Appendices to Action Research report

Appendix 1 - dialogue

Gina Revill on 24 February 2005 at 08:08 +0000 wrote:
(quoting Ken Allen )

The two great methodologies are Naturalist and Positivist. By methodology we really mean philosophy. These philosophies are based on radically different worldviews. The naturalist methodology is based on the belief that people are complex individuals and that it is therefore very hard if not impossible to come to conclusions that are true for all. The positivist viewpoint is that law like generalities can be made for people and their behaviour overall. If you follow a naturalistic philosophy this tends to mean that you are more likely to study individuals and specific situations. Whereas if you study from a positivistic viewpoint to you are trying to collect vast amounts of data so you can come to overall generalities. The more data you collect the more likely your generality are to be representative of truth.

Andy Roberts writes:

I'm feeling a resistance to accept the dichotomy presented here as the most useful way to look at the philosphy. The implication seems to ally positivism with a purely mechanical quantitative approach and anti-positivism with greater subtlety and insight. Is that the intention? I would suggest an alternative viewpoint to the both of them, a viewpoint which begins from a materialist view, maintaining that the world does indeed have a concrete existance and is governed by physical laws which can sometimes be determined. But also that transformative change is a complex process during which one set of law like generalities are broken apart and superseded by a new situation in which the old relationships between people and things, between people and others, no longer hold true and are replaced by new ones.

Complexity and chaos can be discovered throughout the natural world, there is nothing particularly special about human beings in that respect.

So the naturalist, materialist philosophy does not mean that you have to carry on accumulating tick-box data long after it has ceased to mean anything. On the contrary, an enquiry into the material basis of the relationships between individuals and groups of individuals is crucial to developing an understanding of how change may be effected, or not.

In terms of studying people the positivistic approach has gone out of vogue.

And orange is the new black, but hardly a rigourous justification for throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Many people now consider the positivist approach is more suited to the physical rather than the social sciences. Action enquiry tends to be used in education when studying people. It really is a research method based on the naturalistic methodology. This means that quantitative data is not really used. Moreover true collections of quantitative data require teams of researchers over long periods of time. This is clearly beyond the scope of a research project worth 20 credits.

Whilst disagreeing with the philosphical analysis, I agree with these conclusions insofar as they affect the immediate task of completing the module. By looking at qualitative data, it may be possible to glean a generalised understanding of how the process of change takes place whilst on the spot observing it and helping to usher it in. The 'Action' part of Action research should surely be aiming to concern itself most effectively with the specific zone where accumulations of quantitive changes ( small steps ), are transformed into a qualitative change, bringing about a new and fundamentally changed situation.

Having said that there are things an individual researcher can do to approximate a quantitative approach. Questionnaires rather than interviews can give have a more quantitative feel.

I'm using questionnaires as part of the action itself, since the information in the questionnaire affects the readership causing actions by them, and also as a source of qualitative data, to map a spectrum of attitudes.

Extracted from Bib Dick Hotseat:

Andy Roberts posted on Monday 17 Jan '05 at 11:10:28 AM

Q.Hello Bob, I'm wondering if you can bring any experience of action research carried out where the organisation being researched is an online community of practice, since this is the task I have set for myself now. My goal is to get geographically dispersed members of an email list to pool some of their local knowledge in order to create a comprehensive and continually upto date national guide on the subject of the COP. This will involve breaking down the barriers to using a WIKI and trying to show people through practice, that you don't need to have one single copyright owning editor in charge. I'm anticipating some resistance from one or two key individuals in the COP so the introduction of the idea and of the WIKI itself needs to be done very carefully in order to gain collaboration from as many members as possible. What do you reckon?

Bob Dick posted on Monday 17 Jan '05 at 12:18
A. Hello Andy. Thanks for the question. Though I'm a member of several on line communities I don't have direct experience of doing formal action research in that setting. I do use action research informally in just about everything that I do. So I'll try to respond to your question from that perspective.

WIKIs, I think, are eminently suited to building up a pool of knowledge within a community of practice. I also suspect that your misgivings are warranted. I know I'd be reluctant to modify a WIKI unless I was assured that I knew the material I was adding. I think I'd also want to feel that people would be accepting of it.

