17 comments by 4 or more people

1. Steven Carpenter

   Like it. Also, make the tools self-evidently useful in some way. That doesn't necessarily mean efficient either, but engaging and rewarding for the user.

   20 Jun 2005, 16:40

2. Robert O'Toole

   "engaging and rewarding" – that's the hard bit. For example, right now "rewarding" means anything that will help explain page 67 of Keith Ansell Pearson's book Germinal Life. The more academic work I do, the more narrow minded (or focussed) I become.

   And I don't want any distractions. I want the book to be the engaging thing. The content is hard enough as it is.

   But i do know that if i go to the right party i'll almost certainly have an experience that helps me to understand it. The difficult thing is finding that party.

   20 Jun 2005, 17:18

3. Chris May

   become someone who is known to hold really good theme parties, to which the best people want to be invited

   Isn't that the whole problem? Of course, once you can get 'the best people' engaged then the rest will happen trivially – but the problem is getting those people to want to do what you want them to do.

   Your analogy reminds me slightly of the 'instructions for breaking the 100M sprint record';

   1. buy lightweight spiked trainers
   2. buy lycra shorts & vest
   3. turn up to track on time, register for event
   4. kneel in blocks, wait for starting gun
   5. run to end of track in 9.76 seconds
   6. collect medal and praise.

   Observers will note that by enumerating the steps like this we encourage readers to jump to the (false) conclusion that each step is equally easy, and the fact that #5 is in fact almost impossible, whilst 1–4 and 6 are trivial, is lost.

   21 Jun 2005, 11:17

4. Robert O'Toole

   Yes, and in this case its probably Step 1 (become someone who is known to hold really good theme parties) that is equivalent to running 100 metres in 9.76 seconds.

   However, if I were to become really good at one thing, that would be it.

   21 Jun 2005, 11:28

5. Robert O'Toole

   And perhaps it would be best if I skipped the lycra shorts stage.

   21 Jun 2005, 11:28

6. I think the whole concept of trying to get people to use IT in new ways is all wrong. People will only ever use IT if it solves an existing problem that they recognise that they have.

   • I use email because it solves the problem of slow communications.
   • I use listserv email lists as they solve the problem of how to allow a group to easily communicate to each other.
   • I use electronic journals because they solve the problem of having to walk to the library.

   You will never get anybody using IT unless it is obvious to them what problem it is that the IT solves. For example, it is not at all obvious to me (or, I suspect, to most people) what problem WarwickBlogs solves. Thus hardly anyone uses it for academic purposes. Probably the same is true of the Forum thing.

   From my mingling with both students and staff, I reckon that most people have the impression that IT services regard IT as important for its own sake. It isn't. IT is only ever useful if it solves an existing problem.

   So, my advice about how to get staff & students to do new things with IT is this. Find out what aspects of their study & research they find annoying, and do something to sort it out. Then people will naturally want to use it and you won't need to try to force them to.

   21 Jun 2005, 11:56

7. Robert O'Toole

   "I think the whole concept of trying to get people to use IT in new ways is all wrong" – you are interpreting that "trying" in completely the wrong way. We don't have, as a measure of success, some generic notion that IT use is good in itself. In fact we expend a lot of effort in trying to work out what specific problems we can address, and helping people to address them. The Web-Dev and E-learning Teams at Warwick (part of Elab) use an "agile" and "user-driven" development methodology to develop features for our wide and diverse user base. This provides exactly the responsiveness that you claim is lacking. We do more than "mingle" with students and staff. In fact some of us are students, and hence have a direct connection with the problems that they face. However, there are limitations:

   • Sometimes we find that the problems cannot be addressed within the bounds of the currently available platforms. For example, simple student web publishing did not happen until we introduced Warwick Blogs (if you think it did, then you are out of touch with the majority of students). As you say, listserv meets an obvious need, but there are aspects of group communication that it just will never satisfy (and again it is beyond the ability of most users);
   • Often problems don't even get identified as such until a possible solution is available. Yes that sounds like an ad-mans dream, but it is true. I personally didn't even think that access to easy publishing of my ideas (and the chance to get unknown people to respond) was a requirement, someting that really makes a difference to my academic process. And then blogging came along. If we didn't have this technology, then I probably wouldn't realise that I was missing something. But my academic work would be poorer because of it.
   • Many new ideas in technology must be exposed to a large number of people in order for their potential (specific uses) or otherwise to be revealed. We can only get input for our incremental agile development process from people who are actually engaged in using technology. At that point it becomes an autopoietic process, but it takes some priming first. The point of the party analogy is that we need to get more people involved.

   And finally, if you have got some new ideas for what functionality might be useful, meet me for coffee, and bring others who might have an interest.

   21 Jun 2005, 12:34

8. Regarding the purpose of WarwickBlogs, I think that you haven't answered the question. I accept that WB does provide "simple student web publishing", but what problem does "simple student web publishing" solve?

   There are plenty of examples of IT things that I'd like to see. Most are tedious nitty gritty stuff. For example, it would really make my life a lot easier if OPAC provided a simple way of exporting bibliographic information (including journal papers) to BibTeX files. This idea certainly satisfies all your three criteria, but I would be amazed (and delighted) if IT services implemented it, and I'm sure others would be also.

