User:Randyfisher/MP/CR

Work in progress, expect frequent changes. Help and feedback is welcome. See discussion page.

Welcome to Randy Fisher's Masters Project I page

MA, Organization Management & Development, Fielding Graduate University, California (April 2009)

OMD Central |  Topics (Old) { | OldRefs  | MP Assignments  |  Plan Outline |  Hypothesis  |  Concept Review |  Table of Contents  | MP Glossary  |  Complexity article |  VCC Practicum | MP Draft Haiku1  | MP Project Synopsis |  MP DRAFT-1 | MP FINAL-1 | MP References |  MP II | OMD Glossary  | 

Randy Fisher aka Wikirandy

Process

Most of your questions above are addressed, I believe, in Fieldkit #71 ("Masters Project — Final Paper Format"). For example in Section 4 of the kit, there’s an illustrative TOC, as follows:

Front papers Glossary (Follows the ToC, but only include if you’re using acronyms or specialized words) Ch. 1 Introduction (Who, what, where, why, how of the study. Conclusions right up front.) Ch. 2 Concept review of one major concept Ch. 3 Concept review of another major concept Ch. 4 Methods used (including brief description of the thought experiment, if applicable) Ch. 5 Findings and discussion. Critique of the findings, and limitations of the method. Ch. 6 Conclusions Ch. 7 Epilogue — what you learned, apart from what you set out to learn References Appendix A Appendix B, etc.

Devil’s advocacy stuff goes mostly in Chap 5 (discussion of findings), but also, as you said, in the concept review chapters, and also in the summary in Chap 1.

The reader will not be turned off if you set the tone of the project being a learning journey, with surprises along the way. (“Information consists of surprise” — Claude Shannon, father of information theory.)

The reader will not be scared off, but remain interested if you are constantly saying things like, “I started off thinking X, but to my surprise, I found Y.” Or, “I started with the framework of X, but then I read so-and-so’s book which opened up a whole new approach to framing the issue.” Or, “It seemed that authors A and B were completely in disagreement, but on closer look, it seemed that they were just dealing with different situations, in their evaluation of the effectiveness of Intervention Z.” (Contingency theory).

Concept Review (draft)

http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Randyfisher/MP/CR

(1) Proposed Solution

• Needs-based motivation supports Wiki use, growth, as explored in McLelland's thesis about Needs Motivation

Hypothesis

Educators from learning organizations are drawn to WikiEducator for three reasons (or a combination thereof): (1) achievement; (2) power; and/ or (3) affiliation.

Research Question

What motivates educators from learning organizations to provide free instructional and learning content on WikiEducator?

Statement

(Active) Educators provide free content on WikiEducator because they want to experience the 'in-thing'...they want to be part of what's going on, perceived as leaders, what's popular...what everyone is doing..., because of the affiliation / community of support...

(2) Principal Outcome Measures

a critical analysis of outcome measures — success, benefits, side-effect — and perhaps the research method) — one chapter for each concept

• define contribution / participation (see glossary: http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Randyfisher/MP/Glossary )
• rationale for selecting it, along with its limitations;
  • conversion rates indicate sustained motivation / staying power in the community - over what duration (i.e., folks want to stay long enough to develop advanced skills)
  • number, diversity and growth of active users - those users who are most productive in the community, a sense of their profile and activity - within the organization, and in use of the wiki
  • who comes, stays, for how long?
  • this will give us insight into organization type....
• instructor adds content
• ID department, vetted by instructors
• learning from others, and imitate it.... pro-D

Outcome Measures

• Rate of conversion rate from new users to active contributors
• Number, diversity and growth of active contributors in the WikiEducator space
  • Note: Active contributors will develop educational content
• See: Glossary for Definitions

Unobtrusive Measures

• number of people taking wiki skills training
  • New users taking Wiki Skills 101
  • Skills '101' Graduates learning from advanced tutorials
• observing community indicators and performance
• WikiEducator Statistics - http://www.wikieducator.org/Special:Statistics
  • Top Users - http://wikieducator.org/stats/reports/TablesWikipediaEN.htm
  • Newbie survey data
  • Lists of Users, Organizations
  • Search data - for their contribution quantity, quality by User Name, and Institution role
  • Dialogue in main WikiEducator discussion group - http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator?hl=en

(3) Methodology

1. Content Analysis - from forum postings, meetings, discussions, documents (primarily main Google Discussion Group - http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator
2. Unobtrusive Measures
3. 360 Peer Collaboration Rating Scale, with a sample of the WikiEd Group

• • rating the extent of collaboration, as defined by Contribution Activities in the Glossary

Notes

• Quote: "I'm in control on WikiEducator. That's what I want." - Nellie Deutsch, in conversation with Randy Fisher, October, 2008. n-Pow
• Patricipatory Learning (n-AFF), and (n-Pow)