context the work of the article becomes clearer. A striking shortcoming is that method and methodology is left implicit; the parameters of the literature review are not stated explicitly. The interviews and interview processes are minimally described. “To gain insight into the context of technology and rural Alaska, interviews were conducted with three rural Alaska educators and technology coordinators from different geographical locations” (Page & Hill). “The four areas shown in the figure – content, social context, connectivity, and capability – are reflected in the interviews with rural Alaska educators that are described in the next section. First, the responses to specific questions are reported; next the four framework areas are connected to themes that emerged from the interviews” (Page & Hill, 2008). Abruptly “Gary, Joe, and Bob” suddenly have voice in the article and, equally abruptly, they disappear. How were these three selected and why? Why are only men interviewed? Are any of the respondents Alaska Natives? It is also unclear whether the categories came out of the interviews or out of the literature review and informed the interviews. A note on the mentioned graphic “Source: Based on research by Page (2004). This is a mention of the main author’s dissertation, “Exploring the Digital Divide: Poverty and Progress in a Rural County” a study focused on “impoverished areas in the Southern United States.” This begins to explain the mention of data about internet use by rural African Americans and rural whites (Page & Hill, 2008), alas, both demographics remain largely unconnected to Alaska’s situation. The authors touch on interesting topics, such as appropriate technology, cultural difference, and values alas; they never take ahold of any of these issues to explore more deeply. They do not explore the literature generated by Alaska Natives on education, technology, culture, or values. Indeed, only two sources cited are specific to Alaska. Given the shallowness of the literature on the topic of online learning, and Alaska Natives, in the end this article is a disappointment.

This literature review showed excellent recent research being done on Alaska’s North Slope. However, it seems little has been published recently on other social/geographic regions. Eisner et al., and Wexler et al., engage in action research and a mixed methods approach and both collect interviews or digital self-representations. These are utilized in very different ways in each study. Eisner’s group added the challenge of matching the social facts with scientific facts; “We were expected to carry out two modes of verification: examination of aerial photography or satellite imagery, and direct field observation…. We then cross-verified the information with other verbal accounts and finally, visited a subset of sites for validation and data collection” (Eisner et al., 2012). Subramony employs an ethnographic approach but also gathers a document data from the schools. Taken together, ethnography, interview collection, and creation of digital artifacts and the qualitative analysis of these various data in service of a participant-action project offers rich returns on effort. Another important element for a project’s success particularly one with online aspects is to involve both elders and youth from the outset. If Eisner’s group had done this, I wonder if the user interface and the community adoption would have been more enthusiastic with youth buy-in and participation from the outset. Cazden’s presentation surfaces the importance of reverse and cross-cultural mentoring. Member checking is likewise an important aspect of participant-action research and this is seen explicitly in (Eisner et al., 2012; Wexler et al., 2014) and implicitly in (Subramony, 2007). In the end, this review has helped to sketch both methodology and methods for future research. It also shows how wide open the field is for additional research.

Works Cited

Cazden, C. B. (2003). Sustaining Indigenous Languages in Cyberspace. Paper presented at the Nurturing Native Languages, Bozeman, MT.

Page, G. A., & Hill, M. (2008). Information, Communication, and Educational Technologies in Rural Alaska. New Directions for Adult and Continueing Education(no. 117), 59-70.

Subramony, D. P. (2007). Understanding the Complex Dimensions of the Digital Divide: Lessons Learned in the Alaskan Arctic. The Journal of Negro Edutaion, 76(1), 57-68.

Wexler, L., Eglinton, K., & Gubrium, A. (2014). Using Digital Stories to Understand the Lives of Alaska Native Young People. Youth & Society, 46(4), 478-504.

Final Project, ED 653

Original Post

Folks,

You should have an e-mail from my instance of Moodle inviting you to view the course.

http://www.rdheath.com/moodle/

Please login and have a look around. One lesson learned from teaching my last unit is to have only the welcome and the first lesson visible to students and to reveal the course as we work through it. I’m not doing that for you all simply to keep this straightforward. I look forward to your feedback.