(Perhaps that's not entirely undesirable. It may offer some guarantee of quality.) It seems to me that this is a situation for which action research is well suited. It allows you to share the responsibility for keeping the WIKI going with the other members of your community of practice.

In much of my own on line work I use email. The message goes to the person. They don't have to make the effort of going to the message. I think that if I were in your position I'd set up an email list to discuss the WIKI and its use. The email could then be the vehicle for the action research.

I hope it works out for you. And I hope you find some way of publishing the eventual outcomes. I think many people will be interested in your experience.

Warm regards -- Bob

posted on Monday 17 Jan '05 at 14:54
A.Thanks for your reply Bob. Your idea has given me a dilemma - do I create a seperate email list for people interested in the development of the Wiki, or is it better to hold these discussions on the main list itself where the whole membership can read them? I can see advantages and dangers with both approaches, so I think I shall probaby start off with just the one list and only create the specialised one if the discussions become too technical ( off topic for the main list ) and I get complaints from the wider membership. Subscribers have the choice of having all emails delivered or visiting a web interface. Thanks again for your suggestions, all of my coursework including this project, gets published as I go along on a website here http://frankieroberto.com/dad/ultrastudents/andyroberts/

Bob Dick posted on Tuesday 18 Jan '05 at 10:59
A.
Hello again Andy. I haven't had a chance to look at the URL yet; I'm out of town for a few days. My net access is sporadic and slow. I'll try to remember to follow it up later.

I think you're right. There are advantages and disadvantages with both approaches. Whichever you choose, it's good that you recognise the disadvantages. You can then allow for them, or reduce them in some way.

I don't know enough about the situation to be sure of the best choice. It may depend on the number of people involved. Compared to face to face groups, on line groups seem to require greater numbers to be viable.

In my own choices I have a preference for the simplest approaches that will do the job. All else being equal, if I couldn't decide on other grounds I'd go with the simpler of the two: the single list. Probably you would fairly quickly discover if this was the wrong choice. It would then be easy enough to add a second list later, I imagine.

Warm regards -- Bob

Andy Roberts posted on Tuesday 18 Jan '05 at 11:19
A."Compared to face to face groups, on line groups seem to require greater numbers to be viable." I agree entirely. Anything less than about 100 total registered subscribers means there aren't enough active people to answer queries and sustain a conversation in my experience. Fortunately I have around 300 with a long established central core, so building the COP isn't the focus. I'm now starting to think about what kind of DATA I might collect, in order to fit this project into the Action Enquiry model.

Bob Dick posted on Tuesday 18 Jan '05 at 11:35
A. Hello again, Andy

I'd be interested to hear how this progresses. Cheers -- Bob

I had a quick browse of the WIKI, which I enjoyed. -- B.

You say you're beginning to think about what kind of data you might collect. Perhaps you can ask the members of your CoP what issues are most important to them. That might suggest some data worth collecting. Cheers -- Bob

posted on Thursday 20 Jan '05 at 15:16
A. Ok, at some point I shall ask what they think most needs to be looked into, and take it from there. I guess that will help to gain cooperation which is going to be needed

Extracted from Pam Moule Hotseat:

Andy Roberts posted on Wednesday 23 Feb '05 at 10:12:43 AM
Q.
Hello Pam and welcome. I'm not from a Health Service background but I'm interested in Communities of Practice. You mention considering whether students of the healthcare professions could work as communities of practice online, so I suppose that's my question to you really. Would these COPs be about the practice of studying, in which case that's similar to what we are doing at Ultraversity but is arguable whether learning communities can be dubbed COPS, or would they be genuine Health profession COPs populated by many experienced and currently practising health professionals (not just tutors) as well as students?



Pam Moule posted on Wednesday 23 Feb '05 at 20:12
A.
Hi Andy Welcome to the hotseat. The Communities of Practice work I looked at related to students of the health care professions, learning in online groups about working interprofessionally. The groups were facilitated by lecturers, so are perhaps like your experience of working within Ultraversity. The groups were therefore not composed as a typical CoP, of experienced practitioners, other than the lecturer. I was trying to see whether learners within a profession could develop as a CoP online, as very little research has reviewed this, though there are suggestions that CoP can be based online. I found that there was evidence of the essential elements of a CoP from the analysis of data collected, though this was not uniform. It would be interesting to look at a learning community that did include practitioners as well- perhaps something for the future. Hope this answers your question? Pam


