On the weekend, my wife, daughter and I joined thousands of Canadians protesting Stephen Harper proroguing parliament. The protests were particularly remarkable as they grew from a Facebook group "Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament". The group organized only a few weeks ago has over 200,000 Canadians - the group and the protests helped show that despite Harper's assertions Canadians do care about working democracy in this country!
Harper's dismissiveness of open, participatory government and the efficacy of Internet media for facilitating involvement are timely & relevant to my recent research. Governments are increasingly engaging people online and committing to open and collaborative efforts. Canada, however, under Harper's leadership, is missing the boat.
December 2009 saw the United Kingdom, United States, and Australian governments committing to more open and collaborative government, with the Internet central to achieving this. On December 8, the Obama administration in the US released their Open Government Initiative with three core goals of transparency, participation and collaboration. This effort builds on Obama's earlier commitment to more open, accessible government and the use of online technologies in delivering these goals. Brown, prime minister of the UK, released a plan addressing government reform on December 7. This report, Putting the Frontline First: Smarter Government, included online means to make government more responsive and engaging to citizens. Australia followed on December 22 with their report, entitled Engage: Getting on with Government 2.0. New Zealand was ahead of the pack, releasing a similar report, When Government Engages: Online participation - An introduction, in 2007.
Prior to these announcements, these countries were already making innovative forays into online participation. Earlier this year, the United States offerred citizens the opportunity to submit questions to Obama and he responded via online videos to those with the most citizen votes. The prime minister’s office of the UK instituted an e-petition process wherein the government guarantees a reply to any petition that obtains over 500 e-signatures. New Zealand’s Family Commission launched “The Coach,” a self-selected panel of citizens that answer polls and questionnaires to guide policy. Various municipalities in Australia have used online technologies to facilitate citizen discussion, information gathering, and polling on particular issues.
Given the many initiatives of these other countries, one might ask where is Canada on this issue?
For five years, from 2001 to 2005, Canada’s national government earned the distinction from Accenture of having the world’s best e-government. The survey has been discontinued, but Canada has continued to earn praise for its efforts to transfer administrative functions online. Administratively, Canada has made use of Internet technologies to launch innovations such as the world’s first online census and one of the first online tax filing systems.
In looking at Canada’s current state of e-government offerings promoting transparency, participation or collaboration, however, there are few examples and none particularly inspiring. Some examples are rather disheartening, as per an invitation to “join the conversation” on the website of Canada’s governing party, the Conservatives. The multimedia “conversation” begins with Mike Duffy greeting website visitors by name, but then launches into a monologue concluding in an appeal to donate to the party. Even the Green Party of Canada, a proponent of greater direct democracy and an early adopter of digital media, is largely using new media for old, traditional broadcasts.
As with other countries, Canada has enabled citizens to comment on policy electronically. Two examples drawn from last month, December 2009, include British Columbia’s proposed changes to their fresh water act or a national campaign for copyright reform.
Last November, the City of Toronto facilitated citizens to launch a website, Open Toronto, which allowed city data to be openly displayed online and used freely. Toronto appears an anomaly as the other Canadian cases of online participation I found were entirely consultative or communicative.
I was also unable to find any online Canadian government programs that entailed binding or formalized outcomes of citizen participation. Online political discussions, whether organized by the government or citizen-lead, may help influence policy, but their efficacy is severely doubted as there is no commitment from the government to listen or respond to these discussions.
The Internet is certainly being used in Canada to organize and mobilize protest (per the prorogue protest), to produce and disseminate information, as well as hacktivist and DIY projects.
Other countries are using the Internet to directly involve citizens and opening up governments - just not Canada it seems. In looking at the current government, it seems unlikely we'll see any improvements. Some researchers speculate that this is due to the Conservative's minority government status. I, however, wonder if there is not a more overt disdain on behalf of the Tories for the digital revolution and citizen involvement.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Identity Crisis
The issue of identity rarely seems to come up in discussions of e-Learning. Identity, in this sense, is the ability for students or instructors to project a sense of themselves and their unique, individual characters. Without a sense of identity, online interaction with others can seem distant, flat, and does not engage or foster deep learning.
Granted, identity may be less of an issue in e-Learning with very small class sizes or where students already know one another. There are also benefits to online anonymity in that it shifts focus from judgments based on personality or physical features to the quality of one’s ideas – and writing. Researchers have found this allows some people to escape bias associated with disability, appearance, race, and gender. I'm not convinced, however, that for e-Learning the benefits an anonymity outweigh the obstacles it raises. Identity was a barrier in my experience - both in courses that were entirely online with students I never met before and with in-person courses that used online components.
e-Learning often relies heavily on student interaction, often in the form of forum and/or blog postings. When I first started my online program with 45 classmates, none of whom I had met or been introduced to, I found the experience bewildering and overwhelming. Adding to this, I found that most classmate posters did not sufficiently differentiate themselves. The medium, and to a lesser extent, the communicators’ (lack of) action resulted in postings that seemed like overhearing the din of multiple simultaneous speakers and unable to hear any one sufficiently to join in.
There are ways to remediate these issues, however. These include technological mechanisms (e.g. including students photos on all postings automatically, auto linking to profile and to past posts, allowing individual design customization), norms (e.g. limiting the amount of or size of interaction, use of signature lines), or individual mastery of existing devices (e.g. writing style). In my online class interactions, I try to include my (bad) sense of humour, include references to my personal details, and to use a conversational style. The instructor can also address this, for example by establishing expectations or beginning a course with mutual introductions.
