In learning technology research and development (R&D) projects there can appear to be a focus on outputs rather than outcomes: producing artefacts rather than building capacity; quantitative rather than qualitative measures; easy answers rather than the deep complexity of institutional change. Through the JISC-funded Users and Innovation (U&I) Programme a real effort has been made to transform practice based on the needs of individual users working within institutions.
The Emerge project set out to support the creation of a sustainable community of practice around user engagement for the exploitation of new and emerging technologies, such as social software and pervasive computing in educational settings. The timeline and issues around the use of social media to support an R&D programme is explored by Graham Attwell, Josie Fraser and Steven Warburton in their article "Framing the community" [link]. A key component to our approach was to encourage the adoption of a user engagement (UE) process and enabling its use by the developers of the next generation of web-based (web 2.0) services. Isobel Falconer and Chris Fowler, who led the user engagement team describe the approaches, methods and tools for engaging users [link]. Accepting that our research interventions would impact on the community’s development, we chose appreciative inquiry (AI) as an approach which would have a positive effect and which promotes an atmosphere of collective inquiry. Our aim was to ask questions which would support the community to move forwards. Patsy Carke and Rhona Sharpe, who led the appreciative inquiry explore the processes of using AI to develop a community based programme of support [link].
As the programme developed, benefits realisations (BR) activities sought to ensure the outputs and outcomes of the Users and Innovations (U&I) projects went beyond those originally funded to the wider community. Paul Bailey, who led the benefits realisation activities describes the two-stage approach which involved initially encouraging knowledge transfer, validation of outputs and take-up within other institutions. This was followed by Widening Stakeholder Engagement (WSE), using existing groups to feed outputs to their stakeholders [link].
The web presence of the support project was quite novel. We put a public stream of voices from the community right up front using the Elgg social networking platform. Joe Rosa, the project's software architect and webmaster describes how, in developing the support platform, we adopted, adapted and implemented parts of the ITILv3 'best practice' guidelines as a framework and used a mix of self-hosted core services integrated (mashup) with external services making the most of Web 2.0 technologies to deliver a coherent set of 'Services' to the community [link].
It has been possible to identify a range of benefits to deploying social networking and social media tools to scaffold community emergence. However, the form and patterns of interaction that develop across a community over time cannot be predetermined. The stories and voices of participants provided evidence that the community developed into an effective support system for projects. The benefits for individuals and projects included opportunities for professional development, collaboration with others, improved project planning and management, and awareness of the relevance of projects in a wider context. The use of participatory media is multi-modal. But the articulation between people and software is not only a question of interface design. The effective use of Web2.0 applications depends essentially on human networks. This raises questions of inclusion, exclusion and identity. The first question for institutions becomes: to what extent are they comfortable with ceding certain amounts of control to individuals? The second question for institutions is, then, to what extent are they, as established communities, willing to cede control to new communities? For individuals, the principal issue is to what extent do they subordinate their autonomy and self-direction to any community? And, then how much do they subordinate and to which communities? In the end, I suggest that information literacy is being dynamically redefined and that people valued the personal and professional development opportunities that were offered by the programme for themselves and for their own user communities [link].
I can't say that these questions are finally answered here. I hope that they are at least asked with greater rigour and sensitivity than when we started. Institutional change is not a simple task. I would like to thank the JISC for enabling these questions to be asked at all and supporting us in looking for answers. I want to thank the support team who spent two years treading down the nettles and looking for ever shifting trails, good naturedly acknowledging that the journey is as important as the destination. I want to thank the people who signed up for the community of practice, not knowing where it would lead. I know this programme appeared to be more demanding that your "usual JISC programme". I hope that the demands were not simply in the quantitative burden of hours and days spent drawing concept maps and engaging in semi-structured activity. Our aim was to improve the qualitative measures by which success might be understood. That this was not always easy, I accept. We were all, at times, confronted with parts of ourselves we might have rather left in the traditional silos. But, was it worth it? Yes, if these questions continue to be asked. If the spirit of open, asset-based, positive enquiry and evidence-led development continue to be promoted, then yes. For me, it has been an honour - and mostly a pleasure - to have been involved with this programme. The ideas and practices that have been piloted in the Emerge Project are continuing to be developed in the new Institutional Innovation Programme. Three more years to come up with even richer questions!