Owen
April 28, 2015 at 1:31 pm
Hey Bob,
I thought your opening paragraph setting expectations very interesting. I like how you say, basically, that learning how to do your job may require time out of work. I thought about this in light of student expectations regarding learning content. We are so used to negotiated effort agreements, I found your approach refreshing. “This is going to involved work on your part. This is life.”
Under Communications– Section 1, there’s a heading titled, “Assignments” I think these points might benefit from some type of organizational device other than what you have. Here’s your first item:
1: View Leading with Emotional Intelligence, Introduction, and section one and two, Understanding Emotional Intelligence, Developing Self-Awareness, and View Effective Listening, welcome and section one, Assessing your Listening Skills
This is workable but might reorganize somehow? Here’s a thought. (my formatting options are somewhat limited in this post).
View:
1. Leading with Emotional Intelligence:
Introduction, Understanding Emotional Intelligence, Developing Self-Awareness
2. Effective Listening:
Welcome and Assessing your Listening Skills
I really like your thoughtful inclusion of the Lynda.com videos. They’re great and should lead to some valuable conversations in your discussion forums. Running through the unit, I wished I’d had such a learning experience when I was younger – would have saved me a lot of wandering in the darkness.
Bob, overall, a great unit. There’s a few bits waiting to be completed, but your effort is hugely ambitious – which I give you credit for.
What are your thoughts? What are you most satisfied with? What are you least satisfied with? What next?
0 likes
Owen
April 28, 2015 at 1:32 pm
I appreciate also the Moodle hosting decision. Moodle can be a bit text-heavy and visually non-remarkable. That being said, there is a lot of content here and the visual simplicity helps keep the focus on just that.
-owen
0 likes
1. Tatiana
  April 28, 2015 at 6:24 pm
  Moodle-shmoodle can put you through scrolling hell! I have a love/hate (bordering on hate/hate) relationship with it. But I don’t hate it anymore than Blackboard (or any other LMS system). I actually found that you can design more visually stimulating and better organized course with Moodle than BB (which for me was a huge surprise), but it takes a lot of exploring and figuring out of tools in order to do it (learning curve is huge as Moodle is largely counter-intuitive and overwhelming — too many un-needed tools and options and too many gems buried underneath all these options). However, it is FREE ?
  0 likes
Tatiana
April 28, 2015 at 6:09 pm
Bob, I did not receive the email ? Could you try and email it to tapi_______.edu? Thanks!
0 likes
Bob
April 29, 2015 at 4:23 pm
Owen,
Thanks as always for your generous comments.
I was struck profoundly by the differences between classroom teaching/teachers and the workplace and supervisor roles throughout this course. I mentioned this last class too, I miss my team. For example, I have an employee who is a genius with proofreading, grammar, and copy editing. It is my strategy to get her involved and invested in these kinds of projects by relying on her strengths. The young people who do the training will at the end of it tell me how to make it better, as another example. I wonder if I have a freedom to take risks with training/learning that others in this class cannot?
I have to admit that Kim blew me away with the video content that she created for her website. I worried about over relying on Lynda.com in this context. In my own context it is the obvious answer. Moreover, this summer I will pay a couple student employees to make training videos that will be used in these training’s. But, where does that get me in developing my skills, in learning something new? In my context these answers are appropriate. However, I do think there is an important insight about personal development that I wasn’t anticipating — so I will be spending more time with video and podcast creation this summer.
I think you are right Owen some of the assignments are still roughly phrased. I think some of my intentions with certain resources are underdeveloped (The Step up to Supervision book, for example) and so I can do some more work on integrating that resource to subsequent sections. I was surprised and satisfied with how the final project for this class turned into a section that I had no intention of developing. I wasn’t going to spend time on theory only on practice. I’m glad to stumble into a way to do better than that.
One of the most satisfying bits of feedback we hear from former employees is, “I learned to work in the libraries, thank you.” I guess I am trying to do this better with both the Professional Demeanor unit and this Step up to Supervision unit.
Tatiana, I sent you another invite on this new e-mail. And, I agree that Moodle can be an exercise in scrolling. My strategy for this course is progressive revealing and hiding of sections. So that the learner only sees the introduction and the current section, less scrolling. We will see what the feedback is from the young people on that. Obviously my employer owns this training and accordingly it will be behind user id/password, and firewalls, so creating it in Moodle here makes sense in my context. “Open learning” just isn’t a good fit for this purpose.
0 likes
1. Kim
  April 30, 2015 at 7:02 pm
  Hey Bob,
  Sorry I’m a bit late chiming in. I really liked what you did here and appreciated what you are trying to do. I once ended a conversation with an employee “the problem isn’t that you were late, the problem is that I wasn’t’ surprised that you were late.” He got that, and the problem was solved. It takes enough of my time trying to teach new employees a position each semester that I don’t have much left to also teach them how to be good employees. And yet, I think that is what student employment is about in many ways. So, bravo! Taking on this aspect of employee training is huge and a place not many go.
  Also, I kind of liked the ‘rough edges’. I felt like it wasn’t canned or rehearsed and edited to exclusion of all personality. As a matter of fact, I feel like your voice was very authentic throughout. Then you through in the Lynda stuff, which is super polished and edited, and it creates a kind of balance.
  0 likes
Owen
April 30, 2015 at 11:52 am
Hey Bob,
I hear you on the Lynda.com resources. I think you bring so much to the process via the frame of inquiry (essential questions) and the learning activities, (learning logs, discussions, etc…) that the course doesn’t have the feeling of simply a Lynda.com playlist. … And it does seem appropriate that there area few holes you find and fill in (the personal development piece) as you go.
Kudos to you and your team on the positive feedback from your former employees. As I said above, I wish I’d had some training like this early in life. It would have placed and contextualized much of my working experience… Even still, I find some of the content extremely valuable.
-owen
0 likes
Michael Golub
May 4, 2015 at 4:18 pm
How do you log into?
http://www.rdheath.com/moodle/