In a discussion on this topic with a classmate, she felt that such identity issues were not unique to Internet media. She shared an example of a class with a rather hostile teacher who attacked students for expressing opinions diverging from the instructor's. Rather than expressing herself in class, she “felt that my personal identity, open for all to see, needed to be hidden. Based on how quiet many students were, they likely felt the same.” She adds, "this experience showed me that strong classroom management, teacher scaffolding, and respect, either online or off, is vital." Clearly, a respectful, welcoming climate is essential for any type of learning.
I agree that the challenges of projecting, revealing, or protecting identity apply to learning offline and online. Personally, I have found participating in e-Learning discussions allows me a more safe way to project my thoughts and myself than offline. The more deliberate and controlled online mechanisms allow me to take the time to compose and edit my thoughts and expressions, compared to in-class.
I do think that there could be more that e-Learning technology could do to enable identity to be projected (as desired). The the e-Learning platform Moodle, for example, allows students to include their picture and biography. Educators should also consider this issue in relation to educational goals when planning courses. This will not only help guide decisions of e-Learning technology to use but can also allow instructors to structure courses appropriately.
Granted, identity may be less of an issue in e-Learning with very small class sizes or where students already know one another. There are also benefits to online anonymity in that it shifts focus from judgments based on personality or physical features to the quality of one’s ideas – and writing. Researchers have found this allows some people to escape bias associated with disability, appearance, race, and gender. I'm not convinced, however, that for e-Learning the benefits an anonymity outweigh the obstacles it raises. Identity was a barrier in my experience - both in courses that were entirely online with students I never met before and with in-person courses that used online components.
e-Learning often relies heavily on student interaction, often in the form of forum and/or blog postings. When I first started my online program with 45 classmates, none of whom I had met or been introduced to, I found the experience bewildering and overwhelming. Adding to this, I found that most classmate posters did not sufficiently differentiate themselves. The medium, and to a lesser extent, the communicators’ (lack of) action resulted in postings that seemed like overhearing the din of multiple simultaneous speakers and unable to hear any one sufficiently to join in.
There are ways to remediate these issues, however. These include technological mechanisms (e.g. including students photos on all postings automatically, auto linking to profile and to past posts, allowing individual design customization), norms (e.g. limiting the amount of or size of interaction, use of signature lines), or individual mastery of existing devices (e.g. writing style). In my online class interactions, I try to include my (bad) sense of humour, include references to my personal details, and to use a conversational style. The instructor can also address this, for example by establishing expectations or beginning a course with mutual introductions.
In a discussion on this topic with a classmate, she felt that such identity issues were not unique to Internet media. She shared an example of a class with a rather hostile teacher who attacked students for expressing opinions diverging from the instructor's. Rather than expressing herself in class, she “felt that my personal identity, open for all to see, needed to be hidden. Based on how quiet many students were, they likely felt the same.” She adds, "this experience showed me that strong classroom management, teacher scaffolding, and respect, either online or off, is vital." Clearly, a respectful, welcoming climate is essential for any type of learning.
I agree that the challenges of projecting, revealing, or protecting identity apply to learning offline and online. Personally, I have found participating in e-Learning discussions allows me a more safe way to project my thoughts and myself than offline. The more deliberate and controlled online mechanisms allow me to take the time to compose and edit my thoughts and expressions, compared to in-class.
I do think that there could be more that e-Learning technology could do to enable identity to be projected (as desired). The the e-Learning platform Moodle, for example, allows students to include their picture and biography. Educators should also consider this issue in relation to educational goals when planning courses. This will not only help guide decisions of e-Learning technology to use but can also allow instructors to structure courses appropriately.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Participation Points
Recent studies have come out that present a sobering look at celebratory claims that online activities are an effective means of participatory democracy.
1) Pew’s study this month, The Internet and Civic Engagement, finds that predominantly the people that participate in online political activity are largely the same people that participate offline. The Internet is not mobilizing any new people – except for a trend of more young people participating than before. As the study authors state “the internet is not changing the fundamental socio-economic character of civic engagement in America".
2) A July 2009 study, “Building an Architecture of Participation? Political Parties and Web 2.0 in Britain” by Jackson and Lilleker found that most political parties in the UK had constructed online methods of participation but then civic leaders were largely not participating. The authors fear this veneer of participation actually will encourage greater political apathy.
3) An article by Jodie Dean “Communicative Capitism: Circulation and Foreclosure of Politics” (in Digital Media and Democracy, Boler, ed.) is critical of our culture’s technology fetish and that our seeming acts of online participation “enable us to go about the rest of our lives relieved of the guilt that we might not be doing our part and secure in the belief that we are all informed, engaged citizens”. Dean is critical that online participation becomes an act in itself, and does not lead people to do the work that actually provokes change.
This led me to wonder whether the Canadian online political scene is more reciprocally participatory. I checked out the two sources I figured would be most apt to make good use of social media, Mayor of Toronto David Miller and the Green Party of Canada. This is an unscientific study, just quick observations.
I follow Miller on Twitter and Facebook. He posts regularly but I haven’t noticed him reply, debate, or frankly participate. I do like his posts because they clearly come from him and not an aid who is doing the posting to make Miller look hip, get more votes, etc.
I checked out the Green Party's website figuring they would be more open to online political participation. I was hoping for a policy wiki, online polls, something to solicit participation in a strong way. All there is are some blogs. Elizabeth May has a blog, but in a quick review of it, she does not appear to reply to comments.
They are both using new digital media in an old analog way: to broadcast. I believe Miller or May could respond (or more often than rarely, if they do) to show that they are listening at the very least.
Granted, at least they are broadcasting where increasingly more people are, particularly young people (see Pew). I also acknowledge that Facebook and Twitter have different norms and rules (140 characters) that may make "serious" political debate a challenge. An example of this are posts by trolls, possibly political opponents in disguise, that dominate or degenerate conversation.
