Page 1

Web 2.0 Initiative: consultation report Çuna Ekmekçio lu, Chris Adie Version of 30 March 2007

Table of Contents Executive Summary

1

1.

Introduction

3

2.

Aims and objectives

3

3.

Overall approach

4

3.1

Scope of the study

4

3.2

Methodology

5

4.

Main issues

6

4.1

Learning and teaching consultation

6

4.2

Research consultation

9

4.3

Common points raised in both consultations

12

4.4

Emergent service characteristics

13

4.5

The challenges

14

5.

Good practice examples

15

5.1

Teaching and learning

15

5.2

Research

18

6.

Closing comments

21

7.

Recommendations

21

Appendix 1: Acknowledgements

24

Appendix 2: Teaching and learning: notes for discussion

25

Research: notes for discussion

29

Appendix 3: List of participants in consultations and interviews

32


Executive Summary Following on from an earlier report on “Collaborative Tools and Web 2.0”1, Information Services (IS) has conducted a wider consultation on Web 2.0 issues within the University. The objectives of the consultation were: •

to ensure that IS has a good understanding of the Web 2.0 requirements and expectations of researchers and teaching staff,

to identify existing areas of expertise and good practise, and to develop ideas for leveraging that experience more widely,

and thus to inform the development of IS services in the Web 2.0 space.

The consultation process included two focus groups on learning and teaching use of Web 2.0 and one on research use. These were followed up by a number of semistructured interviews. This document reports on the consultation process, documents the findings, brings out some common issues, and makes the following recommendations: 1. IS should urgently provide a centrally supported wiki service. 2. IS should move towards providing a blogging service for learning & teaching purposes. 3. IS should facilitate experimentation with Web 2.0 server-based technologies. 4. IS should facilitate and promote the use of web feeds (RSS). 5. IS should adopt Web 2.0 tools internally as appropriate. 6. IS should provide guidelines (“acceptable use policy”) set at University level. 7. IS should provide information and support to staff regarding Web 2.0, including: a. Establishing a practitioner community b. Raising awareness c. Providing training and support d. Developing a portfolio of good practice examples (this report makes a start on that) 8. IS should consider setting up a Web 2.0 advisory group. 9. IS should maintain a Web 2.0 technology watch. It is not the intention that the output of this study be used to constrain the direction of Web 2.0 development across the University by somehow setting institution-wide goals or strategies. Such leadership may be needed, but must be developed through an ongoing discourse (for instance under recommendation 8) rather than imposed from a central point.

1

http://www.is.ed.ac.uk/content/1/c4/10/46/CollaborativeToolsAndWeb2%200.pdf

2


1.

Introduction

In the last two to three years the web has arguably entered a second phase, known as ‘Web 2.0’, where new services and software have transformed it from being a predominantly "read only" medium to one where anyone can publish and share web content. In academia shifting the web from being essentially a tool of reference to one of collaboration has provided both rich opportunities and challenges. The use of blogs, wikis, media-sharing services, and other social software, has been shown to empower students and create exciting new learning opportunities. Example uses include, the use of blogs to allow students to share and reflect on learning; researchers to share knowledge, exchange ideas and easily publish work. While wikis have provided a collaborative, easy to use authoring tool for students, researchers and support staff. Social bookmarking services have introduced user defined tags, while virtual worlds like Second Life2 have introduced new possibilities for social networking among distance students, and unique opportunities for the development of innovative pedagogies. However, the significant possibilities are matched by notable challenges. These relate to issues such as interoperability, security, IPR and copyright issues, institutional politics etc. in the way to adopt these new developments in educational settings. Bearing this in mind, Information Services (IS) has initiated a bottom up approach with regard to adopting ‘Web 2.0’ applications in teaching, learning, and research communities. A wide consultation across the university has been carried out to explore these issues, and to take on board the experience, expertise, intentions and concerns of those staff who are already making good use of these technologies as well as those who would like to do so. The objective is not to impose (or even articulate) a direction for Web 2.0 activities in education or research across the entire University; instead, this consultation is intended specifically to inform development of service provision activities by IS.

2.

Aims and objectives

This study aims to identify and analyse, from the perspective of the staff, the technical, institutional and end-user issues with regard to employing Web 2.0 applications in their teaching and research, in order to make recommendations for IS strategic planning around establishing infrastructure where appropriate and facilitating adoption. Objectives of this study are to: • Identify key users with regard to the employment of Web 2.0 applications in teaching-learning and research within the university. • Capture the relevant issues pertaining to the use of Web 2.0 applications. • Critically analyse identified issues, based on staff experience and practice. • Identify existing areas of expertise and good practise, and to develop ideas for how IS can facilitate leveraging that experience more widely. • Report back to IS with recommendations which inform the development of IS services in the Web 2.0 space. 2

http://secondlife.com/

3


It is not the intention that the output of this study be used to constrain the direction of Web 2.0 development across the University by somehow setting institution-wide goals or strategies. Such leadership may be needed, but must be developed through an ongoing discourse rather than imposed from a central point.

3.

Overall approach

3.1

Scope of the study

This analysis will address: • Institutional issues surrounding the employment of Web 2.0 applications in learning and teaching, and research applications within the University. • The needs of the user constituencies, with an emphasis on the experience, expertise, intentions and concerns of those staff who are already making good use of these applications as well as those who would like to do so. • The risks associated with the two-way nature of Web 2.0 technologies. The risks will be further examined in detail elsewhere.

3.1.1 Scoping of specific issues Technical issues Technical issues will be raised where they directly impact upon institutional perspectives and stakeholder needs with respect to Web 2.0 applications. Institutional perspectives and issues • Politics, planning and strategy within the University. • Staff development, training and access issues with regard to Web 2.0 applications. • Inter-departmental, inter-faculty co-operation. • Co-operation between IT services, administrative services, libraries and academics within the institution. Learning and teaching applications • Existing and potential use of Web 2.0 tools in learning and teaching applications. • Needs and priorities of the stakeholders with regard to the use of Web 2.0 tools in their own practice. Research applications • Existing and potential use of Web 2.0 tools in research applications. • Needs and priorities of the stakeholders with regard to the use of Web 2.0 tools in their research. Access issues: IPR, Copyright, Security, Privacy, Interoperability etc. These are all very important considerations in any examination of information systems in any sector. They are too complex to be investigated in any depth within the scope of this study, and in any case, are being investigated elsewhere. We will only touch on these as issues where relevant to the institutional and stakeholder needs under investigation.