Bob’s Project 4, 4/11/2015, ED 653

Original Post

Project 4 – Web-based Tools

Use web-based tools to design a learning activity. Review your strategy map to locate an appropriate activity. Remember that students benefit more from active learning experiences (something they do or create) than from passive activities (something they view or listen to). Be creative in designing your learning activity! Write clear instructions to support students in completing the activity. Will the activity be graded? If so, include grading criteria.

I started by brainstorming with Wordle to create a word cloud focused on transactional leadership.

Word cloud based on text from:

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/styles/transactional_leadership.htm

Word cloud based on text from:

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/styles/transformational_leadership.htm

I copied and pasted the text from the website into a Word document. I then used the “replace all” and exact word function to strip out articles, prepositions, and passive verbs. I did this to focus on active verbs, and subjects and objects. I think based on both of the word clouds I could do some additional editing of text to further focus and refine the impact on key concepts in a final version.

This led me to start defining an assignment around leadership styles. Depending on one’s approach, the number of styles defined can range from three to a dozen. However, the work of definition is done (at least, at the lower division undergraduate level) a few keyword searches and the literature on the topic unfolds. Therefore, the more interesting work is making the connections between the styles and exercising a personal interpretation of appropriate use of the styles – tools in a toolbox – as it were.

Starting with these several, resources (but not limited to) research, define and explain leadership styles for yourself.

Write a short forum post that lists the styles you think are most distinctive and important (some styles might be subcomponents of others, for one example) and define the styles in your own words additionally comment on two posts by co-workers.