Why aren’t civic leaders interacting more? Are civic leaders really just too busy to participate? Are they worried, or not allowed, that they’ll stray from the party line?
If Dean is correct that online participation is a distraction from the real work, then what steps are needed to make online participatory democracy vital, effective, inclusive, and democratic?
1) Pew’s study this month, The Internet and Civic Engagement, finds that predominantly the people that participate in online political activity are largely the same people that participate offline. The Internet is not mobilizing any new people – except for a trend of more young people participating than before. As the study authors state “the internet is not changing the fundamental socio-economic character of civic engagement in America".
2) A July 2009 study, “Building an Architecture of Participation? Political Parties and Web 2.0 in Britain” by Jackson and Lilleker found that most political parties in the UK had constructed online methods of participation but then civic leaders were largely not participating. The authors fear this veneer of participation actually will encourage greater political apathy.
3) An article by Jodie Dean “Communicative Capitism: Circulation and Foreclosure of Politics” (in Digital Media and Democracy, Boler, ed.) is critical of our culture’s technology fetish and that our seeming acts of online participation “enable us to go about the rest of our lives relieved of the guilt that we might not be doing our part and secure in the belief that we are all informed, engaged citizens”. Dean is critical that online participation becomes an act in itself, and does not lead people to do the work that actually provokes change.
This led me to wonder whether the Canadian online political scene is more reciprocally participatory. I checked out the two sources I figured would be most apt to make good use of social media, Mayor of Toronto David Miller and the Green Party of Canada. This is an unscientific study, just quick observations.
I follow Miller on Twitter and Facebook. He posts regularly but I haven’t noticed him reply, debate, or frankly participate. I do like his posts because they clearly come from him and not an aid who is doing the posting to make Miller look hip, get more votes, etc.
I checked out the Green Party's website figuring they would be more open to online political participation. I was hoping for a policy wiki, online polls, something to solicit participation in a strong way. All there is are some blogs. Elizabeth May has a blog, but in a quick review of it, she does not appear to reply to comments.
They are both using new digital media in an old analog way: to broadcast. I believe Miller or May could respond (or more often than rarely, if they do) to show that they are listening at the very least.
Granted, at least they are broadcasting where increasingly more people are, particularly young people (see Pew). I also acknowledge that Facebook and Twitter have different norms and rules (140 characters) that may make "serious" political debate a challenge. An example of this are posts by trolls, possibly political opponents in disguise, that dominate or degenerate conversation.
Why aren’t civic leaders interacting more? Are civic leaders really just too busy to participate? Are they worried, or not allowed, that they’ll stray from the party line?
If Dean is correct that online participation is a distraction from the real work, then what steps are needed to make online participatory democracy vital, effective, inclusive, and democratic?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Need Help Coming up with a Suitable Research Area
Just two weeks into my PhD studies and already I will soon have to submit a research proposal. It's a class requirements to help us submit for grants, so we're not tied to it.
Still, I've been frantically trying to narrow down my areas of research interest to prepare for my grant submissions. Although a useful process, it comes ages before I planned. I had hoped taking classes and pursuing an independent study plan would lead to suitable research questions.
The overall area I wanted to focus on was online participatory democracy and civic engagement. All research I have found on this has been rather nihilistic - almost convincing me that it is the wrong track.
So I need your help to devise a feasible, interesting, and original (multiyear) study.
Here are my top ideas so far (in order of my greatest interest in first):
1) Will introducing new mechanisms to filter noise in a political website increase users' [both citizens and civic leaders] sense of engagement (or satisfaction)?
2) How can noise filtration and serendipity (to avoid "inbreeding homophily") co-exist in an online interface in a manner users find useful?
3) How to overcome usability limitations of the use of QR codes and the mobile web?
4) Are genre specific usability guidelines more useful to web practitioners than generic ones?
5) Will Google's Rich Snippets provide the impetus for the use of microformats to hit critical mass?
Two topics I've discounted already are:
a) Can features be added to Facebook to resegment and recontextualize our domestic, work, and familial identies?
b) How can web accessibility support be more transparent in authoring tools, particularly Dreamweaver?
Any help in any regard is greatly appreciated!
Still, I've been frantically trying to narrow down my areas of research interest to prepare for my grant submissions. Although a useful process, it comes ages before I planned. I had hoped taking classes and pursuing an independent study plan would lead to suitable research questions.
The overall area I wanted to focus on was online participatory democracy and civic engagement. All research I have found on this has been rather nihilistic - almost convincing me that it is the wrong track.
So I need your help to devise a feasible, interesting, and original (multiyear) study.
Here are my top ideas so far (in order of my greatest interest in first):
1) Will introducing new mechanisms to filter noise in a political website increase users' [both citizens and civic leaders] sense of engagement (or satisfaction)?
2) How can noise filtration and serendipity (to avoid "inbreeding homophily") co-exist in an online interface in a manner users find useful?
3) How to overcome usability limitations of the use of QR codes and the mobile web?
4) Are genre specific usability guidelines more useful to web practitioners than generic ones?
5) Will Google's Rich Snippets provide the impetus for the use of microformats to hit critical mass?
Two topics I've discounted already are:
a) Can features be added to Facebook to resegment and recontextualize our domestic, work, and familial identies?
b) How can web accessibility support be more transparent in authoring tools, particularly Dreamweaver?
Any help in any regard is greatly appreciated!
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Recommendations to Improve Web Accessibility
In July, I completed my MA thesis researching diffusion issues for web accessibility. I'm hoping to get the full thesis published, so any journal suggestions would be appreciated. In the meantime, below are the recommendations that developed out of consultations with 21 web practitioners (designers, managers, producers, consultants, & developers).
