Attached are two text files that make my BLOG look like it does. I have been playing around with this for quit a bit of time this past week. Essentially there is a style sheet file that controls how the text looks (fonts) and a Main Index file that structures the page – referring back to the stylee sheet. To make your MT Blog look like mine (I am not suggesting this is a good idea), then chose the ‘edit template’ option and then the main and style templates and paste the ‘code’ in. You will need to upload a banner and replace the link to my banner. Play around with these after first saving a copy of your own templates so that you can revert to them if required. If you are not using MT, the principles are the same but my code will most likely not work.

Main index code.
Style sheet code.

I just want to throw in a few thoughts on the issue of Ôø&!Retrospective BloggingÔø&!. This is a phrase I am using to describe the practice of enhancing reputation through the creation of Blog entries that refer to outcomes already known about. For example, the posting in November 2003 in a sports writers Blog that predicts Arsenal for the Premiership, and Manchester United for the FA Cup beating Millwall 4 Ôø&! 0 Ôø&! how did he predict that sir! The answer is he didnÔø&!t, but simply created a Blog entry retrospectively.

This facile example is simply to illustrate the point that Blog technology means that Ôø&!truthÔø&! can be readily tampered with. This is also clearly the case with websites, but I believe that there is something different in hoe Blog entries are presented. That is the time stamped nature of Blogs makes this tampering all the more Ôø&!convincingÔø&! and potentially significant as a practice.
—–
EXTENDED BODY:

—–
EXCERPT:

—–
KEYWORDS:

—–

——–
AUTHOR: stephenp
TITLE: MOVABLETYPE
STATUS: Publish
ALLOW COMMENTS: 1
CONVERT BREAKS: __default__
ALLOW PINGS: 1
PRIMARY CATEGORY: Research & Evaluation
CATEGORY: Research & Evaluation

DATE: 05/31/2004 09:13:52 AM
—–
BODY:

Attached are two text files that make my BLOG look like it does. I have been playing around with this for quit a bit of time this past week. Essentially there is a style sheet file that controls how the text looks (fonts) and a Main Index file that structures the page – referring back to the stylee sheet. To make your MT Blog look like mine (I am not suggesting this is a good idea), then chose the ‘edit template’ option and then the main and style templates and paste the ‘code’ in. You will need to upload a banner and replace the link to my banner. Play around with these after first saving a copy of your own templates so that you can revert to them if required. If you are not using MT, the principles are the same but my code will most likely not work.

Main index code.
Style sheet code.

This list of criteria is designed to help with decisions about community learning platforms. The criteria are intended to help structure the review process and it will be that for some users different criteria have a different level of importance.

The table was developed from a diagram that Richard at Ultralab produced and through conversations with Tom Smith, but they may well take issue with much of it.

As a relatively new Ultralab employee (5 years as opposed to 15) I still struggle with some of the accepted orthodoxies/doctrines/mantras/certainties of Ultralab. I recognize that many of these have come from past research projects and conversations over many years. In this Blog I will start by making a list. Over time I will unpick each of the points I have identifies and challenge the ones I believe are now ill founded, suggest developments, and explain my own understanding based on my current experiences.

NB – Below is an editable document

This is the mantra for Ultralab , but what does it actually mean? No doubt there are many equally valid interpretations by Ultralab staff and the many many people we work with. So, for me one of the qualities of delightful learning is:

“an experience that is compelling enough to follow through to fulfilment”

These are some of the hopefully ‘delightful’ projects we are working on at Ultralab South and these are some of my ideas and research into online learning.

For Michaele Winter, a colleague at Ultralab South, delightful learning meant:

“I like to think of it as meaning of the light, because when I delight in something, I feel illuminated and light hearted. I guess that for me it has something to do with being aligned to my highest and ‘in the flow’.”

On the way into work Tom and myself were talking about blogs again! We got onto the subject of organisational management and how difficult it is to get true transparency (a much overused word) in projects and organizations. Superficially, conferencing systems (such as First-Class) appear to offer this, but anyone who has used then for a substantial period of time will realize that this isnít the case. What they do is enable folk to claim there is transparency because all of the information is there somewhere! However, what I am doing, what my colleagues are doing, what the project and organization are doing isnít well shared in a form that is ëdigestibleí and in a form that can be internalised ñ in short we probably have no more than the sketchiest and fragmented idea of what is going on.