Interpret the relationships between styles. Here we want to explore how styles might be in opposition or how they might be related to or complementary to other styles. With this kind of work, we run the risk of glossing over the difference and focusing on shared attributes. Hence it is important to refer back precisely to the literature of the style as we do this work of comparison and contrast. Rather than an historical description, we need to focus on a functional comparison/contrast of the styles.

Mind map example:

http://www.biggerplate.co m/mindmaps/GUpm8RXX/lewin-39-s-leadership-styles

You may use one of these tools to help you construct your mind map:

Alternatively, you may use an old school approach graphing paper, colored pens, cut out construction paper. Then scan or take a picture of the map and share it to the forums. Those of you using one of the online mappers should download an image or share a link on the forums. Describe your process and summarize your thinking about the connections between the styles you defined.

Finally, we want to consider the value of styles in specific situations. For example, it is an easy gloss to say that transformational leadership is better than transactional leadership and is always to be preferred. However, is that true in an emergency, or a combat situation, for example? Again, the point of this exercise is applying styles to situations. Alas, this is necessarily interpretive work and as such, one needs experience in order to get experience, accordingly we are as interested in our reasons, our process, as we are in our answers.

Active Shooter (anticipate, survive an attack and rebuild after)
Daily operation(re-shelving books in book stacks (think about policy and procedure))
Project management(new software (you have been charged with identifying a new program to train use of library of Congress call numbers)
Company reorganization/turnaround (imagine that we will be adding personal computing support to the service we offer at the service desk)

Pick one of the cases and think about the lifetime of the scenario, express your perspectives, relate to, and reflect on leadership styles switching appropriately between them across the lifetime of the scenario. Create a Prezi to tell the story of your switching between the styles as you navigate the leadership scenario. Again, participants may use the forums as resource to storyboard and develop their Prezi.

These “assignments” reflect the “what” and “why” of our assignment but we need to explore the “how,” now. All of this work is situated in our LMS presentation. It also represents a departure from the work I have already done. In what I have worked up so far, I have been very pragmatic and not overly theoretical. I need to think through where this work might fit in the sequence of the training. I also want this theory-based knowledge to be actively engaged with. While this three step assignment has the potential to be worked into something interesting I think it might be too much for my on the job, LMS training. Rather something like it might have value in a traditional class.

While the work in my training will not be graded in a traditional classroom sense, none-the-less it seemed fruitful to search a bit for rubrics related to student leader training. Texas A&M, Harvard, and Florida A&M linked below offer some very interesting rubrics for assessing both leadership and learning about leadership. The Texas A&M site is a real treasure trove. Again, because I am uncertain that I will actually incorporate this series of assignments into my training, yet because it does seem like a fruitful set of ideas, I want to chase this matter a bit further.

One insight that is… dawning on me as I continue to do the work in this online instruction venue is working its way into my thinking about coaching supervisors. I have observed for a long time that we often engage in the faulty analysis, poor performance needs retraining. Accordingly, we put huge energy into training, imagining that by doing so we will not have to spend time on retraining. The insight comes from shifting our attention exclusively to performance, to perfect performance, to excellence in customer experience, rather than training. Alternatively, in the language of instructional design, we are looking for measurable outcomes, clear rubrics, and performance evaluation. This forces us to get training into perspective, training gives knowledge but that is only a third of the work of the supervisor, skills require practice, and perfection requires feedback and coaching. Excellent supervision also has to recognize when we are rewarding poor or mediocre performance or equally detrimental, punishing excellence and then reconfigure the workplace to correct these dysfunctions. These elements taken together along with a healthy dose of self-reflection and supervisors are more likely to get his/her direct reports to achieve excellence.

So, rather than continue to play the “ungraded” card, and because my last attempt at a rubric was limited. I, for the exercise, made an attempt to rough out a rubric for this assignment. Feedback is welcomed.

