Dear friends,
I'm not sure where the decision-making resides in the course
discussion/logistics. ;-) At the end of this e-mail I have key
questions about who is working on the syllabus (for those desiring
credit). ;-)
It seems to me the fundamental issue regarding online technologies is
if/whether participants will have reliable web-access or need to
interact via e-mail or newsgroup alternatives.
That key decision determines the tools available for giving the best
*approximate* common experience to all participants.
As has been mentioned WebBoard provides the same content and similar
interactive capacities over e-mail, through newsgroup and through
web-based threaded discussion. That is its main virtue, for current
purposes, imho. Another virtue is the cost, set-up and management vis a
vis some of the larger courseware systems used, e.g., WebCT, Blackboard,
etc.
We do have Blackboard at CSULB and could probably use it (as I'm sure
others could as well), but again it depends on how prevalent reliable
web access is assumed to be. Web Crossing is another good product with
the similar multiple capacities of WebBoard, but costs $$$ to use. I'm
always interested in low-cost and/or freeware or open source potential
solutions, yet they can be time consuming in their own right. WikiWiki
could be interesting to use, for instance, with the ability of
participants to work on web pages collaboratively through a browser, but
the web access issue arises again.
I am also well aware of WebBoard's limitations. As has been mentioned
the discussion threading and posting appropriately under topics can be a
challenge for new users (though I find that is a challenge in virtually
all conferencing software in which some time is needed to become
familiar with the feel, terminology and use of the thing). Ironically, I
think when people participate via e-mail or through newsgroups the
threads stay more properly ordered than when folks try to work through
the web interface (maybe there is a relatively general preference for
simple text interfaces ;-)). In any case, I don't think the WebBoard
learning curve is that steep and when people are involved in building a
community from the beginning the threads are often less confusing than
for folks joining mid-stream.
But I only offer WebBoard as I can make it readily available. I
definitely don't think that WebBoard is a panacea, the only or even,
necessarily, the best option. It's a reasonable option. It just has
some key affordances that the group seems to need.
It seems to me there are other burning issues as well, besides choice of
online technologies, i.e.., a syllabus. ;-)
I'm sure for anyone interested in credit a faculty sponsor would want to
see a syllabus and know what "requirements" there are for people
participating for course credit and how grading will occur. So the
standard Objectives, Course Content, Readings, Activities,
Participation, For-Credit Requirements, etc. would need to be in place,
it seems to me. Is someone already working on this? Just wondering.
Seems a point person for the syllabus development and a point person for
finalizing online technologies/logistics would be helpful as time is
ticking on a new semester. ;-) No?
My offer for WebBoard use stands, but is entirely non-dogmatic and is
just an FYI that the resource is available.
In Peace,
K.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 01 2002 - 01:00:06 PDT