AleWikiProcessComments

From LiteracyTentWiki

Comments on the Adult Literacy Education Wiki Process

The most recent comments are added at the TOP, so if you want to read them in chronological order, scroll to the bottom.

February 4, 2005

Bravo everybody! and Kudos to David! What a wonderful resource that will grow and flourish under your leadership! This is wonderful, but would be easier to follow if messages were threaded or provided with most recent additions added at the top as I am doing now. I added a lot of words to the technology glossary. We need to create a place for a resource repository here - one that is searchable and peer reviewed. This is SO exciting! My best, Roberta McKnight

January 31, 2005

Wikiteers,

Welcome Mariann Fedele -- the new Technology in the Classroo Discussion Area Leader (and also the NIFL-Technology list moderator.)

The ALE Wiki announcement, as you know, has gone out. We now have nearly fifty people signed up. I predict we'll have over 100 registered by tomorrow. (See Special:Listusers to see who's registered.) We have a few people who have also introduced themselves on WhosHere .

Here are some wiki suggestions:

  1. When you develop a new wiki page, list it on AleNews
  2. Check out ALEFAQ -- I just added a question which you may want to know the answer to -- how to track changes in the ALE Wiki. There may need to be other questions added to this page. Feel free to add a question even if you aren't sure of the answer.
  3. When developing a glossary, or other reference, consider linking to the Wikipedia. Its entry on _literacy_, for example, is above average -- and, of course, could be improved by --- you.
  4. What do you do once your wiki area is developed? Keep adding to it -- for example from archives of discussions in the past. And as you discover new references or research. But also, think about refining it. Could that summary be written better? Is there a need for two summaries, a short one and a longer one?

The challenge of the wiki process is how it can be participatory, democratic and fresh on the one hand, but also well-organized, and simple to use on the other. Ask yourself -- how does this area look to a newbie? Engaging or intimidating? Is there a way a newbie can get something quickly but also be tempted to come back to look there for deeper, more complex resources?

We're the pioneers in this effort. There's no cookbook. Share your thoughts as you try new things. Let's learn from each other.

David
David J. Rosen

January 27, 2005

Five Levels of simplicity and complexity

Teachers (and others) seeking information from research may need it at different levels of simplicity or complexity, depending on their own knowledge about and interest in the topic. The ALE Wiki will be most useful to practitioners if its design offers several levels, e.g.:

  • Level One: Discussion Topic and Question
    • Level Two: For each Topic (and perhaps Question) a two-three sentence short summary
      • Level Three: A one-two paragraph summary, perhaps with terms linked to a Discussion Topic Glossary page
        • Level Four: A Full Discussion, with links to research briefs and
          • Level Five:links to full studies online (and elsewhere).

Levels two-five could also have links to reading lists/bibliographies/annotated bibliographies.

David J. Rosen

January 6, 2005

Exerpts from a conversation between Marie and David, re: the new wiki page and next steps:


Marie: Hey, the new page is so nice. Very clear and easy now. Very google-esk.

David: Thanks

Marie: I would like to lead a discussion actually.

David: Great

Marie: That is a good strategy for me to keep in the work - I'm better under the pressure. Maybe all the topics should have a leader?

David: Yes, I hope so

Marie: Is that what you're thinking?

David: Yes.

Marie: At least at first it really keeps things moving until it gets a life of it's own. Not sure if other wikis have leaders - do you know about that?

David: I don't know anything about Wiki culture.

Marie: Where should we get the topics from if we add new ones? The one from the Symposium is super;

David: Yes

Marie: Of course the (NIFL - and other adult literacy) lists come to mind:

David: Yes

Marie: Perhaps there should be a wiki on the reauthorization of WIA

David: Yes -- I hope David Collings might be willing to take that on.

Marie: And the points about misconceptions of reading?

David: Yes

Marie: What if each electronic list had a reason to have a wiki? (Once I get into the wiki, I'll repost all these ideas/questions there under the process topic).

David: Exactly what I was thinking.

Marie: What might be any relationship between the ALE Wiki and the chunks of info and resources that exist within the LINCS Collections?

David: Yes indeed. Looks like you and I are thinking about this in the same ways. Jackie Taylor is, too.

