Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Web Literacy standard community call: 14th March 2013
74 views
Skip to first unread message
Doug Belshaw
Mar 12, 2013, 11:27:36 AM3/12/13
to
Hi everyone, thanks for your involvement in helping define this Web Literacy standard! This week we're excited to announce that on the community call the Mozilla team (and hopefully some others) will be LIVE from the DML Conference in Chicago.
This means we have to find a new time to fit in with both the conference timings and the US going into Daylight Savings. So for this week only we'll be meeting at the following time:
Day: Thursday 14th March 2013
Time: 10am PT / 12pm CT / 1pm ET / 5pm GMT
Check out this post: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45182245930/community-calls-looking-back-and-forward-01
This week we need to:
- Decide what we’re going to call the categories (‘strands’?)
- Agree upon some learner personas
- Discuss outcomes in more detail
Hope you can make it! :-)
-----
Doug Belshaw
Badges & Skills Lead
Mozilla Foundation
This means we have to find a new time to fit in with both the conference timings and the US going into Daylight Savings. So for this week only we'll be meeting at the following time:
Day: Thursday 14th March 2013
Time: 10am PT / 12pm CT / 1pm ET / 5pm GMT
Check out this post: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45182245930/community-calls-looking-back-and-forward-01
This week we need to:
- Decide what we’re going to call the categories (‘strands’?)
- Agree upon some learner personas
- Discuss outcomes in more detail
Hope you can make it! :-)
-----
Doug Belshaw
Badges & Skills Lead
Mozilla Foundation
Doug Belshaw
Mar 14, 2013, 9:57:41 AM3/14/13
to
Just a quick update to say that if you're at the DML Conference today and would like to join us LIVE, then please meet in the Lobby at 11.50am CT. We'll be recording from 12pm CT. :-)
Doug Belshaw
Mar 14, 2013, 3:33:52 PM3/14/13
to
Great call today! Thanks to Paul Oh, Christina Cantrill and Paul Allison for joining me live and for all of you for joining in and participating.
Our homework for this week:
- Keep thinking through the strands - is securing/protecting/empowering a cross-cutting theme?
- Is 'ethics' a cross-cutting theme? What about 'identity'?
- Why is "strands" your choice for what we call the categories?
- Create learning personas
Have at it! Looking forward to all of your thinking and responses below.
Our homework for this week:
- Keep thinking through the strands - is securing/protecting/empowering a cross-cutting theme?
- Is 'ethics' a cross-cutting theme? What about 'identity'?
- Why is "strands" your choice for what we call the categories?
- Create learning personas
Have at it! Looking forward to all of your thinking and responses below.
Alvar Maciel
Mar 14, 2013, 4:42:23 PM3/14/13
to Doug Belshaw, webm...@lists.mozilla.org
Doug Belshaw <dajbe...@gmail.com> writes:
> Great call today! Thanks to Paul Oh, Christina Cantrill and Paul
> Allison for joining me live and for all of you for joining in and
> participating.
I Lost againt the call, I connect at 12GTM and then I have trubles in
> Great call today! Thanks to Paul Oh, Christina Cantrill and Paul
> Allison for joining me live and for all of you for joining in and
> participating.
the schooll.
Anyway i will follow ofline the talk and i think that the next week we
will have a first of the White Paper in spanish
Doug Belshaw
Mar 14, 2013, 7:20:56 PM3/14/13
to Doug Belshaw, webm...@lists.mozilla.org
Hi Alvar - great! :-)
Update: audio from this week's call now online: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45376187102/weekly-community-call-14th-march-2013-in-this
Looking forward to your feedback/discussion.
Update: audio from this week's call now online: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45376187102/weekly-community-call-14th-march-2013-in-this
Looking forward to your feedback/discussion.
Doug Belshaw
Mar 14, 2013, 7:20:56 PM3/14/13
to mozilla....@googlegroups.com, Doug Belshaw, webm...@lists.mozilla.org
Hi Alvar - great! :-)
Update: audio from this week's call now online: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45376187102/weekly-community-call-14th-march-2013-in-this
Looking forward to your feedback/discussion.