Recommendation #1: Make WCAG More Accessible
The W3C should consult web practitioners to uncover their specific difficulties using and understanding the guidelines. The guidelines and support material should then be rewritten to address deficiencies. Possible improvements include using better organization schemes, clearer language, alternate access points, and simplified checklists.
Recommendation #2: Support Material Is Needed
Adequate support material is difficult to find and often insufficient. Therefore, a prominent free website should be set up to provide detailed, clear instruction. This may include a code library and design tips. As the W3C is already a central resource and education is already in their mandate, it follows that they should consider assuming this role in a more effective manner that reflected by their current offerings.
Recommendation #3: Education Should Address Accessibility
Both academic and training organizations must start or continue to cover disability and accessibility. Not only is training in the specific techniques required, but also an appreciation of the needs of disabled people. As some small businesses and non-profits have minimal training budgets, ideally education costs should be affordable or free. This may be a suitable role for local advocacy or industry associations to assume.
Recommendation #4: A Canadian Web Accessibility Champion is Needed
No disability organization in Canada is currently effectively leading the charge for web accessibility, leading to inattention and missed opportunities. A Canadian government or advocacy organization is required to take the lead to initiate and maintain momentum on this issue. Duties may include instigating awareness campaigns, appearing at events, promoting education, and acting as an informational resource.
Recommendation #5: Media and Industry Should Cover This Topic
For web practitioners to gain awareness of web accessibility, learn specifics, and appreciate its social importance, media and industry must not ignore this issue. Industry should make a point of addressing this topic in events and newsletters and ensure the topic is raised at conferences. Media, particularly trade reporting, should cover the topic through individual articles on the topic and raising it within the context of other topics as applicable.
Recommendation #6: Authoring and Testing Tools Should Better Facilitate Accessibility
While some authoring tools are increasing accessibility support, continued work is required both to make producing accessible content easier and to render accessibility features transparent.
Recommendation #7: Financial Incentives Should Be Offered
Cost was raised as an issue by all participants, yet the Canadian government offers no specific financial incentives to mitigate the cost of web accessibility work. Although full funding for all organizations to implement accessibility would likely be unattainable, Canadian government should, at the least, allow special tax deductions for accessibility initiatives.
Recommendation #8: Web Practitioners Need to Feel Individually Responsible
Some web practitioners felt unable to implement accessibility without supervisory permission. These practitioners should be encouraged to understand both that their actions can improve the quality of life of disabled people and that not complying contributes to disabled people’s exclusion from full participation in society.
Recommendation #1: Make WCAG More Accessible
The W3C should consult web practitioners to uncover their specific difficulties using and understanding the guidelines. The guidelines and support material should then be rewritten to address deficiencies. Possible improvements include using better organization schemes, clearer language, alternate access points, and simplified checklists.
Recommendation #2: Support Material Is Needed
Adequate support material is difficult to find and often insufficient. Therefore, a prominent free website should be set up to provide detailed, clear instruction. This may include a code library and design tips. As the W3C is already a central resource and education is already in their mandate, it follows that they should consider assuming this role in a more effective manner that reflected by their current offerings.
Recommendation #3: Education Should Address Accessibility
Both academic and training organizations must start or continue to cover disability and accessibility. Not only is training in the specific techniques required, but also an appreciation of the needs of disabled people. As some small businesses and non-profits have minimal training budgets, ideally education costs should be affordable or free. This may be a suitable role for local advocacy or industry associations to assume.
Recommendation #4: A Canadian Web Accessibility Champion is Needed
No disability organization in Canada is currently effectively leading the charge for web accessibility, leading to inattention and missed opportunities. A Canadian government or advocacy organization is required to take the lead to initiate and maintain momentum on this issue. Duties may include instigating awareness campaigns, appearing at events, promoting education, and acting as an informational resource.
Recommendation #5: Media and Industry Should Cover This Topic
For web practitioners to gain awareness of web accessibility, learn specifics, and appreciate its social importance, media and industry must not ignore this issue. Industry should make a point of addressing this topic in events and newsletters and ensure the topic is raised at conferences. Media, particularly trade reporting, should cover the topic through individual articles on the topic and raising it within the context of other topics as applicable.
Recommendation #6: Authoring and Testing Tools Should Better Facilitate Accessibility
While some authoring tools are increasing accessibility support, continued work is required both to make producing accessible content easier and to render accessibility features transparent.
Recommendation #7: Financial Incentives Should Be Offered
Cost was raised as an issue by all participants, yet the Canadian government offers no specific financial incentives to mitigate the cost of web accessibility work. Although full funding for all organizations to implement accessibility would likely be unattainable, Canadian government should, at the least, allow special tax deductions for accessibility initiatives.
Recommendation #8: Web Practitioners Need to Feel Individually Responsible
Some web practitioners felt unable to implement accessibility without supervisory permission. These practitioners should be encouraged to understand both that their actions can improve the quality of life of disabled people and that not complying contributes to disabled people’s exclusion from full participation in society.
Friday, September 11, 2009
End of the Royal Roads
As I get ready to start my PhD classes at UofT's iSchool next week, I wanted to wrap up my master’s studies with a post summarizing my experience of Royal Roads masters of Professional Communication program. Also, I thought it might provide useful information for people considering this or similar programs.
Blogging has been a useful way for me to record my academic experience from my search to find a master’s program to study the Internet, how I chose Royal Roads, my experience as an old student, winning my scholarship, and my thesis research.