George Roberts
Director, Emerge Project
Framing the community
Written by Josie Fraser, Graham Attwel & Steven Warburton
The Emerge project set out to support the creation of a sustainable community of practice around the exploitation of new and emerging technologies, such as social software and pervasive computing, for use in educational settings. To achieve this aim the project itself adapted a number of social software based tools and practices to support community emergence of the community of practice. Seven critical phases of activity were identified during the life-cycle of the Emerge project and the community of practice that grew around individuals and funded projects. Each of these phases, from initial community engagement to building for sustainability, demanded differing support mechanisms to be employed.
These challenges were addressed through the types of tools, services and activities that were deployed over time. Our conclusions suggest that it is possible to identify a range of benefits and potential outcomes to deploying social networking and social media tools to scaffold community emergence. However, the form and patterns of interaction that develop across a community over time cannot be predetermined.
The dynamic and changing needs of the community and its' processes are reflected in changing demands for appropriate social and collaborative spaces. These impact directly on the type and form of the tools and services that need to be made available to the community. Deploying an iterative and agile model to scaffold community needs is a key factor to the successful development of community identities and active participation by its membership.
Users and innovation in institutions: using participatory media to support an R&D programme helps shift the locus of control
Written by George Roberts
The Emerge support project asked, can the use of participatory media and Web2.0 applications (and attitudes?) in learning technology R&D programmes encourage and facilitate both greater autonomy and self-direction in the participants on the one hand, as well as increasing collaborative, community-centred development on the other?
These questions can be re-expressed in terms of shifting centres of control; where greater individual user autonomy and self-direction is in respect to reduced institutional control and direction, of learning, of research and of community engagement. The first question for institutions becomes: to what extent are they comfortable with ceding certain amounts of control to individuals? The second question for institutions is, then, to what extent are they, as established communities willing to cede control to new communities? For individuals, the principal issue is to what extent do they subordinate their autonomy and self-direction to communities? And, then how much do they subordinate and to which communities?
The use of participatory media is multi-modal. In a Web2.0 environment the software becomes an important actor in the networks in which people participate. But the articulation between people and software is not only a question of interface design. The effective use of Web2.0 applications depends essentially on social networks. This raises questions of inclusion, exclusion and identity.
In the end, we see that the information literacy question is being dynamically redefined and that people valued the personal and professional development opportunities that were offered by the programme for themselves and for their own user communities.
Deploying IT Services as a Value
Written by Joe Rosa
This paper discusses our experiences of developing a platform to support the Emerge Project in creating an effective and sustainable Community of Practice (CoP), using collaborative online tools to support community activities and development. It demonstrates a paradigm shift from a 'tools-deployment' to a 'service-oriented' managed platform.
We adopted, adapted and implemented parts of the ITILv3 'best practice' guidelines as a framework and used a mix of self-hosted core services integrated (mashup) with external services making the most of Web 2.0 technologies to deliver a coherent set of 'Services' : that have a positive effect on the performance of being available when needed in sufficient capacity, and dependency in terms on continuity and security.
The initial Strategic Assessment was based on the Technical Project Aims, that were:
To act as a conduit and pathway for the range of locations inhabited by participants,
To channel and enhance the reach of content from existing community members, whether working in single or multiple locations,
To scaffold the online practice, work and communication of the community,
To organise, store and aggregate the project documentation,
To host support materials created by project staff and community members.