Sarah Jones posted on Thursday 24 Feb '05 at 16:18
A.
Hi Andy and Pam. I am a Learning Facilitator on this degree programme and am interested in the subject you are both discussing here. Firstly I wondered Pam, whether the learners within the profession you used were already a Community of Practice (CoP) in a face to face sense before you tried to develop this online? Secondly, I?d be interested to read your paper on this, if it is available.
My interest stems from the terminology of CoP being used. I suppose I see it as a sub division of a Community of Enquiry (CoE), which for me is an overarching term I would give any community, which is formed or forming with learning at it?s core. CoP for me has a more specific meaning, if we follow Wenger?s (1998) definition. I see Ultraversity as CoE, mostly, and only occasionally as a CoP.


Pam Moule posted on Thursday 24 Feb '05 at 21:14
A.
Hi Anna It is useful to have your views on Ultraversity as a Community of Enquiry. The learners I was working with were part of the same Faculty, but had not necesssarily worked toether before. The online discussion groups had one initial face-to-face meeting, the rest of the module being online. That said, within one of the groups it was obvious that some students had developed prior relationships and this was commented on in my data. Other research has also suggested that online groups composed of learners who have previously developed relationships were seen to function wel online. I am working on a paper and have a book chapter coming out this year in Glen and Moule E-learning in nursing with Palgrave. Regards Pam


Andy Roberts posted on Friday 25 Feb '05 at 15:5
A.
Thanks Pam, for your informative replies. Has anybody looked at the alternative approach, that of linking students with practitioners rather than just other students and lecturers? If the practitioners were also learning from each other then perhaps the benefit to themselves and their patients might well be worth the valuable time invested.


Pam Moule posted on Tuesday 1 Mar '05 at 14:19
A.
Hi Andy I agree that looking at Communities of Practice from the view point of virtual learning communities composed of practitioners would be interesting. A PhD study by Murray(2002) considered the use of NURSENET, an online discussion network and reviewed how it was used etc through survey and also considered how nurses reflected on practice online. He suggested that Communities of Practice might make a useful forum for nurse discussion with the potential to benefit patient care. No one to my knowledge has researched it yet- though it is a suggest further development of my doctoral work. Pam

Appendix 3 - data from Ultrastudents Questionnaire

Data 1 - the prototype Questionnaire

Please can you help me with my Action Enquiry project by filling in
this prototype questionnaire. I plan to run an amended version
starting on 1st March on a completely different community, but this
one serves a valid purpose also.
It would be great if you can spare a couple of minutes to answer the
questions, regardless of whether you have any experience of the
subject. You can reply to the group or direct to myself, whichever you
prefer.
ULTRAVERSITY QUESTIONNAIRE
Purpose
The purposes of this questionnaire are
1) To raise the profile of the Ultraversiity Wiki and encourage participation.
2) to determine current use and attidudes to the Wiki.
3) to solicit ideas and opinions for improvement.
Question 1.
Ultraversity has a Wiki website at:
http://terminator.ultralab.net/phpwiki/
a) Have you ever visited it?
b) If so what did you find there
c) How useful did you find the pages you visited?
d) Any other remarks.....
Question 2.
The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
" Edit" button.
a) What do you think of that idea?
b) Have you ever made an edit?
if so what kind,
if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
that you think may be useful to others ?
Question 3.
Wikis are mainly used for collaborative writing projects such as
encyclopaedia, FAQs , common resources - but some hold a certain
amount of discussion as well.
What kind of things would you like to see more of on the Ultraversiity
Wiki, how could it be better used?
Question 4.
Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
Question 5.
Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please?
Thankyou very much for your time.

Response 1

Question 1.

a) Have you ever visited it? We just had a look now.
b) If so what did you find there - nothing helpful

c) How useful did you find the pages you visited? not at alld) Any other remarks.....who invented it?

Question 2.
The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
" Edit" button.
a) What do you think of that idea? Great if you have something to editb) Have you ever made an edit? no
if so what kind,if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
that you think may be useful to others ? I doubt there is anything Rose and I could teach you lot.