   But what really annoys me is that the university doesn't seem to spend as much time and money on developing non-computer related solutions to these things. For example, the issue of getting research students in separate departments to collaborate could be solved by having some paid employee to search for situations where this would be appropriate and to organise, advertise and co-ordinate seminar programmes and reading groups. Would this ever happen? Of course not. Instead we get IT as a panacea.

   This shouldn't be seen as a criticism of you or your department, clearly you get paid to develop IT solutions to these sorts of things, and good for you. My point is that you should be paid for develop solutions for these things, whether they involve IT or not should be irrelevant.

   22 Jun 2005, 01:50

9. Robert O'Toole

   "ome paid employee to search for situations where this would be appropriate and to organise, advertise and co-ordinate seminar programmes and reading groups. Would this ever happen?" – yes, in fact we're just starting to do that in cooperation with the Graduate School and the PDP office.

   We're not at all about "IT as a panacea". Can you tell me exactly what communication from us gave you that idea? I'll make sure that it doesn't happen again.

   I'm about to redesign the E-learning web site. It will be informed by exactly the value you say we ignire – firstly it is the teaching, learning and research that matters, in a way specific to the many different departments. Only then is there possibly as space for new technology.

   I'd like to get your opinions on it? Do you want to meet and discuss?

   22 Jun 2005, 09:13

10. Robert O'Toole

    We've had a quite detailed response from one of the Shoot Out contestants about the format of the awards ceremony (which was re-arranged at the last minute in response to the judges). The tone of the response is interesting, as it shows that participants now have a strong sense of ownership over the event. I think they feel that it is their competition. This response reminds me of the response from the early users of Warwick Blogs to some of the redesigns that we introduced. They also had that sense of ownership.

    That then is a sign of success. Kay has created something that people really like and want more of.

    23 Jun 2005, 08:06

11. "yes, in fact we're just starting to do that in cooperation with the Graduate School and the PDP office."

    Is this really true? There's going to be a person whose job it is to promote interdepartment seminars? Well, let's hope it works.

    "Can you tell me exactly what communication from us gave you that idea? I'll make sure that it doesn't happen again."

    It's an impression (perhaps an unfair impression) that I reckon most people have. Everyone bangs on about e-learning all the time, when actually there are so many simpler (and boring) things that could make teaching easier at this university. As a tedious example from the last year: for complicated reasons I was teaching in a room that is not normally used for u/g seminars, and it was clear the blackboard hadn't been properly cleaned for 10 years or more. When I asked someone to ask the cleaners to wash it I was told that they weren't allowed to for health reasons. So I thought, OK, I'll do it. But I wasn't allowed to use the cleaners bucket and sponge, as they are a private company. In the end I had to go to Tesco and buy a set for myself. Now, this is a trivial example perhaps, but it does illustrate the ridiculous nature of teaching support in this university. There are whole departments developing exciting IT stuff, but there is no one to clean a blackboard, and not even any equipment to clean a blackboard. [No smart alec response about how I should have been using PowerPoint please].

    About meeting for coffee, I would be happy to, although I'm not sure what I can add to proceedings. Although, actually, it may be difficult as eating and drinking at Westwood is being banned on Friday.

    23 Jun 2005, 10:06

12. Robert O'Toole

    "it was clear the blackboard hadn't been properly cleaned for 10 years or more" – it sounds like that blackboard very rarely gets used for teaching then, so as a priority for development, a blackboard cleaning service would be quite low.

    Whereas if Sitebuilder stops working, we get a flood of calls straight away.

    Interesting how this blog tool and my use of it has sparked of an exchange of ideas from two people with different views. Isn't that one of the core values of higher education. Hence the technology is working.

    23 Jun 2005, 10:23

13. "as a priority for development, a blackboard cleaning service would be quite low"

    Possibly, but let's face it, it wouldn't require a large amount of work. Only a bucket and sponge is needed. You would have thought that the university could manage that. Maybe if I asked someone to develop a robotic automatic e-learning blackboard cleaner the university would be more keen to provide it, possibly in the form of a one stop shop?!

    "Whereas if Sitebuilder stops working, we get a flood of calls straight away."

    Exactly! This is my point. You get a flood of calls because you exist! And I suppose that is a good thing, because, as you say, some of the technology does work. However, if there was an equivalent department set up to sort out other non-computer related teaching things they would also be flooded with calls. But because they don't exist everyone has to muddle through on their own, even if this means wasting time and money going to Tesco to buy buckets and sponges.

    23 Jun 2005, 11:40

14. Robert O'Toole

    If you think that a blackboard cleaning service required "Only a bucket and sponge" then you have little experience of organising even simple services.

    23 Jun 2005, 13:40

15. Hmmm. I think what I was getting at was that a bucket and sponge blackboard cleaning service would certainly be an improvement on a "go and buy yourself a bucket and sponge" blackboard cleaning service.

    23 Jun 2005, 16:17

16. Robert O'Toole

    It might be an improvement in that scope, but obviously would mean resource diverted from elsewhere. These things are never simple.

    23 Jun 2005, 17:05

17. Diverting potential revenue streams without appropriate inter-function dialogue could lead to a missappropriation of non-generic (and certainly intangible) cross-fertilizations into 'anti-mission', or 'anti-task' behaviours which ultimately leads to a degredation in service quality through unconscious re-engineering of downward spirality.

    03 Nov 2005, 11:47