Exerpts from an e-mail message to the ALE Wiki-teers on January 6, 2005

I am looking for people (some of you, I hope) who would like to take on a specific area of the ALE Wiki as an Area Leader. The area could be a discussion topic, or possibly one question or part within a busy topic. As an Area Leader you would keep an eye out on the pages in your area. (You could set the "watch" tab on them so you could easily see when someone added to or changed a page.) You would organize/re-organize the pages from time to time as needed, develop a summary page, and a resource page. You would invite people to your area who had an interest in the topic. If there were a post regarding your topic area -- on a NIFL list or other adult literacy list -- you might respond by directing people to your area of the Wiki.

For Wiki Area Leaders who are also e-list moderators, you could develop an area of the Wiki specifically related to your e-list. On your Wiki, you could include: a glossary of commonly used terms (Marie, for example, you could have an assessment terms glossary in your Wiki area which might help teachers who weren't sophisticated in assessment;) a resource page -- with links to the NIFL special collections and other resources pertinent to your topic area; a table of contents, a summary, and other tools which would make it easier to enter a topic. For example, David Collings, moderator of the AAACE-NLA e-list (and who I have just added to this list,) could have a Wiki area on public policy which has links to the WIA documents people can never seem to find. E-list moderators: you could reply to posts on your lists which had complex ideas or terms by sending people to the Wiki page(s) which illuminated them. The URLs of the Wiki pages could be included in posts to your lists, so the tools for unlocking complex meanings are right there, a click away.

A good question that has come up is "How does a Wiki differ from an e-list?" My answer: they can go hand in hand. Messages from e-lists can be copied into threads on a Wiki (in a discussion topic) as a sort of threaded archive on a topic. They can be accompanied by tools for better understanding the discussion such as those I mentioned above. The discussion can be summarized, refined. Researches can be asked to read the discussion -- all in one place -- and to comment on/add to/elaborate on parts where they think their research is especially pertinent.

When Erik Jacobson suggested the Wiki environment for engaging practitioners in research -- and bringing researchers to the dialogues -- I was very excited. This environment, connected with e-lists, has the potential to pull inexperienced practitioners in to the discussion, to create a scaffolded learning environment for them. And because the discussions are focused on research (topics or questions) this should be an appealing area for researchers to visit from time to time.

Those of you receiving this message are in at the ground level as we build this. As nubie wiki-teers we'll learn how to do it together. I know several of you are eager to get the word out about the Wiki, but let's hold off until February so that you Wiki-teers can develop your areas (if you wish) and also because I will be AWOC (away without a computer) for the last two weeks in January. I want to be close to a computer when we launch this.

All the best,

David

David J. Rosen
ALE Wiki-teer
djrosen@comcast.net

December 16, 2004
David J. Rosen

Some thoughts about Wiki's.

A Wiki is a constructivist learning environment, an asynchronous community of knowledge-builders. It provides opportunities for reflection-action-reflection, an iterative process. A Wiki depends on text, so it's a literacy environment. Wiki-teers add to and revise text, their own and others'. A Wiki may be wide open (a wild west Wiki) or controlled ( a professional Wiki). It may have:

Drivers:

  • questions which need to be answered,
  • problems which need to be solved,
  • decisions which need to be made

Knowledge sources:

  • research (one's own and others')
  • knowledge from practice, for example from direct observation
  • knowledge from personal experience, for example as a learner
  • theory

Organizers (distillers or refiners):

  • summaries
  • hypotheses
  • syntheses
  • outlines
  • bullets (such as this one) and
  • definitions

Expanders

  • brainstorms
  • lists of references and resources, annotations

Forms of discourse and prose

  • Questions and answers
  • debate
  • narrative
  • description
  • data and
  • critique

December 8

HAHAHAHAHAHA!! I'm still laughing at Michele's kids (cybersex orgy) - but seriously though, maybe that's part of the point? I'm not sure how many people would want to come on over to the exciting adult ed wiki and throw in some f words here and there. On the other hand, perhaps people's differing politics might make them want to change what they read there. Is there any way to get information on this issue? There are lots of wikis - how does that issue get handled? Are there always moderators?