Question 3.
No
Question 4.
No
Question 5.
No

Response 2

a) Have you ever visited it? Yes
> b) If so what did you find there
> Help and instructions on how to use it
> Useful information
>
> c) How useful did you find the pages you visited?
> Very useful to have info in one place
>
> d) Any other remarks.....
>
>
>
> Question 2.
>
> The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
> "Edit" button.
> a) What do you think of that idea?
> Good way of sharing the workload of maintaining a website and creating
> a central pool of knowledge
>
> b) Have you ever made an edit?
> Yes
> if so what kind,
> Created a new page on autism and added some information to an existing
> page
>

>
> Question 3.
>
how could it be better used?
> More publicity - possibly a link from the FC desktop.
> Could be used as publicity for the degree?
> The sandbox could be better highlighted - I might have discovered it
> sooner
>
>
> Question 4.
>
> Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
> the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
>
> I don't know how to sign in! so entries are not credited!
> It took along time for me to put a toe in the water - the problem now
> is time!
> It would have been better to have been available at the start of the
> degree - it could have been made more use of
> It doesn't seem to be used by the LF's to disseminate information -
> that is all done via their own web pages - eg the new info on the AE
> tool - this seems to be to be better put in the one central repository
> for knowledge than to be spread around the net and having to try to
> track down un-bookmarked links - it seems to be ignored as a place to
> share 'official' knowledge
> Question 5.
>
> Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please?
>
> Easy to complete and quite straightforward.
> You could ask why people don't visit - there's not much to fill in if
> people don't visit and you might get some more useful information that
> way
> Ditto why people haven't edited it ...

response 3

a) Have you ever visited it?
Yes
> b) If so what did you find there
People pages
FAQs about FirstClass
Sections on topics like behaviour management, autism, etc
>
> c) How useful did you find the pages you visited?
Very - I've referred to some of them in reports
>
> d) Any other remarks.....
>
> Question 2.
>
> The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
> "Edit" button.
> a) What do you think of that idea?
I like it.
>
> b) Have you ever made an edit?
Yes
>
> if so what kind,
created pages, got rid of SPAM,
>
> if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
> that you think may be useful to others ?
>
> Question 3.
>
> Wikis are mainly used for collaborative writing projects such as
> encyclopaedia, FAQs , common resources - but some hold a certain
> amount of discussion as well.
> What kind of things would you like to see more of on the Ultraversiity
> Wiki, how could it be better used?
NB - this is 2 questions - worth seperating them perhaps?
More FAQ type stuff about modules, more interesting topics, page about
good resources people have found about action enquiry, for example.
It would be better if more people were comfortable using it. There's
not enough there yet for it to be really useful
There's no obvious way for people to have discussions on it.
>
> Question 4.
>
> Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
> the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
A permanent link in FC?
>
> Question 5.
>
> Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please?
It's good - clear and consise. Doesn't take long to fill in.
You might ask people more about why they don't edit it, or even if
they are happy to use it as a resource but wouldn't edit it.

response 4

a) Have you ever visited it?
>
Once I think a long time ago, but I couldn't really remember what for. Just looked again a few secs ago.
> b) If so what did you find there
>
>
Action Enquiry tool stuff and I suppose I ought to investigate the
skills workshop but haven't got the time at the moment. Might be
getting a Mac soon so may investigate MacFaq
> c) How useful did you find the pages you visited?
>
>
I've seen the AE tool info before but it is probably quite handy having
it in one place.
> d) Any other remarks.....
>
>
I've survived without it so far and I've got a lot of other stuff I'm
feeling guilty about not getting on with so it feels a stage too many at
the moment and perhaps something to investigate after report
submission. Time is my difficulty - spreading myself too thinly.
> Question 2.
>
> The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
>" Edit" button.
> a) What do you think of that idea?
>
>
Sounds easy, but it may be one of those take the bolt off moments. Some
time later you are still struggling with it.
>
> b) Have you ever made an edit?
>
>
No
> if so what kind,
>
>
N/A
>
> if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
> that you think may be useful to others ?
>
>
>
>
Maybe, if time allows. My work role is unique so I wouldn't have a big
audience which is a bit of a disincentive.
>
>
>
> Question 3.
>
> Wikis are mainly used for collaborative writing projects such as
> encyclopaedia, FAQs , common resources - but some hold a certain
> amount of discussion as well.
> What kind of things would you like to see more of on the Ultraversiity
> Wiki, how could it be better used?
>
>
>
>
Sorry, absolutely no idea. I suppose the more varied the content the
more there will be to suit everybody. The page looks a bit dry as it
stands.
>
>
> Question 4.
>
> Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
> the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
>
>
>
>
I am beginning to feel quite useless at this stage in the
questionnaire. I suppose if I feel more inspired later in the week I
could have another go.
>
>
>
> Question 5.
>
> Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please?
>
>
>
>
If I hadn't taken the trouble to revisit the wiki I would have fallen at
the post of question 1a). If lots of people had the same reponse you
won't get much information to collate.
Perhaps ask the fallen at 1a) what arenas of information they currently
use instead and what they like about them? What would tempt them to
include another in their visits?
Is it worth asking if people have visited other wikis? (I am assuming
there are such things) How does this one compare?