4


3.2

Methodology

Web 2.0 consultation process was a qualitative study, involving two phases: issue capture and analysis of these issues.

3.2.1 Capturing issues The issue capture process involved arranging a series of focus group meetings for open discussion which were then followed up by ten semi-structured interviews with key innovators. This IS led initiative also involved MIS in order to capture any implications for MyEd, the University’s central portal.

Developing consultation agendas Two discussion documents (see Appendix 2) – one for learning and teaching consultation and another for research consultation- were developed to use as a basis for discussions with actual and potential users of Web 2.0 applications. The aim of these documents was to: • Establish the reasons and objectives of the consultation. • Give examples of existing or potential uses. • Put forward, where appropriate, a range of alternative service/support scenarios for a particular area. • Pose questions for discussion in the consultation meeting.

Identifying key stakeholders to consult Key contacts were identified within three Colleges and Support Groups by liaising with the: • Existing “Web 2.0” service providers within IS. • Members of the original Working Group to identify known individuals. • Teaching and learning, and research committees of each college. • College Academic Liaison Directors (ALDs). • Project Managers of the e-learning funded projects. • School Computer Officers. • School administrative staff. Initial contact with the above stakeholders led to suggestions for further contact points for consultation. It is worth noting that given a short timescale the consultation process could not be extended to the student community.

Consultation meetings Consultation meetings were carried out on an individual and group basis. Two focus group meetings - one for learning and teaching applications and another for research applications- were held in December 2006 and January 2007 respectively. Some of the stakeholders who couldn’t attend these meetings were consulted individually at a later date. Consultation process also involved consulting potential service providers within IS, in order to understand their ideas about the kind of services which might be offered, and

5


about the specific user requirement and priority information which will influence the shape of the services.

Follow up interviews The focus group meetings were followed up by ten open-ended individual interviews which were carried out jointly with MIS.

Identifying good practice examples Good practice examples were identified from the focus group meetings and individual consultations. It is worth noting that these include highlights from only a few of the available examples within the University. A detailed portfolio of good practice examples is required in order to support awareness among stakeholders.

3.2.2 Analysing issues The issues arising from both consultations in learning and teaching, and research as well as individual consultations were analysed in Section 4 in the light of the discussions held with stakeholders. This analysis feeds into the recommendations in Section 6 for IS strategic planning around establishing necessary infrastructure and facilitating use of Web 2.0 applications in learning, teaching and research.

4.

Main Issues

This section notes the most significant points raised during the consultations. “Web 2.0” covers a potentially very wide range of types of applications. Due to limited time availability while a wide variety of topics were touched on, only a relatively small number of these were discussed in any detail. In line with the practical, service-development-oriented approach outlined in Sections 1 and 2 above, this report does not attempt to come to any conclusions of institution-wide strategic import regarding pedagogical or research project use of Web 2.0 tools. It is instead focussed on what IS needs to do to respond to user demand.

4.1

Learning and teaching consultation

General points • Although centrally supported services were favoured by many people, there were some concerns about it as well. It was pointed out by some that providing a central service shouldn’t be a way of forcing people to do everything in the same way. The problem about making things a central service is that you start pushing people towards one way of doing things. Everybody is expected to produce whatever they are doing in the same sort of way and you start losing individuality. • Computer regulations should be re-visited regularly. There was an agreement among the participants with UKOLN’s Brian Kelly in that policy needs to be evolving rather than fixed – a mechanism was needed to enable this evolution. • Generally people felt more confident about experimenting within a centrallysupported “closed” environment (where mistakes are less visible to others) than using a widely-visible service. • Agility of response is important. University is too slow with keeping up with the new developments as they waste much time with piloting new tools. By the time you

6


introduce a service things have moved on. The issue is taking risk and going ahead with the new developments. • Web 2.0 technologies are here because innovators are going outside the university to use new things, and students are bringing in their own experiences and expectations. So what should be the position of IS? Should it be in terms of establishing policy or a framework? • Some stakeholders felt that we need to be sensitive to the balance between control and innovation. • There are tools staff may want to use and/or install locally, but there are technical and security issues that might discourage them from going ahead. • Web 2.0 tools can facilitate development of better IT documentation. Documentation and discussions can be brought closer to each other. Discussions can slowly feed into documentation so that documentation grows and matures. Collaboratively authored documentation is important. There is a role for IS in facilitating that development. • It was noted that some students are ahead of us in using these technologies. However, they were perceived as using new tools because their peers do, rather than more positively embracing the technology. Wikis • It was noted that some Web 2.0 tools such as wikis and blogs lend themselves to central provision, while others such as del.icio.us3 and Flickr4 for example do not. • There was some consensus that a centrally-provided service would enable a safer environment where mistakes could be less costly and seen as learning opportunities. • It was pointed out that a major drawback with the University’s MediaWiki pilot service is that it doesn’t allow users to store documents, images and media. • Most felt that on the whole wikis are not complex in technology. They are easy to set up and easy to use without requiring much guidance. • Many felt that wiki or other collaboration threads associated with an event or project should be kept open after the event so that they could be referred to afterwards. This might be a useful service to alumni. • Wikis may provide an answer for knowledge sharing (a knowledgebase) in conjunction with the CMS (Call Management System). There was a need however for some central ownership of support documentation, for instance by selecting core items from the knowledgebase for a FAQ. Blogs • Students are used to blogging as a concept, which makes it easier to use this tool in educational settings. • Blogs are mainly used to get students reflect on their learning, and work collaboratively on group projects. 3 4