It is a concise description of the strategic methodology employed, emphasising the use of a versioning 'Configuration Management' system for a transparent Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) control as well as providing an effective deployment tools system to upgrade customised service applications. A full detailed documentation of every piece of code is available at http://repository.jiscemerge.org.uk/
Successful approaches to benefits realisation
Written by Paul Bailey
The Benefits Realisations (BR) activities sought to ensure the benefits i.e. outputs and outcomes of the Users and Innovations (U&I) projects went beyond those originally funded.
The U&I programme adopted a two-stage approach which involved initially encouraging knowledge transfer, validation of outputs and take-up within other institutions. This was followed by Widening Stakeholder Engagement (WSE), using existing groups to feed outputs to their stakeholders.
The Benefits Realisation activities comprised small projects that were ‘project-anchored, community-led’, i.e. they are anchored in a current project and led by one or more members of the Emerge online community or in the case of the Widening Stakeholder Engagement projects, led by an external stakeholder e.g. Subject Centre.
The three invitations for Benefits Realisation funding were issued in September 07, April 08 and July 08. An additional invitation to work with wider stakeholder communities (WSE) was issued in July 2008 for projects to start in August/September 2008 along with an invitation for Emerging Issues Studies (ES).
The Benefits Realisation activities included several within the Emerge project, for example the Emerge Bazaar within the Emerge Second Life Island, the Emerging Mondays Sounds of the Bazaar radio broadcasts, Dragons Den activities and communications products.
A total of 18 Benefits Realisation projects were funded (up to £15k each). Of these, nine were project-led and nine were community-led. Widening Stakeholder Engagement funded five projects (£40k each) looking at take-up and capacity building within subject areas (five projects) and Centers of Excellence in Learning and Teaching (one project). Four Emerging Issues Studies projects were funded.
Approaches, methods and tools for engaging the user.
Written by Isobel Falconer & Christopher Fowler
The User and Innovation programme funded Emerge to support the JISC in building, maintaining and sustaining a community of practice to help develop and promote a consistent approach to the development of the next generation learning, teaching, research and administration environments. A key component to the JISC Emerge approach was to encourage the adoption of a User Engagement (UE) process and enabling its use by the developers of the next generation of web-based (web 2.0) services.
The UE process is described in the CMS in three layers. First there is a contextual layer that consists of a paper providing a high level description of the UE process in terms of its rationale, general description of the UE framework, and its implementation. It ends by drawing some conclusions and recommendations. The contextual layer also provides an overview of the UE process showing the various layers, their components and relationships.
The second layer provides implementation details. This takes the form of a System Implementation (SI) Architecture that describes the UE process from the development rather than the change practice perspective. The various SI stages and a selection the methods and techniques within each stage are provided in a Guide. The third and final layer provides access to a range of Case Studies drawn from the experiences of the Emerge community from using the UE process in their own projects.
The layered approach has been designed to provide the CMS user with multiple access points with differing levels of detail and so hopefully will meet the needs of a wide and diverse audience.
Developing a community based programme of support
Written by Patsy Clarke & Rhona Sharpe
This section documents the inquiry which ran alongside the Emerge support project, to inform and direct its community based model of support. Accepting that our research interventions will impact on the community’s development, we chose appreciative inquiry as an approach which would have a positive effect and which promotes an atmosphere of collective inquiry. Assuming that research participants move in the positive direction of what they study, our aim was to ask questions which would support the community to move forwards.
The inquiry questions were
What conditions/activities/processes make the community successful?
What do participants value about a community based approach to support?
What is effective about a community based approach to supporting a funded programme?
The iterative nature of this inquiry allowed for the collection of data at multiple points in time and in various formats, which resulted in a large and rich dataset. In all there were approximately 25 separate data collection points, each of which was reported back to the community members and management team in order to assist them in making decisions about what to do next. The stories and voices of the members were used to examine how this community developed, and what made it successful. There was evidence that the community developed into an effective support system for projects. The benefits for individuals and projects included opportunities for professional development, collaboration with others, improved project planning and management, and awareness of the relevance of projects in a wider context. The AI final report makes recommendations for planning and conducting community based models of support.
APT Stairs - interview