response 5

a) Have you ever visited it? yes
b) If so what did you find there info on course links etc

c) How useful did you find the pages you visited? ok d) Any other remarks.....

Question 2.
The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
" Edit" button.
a) What do you think of that idea? good everyone acan feel a part of it b) Have you ever made an edit? yes
if so what kind, to answer a question on the wiki if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
that you think may be useful to others ?
I think that there are enough other way of telling people about things. Sometimes i think that there are too many alternative ways of informing people
eg blogs, wiki first class hot seats utlrastudents
I find it all to varied and and would like everything to be in the same place and easy to find

Question 3.
Wikis are mainly used for collaborative writing projects such as
encyclopaedia, FAQs , common resources - but some hold a certain
amount of discussion as well.
What kind of things would you like to see more of on the Ultraversiity
Wiki, how could it be better used?
dont know

Question 4.
Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
i dont use it often enough to make any suggestions not even sure of the purpose of the wiki ie when are we meant to use it .

Question 5.
Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please?

Response 6

a) Have you ever visited it? NO
> b) If so what did you find there
>
>
>
> c) How useful did you find the pages you visited?
>
>
> d) Any other remarks.....
>
>
>
> Question 2.
>
> The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
> "Edit" button.
> a) What do you think of that idea? I'M NOT SURE IF THIS WOULD HAVE A
BENEFIT TO ME AS PART OF MY COURSE WORK OR PERSONALLY
>
>
> b) Have you ever made an edit?
>
> if so what kind,
>
>
> if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
> that you think may be useful to others ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Question 3.
>
> Wikis are mainly used for collaborative writing projects such as
> encyclopaedia, FAQs , common resources - but some hold a certain
> amount of discussion as well.
> What kind of things would you like to see more of on the Ultraversiity
> Wiki, how could it be better used? DON'T KNOW AS I'VE NEVER BEEN THERE
>
>
>
>
>
> Question 4.
>
> Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
> the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
I'M NOT SO MUCH A TECHNOPHOBE AS ONE WHO LCKS THE TIME AND INCLINATION TO
BECOME AN EXPERT, OR EVEN SOMETHING SLIGHTLY BETTER THAN A NOVICE. I AM A
LITTLE UNSURE OF THE VALUE OF MANY THINGS CONNECTED WITH TECHNOLOGY. PERHAPS
IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WE JUST TALKED TO EACH OTHER FACE TO FACE
OCCASIONALLY, THAT WAY WE MIGHT HAVE A CLEARER UNDERSTANDING OF INTENT WHEN
WE STARTED TO COMMUNICATE IN OTHER WAYS.
MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IS THAT I HAVE BETTER COMMUNICATIONS WITH THOSE
PEOPLE I HAVE FIRST EITHER MET F2F OR ON THE PHONE, RATHER THAN SITUATIONS
WHERE THERE HAS ONLY BEEN 'ONLINE' CONTACT.
>
>
> Question 5.
>
> Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please? I THINK YOU
NEED A LITTLE MORE EXPLANATION OF A WIKI, YOU SEEM TO EXPECT A LEVEL OF
KNOWLEDGE I DONT POSSESS.