Overall impression
The main strengths of the program in my experience were the flexibility to manage learning with work and family, solid foundation in communication theory, interaction with classmates, helpful and friendly faculty and staff, and the beautiful campus. The main weaknesses were the lackluster use of e-Learning techniques and over use of team work.
Program structure
The online master’s programs at Royals Roads combine distance and on-campus learning. The program lasts about two years, with the last few months spent working on a thesis or major project. One can extend the deadline, but there are hefty fees to do so.
There are two three-week residency periods (one a year) at Royal Roads’ incredible Victoria, BC campus. In between these residencies, one takes an online course one at a time. There were no electives for online courses and only a small choice of electives for the final residency component.
The program follows a cohort model with one annual intake. This means one studies for the next two years with the same classmates, which in my case was approximately 40 students.
Classmates
With distance learning it can be difficult to get to know one’s classmates, but the cohort model allows one to have the time to get to know one’s classmates and build relationships. The program is available to students around the world, but the bulk of students came from Victoria and Vancouver followed by southern Ontario. There were students from most provinces and a couple from abroad.
As this program is targeted to working professionals and as it is a graduate degree, I found that the background of classmates was impressive and diverse. There were a few students in my cohort who were young and beginning their career, but the average student was 30-50, mid-level career, and female. The ratio was about one male for ten females – but this seems typical of the communication field.
Residency
The program requires residency of three weeks per year. The residency follows traditional university format, ie. lectures with profs, essays, student presentations, team meetings, occasional guest speakers, and symposia. This period is intensive, covering most of 3-4 courses in that period. One has a few hours of class a day and essays and readings to work on at night. The first residency is lighter, so this is definitely the time to get to know one’s classmates.
Campus
Spending time on campus is an absolute treat as it is the most beautiful campus in Canada (if not anywhere). Take a look at my pictures. Vancouver Islands itself is beautiful and the campus is sandwiched between the ocean and primeval forest. Studying post-modernism in a Japanese Zen garden or spending a coffee break amongst giant trees are highlights of my experience. Google Maps has a good satellite image of campus.
Be sure to try the trails that run through or next to the campus. Students get a free guided tour of the national historic site, Hatley Castle and access to the gardens that one would otherwise have to pay for entry. X-Men movies were filmed here – Hatley Castle was used for Xavier’s school for mutants. I loved telling my daughter I went to Xavier’s school. The campus library even has copies of all the X-Men movies which was a lot of fun to watch in the student lounge (the library has a bunch of free movies).
Other than the incredible beauty of the location, the campus is much like any other, except smaller. There is only one place to eat, and while most of the dishes were fairly good, the menu is limited and a bit pricey. I made some meals in the kitchen RRU provides to save some money. There are nearby restaurants (short drive or 20 minute walk) but they are rather mediocre. There is a grocery store and wine and bear store nearby, as well as other amenities like a post office, pharmacy, etc.
Some classmates elected to stay off-campus – and while that does allow one a calming separation, these classmates didn’t get the same degree of interaction with classmates. I’d recommend staying on campus if only for the chance to get to know one’s classmates better.
The only downside is that the campus is rather far from downtown Victoria. Bus service is less than ideal and cabs downtown are expensive. Some nights when we wanted to go downtown we would wait half an hour or more to even get a cab to pick us up. Also, cabs from the airport are expensive, so arrange cab sharing with classmates.
Online courses
All courses make use of Moodle for their online interaction (forums, chat) and resources (links, readings). I previously criticized Royal Roads non-innovative use of e-Learning techniques. Having finished my degree now, I stand by that post. While some professors used effective e-Learning techniques, most classes were based on extensive discussions with classmates, often in the form of discussions and projects amongst a team of 5-6 students. I also posted on the benefits and challenges of relying on online interaction for learning.
Most classmates felt there was way too much teamwork. This is probably my biggest complaint. Although teamwork does enable one to get to know classmates better, it becomes overwhelming doing the actual work and managing the team (which is just as much, if not more, work). Teams for online courses are randomly assigned, but even out of 45 classmates I ended up with a bunch of the same people repeating on my teams. I lucked out and had teams (except one) where everyone participated and was pleasant. However, I talked to classmates who had bad experiences with teams, mostly in the form of people not participating. Considering that most students at Royal Roads are working professionals and thus encounter/cannot avoid extensive team experience, positioning team work as building skills is dubious (easier for professors to mark – is probably the real reason).
Program flexibility
The main reason I chose the program was that I could cater my learning around my schedule. Even living in a city with three universities, I would not have been able to have sufficient flexibility to continue to work and spend time with my family. This program is therefore ideal for those that need flexibility.
But it is not as flexible as some of my classmates thought it would be. Most classes required one to post to discussions frequently and at least every few days. Some classes had tight, rigid deadlines for team work that was quite difficult to orchestrate when combined with busy work schedules and various time zones. I could not participate in some class chats as a result and would also have a one day turnaround on some team work.
Kids - I was the only one in my cohort with a young family and I don't recommend doing this and working too if one has young kids.
Subject matter
I feel this program gave me a solid foundation in communication theory and cultural studies and honed academic skills, such as research, writing, and formatting (APA). I had not studied communication before but had encountered some concepts from my bachelor’s film studies and journalism classes. I think the program did well in not assuming a prior knowledge set, teaching the essentials, and moving quickly enough through concepts to be appropriate for master’s level courses.
There were professional development courses geared to communication professionals, but reviews from classmates were rather mixed on these. The courses on research methodology were extremely useful both for preparing one for future study or performing research in a workplace. Other courses cover the gamut of communication theory from interpersonal to organizational and from computer to culturally meditated.