Update: audio from this week's call now online: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45376187102/weekly-community-call-14th-march-2013-in-this
Looking forward to your feedback/discussion.
Alvar Maciel
Mar 15, 2013, 5:24:45 AM3/15/13
to Doug Belshaw, mozilla.webmaker, webm...@lists.mozilla.org
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Doug Belshaw <dajbe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Update: audio from this week's call now online: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45376187102/weekly-community-call-14th-march-2013-in-this
Great!!!
> Update: audio from this week's call now online: http://weblitstd.tumblr.com/post/45376187102/weekly-community-call-14th-march-2013-in-this
Doug Belshaw
Mar 18, 2013, 2:31:25 PM3/18/13
to
Sounds like either there's a lot of consensus around last week's call or everyone's busy! ;-)
I'd like to ask about Learner Personas. Does anyone feel able to contribute a learner persona like the ones created by Jess (see line 129 down): https://etherpad.mozilla.org/weblitstd-community-14mar13
Or should we just run with what we've got from the Webmaker work?
I'd like to ask about Learner Personas. Does anyone feel able to contribute a learner persona like the ones created by Jess (see line 129 down): https://etherpad.mozilla.org/weblitstd-community-14mar13
Or should we just run with what we've got from the Webmaker work?
da...@plml.org
Mar 18, 2013, 5:13:44 PM3/18/13
to
All,
Responses on two fronts; personas, and the matter of themes (both individual and 'cross-cutting'). Feel free to push back on one or both! Enforcing a personal gag-order word limit below; will elaborate if needed!
(1) Personas: The list of personas generated via Webmaker/and in the call are quite comprehensive!
Some personas will apply the structure to make instructional choices to design content within a larger program (Nonprofit education coordinator, State or district instructional designer), others will design specific instructional content (school administrators, teachers) and still others will demonstrate personal proficiency (activist, mentor, student).
What isn't clear is whether and how personas matter for the design process. So if the idea is to keep the final product simple - a set/series of standards- then developing too many personas may only be of tangential use!
Practical implication: Will standards look different depending on persona? What can we learn from persona to drive Web Standard building?
(2) Cross-Cutting Themes: Eliminate them. I'm going to advocate for explicit treatment of what could otherwise be 'cross-cutting' (CC) themes on the premises that (a) there are a multitude, not just one or two, CC themes and (b) that in order to assess+badge, we should keep things simple and (c) that we can't possible foresee all of the CC's.
First, there a large number of cross-cutting themes related to exploring, creating, connecting and protecting: ethics and identity, privacy, rights, collaboration, encryption - to name a few. They're all important!
Secondly, if we think about standards, they're quite simple for a good reason - so it's possible to tell when someone has met one. The more complex a particular standard is, the harder it is to measure (and thus the call for rubrics).
Finally, the demands are such that learners will likely have to apply ("transfer") their understanding of, say, privacy to a multitude of situations, both foreseen and unforeseen, in all of the major strands. Best to address this clearly and directly, separately, then muddle through a process of trying to integrate it with each and every sub-item of other strands.
Practical impact: keep it simple! Eliminate cross-cuts. Focus on defining major strands but allow room for educators to combine or "shuffle" standards within instructional exercises - we see this all the time in education!.
Responses on two fronts; personas, and the matter of themes (both individual and 'cross-cutting'). Feel free to push back on one or both! Enforcing a personal gag-order word limit below; will elaborate if needed!
(1) Personas: The list of personas generated via Webmaker/and in the call are quite comprehensive!
Some personas will apply the structure to make instructional choices to design content within a larger program (Nonprofit education coordinator, State or district instructional designer), others will design specific instructional content (school administrators, teachers) and still others will demonstrate personal proficiency (activist, mentor, student).
What isn't clear is whether and how personas matter for the design process. So if the idea is to keep the final product simple - a set/series of standards- then developing too many personas may only be of tangential use!
Practical implication: Will standards look different depending on persona? What can we learn from persona to drive Web Standard building?