RUBRIC	Excellent	Satisfactory	Incomplete
Definition	Forum posting shows extensive and thorough familiarity with leadership styles. Learners’ cite linked resources and may cite sourced beyond those linked.	Forum posting shows understanding of most styles. Learner’s uses several of the linked sources in their explanation.	Forum posting is incomplete or shows errors in understanding. Learners’ do not refer to linked sources.
Interpretation	Mind maps are rich, thoughtful and well laid out. Inclusion of concepts and connections are clear and well demonstrated. Reference to source material is included.	Mind maps are complete and connections are clear. Linked sources obviously inform the work.	Mind maps are incomplete and connections are poorly chosen or illustrated. Reference to source material is lacking.
Application	Prezi presentation flows well; shifting between leadership theories is fluid and logical. Details both in theories and in use of scenarios are present. Switching between styles is present and facile.	Prezi is complete both in terms of content and slide show effectiveness. The learner shifts between theory and application in the scenario. Also, shifts between several styles. Linked sources are evident in the work.	Prezi slide show is used poorly (inadequate number of slides, or poor transitions, for example) or not at all. Errors in understanding or misapplication of styles to the scenario are present. Source material is not used or cited.

Document Accessibility, ED 653

Original Post

H-5-MS-Word-Document-with-graphics-and-accessibility-Bob-Heath

Ok, so in the end, it is a pdf, rather than an MS Word document, but I think that might even accomplish more in terms of accessibility. I took my product review paper and based on chapter 3 of:

Coombs, Norman (2010). Making Online Teaching Accessible: Inclusive Course Design for Students with Disabilities. Jossey-Bass. Retrieved January 14, 2012, from Ebook Library. Read Chapters 1 and 7.

I added a bunch of formatting and images per Owen’s request.

This was a good practice for me since so much of what we do in the workplace is quick and dirty Google docs. The downside is that a 5-page paper is now nearly double that. An interesting practice in both Word and Adobe was to use the “read out loud” feature of the respective programs to review my work.

Bob’s Screen Cast, ED 653

Original Post

This was an interesting process for me. I did a first draft with Jing and it was horrible — though it did give me practice. I talked with one of our Academic ITS people and he turned me onto Chrome Screencastify. This version is my second go with that product. To my thinking this is adequate, but, I think better is possible, though perhaps not with free products. Oddly enough publishing it was interestingly challenging. Ostensibly you can simply upload to YouTube, alas, that didn’t work for me. In the end WordPress came through and even though this installation isn’t “live” (soon it will be my e-portfolio, but for now it is in development) you should be able to view the screen cast. I think I can get away with my use of the segment under Fair Use, alas, while Pharrell probably wouldn’t be a chump about it, NBC might. So I am casting about for other examples for avoiding weaknesses and focusing on strengths.

7 thoughts on “Bob’s Screen Cast”