Social bookmarking: http://del.icio.us/ http://www.flickr.com/

7


• The current weblog system in WebCT is found restrictive and not rich enough to encourage teachers to use this tool in their teaching. Therefore, there is a need for a flexible, tailorable blogging service provided by the University. This service should have much more functionality than the current system in WebCT. It needs good links to the course data source (Euclid) in order to easily constrain access to blogs, and needs to be capable of working independently of the VLE. Podcasting • There is an end-to-end podcasting service provided by IS which is very well received by the stakeholders. • School of Divinity and School of Physics use podcasting to provide students with support material such as introduction to the School, “how to?” guides in exam preparation, self tests, writing essays etc. • Most felt that podcasting lectures is not an innovative way of using this tool. However, some argued against this, saying that it has got huge potential for some courses, particularly language teaching, and for courses with dyslexic students or international students with poor listening skills. It was also pointed out that providing students with podcasts of lectures would not necessarily encourage students to miss the lectures. Instant messaging (IM) • This tool makes sense when working with remote colleagues. • No significant use of IM was noted in teaching and learning. Medicine uses Macromedia Breeze to have tutorials on assignments to be handed in. • Skype5 is used for tutorials with distance learning students in TESOL (Teachers of English as a Second or Foreign Language) • SMS texts were seen as useful for some student alerts – e.g. library books overdue.

High priority issues as identified by stakeholders • There is a need for richly functioned blogs, associated with course membership, accessed through MyEd and linked to the student record database so that the system is aware of the courses that a student is taking, and can easily link student to student, and student to teacher. • There is an urgent need for establishing a regularly reviewed guidelines and “acceptable use policy” at University level. People want to use external services but are reluctant because of lack of clarity about “what is acceptable to the University”. • Awareness raising, staff development and good practice examples to help staff adopt these Web 2.0 applications in their own practice.

Other issues • There is a need for a space outside of WebCT but within EASE authentication in which potential adopters can “play” in a safe environment with these Web 2.0 applications for learning and teaching purposes. WebCT is accessible to on5

http://www.skype.com/

8


course students and students who can be added by populating the course in one of the various ways WebCT allows. Therefore, there is a need for a space that is accessible to all members of the graduate school and to staff so that it forms a resource and tool for students who might not necessarily be using it as a credited course. The aim is to make resources as easily accessible as possible to both students and staff. • Some stakeholders questioned the role of social networking tools such as Facebook, MySpace6 in learning and teaching? These tools are considered mainly for socialisation. • A list of names for people to contact when they need help or advice with these technologies would be welcomed. Part of this is to have contacts in your own discipline, with shared interests. Making the technology available without support is not going to work. • IS could use Web 2.0 tools to help support its user base. User information could be improved and be opened up to users via these tools. • EASE is “brilliant”. However, problems were encountered with navigation (some people go to www.ease.ed.ac.uk, log in and navigate from there, perceiving this as the only way in) and reliability (the problems at the start of Semester 1).

How should IS help learners and teachers benefit from Web 2.0? • Setting up a campus-wide, easy to use, fully functional wiki service. • Providing space and resource outside WebCT but protected by EASE authentication for experimenting with Web 2.0 tools. • More robust authentication service, including for visitor access to services. • Facilitating collaborative authoring of documentation. • Help improve internal communications within IS. • An “acceptable use policy” which has to be flexible and evolutionary. We need a mechanism for reviewing what our policy should be given the rapidly changing nature of Web 2.0. We have very prescriptive static set of computing regulations. These regulations need to be flexible and empowering rather than controlling. • Setting up a directory of names people can contact when they need help or advice • Providing a portfolio of good practice examples. • Some IS staff are keen to have a university branded blog to provide better service to students.

4.2

Research consultation

General points •

6

There are lots of Web 2.0 tools out there, not only a few applications such as wikis and blogs. Wikis and blogs are examples of very well-established applications which are already used by many people effectively, but there are many tools and services which are much less well-defined and which are much less well-known. How can we (and should we) encourage people to find out

http://www.myspace.com/

9


about and leverage these things? These services are changing very quickly - can we hope to keep up with them? •

The more ‘classic’ Web 2.0 tools such as wikis and blogs lend themselves to central service provision much like a functional application; whilst other more light weight tools such as social bookmarking, and mapping tools were more likely to be used as components or ‘mashups7’ within an application.

Wikis •

There is a need for a centrally-provided wiki service which is: o

Easy to use

o

Reliable

o

Has good functionality including RSS8 feeds

The wiki service must be available to external users (research collaborators in other institutions) for (authenticated) editing.

There’s a tension between a “managed” web environment (using a Content Management System) and the “anarchy” of a wiki. Should IS help develop guidelines for managing wiki anarchy?

Must be able to brand wikis where appropriate.

Blogs •

A centrally-provided blogging service is not seen as such a high priority as a centrally-provide wiki but would be welcomed. It is important that central service should provide an easy way of setting up a rich personal home page, which could be associated with a personal blog. At present, staff need to know either HTML or a WYSIWYG web editor such as Dreamweaver or Front Page to create their home pages – so frequently they don’t bother. There is a role for IS here to make this as easy as possible for staff.

Instant messaging •

Skype is mostly used among research staff. There is no need for a centrallyprovided Instant Messaging service.

RSS feeds •

RSS is used in Informatics, and CHSS has some isolated use, but there is not a significant use of or awareness of RSS across the University. Awareness is important – people just don’t know how useful this technology is.

High priority issues

7 8

There is an urgent need for an “acceptable use policy” regarding use of external Web 2.0 services set at university level and reviewed regularly.

There is a lack of awareness about Web 2.0 applications among the University staff. Staff time is one of the major barriers to taking up these new applications, therefore support in the form of animated tutorials, quick start-up guides or other online learning opportunities should be provided to help staff familiarise

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mashup_(web_application_hybrid) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSS_(file_format)

10


themselves with these technologies in their own timescales. Scheduled face-toface training is seen as much less workable now. •

A portfolio of good practice examples to support awareness would be very useful.

Other issues •

The need (and ability) to be agile in keeping up with Web 2.0 developments.

Interoperability: there are quite a large number of wikis out there with different markup languages.

Technology is not the biggest issue – the problem is cultural barriers to adoption.