Studying the Internet
I took communication, but I really wanted to take Internet Studies. As Internet Studies is such a new discipline, there were not a lot of options to study this remotely. I felt, however, that studying communication would give me a good foundation to study this aspect of the Internet. Plus, I hoped to examine specific instances when I could. A lot of the professors and classmates were unwired luddites, so Internet topics did not often come up – or with much depth. I have a multimedia background so I enjoyed discussing and learning about other media.
I told my professors of my career path and research interests and they were all open and encouraging to me applying course concepts to Internet cases. Since I started Royal Roads has added “thematic paths” which is essentially what I did, but Internet Studies is still not an official path or focus. Considering how much of the concepts do apply to the Internet, I’m surprised they don’t offer this.
Final thoughts
Over the years, I have studied at six post-secondary institutions. Never have I encountered such helpful, pleasant staff and faculty as my time with Royal Roads. Even the support staff and tenured professors were nice! Whether I was on campus, emailing, or telephone everyone was incredibly friendly and cared about helping me. There was one difficult nutty professor, but that's to be expected. Time and time again, Royal Roads staff and faculty spent extra time and effort to really help and talk to me, whether it was applying for scholarships, getting research approval, ordering food, finding library resources, discussing semiotics, etc. I'm not sure if it is a West Coast vs. Toronto thing, but it sure makes a difference to study at such a welcoming place.
I definitely recommend the program and university. If there is anything else you'd like to know, please feel free to ask below.
Blogging has been a useful way for me to record my academic experience from my search to find a master’s program to study the Internet, how I chose Royal Roads, my experience as an old student, winning my scholarship, and my thesis research.
Overall impression
The main strengths of the program in my experience were the flexibility to manage learning with work and family, solid foundation in communication theory, interaction with classmates, helpful and friendly faculty and staff, and the beautiful campus. The main weaknesses were the lackluster use of e-Learning techniques and over use of team work.
Program structure
The online master’s programs at Royals Roads combine distance and on-campus learning. The program lasts about two years, with the last few months spent working on a thesis or major project. One can extend the deadline, but there are hefty fees to do so.
There are two three-week residency periods (one a year) at Royal Roads’ incredible Victoria, BC campus. In between these residencies, one takes an online course one at a time. There were no electives for online courses and only a small choice of electives for the final residency component.
The program follows a cohort model with one annual intake. This means one studies for the next two years with the same classmates, which in my case was approximately 40 students.
Classmates
With distance learning it can be difficult to get to know one’s classmates, but the cohort model allows one to have the time to get to know one’s classmates and build relationships. The program is available to students around the world, but the bulk of students came from Victoria and Vancouver followed by southern Ontario. There were students from most provinces and a couple from abroad.
As this program is targeted to working professionals and as it is a graduate degree, I found that the background of classmates was impressive and diverse. There were a few students in my cohort who were young and beginning their career, but the average student was 30-50, mid-level career, and female. The ratio was about one male for ten females – but this seems typical of the communication field.
Residency
The program requires residency of three weeks per year. The residency follows traditional university format, ie. lectures with profs, essays, student presentations, team meetings, occasional guest speakers, and symposia. This period is intensive, covering most of 3-4 courses in that period. One has a few hours of class a day and essays and readings to work on at night. The first residency is lighter, so this is definitely the time to get to know one’s classmates.
Campus
Spending time on campus is an absolute treat as it is the most beautiful campus in Canada (if not anywhere). Take a look at my pictures. Vancouver Islands itself is beautiful and the campus is sandwiched between the ocean and primeval forest. Studying post-modernism in a Japanese Zen garden or spending a coffee break amongst giant trees are highlights of my experience. Google Maps has a good satellite image of campus.
Be sure to try the trails that run through or next to the campus. Students get a free guided tour of the national historic site, Hatley Castle and access to the gardens that one would otherwise have to pay for entry. X-Men movies were filmed here – Hatley Castle was used for Xavier’s school for mutants. I loved telling my daughter I went to Xavier’s school. The campus library even has copies of all the X-Men movies which was a lot of fun to watch in the student lounge (the library has a bunch of free movies).
Other than the incredible beauty of the location, the campus is much like any other, except smaller. There is only one place to eat, and while most of the dishes were fairly good, the menu is limited and a bit pricey. I made some meals in the kitchen RRU provides to save some money. There are nearby restaurants (short drive or 20 minute walk) but they are rather mediocre. There is a grocery store and wine and bear store nearby, as well as other amenities like a post office, pharmacy, etc.
Some classmates elected to stay off-campus – and while that does allow one a calming separation, these classmates didn’t get the same degree of interaction with classmates. I’d recommend staying on campus if only for the chance to get to know one’s classmates better.
The only downside is that the campus is rather far from downtown Victoria. Bus service is less than ideal and cabs downtown are expensive. Some nights when we wanted to go downtown we would wait half an hour or more to even get a cab to pick us up. Also, cabs from the airport are expensive, so arrange cab sharing with classmates.
Online courses
All courses make use of Moodle for their online interaction (forums, chat) and resources (links, readings). I previously criticized Royal Roads non-innovative use of e-Learning techniques. Having finished my degree now, I stand by that post. While some professors used effective e-Learning techniques, most classes were based on extensive discussions with classmates, often in the form of discussions and projects amongst a team of 5-6 students. I also posted on the benefits and challenges of relying on online interaction for learning.
Most classmates felt there was way too much teamwork. This is probably my biggest complaint. Although teamwork does enable one to get to know classmates better, it becomes overwhelming doing the actual work and managing the team (which is just as much, if not more, work). Teams for online courses are randomly assigned, but even out of 45 classmates I ended up with a bunch of the same people repeating on my teams. I lucked out and had teams (except one) where everyone participated and was pleasant. However, I talked to classmates who had bad experiences with teams, mostly in the form of people not participating. Considering that most students at Royal Roads are working professionals and thus encounter/cannot avoid extensive team experience, positioning team work as building skills is dubious (easier for professors to mark – is probably the real reason).