Kim
March 25, 2015 at 7:29 pm
Hi Bob,
I’m glad you did this. I wouldn’t have ever thought of doing a web tour, but it was a great idea. There were no distractions and it was very natural sounding like you were just sitting next to another person and walking around the gallup site. My favorite part was at the very end when you said, ‘you know your strengths are, we are doing this so we can discover them’. I think that was a really powerful concept to bring out and a great note to end on. I would love to side chat some time about how much time you are able to spend on strengths training for your team and find out what activities are working for you. How much individual work do you get in before you jump into the team stuff? Stuff like that:)
0 likes
1. Bob
  March 28, 2015 at 4:33 am
  Kim, I’m certainly willing to talk about this further. I will say that our program to create a library wide student employee career path was interrupted and broken. I have a project for this Spring and Summer to redo that work. While I am optimistic about this new opportunity I am also frustrated that we are doing this work anew again, rather than being further along. So, I am just now introducing the emphasis on strengths to our entire staff, not just, student employees. I think an important value it introduces is looking at the good in our co-workers rather then their weaknesses. It is a timely roll-out as it fits well with our new President’s values.
  0 likes
Tatiana
March 27, 2015 at 3:08 pm
Hi Bob, I found the content of your screencast very interesting. We do not always think about our strengths (and if you are like me you think more of weaknesses because they are more noticeable, I think). What I also liked about your screencast is that you have shared found resources simultaneously with delivering course content and sharing your own experience like with taking StrengthTests. It really put things in perspective for me and eased a fear that I might potentially fail these tests (if that makes sense).
The background noise was distracting though ? If you are looking for a good screencasting free piece of software I highly recommend http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/. There is a web-based version and an app you can download to your computer. It gives you some editing capabilities (even with free account) connects directly to your YouTube account, allows you to download your video on your computer in mp4 format, which you can also bring into video-editing software where you can clean up extraneous noise a little. I swear by it.
0 likes
1. Bob
  March 28, 2015 at 4:28 am
  Tatiana, thanks for the recommendation. I was annoyed with both Jing and Screencastify because they produce files that are not editable. I’ll look at Screencast-o-matic.
  0 likes
  1. Kim
    March 28, 2015 at 1:47 pm
    When we first started strengths our department of 3 staff and 2 student employees all did it. I think it helped the student employees to have all of using the same language. I know it helped me as a supervisor get to know what motivates each member of my time. I was not able to edit using keynote and quicktime. I was glad it was a short assignment because I just had to keep starting over.
    0 likes
Owen
March 30, 2015 at 2:37 pm
Lots of good stuff here, Bob. Nice job on the web tour and I agree with Kim and Tatiana’s comments about the presentation and the content.
I thought your screen cast was great and I liked how you led us through your thinking and some of the results. You had a reflective quality, which is often hard to project. As soon as we turn on the record button, it often becomes hard to continue to think…we tend to switch over into narration mode.
Too bad the audio on the clip was a bit weak. I’m wearing headphones and I struggled to hear the first portion until you turned it up. (But I’m sure you’re aware of that)…
How long does it take to assess one’s strengths? Is it an arduous survey that then reveals some sort of strength scores based on how you respond to various questions? Or is it more self-assessment based? Curious.
0 likes
Owen
March 30, 2015 at 2:56 pm
On the subject of various screencasting solutions… I’d throw out another vote for Quicktime. I know the updated mac client allows for easy screen video capture, and I believe the PC one does as well. And it is free. I’ve had some luck with screen-cast-o-matic as well… but it can be a bit twitchy with java requirements and so on. Lastly, my new favorite is ScreenFlow. If you do much video editing, the screen capture tool within screen flow is a wonderful professional level tool also.
On the windows side of the room, there’s http://www.screenpresso.com also… seems like they’re putting some effort into this as well.
-owen

LMS Comparison Business POV, ED 653

Original Post

Final Project, Third Draft Strategy

Learning Management Systems Comparisons from the Business Point of View

5 thoughts on “LMS Comparison Business POV”