Resource issues: If something is developed internally by central services it takes a significant resource to develop, and it then becomes a service that people expect to continue for very long time. This imposes a continuing support load on the central service. Therefore, the difficulty in taking up new things is because of the amount of resource taken up with supporting existing services continuously for very long amounts of time. It’s easy to start a service, much more difficult to close one down. That model doesn't work well in the very rapidly changing Web 2.0 world.

A list of names people can contact when they need help or advice. Role models and experts who are enthusiastic about wider adoption.

Every project and every group of users have specific needs. It is important to acknowledge the wide range of cultures / needs / ways of doing things within the university. There is a case to be made for accommodating the differing needs of different subject areas, levels of technical expertise etc. A single solution may not suit everyone.

Access problems: an ability to allow visitor registration to collaborative work spaces is essential for cross-institutional research projects. IS should deliver an appropriate kind of identity management.

Branding is seen as an important issue – University branding on research wikis or a research group blog can be prestigious for the University and for the researcher – but clear guidelines and policies would be required.

Wikis are such that it may be easy to feed the information in but more difficult to transfer that information elsewhere due to lack of a standard wiki markup language. We need to have a coherent approach to issues of “information architecture” which recognises such problems.

Managing risks. Some people may not be fully aware of the implications of what they are doing with Web 2.0 services and tools - e.g. data privacy, security, etc.

Social tagging (e.g. Connotea) and structured information (e.g. XML representation of models) - can we bring these two together? This doesn't apply just to a specific discipline but is a general challenge.

There might be some issues with accessibility of these tools (e.g. podcasting) but we need to be careful not to see accessibility requirements as being an obstacle which prevents change.

Teaching and research are very much integrated - the mantra is “teaching within a research environment”. WebCT is not a framework that all staff enjoy using.

11


WebCT is not a parallel universe but a different universe. How we can integrate all these other tools with WebCT?

How should IS help research community to benefit from Web 2.0? •

A centrally supported wiki service with support for external contributors. It is important that any central service used for research, must have the ability to be used easily by external collaborators.

Help and advice with setting up wikis.

A list of key contacts to speak to when help is needed.

A web site to keep people aware of what's happening.

Easy access to web publishing, particularly easy way of creating staff home pages with links to individual blogs.

An efficient way of rolling out information to people in an environment where people are too busy to check websites regularly.

Good practice examples with contact details, to allow experiences to be shared.

Providing a blogging service centrally might provide improved protection against spam comments and thus encourage use.

Rather than simply providing a self-service facility (e.g. a wiki service), some researchers want to be able to ask for a facility and have someone set it up and manage it for them.

Support innovative use of services like Second Life – e.g. by buying land in Second Life for University units to exploit.

Help researchers with shared interests to get together. Establish a community of practitioners.

Provide easy to use systems accessible across all platforms, without any authentication problems.

Define a well-structured information architecture, and help people who generate high value information to manage it in a structured way.

Engage more with specific researcher computing aspirations, to identify and help leverage relevant technologies, including Web 2.0, XML and perhaps the Semantic Web.

4.3

Common points raised in both consultations

Learning and teaching, and research communities have obviously differing needs in terms of using “Web 2.0” tools in their practice. Students prefer an integrated approach so having these tools embedded within a VLE is essential in learning and teaching. They also like something "safe" that is somehow seen as University owned and not open to all. On the other hand, research needs are different as they do need to be available for contribution by people outwith the University so authentication, visibility is important. Also, some kind of Edinburgh University identity becomes important for marketing purposes. However, in general a number of common points were noted in both consultations: • Need for a centrally supported wiki service.

12


• “One size fits all” will not work, but this must not be an excuse for inaction by central services. • Easy to use systems, accessible from any platform, supported by appropriate and reliable authentication. • Evolutionary and flexible “acceptable use policy” and/or guidelines. • A portfolio of good practice examples and people to contact would be helpful. • Develop awareness and understanding of the possibilities within the University. • An easy way for staff to create rich home page and blog. • The need to be agile and to keep up with these technologies.

4.4

Emergent service characteristics

During the discussions, the following key characteristics of any centrally-provided Web 2.0-related service (e.g. a central wiki service) emerged as particularly significant: Integrated and consistent system delivery Students had highlighted this issue at the Stargazing Conference during November 2006, and this was reiterated by the participants during the consultations. An important aspect of this was the ability to apply centrally managed/customised interface design together with single sign-on, regardless of whether the user is accessing the service from on- or off-campus. However, another key point was that Web 2.0 tools need to be made available more widely than just within a VLE. Ease of use It was suggested time and again that a centrally-provided system should be easy to use, without having to overcome a steep learning curve. Users come with different levels of expertise, those who: • • • •

are naïve about new technologies, are aware of some of these technologies but have not used them before, have some knowledge and expertise with these technologies, and are on the cutting edge, i.e. the innovators.

IS will be expected to provide support at all these levels, and ease of use is critical to engage those users with less familiarity. Reliability and stability Another important aspect of any system which is expected to be in widespread use is its reliability, and any centrally-provided system must be at least as reliable and stable as external service options. Accessibility This includes accessibility for users with differing physical abilities; adaptability to differing learning styles; availability on and off-campus; and usability on any platform or hardware. However, it was noted that we need to be careful not to see accessibility requirements as being an obstacle which prevents change.