Program flexibility
The main reason I chose the program was that I could cater my learning around my schedule. Even living in a city with three universities, I would not have been able to have sufficient flexibility to continue to work and spend time with my family. This program is therefore ideal for those that need flexibility.
But it is not as flexible as some of my classmates thought it would be. Most classes required one to post to discussions frequently and at least every few days. Some classes had tight, rigid deadlines for team work that was quite difficult to orchestrate when combined with busy work schedules and various time zones. I could not participate in some class chats as a result and would also have a one day turnaround on some team work.
Kids - I was the only one in my cohort with a young family and I don't recommend doing this and working too if one has young kids.
Subject matter
I feel this program gave me a solid foundation in communication theory and cultural studies and honed academic skills, such as research, writing, and formatting (APA). I had not studied communication before but had encountered some concepts from my bachelor’s film studies and journalism classes. I think the program did well in not assuming a prior knowledge set, teaching the essentials, and moving quickly enough through concepts to be appropriate for master’s level courses.
There were professional development courses geared to communication professionals, but reviews from classmates were rather mixed on these. The courses on research methodology were extremely useful both for preparing one for future study or performing research in a workplace. Other courses cover the gamut of communication theory from interpersonal to organizational and from computer to culturally meditated.
Studying the Internet
I took communication, but I really wanted to take Internet Studies. As Internet Studies is such a new discipline, there were not a lot of options to study this remotely. I felt, however, that studying communication would give me a good foundation to study this aspect of the Internet. Plus, I hoped to examine specific instances when I could. A lot of the professors and classmates were unwired luddites, so Internet topics did not often come up – or with much depth. I have a multimedia background so I enjoyed discussing and learning about other media.
I told my professors of my career path and research interests and they were all open and encouraging to me applying course concepts to Internet cases. Since I started Royal Roads has added “thematic paths” which is essentially what I did, but Internet Studies is still not an official path or focus. Considering how much of the concepts do apply to the Internet, I’m surprised they don’t offer this.
Final thoughts
Over the years, I have studied at six post-secondary institutions. Never have I encountered such helpful, pleasant staff and faculty as my time with Royal Roads. Even the support staff and tenured professors were nice! Whether I was on campus, emailing, or telephone everyone was incredibly friendly and cared about helping me. There was one difficult nutty professor, but that's to be expected. Time and time again, Royal Roads staff and faculty spent extra time and effort to really help and talk to me, whether it was applying for scholarships, getting research approval, ordering food, finding library resources, discussing semiotics, etc. I'm not sure if it is a West Coast vs. Toronto thing, but it sure makes a difference to study at such a welcoming place.
I definitely recommend the program and university. If there is anything else you'd like to know, please feel free to ask below.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Oh What a Night - Jersey Boys Highlights Problems with Web Usability
Going to see Jersey Boys last night confirmed the value in me studying web usability. The websites to book the tickets and the theatre had such appalling usability it is unbelievable.
Here are the problems I encountered.
To book our tickets, we went to Ticketmaster.ca. Ordering tickets is fine if you're familiar with the theatre and don't have any special requests.
The site does not allow one to refine a search by any criteria other than date and price. One clicks on a button to "Find Seats" within a price range and is given up to two options of seats.To check out where those seats are and if they have an less-than-desirable view, there's not much help. They do have a good feature that lets you click on a seat to see its view.
But ideally, the seat you're considering buying should be highlighted on a map of the theatre. One can find the seat for oneself by searching through their maps of theatres. A bunch of theatres are shown not just the one hosting the show you want to see, so you have to remember the name of the theatre (and with Toronto theatres changing names regularly this is not easy). The initial theatre maps are impossible to read, so one has to download the high-resolution PDF. It's not worth the download as even at full zoom the seat numbers are unreadable (my vision BTW is fine - recently tested even).
Better not have any special requests for seats as there is no criteria to refine a search or information provided about the seats other than their number. The site does have a feature to find "Best available seats". I can see the up-selling value to the company in that feature - but does anyone use it? What constitutes best available - surely people have some preference.
We like aisle seats (extra legroom and great for any hasty exits), to not to be under a balcony (bad acoustics and views), and to not be too close to the front (avoid neck craning). There's no way to find any of this out except to run a search, manually look up the two options of seats on their poor maps, and repeat ad nauseum until fate smiles upon you.
Or you get sick and tired of it and call Ticketmaster and get connected with someone who can find your customized seats in moments. Which is what I had to do.
No other online problems (they did forget to mail us our tickets, however) until the day of showtime when the show's websites let us down. I googled.ca "Jersey Boys" and clicked on the first hit, the "official site". I can almost forgive them for their first two crimes as it is an entertainment sites and more "fun" is permitted. First crime - a splash page. Second crime - slow download. Then I discover I'm in the wrong site as even though I used Google's Canadian service the website for the Broadway version is the first to come up. But they do have an inconspicious link to international versions of the show, which gets me to the Toronto version site (and another slow-to-load splash page).
I usually take the subway to this theatre, but was driving this night and wanted to know where the nearest parking lots were located. I expected the site to have a "Directions" or "Getting There" link. To find parking info one has to guess. I tried the "Theatre" nav link and it seems like it is not there, except until below the fold there's the following text (I have to quote it as I just couldn't believe it:
The presentation looks like an ad, so one would never intrinsically click it. But when instructed to do so, I thought I'd get the parking instructions right away. Instead I have to click through 12 slides manually to first find out about the architects, the neighbourhood, the grand opening, its first show, the decor, the acoustics, the air conditioning, 3 more slides, then driving instructions, then a link to a PDF of a parking map. The map was exactly what I was looking for - excellent even - so I printed it out. I just couldn't believe all the b.s. they put me through in order to get it!