Another organizational issues that is notoriously difficult to crack is that of performance management (PDP, appraisal, etc), again a great idea and undoubtedly if done well it can have a positive impact for both individuals and for organizations. However, the process is time consuming and somewhat cumbersome and I would argue doesnít work particularly well in complex situations (and we are increasingly in a world of ësupercomplexity) where impact is not easily measured and related to work outputs.

Briefly to recap some of the characteristics of Blog’s (previous posting) :
- they empower individuals removing ëgatekeepersí from the equation
- they are quick and easy to contribute to
- they are readily accessible and are inherently ëtransparentí in nature
- they are person centric
,

So back to the Blog, what might it offer in terms of combining elements of performance management and transparency of an organization or at least projects within an organization? A project Blog that pulls together (syndicates) contributions and:
- enables individuals to be identified as having particular responsibilities derived from overall project aims and articulated as project objectives and share the current ëstate of playí
- enables individuals to share the particular tasks they are engaged upon and to share their progress including issues and difficulties
- support based on a ëcritical friendshipí model; that is working in small teams
- peer ëappraisalí through the active interest of colleagues and those with projet responsibilities

Clearly for the above to work, there is much in terms of the culture of an organization that needs to be right. However, if only a fraction of the potential is realised it would I believe be a powerful use of technology for managing modern organisations with ICT.

Both f2f and asynchronous conversations allow ‘interjections’ at chosen points in the communication.

In the case of synchronous f2f conversations this is represented by readily identifiable ‘light’ and ‘heavy’ interventions. An example of a light intervention being an ‘aha’ or some other encouraging utterance, a nod of the head, or a facial gesture, etc. Heavy interventions are represented by interruptions, that are challenging an idea/statement, picking up and developing a point etc. This process can be seen as one of negotiation, that is establishing an understanding or interpretation of events that, to or a greater or lesser extent, ‘tally’ with each other.

With asynchronous online conversations, the practice of negotiation of meaning is somewhat stymied. Light interventions are far less frequent so the feedback we expect and usually receive f2f often doesn’t happen, or is reduced in frequency. Heavy interventions are equally rare often in the form of challenges or requests for further information. An exception to this can sometimes be observed with ësophisticatedí users of asynchronous online communication tools, although this also is uncommon.

So where does this leave the negotiation of meaning? In online asynchronous conversations the level of assumption between discussants is far higher than f2f conversations.

To what extent this matters depends largely on the purpose of the conversation. If it is for sharing of information, or generating ideas – a brainstorming session – it matters little that there is no discernable negotiation. If however, the purpose of the conversation is to come to a common understanding it is essential that a ëtrueí negotiation of meaning takes place. Likewise, if it is for guidance on a task or activity it would seem to be important that both sides have some level of certainty that what has been said has been heard and what has been heard has indeed been said!

To what extent this difference between synchronous f2f and asynchronous online is a feature of us learning a ‘new literacy’ of communication or an unavoidable feature of the technology is a point for discussion. Perhaps as we become more sophisticated in out use of online technology negotiation of meaning will become second nature, or as Rheingold indicates in his book ëThe Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontierí it is a feature of the technology that online communications are good at raising issues and generating debate and ideas but lousy at reaching consensus or agreements!

I am posting just two illustrative quotes from Ultraversity researchers about their Ultraversity degree experience. They articulate the views of many researchers in recognising just how transformative of practice a workplace can be and for the Ultraversity project that is very encouraging. The TTA report on impact (Gina Revill and Ian Terrell) is looking into this aspect in detail and will be published in summer.

There is a less encouraging although not unexpected messages as well and that is the high degree of frustration of researchers who don’t believe their institutions are matching their level of professionalism, commitment and enthusiasm to make a difference. This is the ‘knowing what and knowing how’ central to the degree experience, but not capitalised on by many (not all) of the institutions with Ultraversity researchers.

(Both quotes used are done so with permission of the individuals involved.)

“I really feel that once we have completed this degree we will have learned skills that will be extremely valuable as we progress in our careers. The student teacher I am working with at the moment says that her course feeds the students facts, which they then have to try to put into practice. We are being made to think for ourselves.”

” I am aware of evaluating everything I do or am asked to do much more carefully than I used to, wanting to know why we are doing things in such a way and what will be the outcome of what we do. I think finding that other members of staff won’t allow their views to be challenged has left me quite disheartened, change is something which doesn’t seem to be embraced readily by some teaching staff at the school (particularly when suggested by a teaching assistant!) and it means it is difficult to put into practice some of the ideas and good practice emerging from the course.”