13


4.5

The challenges

The consultation identified a number of challenges to greater Web 2.0 use within the University, independent of whether some kind of central service is provided. While it is not the purpose of this report to articulate a University-wide direction for Web 2.0 adoption which addresses these issues, it is nevertheless useful to document what we found in order to identify areas where IS can make a difference. Culture Some stakeholders were clear that technology is not the biggest issue - it is more making sure that the organizational culture is fully supportive. If we could solve organisational problems which exist at every level, we could easily skill up on the technology and move forward. Resources There is a need for coherent vision and adequate resources from a high level, responsive to the demands and needs of the learners and taking account of the expertise of staff. Time management How will over-stretched staff find the time to explore these new technologies to make use of them in their own practice? This is both an institutional and a resourcing issue, as well as a staff development one. Any solution needs to address issues such as information overload and guidance for new users. Institutional infrastructure and politics The nature of the proposed systems requires co-operation, collaboration, mutual understanding, and sharing of resources. This ties into the previous issue of resourcing, but some other points include: • Resistance to change in general has several factors, including: concerns about losing “role” and “status”; fear of being overwhelmed or left behind by new technologies; and concerns about the potential loss of academic freedom through collaboration. • Resistance to new technologies. The need for academics to master new tools and develop the pedagogical skills to use them effectively can sometimes lead to the perception of IT as an additional, difficult, and perhaps resented job expectation. Those who have less IT expertise may feel left behind and threatened by quicklychanging technologies. • Inter-professional difficulties, particularly between IT services and academia. There is a perceived lack of full and effective communication between academics and IT staff. The latter have been criticised for providing services without fully considering user needs, with the attitude sometimes being seen as “here’s the service you’re getting - take it or leave it”, with little flexibility or scope for negotiation. Staff development issues Staff development could be seen as both a resourcing issue and an infrastructure issue. However, it has its own specific problems. Institutional IT strategies must explicitly encompass staff development; it is no use having the systems available if there is no ongoing support and encouragement in using them.

14


Access issues IPR, copyright, security, data privacy, and authentication were all common concerns. Are these issues likely to get in the way of being able to do what is required? Some stakeholders raised the point that some people are unaware of the full implications of these issues for what they are doing.

5.

Good practice examples

The examples given in this section include highlights from only a few of the available practices within the University. A detailed portfolio of good practice examples is being planned in order to support awareness among stakeholders.

5.1

Teaching and learning

5.1.1 School of Divinity Overview Use of: • Weblogs integrated with WebCT • Podcasts9 Elements of good practice • Weblogs are used for: o

Reflective practice

o

Collaborative group work in seminar preparations

• Podcasts are used to provide support material for students such as introduction to the School, “how to?” guides in writing essays, preparation for tutorials and exams, etc. Contacts Dr Jessie Paterson Dr Sara Parvis

5.1.2

Moray House School of Education

6.1.2.1 MSc in E-Learning Programme10 Overview Use of: • A wiki integrated with WebCT • A weblog integrated with WebCT • Social networking tools: Second Life and Facebook11 • Social bookmarking: del.icio.us 9

http://www.podcasts.ed.ac.uk/Religion1A/podcasts.html http://www.education.ed.ac.uk/e-learning/ 11 http://www.facebook.com/ 10

15


• RSS feeds Elements of good practice • Weblog is used for reflective practice. • Wiki is used for sharing resources. • Second Life and Facebook are used for creating a sense of community within the group. • Course participants are exposed to these new technologies allowing them to reflect on how these technologies might be applied in the educational settings. Contact Dr Siân Bayne 5.1.2.2 TESOL (Teachers of English as a Second or Foreign Language) Overview Use of: • Private wiki spaces attached to courses • Social bookmarking: del.icio.us • Skype Elements of good practice • Wikis are used for collaborative group work. • Del.icio.us is used for sharing resources with students. • Skype is used for tutorials with overseas students. Issues • Skype is very useful for communication in distance learning courses but it is time consuming and not scalable. Contact Ruby Rennie

5.1.3 Centre for Social Sciences Research Overview Use of: • A wiki integrated with WebCT • A weblog integrated with WebCT Elements of good practice • Wiki is used for collaborative group work. • Weblog is used as a personal space to post thoughts, notes, links etc. Issues • Weblog was difficult to use as it was integrated with WebCT, there was no option of building personal blogrolls. • Wiki did not link to the blog.

16


Contact James Stewart

5.1.4 School of Informatics Advanced Vision12 Introduction to Vision and Robotics13 Overview Use of: • Audio in mp3 format Elements of good practice • All the lectures are recorded and uploaded onto web in mp3 format together with PowerPoint slides. • The recording is edited by chopping them up into logical sections rather than providing students with pure recording. Contact Professor Bob Fisher

5.1.5 Psychology Overview Use of: • A wiki integrated with WebCT • UCCASS14 (The Unit Command Climate Assessment and Survey System) which is a PHP-based server application to produce surveys and collect data. Elements of good practice • Wiki is used to provide a cooperative space for research projects which students (over 200) of Psychology in year 2 run in small groups at the end of the year. This provides a unique opportunity to widen research ideas from the small group to the whole class, allowing tutors (17) with different expertise in psychology to support students in different tutorial groups, which would not be possible in a traditional class-dependent organization. • UCCASS provides an extra layer of interactivity as students can create their own surveys/questionnaires for research directly. Contact Lorenzo Vingentini

5.1.6 School of Physics Overview 12

http://www.inf.ed.ac.uk/teaching/courses/av/ http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/AVAUDIO/ 13 http://www.inf.ed.ac.uk/teaching/courses/ivr/ http://www.inf.ed.ac.uk/teaching/courses/ivr/lectures/index.html 14

http://www.bigredspark.com/survey.html

17


Use of: • A wiki integrated with WebCT • Podcasts15 Elements of good practice • Wikis are used to enable students to collaboratively build up past exam paper solutions. It is also being planned to make some of the lecture notes (interactive content) available to students for editing through the wiki. • Podcasts are used to provide support material for students such as introduction to the School, “how to?” guides in writing essays, self tests, preparation for tutorials etc. Contact Dr Simon Bates

5.1.7 College of Medicine and veterinary Medicine Overview Use of: • An in-house developed wiki compatible with all of the CMVM e-learning platforms • An in-house developed blog compatible with all of the CMVM e-learning platforms • Podcasts • Vodcasts • RSS feeds Elements of good practice • Wikis are used to support group project work that is to be published to the web. Also, every student has a personal wiki that s/he can use for any purpose. • Blogs are used for students to discuss group project work with each other and their supervisors and to keep an authors' track on past and future work within the project. They are also planned to be used as log books with postgraduate students (MSc and PhD) within the EEPoP system. • Podcasts and vodcasts are used to make teaching material available to students who cannot make the lectures. Contacts Dr Rachel Ellaway Michael Begg