I love that someone must have noticed that parking info was hard to find, so they took the time to add the copy I quoted above. If they noticed the problem and had the time to address it, why not just include the info or link to a map right on the page? Why make someone wade through a presentation of useless information?
In preparing for this posting, I checked if there was another link elsewhere and the is parking info buried under FAQs. It is great info - but completely different. This info actually lists the rates (that is really good to know in Toronto) but does not have a link to their great map PDF.
I saw a link to "Jersey Boys radio" while on the site. After the show, I wanted to my wife to hear their songs, so I thought of this cool feature. But despite offering the radio in Windows Media and Real Player, it would not play for me in Internet Explorer or Firefox that night. This may not be the site's fault, but I didn't get any helpful messages or explanations. Today, it works for me - but such mysteries should not remain at this stage of the Internet's development.
Most of these usability errors and a lot that I encounter in general are so serious and so obvious that I find it hard to believe any web professional could miss it. After all don't people that make websites want to make money, by selling things, providing information to avoid phone calls, etc.? So lately I've been thinking what needs studying is not uncovering usability issues but rather why web practitioners fail to implement such basic practices?
Here are the problems I encountered.
To book our tickets, we went to Ticketmaster.ca. Ordering tickets is fine if you're familiar with the theatre and don't have any special requests.
The site does not allow one to refine a search by any criteria other than date and price. One clicks on a button to "Find Seats" within a price range and is given up to two options of seats.To check out where those seats are and if they have an less-than-desirable view, there's not much help. They do have a good feature that lets you click on a seat to see its view.
But ideally, the seat you're considering buying should be highlighted on a map of the theatre. One can find the seat for oneself by searching through their maps of theatres. A bunch of theatres are shown not just the one hosting the show you want to see, so you have to remember the name of the theatre (and with Toronto theatres changing names regularly this is not easy). The initial theatre maps are impossible to read, so one has to download the high-resolution PDF. It's not worth the download as even at full zoom the seat numbers are unreadable (my vision BTW is fine - recently tested even).
Better not have any special requests for seats as there is no criteria to refine a search or information provided about the seats other than their number. The site does have a feature to find "Best available seats". I can see the up-selling value to the company in that feature - but does anyone use it? What constitutes best available - surely people have some preference.
We like aisle seats (extra legroom and great for any hasty exits), to not to be under a balcony (bad acoustics and views), and to not be too close to the front (avoid neck craning). There's no way to find any of this out except to run a search, manually look up the two options of seats on their poor maps, and repeat ad nauseum until fate smiles upon you.
Or you get sick and tired of it and call Ticketmaster and get connected with someone who can find your customized seats in moments. Which is what I had to do.
No other online problems (they did forget to mail us our tickets, however) until the day of showtime when the show's websites let us down. I googled.ca "Jersey Boys" and clicked on the first hit, the "official site". I can almost forgive them for their first two crimes as it is an entertainment sites and more "fun" is permitted. First crime - a splash page. Second crime - slow download. Then I discover I'm in the wrong site as even though I used Google's Canadian service the website for the Broadway version is the first to come up. But they do have an inconspicious link to international versions of the show, which gets me to the Toronto version site (and another slow-to-load splash page).
I usually take the subway to this theatre, but was driving this night and wanted to know where the nearest parking lots were located. I expected the site to have a "Directions" or "Getting There" link. To find parking info one has to guess. I tried the "Theatre" nav link and it seems like it is not there, except until below the fold there's the following text (I have to quote it as I just couldn't believe it:
For those who wish to drive to the theatre, please view the presentation on the left side of the page 'Where is the Toronto Centre for the Arts?' by clicking the 'Learn More' button for more detailed information, directions, parking information and maps."
The presentation looks like an ad, so one would never intrinsically click it. But when instructed to do so, I thought I'd get the parking instructions right away. Instead I have to click through 12 slides manually to first find out about the architects, the neighbourhood, the grand opening, its first show, the decor, the acoustics, the air conditioning, 3 more slides, then driving instructions, then a link to a PDF of a parking map. The map was exactly what I was looking for - excellent even - so I printed it out. I just couldn't believe all the b.s. they put me through in order to get it!
I love that someone must have noticed that parking info was hard to find, so they took the time to add the copy I quoted above. If they noticed the problem and had the time to address it, why not just include the info or link to a map right on the page? Why make someone wade through a presentation of useless information?
In preparing for this posting, I checked if there was another link elsewhere and the is parking info buried under FAQs. It is great info - but completely different. This info actually lists the rates (that is really good to know in Toronto) but does not have a link to their great map PDF.
I saw a link to "Jersey Boys radio" while on the site. After the show, I wanted to my wife to hear their songs, so I thought of this cool feature. But despite offering the radio in Windows Media and Real Player, it would not play for me in Internet Explorer or Firefox that night. This may not be the site's fault, but I didn't get any helpful messages or explanations. Today, it works for me - but such mysteries should not remain at this stage of the Internet's development.
Most of these usability errors and a lot that I encounter in general are so serious and so obvious that I find it hard to believe any web professional could miss it. After all don't people that make websites want to make money, by selling things, providing information to avoid phone calls, etc.? So lately I've been thinking what needs studying is not uncovering usability issues but rather why web practitioners fail to implement such basic practices?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)