I'm still thinking about David's question about the benefits of the wiki.

marie

December 7, 2004

Someone -- I'm not sure who -- has added some new pages and a link to the main pages with several hypothesis categories. This may help with the branching and synthesizing that needs to take place here.

So far, I see three benefits to this medium which differ from the electronic list medium:

  1. an archive of discussion(s) on the topic (from one or more lists) in one place
  2. related useful resource links
  3. synthesis and refinement of synthesis

Do you see any others?

There is an area of inquiry called something like "knowledge building communities." That's what a Wiki is.

Interesting question: How does a community build knowledge?

David

December 5, 2004

The wiki is great. What is particularly strong is that I can follow the threads of the discussions on the other NIFL lists more in digest form without subscribing to everything separately. This is great. Something did come up about wikis which disturbs me a little. After I asked my teenagers what a wiki was (and after they had their little jokes about it being a cybersex orgy...hmm...) they told me that anyone can go into anyone else's post and edit it. While this is great for teens who like to go in and graffiti-ize each other's posts, I wonder how a moderator would stay on top of it. Any thoughts?

Michele

George Demetrion' s message with replies (in italics) by David Rosen
December 4, 2004

George: I spent about 30 minutes, to no avail, in trying to get a handle on this Wiki stuff.

David: You did post the to Wiki. Right now your message is at the top of the page. However, I am going to create a new page (with a link from this one) called AleWikiProcessComments and I'll put it there.

George: A few observations:
1. What I think is enormously valuable is the capacity to review, discuss, and analyze listerv threads. With you, I agree that is an essential step in moving from daily commentary to broader collaborative analysis of the messages, moving into more of a formal practitioner-inquiry project.
2. Having available documents on the definitions of literacy--that's also valuable
3. The technology needs to be greatly simplified before it will be widely used. Think about the early computer era--way too complicated for me in the mid-80s to even think about using a pc. Microsoft has really made that simple

David: I am open to suggestions on improving the AleDirections which might make it easier. (Did you use these?)

George:
4. The longer threads are valuable, but they take a lot longer to grapple with. The format may well prove viable for some (many?), though I do wonder the extent to which their will be multiplicative effect in raising the quality of the research. I say that because research takes time--not only that, sustained commitment to the process. Thus, if there are folks who become committed to this new format, they would, logically, be able to create (and sustain) the intellectual force to make the format worth the while.

David: The casual user will not like or benefit from this. This is an environment best used by a group with a purpose, a product to produce, a compelling question to answer.

George:
5. Something additional needs to come out of the Wiki threads--attractive, consumable, projects, products, directives, etc. I realize this is in an experimental stage

David: Exactly

George:
6. There is something very clear, powerful, and attractive about the singular listserv posts that the Wiki format in some way would have to match, complement, or expand upon if it's going to be a truly viable communication/research tool of which it has the potential of becoming.

David: This is not better than listservs -- it's different. We need to figure out when and how to best use it.


George: As you can see from the current FOB threads on reading plateaus and related topics, the discussion continues.

Question for the day: When does one thread end and another begin? How do you know?

David: On a Wiki, there are no threads -- so this is not a problem.

George: Post this on Wiki land if you'd like. The technology, at this time, is beyond me.

David: But it isn't. You did post this but just didn't realize your own power, George!

December 3, 2004

David: How could Wiki best be used to make it easy and worthwhile for practitioners and researchers to collaborate?

Collaborate to do what? And what could this environment provide that isn't already easily done through e-mail and e-lists?

My hunch is that the best use of Wikis for researcher/practitioner dialogue needs to be in the context of focused questions, and particular ongoing research.

The ebae discussion I led on the ebae list at the end of last year, for example, might have worked well as a Wiki. (I might "re-purpose" it as a Wiki and ask people to re-visit it twice yearly.)

Marie: Yes, I agree that something focused will make the person want to contribute because there won't be anything else for them to wonder/figure out: they just want to contribute. Questions are good (and I think that your ideas about the ebae discussion are a really good experiment), and I also can't escape the notion of "chunks" of information - like it's set up at wikipedia.

Marie: We could also target individuals to join us based on what sort of information/contribution they can make at the time - you know, ask them directly to contribute something specific, until we build enough of a foundation of info for others to more easily add to.