5.2

Research

5.2.1 Institute of Astronomy Overview Use of: 15

http://www.ph.ed.ac.uk/elearning/projects/podcasting/

18


• A wiki for internal communication. Elements of good practice • All the systems documentation is written on a wiki by the group. • A sophisticated use of wikis in the sense that the users have a clear idea what it is that they are trying to achieve. Contact Johann Bryant

5.2.2 Centre for Social Sciences Research Overview Use of: • Wikis in two new international European projects Elements of good practice • Wiki is used for collaborative authoring and for the day-to-day management of the projects. Contact James Stewart

5.2.3 School of GeoSciences Overview Use of: • A wiki in a research project on Arctic climate change16 with partner institutions throughout the UK, and currently we are setting up. Elements of good practice • Wiki is used for the communication and data sharing and to facilitate close interaction in the whole team. Contact Stephan Matthiesen

5.2.4 School of Informatics Overview Use of: • Wikis • Blogs • RSS Elements of good practice • Wikis, blogs and RSS feeds are used for collaborative authoring and for the dayto-day management of the European based projects and semantic web projects. 16

http://www.abacus-ipy.org

19


Contacts Dr Jean Carletta Dave Robertson

5.2.5 School of Law Overview Use of: • A wiki as part of a collaborative and comparative investigation of protection of personality. • An overseas project. • 15 jurisdictions involved in the project. • A series of case studies to which people have contributed to. • A database of cases and materials of different jurisdictions dealing with protection of personality. Elements of good practice • Open wiki but it does require people registering before they contribute. • Content is licensed under Creative Commons and Attribution only Creative Commons Licenses, a privacy policy, disclaimers, a mechanism of checking content for IPR or copyright. Contact Dr Charlotte Waelde

5.2.6 School of Mathematics (potential use of wikis) Overview Two projects have been identified within the School where multi-authored documents are being produced: syllabus development for the Scottish Mathematical Sciences Training Centre and production of RA5a's for the RAE where staff feel the use of wikis would be very beneficial. Two essential features are that (specified) authors outside the University of Edinburgh would have to be able to have write access to the documents and that these should be set up quickly---if they are not working within a month or so, it will scarcely be worth bothering with, because of the production deadlines for these documents. Security is also important, particularly for the production of RAE documents. Looking a little further ahead, staff would like to see wiki technology readily available within the School for anyone working with multi-authored documents: research reports, syllabus development, grant applications---the list is endless. Contact Professor Michael Singer

5.2.7

Moray House School of Education

Overview • Use of a blog in a research project looking at web 2.0 applications in teaching and learning Contacts Dr Siân Bayne

20


Dr Akiko Hemmi

6.

Closing comments

Collaborative tools such as wikis and blogs are well established technologies which are already used by many people effectively. As a result of the consultations carried out in learning and teaching, and research communities, it has become apparent that there is an urgent need for a centrally-provided, fully functional and easy to use wiki service. For the research community it is essential that authenticated editing facilities must be made available to users outside the University. There is an emerging demand for blogs as a learning and teaching tool. External blog services cannot be integrated with University structures (e.g. such that blog visibility can automatically be restricted to class members), so for this and other reasons there is a need for a flexible, tailorable blogging service provided by the University. This service should have much more functionality than the current system in WebCT. It needs good links to the course data golden copy (EUCLID) in order to easily constrain access to blogs, and needs to be closely linked to University VLE(s) yet be capable of working independently of them. There is also an urgent need to develop greater awareness and understanding of Web 2.0 applications among University staff. This should be supported a portfolio of good practice examples and with up-to-date dissemination techniques such as step by step quick start up guides and online tutorials on how to use these Web 2.0 services. Establishing a community of interested practitioners would also be necessary in order to keep up with these constantly changing Web 2.0 applications. An emergent and evolutionary “acceptable use policy” set at University level is needed to guide users on how far they can or should adopt Web 2.0 applications services, such that innovation is not discouraged, but risks and legal issues are borne in mind. Last but not least, innovative developments such as Second Life should be supported by IS. For example, buying land for the University in Second Life could help staff to employ this tool in their practice for the development of innovative pedagogies.

7.

Recommendations

1. IS should urgently provide a centrally supported wiki service. The service should be: • Easy to use • Scalable • Flexible in terms of functionality, group and permission management, read/write access for both authenticated and unauthenticated users. • Robust and reliable. • Integrated with central systems such as EASE, MyEd and central VLE's. • Accessible. • Usable on all University of Edinburgh supported operating systems and browser platforms. • For the research community, authenticated editing facilities must be made available to the users outside the University.

21


2. IS should move towards providing a blogging service for learning & teaching purposes. There is an emerging interest in blogging as a learning and teaching tool. External blog services (Blogger17, for instance) cannot be integrated with University structures (e.g. so that blog visibility can be restricted to class members); for this and other reasons there is a need for a University-provided service. IS should, as part of the forthcoming VLE review pilot project which will compare Sakai with WebCT, develop a specification for, with a view to implementing, a blogging service, principally for learning and teaching use, but integrated into the University information architecture in a way which allows it to work independently of the VLE. 3. IS should facilitate experimentation with Web 2.0 server-based technologies. There is a requirement for a “safe” environment in which potential adopters can “play” with new server-based Web 2.0 technologies, particularly for learning and teaching purposes. The virtual server service proposed by the IT Infrastructure Division could be a basis for this. Some users are able to get themselves going given only a “raw install” of an operating system, others will need assistance to reach a stage where they are comfortable to experiment themselves. 4. IS should facilitate and promote the use of web feeds (RSS). Web feeds are a potentially very effective mechanism for improving dissemination of information and for managing information overload, which was seen as a problem for staff. IS should facilitate and promote the use of web feeds, for instance by ensuring that it is easy to create RSS feeds, that there is easy access to RSS feed readers, and by increasing awareness of its usefulness. 5. IS should adopt Web 2.0 tools internally as appropriate. Adopting these technologies internally will increase awareness and put our staff into a better position to advise and advocate them elsewhere. There are significant pockets of activity within IS already, and these need to be extended and/or consolidated. IS should continue to strongly take forward the use of wikis in its IT-related documentation activities. 6. IS should provide guidelines (“acceptable use policy”) set at University level. These guidelines should be flexible and evolutionary. IS should immediately start a process of developing such guidelines in consultation with relevant stakeholders. 7. IS should provide information and support to staff regarding Web 2.0. The following specific actions under this general heading are suggested: • A community of interested practitioners should be established, to encourage involvement of and collaboration between staff with relevant expertise, and to facilitate dissemination of that expertise more widely within the University. • Awareness raising, training and support. There is a lack of understanding and awareness of Web 2.0 applications among some groups of staff and there is no clear place they can go to for help. IS should initiate a programme of developing awareness and understanding (perhaps initially among its own staff!) about the benefits and opportunities of Web 2.0. 17