response 7

> a) Have you ever visited it? Yes
> b) If so what did you find there
> It's a while since I last looked, so here's what I remember. Help topics
such as Dreamweaver, setting up a blog, I think something for mac users etc,
personal members' pages, message boards, shared resources.
>
>
> c) How useful did you find the pages you visited?
> If I'm honest, not that much - let's say I didn't learn anything from
there that I couldn't/hadn't found elsewhere
>
> d) Any other remarks.....
>
One of many new areas to explore - blogs, furls, 43 things, wikis. Haven't
really had time to get to grips with how the wiki can offer me anything over
and above what I can already access.
>
> Question 2.
>
> The wiki is a website which anybody can contribute to by clicking the
> "Edit" button.
> a) What do you think of that idea?
A good idea when it is a website that cold hold the interest of all the
participants, otherwise it can just become a space that gets taken over by a
few participants and then others lose interest. The subject needs to be
more than something that unites the participants, it needs to be something
which they are passionate about too.
>
>
> b) Have you ever made an edit?
> Yes, I think I did have a go at this a while back.
> if so what kind,
> I left a comments on the message board, had a go at making a personal page
and I added a link to a resource that I had foud useful on reflective
practice. I think I also commented on someone else's page.
>
> if not - would you ever consider making an edit or adding something
> that you think may be useful to others ?
>
>
>
> Question 3.
>
> Wikis are mainly used for collaborative writing projects such as
> encyclopaedia, FAQs , common resources - but some hold a certain
> amount of discussion as well.
> What kind of things would you like to see more of on the Ultraversiity
> Wiki, how could it be better used?
>
I can't see how it can be used to any better effect than what we already
have - it is just spreading the population of contributions even further so
that discussions, resources and shared knowledge become accessible only to
those who have knowledge of the technology and the time to pursue it.
>

> Question 4.
>
> Any other remarks, opinions suggestions for improving participation in
> the process of building the knowledgebase on the wiki.
>
> Not really, unless the wiki concentrated on one specific area that has not
already been covered elsewhere - as it is if it is merely duplicating what
students can access elsewhere, I think it would be hard to convince people
to use the wiki as well.
>
> Question 5.
>
> Any remarks or observations about this Questionnaire please?
>
No - but I'd be interested in your own observations and the findings from
your action enquiry.

response 8

Questionnaire
answers

Question 1
Answer ~ No

Question 2
Answer ~ It may depend how it is used and by whom.

Question 3
Answer ~ Not having foun the time with current commitments I feel it could end up just an area to browse.
If It was part of a on-line module for sharing resources for a particular unit that we had to take part in i know I would have to find time to explore and contribute. With all the other emails I just about keep study head above water these days.

Question 4
Answer ~Not really experienced enough to comment at this point

Question 5
Answer ~ maybe a hyperlink to questionnaire proforma ~ easy to create data results from electronic data

Appendix 4 - ukcider wiki, website, list, blog, 43things

1) The main purpose of the project is the production of the ukcider WIKI, and here it is: http://ukcider.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

pages referred to are

the extensive cider pub guide

history page for cider pub guide

copyright discussion page

calendar of events discussion page

Recent Changes page ( up to 200 days history, Wiki begins 31/1/05)

Registered Users list (voluntary, not all wiki editors bother to register)

2) The original "static" ukcider website

http://ukcider.co.uk/

Recommendations

3) The ukcider mailing list archives

These are public archives which record exactly the conversations which take place on the email list.

February 2005

March 2005

about ukcider on googlegroups

4) Andy Roberts' Blog - "have envelope will push"

Communities Of Practice series

part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4

Migrating to Googlegroups

( not referenced but ukcider related - Save the orchards

On your farm )

5) 43things.com

aroberts on 43things.com

SMART tasks

use SMART tasks to take steps towards my goals
track my SMART tasks for the next module using 43 things
SMART 01 - check out options and prices at current domain host, including transfer out
SMART 02 - try uploading a moinmoin Wiki
        overall plan

SMART 03 - find a new hosting service for the website
SMART04 - install MediaWiki at dc-hosting
         getting closer
        Wayhay!!!!!! it's working tra la la

use 43things to develop collaborative Ultraversity work (with 6 others)
SMART05 - plan the next phase

A slight change of plan
SMART05.2 - revised plan
SMART05.3 - more positive developments

SMART06 Write a literature review for the action enquiry (with 2 others)
SMART07 - update old site
SMART08 - questionnaire

Nice one
SMART08 prototype questionnaire
SMART08-1 analyse prototype feedback

SMART09 - finish the report

SMART10 - publish

problems of success?