(2) Cross-Cutting Themes: Eliminate them. I'm going to advocate for explicit treatment of what could otherwise be 'cross-cutting' (CC) themes on the premises that (a) there are a multitude, not just one or two, CC themes and (b) that in order to assess+badge, we should keep things simple and (c) that we can't possible foresee all of the CC's.
First, there a large number of cross-cutting themes related to exploring, creating, connecting and protecting: ethics and identity, privacy, rights, collaboration, encryption - to name a few. They're all important!
Secondly, if we think about standards, they're quite simple for a good reason - so it's possible to tell when someone has met one. The more complex a particular standard is, the harder it is to measure (and thus the call for rubrics).
Finally, the demands are such that learners will likely have to apply ("transfer") their understanding of, say, privacy to a multitude of situations, both foreseen and unforeseen, in all of the major strands. Best to address this clearly and directly, separately, then muddle through a process of trying to integrate it with each and every sub-item of other strands.
Practical impact: keep it simple! Eliminate cross-cuts. Focus on defining major strands but allow room for educators to combine or "shuffle" standards within instructional exercises - we see this all the time in education!.
da...@plml.org
Mar 18, 2013, 5:21:27 PM3/18/13
to
p.s. I'm asking these hard questions to promote debate & understanding -- in good humor -- not to knock anyone! :o)
da...@plml.org
Mar 19, 2013, 10:54:50 AM3/19/13
to
To help make this more clear, I've attached an X-Mind (http://www.xmind.net/) diagram that represents the current Web Literacy Standards (Sheet 1), and a possible branch (Sheet 2).
File: http://goo.gl/hi92p
The branch:
* Consolidates Cookies and Privacy Controls into 'Browser Skills'
* Augments some of the existing standards elements w/ other potential skills
* Indicates a need to reconcile Protecting > 'Rights Online' with Connecting > 'Open Standards'.
The remaining items under 'Protecting' are Security Basics, Identity as it relates to managing personal information online, Security & Encryption and Legalese on the Web.
Hopefully this is helpful?
And -- By taking a relatively specific approach to 'identity', perhaps we can simplify the conversation a bit?
--Dave
File: http://goo.gl/hi92p
The branch:
* Consolidates Cookies and Privacy Controls into 'Browser Skills'
* Augments some of the existing standards elements w/ other potential skills
* Indicates a need to reconcile Protecting > 'Rights Online' with Connecting > 'Open Standards'.
The remaining items under 'Protecting' are Security Basics, Identity as it relates to managing personal information online, Security & Encryption and Legalese on the Web.
Hopefully this is helpful?
And -- By taking a relatively specific approach to 'identity', perhaps we can simplify the conversation a bit?
--Dave
Ian O'Byrne
Mar 19, 2013, 2:04:51 PM3/19/13
to
Hi Dave,
I agree with the thinking on the Personas. I think they're beneficial as they personalize the web literacies for users, and in a way help situate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of learners as they work within the frameworks we've defined. Of course my understanding of the Personas, or how they play out in this work is limited as best. I think there are far smarter people than me in the group as it applies to the role of Personas.
In terms of the frameworks and branches that you've defined...I think it looks great. I don't like the label and focus of the "exploring" strand, but I can go ahead with it for now. I posted about this in last week's thread. As far as "protecting" is concerned, I go back and forth on that as well. I'm not opposed to protecting as a major strand, and I think it puts a line in the sand about how important we feel it is.
I don't entirely believe that "identity" should be placed beneath protecting...even though this is one of the reasons why I think protecting might need to be pulled from the major strands. I postulated last week that purpose, identity, and sociocultural factors should be considered as each nesting within each other and surrounding the strands. This is largely informed by the RAND heuristic and work by Bronfenbrenner. You can read more on the discussion threads I left here in Google Groups last week. The graphic that I drew up and shared is available here: http://wiobyrne.com/a-tale-of-two-wikis-open-closed-learning-management-systems/
In effect, I would see the schematic that you shared (with or without exploring/protecting) with the various nodes being surrounded by the purpose, and then the identity, and then the sociocultural factors that motivate the user. I think these are very important and offer us latitude as we discuss identity, security, etc.