December 2, 2004

Omigod. This is SO corny, but I just LOVE this tool!! I'm so excited by it, I'm surprising myself. But it's so perfectly virtual (I KNEW that one day I would really understand that word!).

I see that others are adding a lot to the wiki - but it's still in linear format....what can we do about that? How do we get people to talk without thinking "email format"?

Does the wiki have a different structure we can fall into? I guess that would sort of be what I just was doing, learning how to make those new pages and stuff.

Ok, I guess maybe I just need to hold my horses a little and be patient with this new thing. It'll happen.

Marie

December 2, 2004

Hello good wikiteers!

I'm ever so slightly excited about wiki (can you tell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????) - I think that it's a really interesting medium for us to take advantage of.

Before we can make our wiki public though, we really need to start working on a format that is not so linear - right now, our wiki is really sort of duplicating the email format (you post, I post, you post).

Here's my suggestion: when you want to post something next, instead of adding your thoughts at the bottom, generate a new page, give it a title (just like you would in your email subject line), and then write what you want. Then others can click on the various pages that exist there, to add or take away info from that page.

(So for this discussion, we could have a page that discusses findings on this topic in children; a page that discusses possible reasons for not learning to read; a page that discusses possible teaching processes and testing tools; etc)

That is what I did with 2 things: I made a Discussion Summary page where I just summarized people's main ideas from when David first wiki'd the plateau discussion thru yesterday. So that is all by itself on one page now. In the beginning of the ALEwiki, you will see where I added the link for this.

The other page I made is for the resources that I drummed up regarding that particular discussion.

So go look at that, get a feel, and then try to make your own page as well.

Directions for making your page will be found at AleDirections

Note that each page has its own edit (top) and Save page buttons (bottom) (i.e.: editing within one page only matters on that page, it doesn't affect anything else in the ALE wiki).

Ok, then, now you know what to do with all that free time you have on your hands! ;)

Marie

December 2, 2004

I think we're trying to duplicate what already exists in online course platforms like Blackboard and Moodle (the ability to create separate discussion threads in the same space; they also have the capacity for both asynchronous discussion boards and synchronous chats among some or all participants). I know Steve Linberg was experimenting with moodle at literacy tent, and there is a source of a huge number of blackboard virtual seats, with whom I think David and probably Erik already have relationships.

I just tried for the 3rd time to answer Andrea's questions, and couldn't because someone was already using the site. I'm glad some are experimenting and getting a lot out of using wiki, but I think I'm going to stop going back and trying for now, because I just have too many other things I should be doing instead--sorry to bail for now, and please keep me on the list if it's not a problem to do so; I may be able to re-join later.

Eileen

December 1, 2004

Hi everyone,

There's a cool place called Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page) that you can go to where you can really get the idea of what a wiki is like. It's an encyclopedia by everyone! I went there a couple of times maybe 6 months ago and clicked on the education section under Browse, but I see that Education isn't there any more. But anyway, you can check this place out and get a feel.

Marie

December 1, 2004

Hi.

I just posted to the Wiki. MY GOODNESS, there's a learning curve to that puppy! Going to Preview/ Check spelling obliterated the save options. I finally figured it out after a half hour but know I won't consider doing THAT again. I'll just edit and save and take my chances.

Thanks for doing this. I may actually consider this for my dissertation topic. I'd love to see yours. I think you (it was someone on the list anyway) who sent it to my bloglines address and that doesn't take attachments. This e-mail will.

Fascinating topic, isn't it?

Jean Marrapodi

November 30, 2004

The key to gaining true benefits (beyond your listserv) will be for you and your group to change your habits: Start thinking of this site as a collection of growing information and less of a linear thread of correspondences. Obviously David had to start somewhere, so you are starting with linear information. Just try not to treat it that way as you experiment. Good luck!

Andre

November 30, 2004

Hello David,

Thanks for taking the initiative to start this. I went to the page last night and began to try out editing, but erased my presence when I was called away before actually writing anything. I did notice that I was afraid to try it because I didn't know if I'd mess something up inadvertently; it was a great relief to see that I could "cancel" what I had begun. I will go play with it sometime this week.

Again, thanks.

Eileen

Retrieved from "http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/AleWikiProcessComments"