http://www.blogger.com/

22


• IS should identify a portfolio of good practice examples to support the awareness effort. 8. IS should consider setting up a Web 2.0 advisory group. This would be a broadly-based group which would address (on an ongoing basis) questions of University-wide direction in the Web 2.0 space which this one-off consultation does not address. Questions of the group’s precise remit, its reporting line, and its relationship to the eLearning committee and the proposed Research Computing Working Group would need to be resolved. 9. IS should maintain a Web 2.0 technology watch. IS should maintain an active engagement with innovative Web 2.0 developments and virtual environments such as Second Life, with a view to supporting staff in the development of innovative pedagogies in their teaching.

23


Appendix 1 Acknowledgements We would like thank all our colleagues who attended the consultation meetings and/or volunteered to be interviewed, for their invaluable contributions to this consultation. Thanks are also due to Dr Hamish Macleod and Dr Chris Adie who facilitated the focus group meetings, and to Mark Wetton for joining us in the follow-up interviews and his comments and contributions to this report.

24


Appendix 2 Web 2.0 consultation process for teaching and learning: notes for discussion Aims and objectives of the consultation This document is produced as part of Web 2.0 consultation process which aims: •

to ensure that Information Services (IS) has a good understanding of the Web 2.0 requirements and expectations of the learning and teaching communities,

to identify existing areas of expertise and good practise, and to develop ideas for leveraging that experience more widely,

and thus to inform the development of IS services in the Web 2.0 space.

Web 2.0 associated applications at the University of Edinburgh Wikipedia18 defines Web 2.0, as “second generation of Internet-based services—such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies19 — that emphasize online collaboration and sharing among users”. A wide variety of Web 2.0 associated applications – including wikis, blogs, instant messaging, podcasting, discussion forums, RSS feeds – have been in use at Edinburgh. Below are only a few examples of the Web 2.0 projects currently underway: MSc in e-Learning is using a weblog, a wiki and social networking tools – Facebook20 and Second Life21– to expose participants to new technologies, to allow them to reflect on how these technologies might be applied in the educational settings. The College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine has integrated a number of Web 2.0 tools within its undergraduate and postgraduate teaching and learning activities. These tools are developed in-house as an integrated web service compatible with all of the CMVM e-learning platforms. They could be used stand alone tools or could easily be integrated with other platforms. In CMVM, wikis are used to support group project work that is to be published to the web. Also, every student has a personal wiki that s/he can use for any purpose. Blogs are used for students to discuss group project work with each other and their supervisors and to keep an authors' track on past and future work within the project. Blogs will shortly be rolled out as PPD tools for MbCHB students. They are also planned to be used as log books with postgraduate students (MSc and PhD) within the EEPoP system. Vets are planning to use blogs in their undergraduate curriculum. CMVM are using podcasts and vodcasts to make teaching material available to students who cannot make the lectures. The School of Divinity has been experimenting with wikis, weblogs and podcasts in their undergraduate teaching. Weblogs are integrated with WebCT and they are used for 18

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2

19

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy

20

http://www.facebook.com/ http://secondlife.com/

21

25


group work in seminar preparations. One course is also using weblogs for reflective practice. Divinity is creating podcasts in cooperation with Physics to provide support material for students such as how to prepare tutorials, write essays, prepare for exams, self tests, introduction to the School etc. The Digital Curation Centre uses discussion forums and a wiki. MIS have been experimenting with MediaWiki22 and an Enterprise Wiki – Confluence.23 EUCS has been supporting the use of podcasting, providing podcast hosting facilities, and offering advice and assistance in their use. Media and Learning Technology team have produced some podcasts for some courses (Law). EDINA has created a podcast of its 10th Anniversary event24. EDINA have been using Jabber Instant Messaging25.

Some established Web 2.0 applications available to use in educational settings We have listed below some of the established Web 2.0 applications available for implementation in educational settings. We would like you to ponder on the following scenarios or statements given under each application and discuss the possible advantages and disadvantages of implementing them within the University of Edinburgh.

Wikis A wiki is a type of Web site that allows the visitors themselves to easily add, remove, and otherwise edit and change some available content, sometimes without the need for registration. This ease of interaction and operation makes a wiki an effective tool for collaborative authoring. The most prominent example might be Wikipedia26, one of the most active and largest wikis. Scenario 1: A central wiki service Information Services provide a central wiki service with multiple wiki spaces available for particular applications. Scenario 2: External wiki hosting Information Services liaises with an external wiki hosting provider to deliver a service similar to the one in scenario 2 but the university has less control over this service Scenario 3: Multiple wiki platforms Information Services facilitates the use of multiple wiki platforms but they provide very limited support on each wiki platform.

Blogs 22

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/ 24 http://edina.ac.uk/events/edina10th/programme.hrml 25 http://www.jabber.com 26 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki 23

26


Wikipedia defines a blog as a website where entries are made in journal style and displayed in a reverse chronological order. A good example of using blogs at universities is the Warwick blogs27. Scenario 1: Warwick blog Warwick University is playing a pioneering role with its Warwick Blogs project, which is available to all students, teachers and staff. The idea behind this is to encourage students, teachers and staff to build a community, foster collaboration and perhaps helping with the personal development planning that students and tutors have to work on (John Dale, Head of IT Services at Warwick). Should University of Edinburgh follow this route of a centrally provided universal blog service? Scenario 2: External blog hosting There are various blogs freely available on the Web, e.g. blogger.com28. There is no need for the University to provide a university branded blog service as these free external services can easily be used for blogging activities in teaching and learning. Scenario 3: Use of weblogs integrated with WebCT Students are encouraged to use the in-house developed weblog which is integrated with WebCT. For other purposes, external blogging services can be used.