Much of this is all motivated by the discussions we had last week...and Carla's thinking that it should be a 3D model.
Just my two cents...
-Ian
I agree with the thinking on the Personas. I think they're beneficial as they personalize the web literacies for users, and in a way help situate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of learners as they work within the frameworks we've defined. Of course my understanding of the Personas, or how they play out in this work is limited as best. I think there are far smarter people than me in the group as it applies to the role of Personas.
In terms of the frameworks and branches that you've defined...I think it looks great. I don't like the label and focus of the "exploring" strand, but I can go ahead with it for now. I posted about this in last week's thread. As far as "protecting" is concerned, I go back and forth on that as well. I'm not opposed to protecting as a major strand, and I think it puts a line in the sand about how important we feel it is.
I don't entirely believe that "identity" should be placed beneath protecting...even though this is one of the reasons why I think protecting might need to be pulled from the major strands. I postulated last week that purpose, identity, and sociocultural factors should be considered as each nesting within each other and surrounding the strands. This is largely informed by the RAND heuristic and work by Bronfenbrenner. You can read more on the discussion threads I left here in Google Groups last week. The graphic that I drew up and shared is available here: http://wiobyrne.com/a-tale-of-two-wikis-open-closed-learning-management-systems/
In effect, I would see the schematic that you shared (with or without exploring/protecting) with the various nodes being surrounded by the purpose, and then the identity, and then the sociocultural factors that motivate the user. I think these are very important and offer us latitude as we discuss identity, security, etc.
Much of this is all motivated by the discussions we had last week...and Carla's thinking that it should be a 3D model.
Just my two cents...
-Ian
da...@plml.org
Mar 19, 2013, 3:57:50 PM3/19/13
to
Awesome, thanks for sharing!
Thinking about specific standards / badges, what would the impact be on their writing & stating, and rough assessing (in terms of a person meeting something as specific as, say, Code Whipserer: https://badges.webmaker.org/badge/criteria/code-whisperer) if identity were at an ecologically higher level?
--Dave
Thinking about specific standards / badges, what would the impact be on their writing & stating, and rough assessing (in terms of a person meeting something as specific as, say, Code Whipserer: https://badges.webmaker.org/badge/criteria/code-whisperer) if identity were at an ecologically higher level?
--Dave
Ian O'Byrne
Mar 19, 2013, 5:17:10 PM3/19/13
to
Hi Dave,
In my thinking, Identity is exactly where it needs to be, situated between purpose and sociocultural elements. I think that identity, or at least the identity presented by an individual would help define or determine the purpose of the work process and product as it applies to these web literacies. I think that purpose and identity are both affected by the effects of society, culture, and diversity as well as other contexts and contingencies. I would see it as resting in the series of nesting circles.
I also think that the RAND heuristic and the Ecological model (Bronfenbrenner) offers a nice schematic that has a certain level of "acceptability" within literacy, education, psychology, and other fields. It would be easy to bring this work to other areas to help get buy-in.
-Ian
In my thinking, Identity is exactly where it needs to be, situated between purpose and sociocultural elements. I think that identity, or at least the identity presented by an individual would help define or determine the purpose of the work process and product as it applies to these web literacies. I think that purpose and identity are both affected by the effects of society, culture, and diversity as well as other contexts and contingencies. I would see it as resting in the series of nesting circles.
I also think that the RAND heuristic and the Ecological model (Bronfenbrenner) offers a nice schematic that has a certain level of "acceptability" within literacy, education, psychology, and other fields. It would be easy to bring this work to other areas to help get buy-in.
-Ian
Ian O'Byrne
Mar 19, 2013, 5:18:39 PM3/19/13
to
Hi Doug,
Are you asking people to build a Persona, or hunt down ones by others?
I'd be willing to build one because it'll force me to think critically about this tool...and how it applies to the online badges. But...I'm not sure that's what you're looking for.
