Student created content - reading

Chin, P. (2006) The Value of User-Generated Content, Intranet Journal, http://www.intranetjournal.com/articles/200603/ij_03_07_06a.html

In this article Chin asks how the role of user generated content sits alongside engineered content in a business environment. Much of our content management system for websites is like this in my experience. I write and generate content, but it goes through an editorial process to make sure that it is on brand. And this is the issue, depending on where the content is. How do you differentiate between the corporate identity and ‘official’ content as opposed to user content. What makes it official? Do we need to worry about official?

In my experience many discussion forums regulate themselves well – but then it is clear that these are informal. I think here it is important to define the topic areas. So, for example, rules and regulations, guidnace about things like safeguarding, need to have some expertise behind them. But content about leadership or management has a wider expert range and may be a better subject with which to explore the use of user content.

Cook, J. and Light, A. (2006) ‘New patterns of power and participation? Designing ICT for informal and community learning’, E-learning, vol.3, no.1, pp.51–61; http://www.wwwords.co.uk/pdf/viewpdf.asp?j=elea&vol=3&issue=1&year=2006&article=6_Cook_Light_ELEA_3_1_web&id=137.108.145.11

Cook and Light focus on the idea of participation and technology and how they enhance each other. An important point is again raised, in that not everyone is aware or knows how to exploit online content. It’s great to use technology to enhance and develop practices, but we do risk the digital elite being the only ones who manipulate this. If we want to be truly user focused are user group needs to be fully represented for the context…..

“over a third of the population will not be motivated to ‘participate’ because they have no wish to learn new ways of doing things. Such a suggestion throws out a great challenge to th ideal of an inclusive and participative society.”

What I get from this article is that we need to remember that people have different motivations, and that technology in itself may not be the hook. But getting individuals excited through using technology to do something interesting (eg family trees) means that the ‘spark’ (Salmon) may be ignited. It goes back to what we were saying in the forums about needing to be interested. Then individuals may be more interested in getting behind the technology,how it works and helping to design it. A really good example is the Club house in Massachusetts. Here taher than give kids the computer as a tools, they get them to create the content themselves.

Johnson, J. and Dyer, J. (2006) ‘User-defined content in a constructivist learning environment’ [online], elearning papers, http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=8404&doclng=6

“New pedagogies are developing with the digital age which reflect collaboration, internalised thinking, reflection and iteration rather than the concept of the taught lesson, however the internet is still regarded by many as a convenient mechanism for delivering traditional materials online.”

Firstly, I am not sure that collaboration etc is a new way of thinking, and well, if our forum debates are anything to go by, the digital age isn’t developing new pedgagogies but utilising old ones. (Interesting discussion around this area by Chasing Mr Chips blog).

Despite this there are some good areas of thought or snippets to come out of this paper. They reiterate the point about confusing interaction with participation (one of the things we are guilty of at work), and note the possibility of a changing culture of learning. Once again the need for the learner to be ‘aroused’ into learning is important.

It is interesting that they note that successful communities of practice are not text driven, but use multimedia to attract their members. Now, if I were considering social communities that may be true, but when I consider professional communities and networks, in my experience they are highly text driven. I get that if you want to attract new members you need to think about new hooks, but there does not seem to be any links to such ‘successful communities’ as examples. The things they highlight point to users who are sophisticated and experiences, not those, as Cook suggested, who are outside the digital presence. Having a range of multimedia tools available does not mean that it will make it easier for people to us ethem, it really does depend on your users.

Livingstone, S. (2004) ‘What is media literacy?’ [online], LSE eprints, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/1027/

This article again points out the need for literacy around communication and information technologies and the fact that the majority of the public has yet to develop the skills to make the most of online opportunities. The ‘content creation’ element is the part that focuses on user created content, recognising that by creating one often learns more and feels more engage in the process (Learning by doing). Changing the users from passive to active.

“ Media literacy….the ability to access, analyse, evaluate and create messages acrossa variety of contexts.”

Here though, they argue that media literacy is a key right by which citizens participate in society. To summarise my thoughts on this, it’s all good to talk about new media/digital literacies and pedagogies, but currently this is only available to those with the drive or opportunity to pursue this, much as one might say that the route through University and the knowledge acquire was once, and probably still is, available only to a select few. We talk a lot about the possibilities for user content and openess and access to all, but is it any more open and available than some traitional forms of education?

Morgenstern, D., Plasencia, A. and Seiz, R. (2003) ‘Students as designers and content creators: an online multimedia exchange between the U.S. and Spain’ [online], Campus Technology, 11 January 2003, http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2003/09/Students-as-Designers-and-Content-Creators-An-Online-Multimedia-Exchange-between-the-US-and-Spain.aspx?p=1

This was an interesting article in the sense that you got an idea of how communicating with students across the world, allowed studenst to get a diffreent perspective on being a student, opening tehir eyes to the different experiences people have. Is this student created content though? They ghave access to discussion boards etc, but much of the content they talk about is enabling the students to create the content to be hosted. Do students need to be involved in every process to making it truly student created, or is that fact that they are support to make things like videos enough?

Nicholson, P. (2006) The Changing Role of Intellectual Authority [online], Association of Research Libraries, Notes for remarks to the Association of Research Libraries 148th Membership Meeting, Ottawa, Canada, 18 May 2006; www.arl.org/arldocs/resources/pubs/mmproceedings/148/nicholson.pdf

“ Intellectual Authority…. is changing fundamentally”. Nichollson’s thesis is based on the idea that our deference to any kind of authority is corroding, and thus, so does our intellectual… ‘mistrust and scepticism reign’. Society has changed to one that is focused more on the individual and personal fulfillment. (Ironic when we talk about Web 2.0 being all about collaboration? Are we trying to rebuild our old notions of society after rejecting the old heirarchical ones?) There is more information to assimilate but we no longer trust the traditional agents who used to do it for us!

Nicollson returns us to the idea of the ecosystem…’where different species are adapted to different niches.’  Our job is to educate users on the best use of the information available, back to our right tool for the right job.

Oblinger, D. and Oblinger, J. (eds) (2005) ‘Educating the Net generation’ [online], Educause, http://www.educause.edu/content.asp?page_id=666&ID=pub7101&bhcp=1

I started reading this right back at the start of H807. It’s a very interesting and funny book and great for an easy read around the subject. It should however, also be read with caution, as not everyone fits the ‘net generation’ definition. The important message, once again is to know your user/learner. Don’t make assumptions, engage with learners, relinquish controls and stick to your core values.

Prescott, L. (2006) ‘The year in consumer generated content’ [online], iMedia Connection, 11 January 2006, http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/7800.asp

Prescott tells us that 2005 was the year that users started generating content. MySpace, Facebook, Wikipedia, Flickr, Blogs and You Tube. She also tells us that most of these are visited by people under 35 years old. 5 years later, I wonder if this is still true? Has her notion that there will be a smaller divide between content creaters and content consumers come true?