Owen
March 23, 2015 at 3:09 pm
Hey Bob,
I like your UBD Tree “deconstructed.” Did you find the little fillable boxes annoying? Are you more comfortable with this more linear format?
I too think more quickly and more clearly within the confines of a word or google document.
I’d be curious as to your thoughts on this exercise as a process tool? What do you think about “charting” as a design process?
I know your thinking on your own subject is quite evolved, and this is reflected in the flow of your Leadership and Management design – from Essential Questions through Learning Logs (forums) as assessments, and into traditional content areas such as training videos, research, and mentor feedback.
-Owen
0 likes
1. Bob
  March 25, 2015 at 9:27 am
  Yup, the little boxes pinched and chaffed a bit. That admitted I am suspicious of my response to the text. I am holding open the possibility that in a different circumstance that chart might be the right tool. Right here and now the linear path got it done. I wonder if in a collaborative setting that chart might be a way for content expert and instructional designer to work together? I wonder as well if particular disciplines might call for that approach, say, poetry, for example. I recall last semester we were wrangling over the laboratory component of science instruction. I wonder as well about the studio component of arts courses in the online venue. Perhaps the chart has a place in helping me connect with those teachers?
  0 likes
Owen
March 23, 2015 at 5:16 pm
…and on your paper…
Interesting point about the LMS in the workplace. I completely agree that most companies aren’t going to encourage “open learning” – so much effort is bent and focussed on combing and preening the corporate image, tolerance for behind the scenes exposure will be extremely low, I would think.
Wow. In addition to a simple tool evaluation, your paper addresses such a complex and very interesting topic. … I hardly know where to begin.
Sort of stream of consciousness – I think it interesting that Oxford Online uses Moodle. I’ve also been intrigued by edX and Canvas. The advantage that Blackboard offers is institutional security – that is, large departments can feel secure in knowing that they’re purchasing the Chevy Caprice of LMS Learning Taxis. The one thing about Blackboard (Bb) is that their pricing is also institutionally variable. There is entry level pricing to entice the institution and once your institution is invested, prices and service contracts may increase.
Years ago I was involved with a Major LMS/Campus Software system upgrade. The small college I was working for had a terrible system that was horrendously expensive through Campus America. It operated on an antiquated VAX computer… and was incredibly unapproachable. I was head of IT at the time and after a year of deliberations, we purchased a new product based on WindowsNT servers, super user friendly, much easier to maintain, etc… Product was called TEAMS. We got through a year of installation and data conversion and finally decommissioned the old VAX server… two months later the company was purchased by Campus America… It was a good system while it lasted, but I fear the future was not bright at that point.
There are so many factors. Faculty, Students, IT, costs. Even maintenance philosophies and capacities within IT departments can be highly variable and extremely important. UAA and UAF both have Blackboard, but UAF’s installation is several versions ahead, and UAA’s support staff is a small fraction of UAF’s.
I’m intrigued that Google has backed edX’s open platform efforts. I like the platform and am hopeful for a bright future funded by our click-generated dollars. Check out Mooc.org…
Thanks for the reviews and for opening the can of worms that is the LMS debate.
-owen
0 likes
Tatiana
March 27, 2015 at 2:31 pm
I am surprised that you did not go deeper in evaluating Moodle (the open source version). I find there are two main features that IT departments are looking for: scaleability, cost, and security. Incidentally, free Moodle offers all three. Additionally as far as features go, I actually find Moodle more powerful than Blackboard. There are a lot of additional features available that are built-in. One that I think any professional trainer will appreciate is called Workshop and allows you to build branching scenarios (which are at the core of instructional design for training purposes, I think). The interface for building is a bit complicated at first, but you can create SCORM-comparable training modules without purchasing SCORM building software like Articulate.
0 likes
Bob
March 28, 2015 at 4:04 am
While Owen assigned us a paper on “product comparison” in the end my paper was about decision models and organizational change management. There are literally hundreds of LMS products. That and the realization that in a business case an HR department will be running the training program. This means that other factors need to be included in the review of LMS products, like the suite of HR tools the LMS is embedded in or at least integrated with matters too. For example, an employees personal file is accurately and immediately and hopefully automatically updated based on LMS results. So my examples were more foils for the other discussion, however, they were selected based on being full featured, then on being very different from each other.

Author: Robert Heath

Human Posture, Place-Based Learning, and Mobile Technologies: Some Introductory Ruminations.

References

Initial Exploration of Structures and Boundaries in Creating a Web Presence

In which, a doddering old guy takes insight from a couple of young men. And, in which we explore dualisms and speculate on more fruitful x-y-z coordinates.

Research Proposal, ED 601

Works Cited

Research Terminology Dictionary, ED 601

Research Terminology Dictionary

Works Cited

Literature Review, ED 601

Works Cited

Final Project, ED 653

8 thoughts on “Final Project”

Bob’s Project 4, 4/11/2015, ED 653

Document Accessibility, ED 653

Bob’s Screen Cast, ED 653

7 thoughts on “Bob’s Screen Cast”

LMS Comparison Business POV, ED 653

5 thoughts on “LMS Comparison Business POV”