Agendas+and+Meeting+Minutes

wiki home

SSHRC NFSDL Research Team Meeting Agenda: December 12, 2008

1. Updates from team members 2. Issues around qualitative analysis 3. Methods for conducting analysis 4. Handling and preserving data 5. Qualitative analysis tool? College support. 6. Coding practice – reliability & trustworthiness 7. Next steps/activities
 * a. Sense of community indices
 * b. Density, intensity, reciprocity
 * c. Transcript analysis
 * a. Shared coding/independent coding strategies
 * b. Dedicated backup drive for data

NFSDL Meeting: Aug 27th, 2008 Room 8, Educ In attendance: Rick, Dirk, Jaymie (iChat) and Kirk.

1. Team member report: Jaymie: still carrying on with her resource collection work, re-worked the wiki, looking into workplace learning.

Kirk: SL workshop (construction junction); seeing how class is operated, design, tools using, etc. Reading a lot of the resources. Some in VL and SDL (Rick: embodied curriculum design in Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology). U of S SL land; Frank is looking into getting it deeded over to us, we will be officers of that space. We need to be able to get to the point where we can run media. (Rick: could you make a list of design principles as Kirk is going along). JeffKirka Blog records on construction junction. (Easy Speak HUD issues).

Dirk: “sustaining interest” and “motivation” and “engagement” and “persistence” and “reluctance/fear” are all key ideas I’ve been thinking about, especially in context of talking with Glenys about her thesis. Reading what’s been posted. Thinking about senior context, how that might work, how it would be tracked, etc.

Rick: ethics certificate (held up over the summer); don’t have funding set up yet (research services to set up funding). Proposal to AERA, may not get accepted; sent to design and technology; may get in somewhere else. Biggest piece was redesigning Transforming Teaching. He finessed the design, to jig it toward this direction; Tara and he had good conversations, some push-back, questions, etc. Course is designed in two-week cadence (first to be self-directed, one reading, but wander around); do a self-reflection on blog they create on WordPress, to track their thinking on teaching (Google reader aggregates RSS to give master blog). Failsafe? Can do a private post if they choose but will be pushed hard to get the stuff out there. Big question? Data protocol, what are we going to map out (e.g., interactions between people, external resources they cite, themes, threads, etc.).

TO DO: start making list of questions, the kinds of data we should collect, etc. Think in terms of papers to produce. By Tues/Wed of next week.

VLCResearch.ca “Scribed” like “Flicker” for academic papers; posted papers on scribed. Comments on it.

Three papers: need topics!! Kirk to be lead on proposal for chapter in NFSDL design in SL.

Next meeting: Sept. 18, Educ 8 at 5:00

_ NFSDL Research Team Mtg. Oct. 22, 2008 In attendance: Xing, Rick, Ben, Kirk, Dirk, Jaymie

1. Welcome Xing!

2. SDL Symposium: if there’s a paper, we could likely do it. Action item: find out re: deadline, and draft/abstract

3. TT Project update: can’t let us in the “backdoor” as Rick told them it was a “safe and private” place, so wants to delay (ethically, etc.); alert them to the fact that we want to evaluate the class (Dirk would go in and discuss this without Rick present). F2F is great, active engagement; with online, not so much. Rick will continue cajoling, pleading, begging, etc. participation in non-formal components. Question may come when Rick’s tummy tells him, or at the very end of the class. Maybe talk to them about formative evaluation opportunities and intervene in December or January (this would be good modeling for T&L anyway). Action item: Rick will journal more often, tracking his processes, interventions, etc. Discussion re: non-formal learning vs. formal (can’t “force” participation); carrot may be an expectation to contribute something they’ve learned, found, etc. that reflects their non-formal learning. So, potluck vs. dinner party metaphor. Cultural assumptions regarding these non-formal environments (e.g., Chinese students not used to commenting on others’ work, so reluctant to do so). Does the formal structures of, say, TT, make it look too much like a “formal” course and therefore will “set off bells” regarding how to behave, how to interact, how to present yourself; if it were less “coursey” and more toward the non or informal end of the spectrum, would people feel less reticent to contribute? Create a matrix to look at assessments, content, etc. look like in different environments.

4. Methodology: Coding issues! Scope project might be a useful non-formal data set to practice code creation, and to practice the coding process, establish inter-coder reliability. Manifest variables (VLC model); does this change across “courseyness” (from formal to non-formal); emergent variables? For example, the course instructor for Agric 112 asked students a specific question for discussion but in TT, there is not? Paper: methodology in the data, struggling with the issues, especially in terms of non-formal environment.

5. Connectivism Course: Participants will not do tasks if it is work; one participant had a difficulty with chaos; set up a course, then when people didn’t play the way she wanted, she got upset. Question: how does motivation manifest itself in a non-formal learning environment; how much work (or nature of work) is tolerable? Free riding and social loafing? Think it is fair to grab the data if public; usage data not user data. Chaotic environment in SL; potential for rebellion in non-formal and to move away/toward structure (emergent). Non-formal structures are a natural outcome of chaotic informality? Kirk found a tool to capture text chats on the island.

6. Regular lab time: Wednesdays, ID centre. Chance to meet, have a regular time to be there, people show up, conversations.

7. Future tasks: each of us to think in terms of timelines; particular projects, key markers, in terms of product (e.g., environment, articles); think in terms of months, where you want to be. Planning: seniors environment and SL. Need to put this on my schedule. Deliberately fit in the meta ideas of NFSDL and fit them into this environment.

Thursday, February 26, 2009 In attendance: Rick, Ben, Kirk, Jaymie

Team member reports:

Rick: • Working on collecting data and ideas for AREA – deadlines are coming up soon. • Wants to focus on negotiated coding agreement for the initial analysis (basically between Rick and Jaymie at this point) • Initial ideas: there is no VLC in the transforming teaching group – this could have major implications about the nature of non-formal and blended learning contexts

Kirk: • Gave us a tour of the new ECMM space in SL • Working on setting up in world, including proximity sensors and other tools for research purposes • Talked about holodecks, changeable spaces in SL that could be employed in our space • Working on each area in the space in turn: the welcome center, a social area, a presentation area, a sandbox (for scripting, etc.) and an instructional area. • Things to think about: what kind of resources and support systems will we need to make the space function as an educational environment? • Kirk took a course about analyzing your educational presence in SL and saved all the transcripts and discussions.

Ben: • Ben walked us through generating some reports on NVivo data – basically using NVivo to get the numbers for export into excel or whatever program to create graphs/charts based on the exact data you want to use. • Ben will find out about setting up queries in NVivo to generate inter-coder reliability reports

Jaymie: • Next week will be coding and discussing results with Rick • Uploading files to file cabinet in PAWS for access outside the IDC • Dirk & Jaymie outlining the methodology paper; will bring back to the group

Next meeting: TBA

wiki home