Skip to main content

Home/ Groups/ Online Dialog
Sheryl A. McCoy

Grocery shopping our way - Disaboom - 0 views

    grocery shopping is a necessity for most people. Surprisingly, it's seemingly simply errands like this that sometimes keep people with disabilities from living independently.
Todd Suomela

Facilitating Online | Centre for Educational Technology - 0 views

    Facilitating Online is a course intended for training educators as online facilitators of fully online and mixed mode courses. The Centre for Educational Technology (CET) produced a Course Leader's Guide as an Open Educational Resource to assist educators and trainers who wish to implement a course on online facilitation within their institution or across several institutions. The guide contains the course model, week-by-week learning activities, general guidance to the course leader on how to implement and customise the course and specific guidelines on each learning activity.
Todd Suomela

discussionworkshop - The Discussion Workshop - 0 views

    The Discussion Workshop Series is an online training program designed to develop discussion skills for the purpose of building democratically organized web communities.
Todd Suomela

Public Engagement Principles Project - Version 2.4: Core Principles for Public Engagement - 0 views

    • There are many ways government officials and community leaders can engage the public around the myriad issues that affect people's lives.  It is our stance that quality public engagement must take into consideration seven core principles if it is to effectively build mutual understanding, meaningfully affect policy development, and inspire collaborative action among citizens and institutions.

      The following seven principles overlap and reinforce each other in practice.  They serve both as ideals to pursue and as criteria for judging quality.  Rather than promoting partisan agendas, the implementation of these principles generates authentic engagement in public problem-solving.

      The Seven Core Principles

      1. Preparation - Consciously plan, design, convene and arrange the engagement to serve its purpose and people.
      2. Inclusion - Incorporate multiple voices and ideas to lay the groundwork for quality outcomes and democratic legitimacy.
      3. Collaboration -  Support organizers, participants, and those engaged in follow-up to work well together for the common good.
      4. Learning - Help participants listen, explore and learn without predetermined outcomes -- and evaluate events for lessons.
      5. Transparency - Promote openness and provide a public record of the people, resources, and events involved.
      6. Impact - Ensure each participatory effort has the potential to make a difference.
      7. Sustainability - Promote a culture of participation by supporting programs and institutions that sustain quality public engagement.
Todd Suomela

ASCII by Jason Scott / Opinion Spectrum Collapse Disorder - 0 views

    "As the accessibility of a conversation increases, so too does the spectrum of opinion brought to that conversation, until the opinions range along such a wide spectrum that the conversation simply cannot move forward. It will continue to grow, but like a tumor it is useless and for all purposes dead. It will not better anyone involved in it. The conversation has collapsed from the width of the spectrum of opinion."
Todd Suomela

Dave Gray » Some rules for effective business communication - 0 views

    • Rule 1: IROC. Classify all communications as one of the following:

      • Information: No reply required.
      • Request: Reply options are “Yes” or “No” (System asks “why?”). No response is considered “No”
      • Order: Reply options are “Accepted” or “Rejected” (System asks “why?”). System follows up aggressively when it gets no response.
      • Confirmation: Reply options are “Yes” and “No” (System asks “Why?)

      Rule 2: Passive approval. “Yes” is assumed for all intra-company requests unless you hear “no” within 48 hours. “No” requires a rationale.

      Rule 3: Brevity. Use short words. Use short sentences. Use short paragraphs. Be clear.

      Rule 4: If it wasn’t said by email, it wasn’t said. “I told you on the phone last week,” “I told you in the hall” etc., are unacceptable.

    Not quite all online but still useful.
Todd Suomela

Group photo - 2 views

Group photo from PflugerPhotos flickr stream. Direct link.

photo creative-commons

started by Todd Suomela on 25 Jan 09 no follow-up yet
Sheryl A. McCoy

We the People Bookshelf - 0 views

    A total of 4,000 public and school (K-12) libraries will be selected to receive the "Picturing America" Bookshelf. Awards will be announced in April 2009.
Fredric Markus

Flame Wars need not apply! - 6 views

I remember that the early 1990s I was enthralled with the potential that Internet email presented. I could, with a little attention to detail, converse with people around the planet. For a geograph...

flame wars

started by Fredric Markus on 25 Aug 08 no follow-up yet
Todd Suomela

Easily Distracted » Blog Archive » On the Rebound - 0 views

    In most online conversations I've been involved with, you eventually come to a point where the people interested in an evolving, exploratory dialogue, in learning something new about themselves and others, in thinking aloud, in working through things, find themselves worn out by a kind of rhetorical infection inflicted by bad faith participants who are just there to affirm what they already know and attack everything that doesn't conform to that knowledge. (Or by the classic "energy creatures" whose only objective is to satisfy their narcissism.) I used to think that was a function of the size of the room, that in a bigger discursive space, richer possibilities would present themselves. Now I don't know. Maybe it's a product of the form itself, maybe it's a sign of our times, and maybe it's my own unfair expectations or my own character that's the problem.
Todd Suomela

Do Rewards Shape Online Discussions? - Katrina A. Meyer The University of Memphis - 0 views

    This research attempted to test whether the granting of points for receiving the most votes as the "best post" would affect the quality of subsequent postings to online discussions. Five online discussions were held in a small graduate-level course in leadership theory, and postings were coded into Bloom's taxonomy. Quality was defined as the percent of postings in the upper three levels (Analyze, Evaluate, and Create), but did not change. By asking students their reasons for choosing a posting as best, content analysis resulted in five reasons: "personal," "new," "stimulating," "informative," and "like me," which are compared to the instructor's views. When asked if the availability of points affected their performance, nine students felt the points did not affect their postings and two students tried harder because of them. While these results do not capture a link between receiving rewards and improved quality in online discussions, this exercise may capture the process whereby compliments for good postings may set the standard for how graduate students think and contribute online.
1 - 20 of 21 Next ›
Showing 20 items per page