-Ian
Are you asking people to build a Persona, or hunt down ones by others?
I'd be willing to build one because it'll force me to think critically about this tool...and how it applies to the online badges. But...I'm not sure that's what you're looking for.
-Ian
Carla Casilli, Webmaker Badges Project Lead
Mar 19, 2013, 7:44:17 PM3/19/13
to
Hey Dave,
Thanks for taking a good long look at this and proposing some suggestions. While some folks might have Xmind, in the interests of folks who do not, is it possible to share this as a PDF?
Thanks for taking a good long look at this and proposing some suggestions. While some folks might have Xmind, in the interests of folks who do not, is it possible to share this as a PDF?
Doug Belshaw
Mar 20, 2013, 8:57:34 AM3/20/13
to
+1 to what Carla says about everyone not having XMind (although it is awesome). I'd point out that you could publish your mindmap to the Web and provide us with the URL?
I've downloaded it to look at - thanks for your awesome work Dave and Ian! :-)
I've downloaded it to look at - thanks for your awesome work Dave and Ian! :-)
Doug Belshaw
Mar 20, 2013, 8:58:12 AM3/20/13
to
I was suggesting that people might like to build their own! :-)
Ian O'Byrne
Mar 20, 2013, 1:59:41 PM3/20/13
to
Hi Doug,
I'd love to build my own...how do I do this?
Sorry to be such a newb.
-Ian
I'd love to build my own...how do I do this?
Sorry to be such a newb.
-Ian
jamieal...@googlemail.com
Mar 21, 2013, 9:15:52 AM3/21/13
to
Hi Y'all
Thumbs-up to the discussions & posts though couldn't access Ian's ED627 or Daves X-Mind, no time now to find out why, sorry guys, both seemed interesting.
Protecting = Safeguarding?
Doug, "....visualising learning pathways..." is that (mock horror) related to cross-cutting themes?
Jamie
Thumbs-up to the discussions & posts though couldn't access Ian's ED627 or Daves X-Mind, no time now to find out why, sorry guys, both seemed interesting.
Protecting = Safeguarding?
Doug, "....visualising learning pathways..." is that (mock horror) related to cross-cutting themes?
Jamie
da...@plml.org
Mar 21, 2013, 9:52:24 AM3/21/13
to
Hi Carla,
Thanks for the tip, apologies about the semi-locked-in format. The simplest option through XMIND seems to be to access the file online, via its share. Here are the two maps:
Original - http://www.xmind.net/m/rLHC/
Branch - http://www.xmind.net/m/YABZ/
I'll search for a more "open" charting solution, but so far, XMind seems to be the simplest & most friendly for the task. Any other recommendations?
Thanks,
--Dave
Thanks for the tip, apologies about the semi-locked-in format. The simplest option through XMIND seems to be to access the file online, via its share. Here are the two maps:
Original - http://www.xmind.net/m/rLHC/
Branch - http://www.xmind.net/m/YABZ/
I'll search for a more "open" charting solution, but so far, XMind seems to be the simplest & most friendly for the task. Any other recommendations?
Thanks,
--Dave
jamieal...@googlemail.com
Mar 21, 2013, 10:11:32 AM3/21/13
to
jamieal...@googlemail.com
Mar 21, 2013, 10:55:17 AM3/21/13
to
Hi Dave, nice post.
It introduced me to XMind & agree it does looks good compared to what I've seen.
Been looking into mind map templates on offer since December. Sorry I can't recommend anyone of them. Can't find the right combination of 3-D, fluidity, good visual design for presentation, etc. and may go custom.
(But a very interesting field though, at an early stage & sense some good things will be coming :) )
Regards, Jamie
It introduced me to XMind & agree it does looks good compared to what I've seen.
Been looking into mind map templates on offer since December. Sorry I can't recommend anyone of them. Can't find the right combination of 3-D, fluidity, good visual design for presentation, etc. and may go custom.
(But a very interesting field though, at an early stage & sense some good things will be coming :) )
Regards, Jamie
0 new messages