Instant Messaging Wikipedia defines Instant Messaging or IM as a form of real-time communication between two or more people based on typed text. The text is conveyed via computers connected over a network such as the Internet. • People don't know they need an IM service until they've got one - then they wonder how they did without it. • IM is already available to anyone who needs to use it - there's no need for IS to provide a service. • There's real value in having a single internal IM service where you can find coworkers (and/or students?) easily. • There's no role for IM in my work - email and telephone are sufficient.

• "The IM 'presence status' would tell me whether colleagues were around - this would be really helpful."

Podcasting “Podcasting is a simple means of delivering a media file by downloading it after a user requests it. The downloaded file can then be played on a PC, or transferred to a wide range of portable media players, of which the iPod is the best known example. MP3 audio is probably the most well known file format, but podcasting is not limited to audio, any file can be delivered in this manner.” See Computing Services Web Help29. • I would like to have access to an end to end expert service provided by Information Services to help create podcasts. 27

http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/ http://www.blogger.com/start 29 http://webhelp.ucs.ed.ac.uk/services/media/podcasts/ 28

27


• I would like to have access to advice and guidance provided by Information Services to help create podcasts. • I envisage my students creating their own podcasts.

Questions 1. What new Web 2.0 associated applications have you used for learning and teaching to date? Are there any other applications that you are aware of, would like to use in your teaching, but haven’t yet had the chance of doing so? 2. In what ways do you think these applications can be implemented in educational settings? 3. How do you think you might make use of these applications in your own teaching? 4. To what extent do you think it is useful to have these applications in a framework which is not embedded in a VLE? 5. What kind of support do you need/expect from Information Services to implement these Web 2.0 associated applications in your teaching? 6. How do you think Information Services can encourage the adoption of Web 2.0 applications in teaching and learning?

7. What do you think are the most serious risks to the University arising from the adoption of Web 2.0 associated applications? How might they be reduced?

28


Web 2.0 consultation process for research: notes for discussion Aims and objectives of the consultation This document is produced as part of Web 2.0 consultation process which aims: •

to ensure that Information Services (IS) has a good understanding of the Web 2.0 requirements and expectations of the research communities,

to identify existing areas of expertise and good practise, and to develop ideas for leveraging that experience more widely,

and thus to inform the development of IS services in the Web 2.0 space.

Some established Web 2.0 applications available to use in research settings We have listed below some examples and scenarios of the established Web 2.0 applications available for implementation in academic research settings. We would like you to ponder on the given scenarios or statements under each application and discuss the possible advantages and disadvantages of implementing them within the University of Edinburgh.

Wikis A wiki is a type of website that allows allows distributed teams to collaboratively write and edit documents through the Internet in a shared online workspace. The flexibility of wikis is an advantage for increased cooperative work for large team projects. Below are some examples of how wikis are used in research: Technology Enhanced Learning in Science (TELS) Centre (a research consortium supported by the National Science Foundation) uses a wiki (Atlassian Confluence Wiki30) to capture and share knowledge across different projects, departments and institutions. The Centre consists of approximately 40 researchers within U.C. Berkeley and 40-50 researchers working in 6 other universities from the U.S. and Israel. For further information visit the case study page31. JISC Digital Repositories Research Team uses a wiki - DigiRep32. The DigiRep wiki is intended for all those working on the JISC Digital Repositories Programme and other experts in the field of Digital Repositories. The wiki is maintained by the Digital Repositories Support team at UKOLN and CETIS. John Hopkins University uses a wiki (Altassian Confluence Wiki) for managing, writing, and collaborating on technical specifications and policies. Also, all of the University's admissions, financial aid, registrars, and student billing offices—about 30 departments— use Confluence, in support of their student information system implementation. For further information visit the case study page33. 30

- http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/ http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/casestudies/Atlassian_Confluence_Berkeley_Case_Study.pdf 32 http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/JISC_Digital_Repository_Wiki 33 (http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/casestudies/johnhopkins.jsp 31

29


Scenario 1: A central wiki service Information Services provide a central wiki service with multiple wiki spaces available for particular applications. Scenario 2: External wiki hosting Information Services liaises with an external wiki hosting provider to deliver a service similar to the one in scenario 2 but the university has less control over this service. Scenario 3: Multiple wiki platforms Information Services facilitates the use of multiple wiki platforms but they provide very limited support on each wiki platform.

Blogs Wikipedia defines a blog as a website where entries are made in journal style and displayed in a reverse chronological order. Below are some examples of how blogs are used in research: Robert O'Toole, a PhD student in philosophy, uses his blog for both academic and personal purposes. His entries include subjects such as creativity in technology, philosophy definitions and details of a recent trip to Botswana. He says he has received responses from far and nears: "Blog turned my thesis proposal into a written one, I've been able to speak to academic communities across the UK and have gained knowledge from strangers. Blog has allowed me to write in a single place almost daily and develop things in fairly cohesive fashion34." Esther Maccallum-Stewart35, a Sussex University historian is one of the pioneering British academic bloggers who is using the technology to teach and carry out research. CS-ED.org36 is a site that is attempting to build a network of computer science education researchers, using blogs to begin building a virtual community of researchers, writing about and discussing their research process and progress. Cosmic Variance37 is a physicists’ group blog which concentrates on building bridges between the worlds of specialists and interested outsiders38. Other examples could be an institution-wide intranet blog for projects, project updates, good practices, articles; and team blogs for specific projects. Scenario 1: A central blog service Information Services provides a University branded and EASE authenticated central blog service. Scenario 2: External blog hosting 34

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4194669.stm http://www.whatalovelywar.co.uk/war/ 36 http://www.cs-ed.org/ 37 http://cosmicvariance.com 38 Physicsworld, 20(1), pp.14-30 35

30


There are various blogs39 freely available on the web. There is no need for the University to provide a university branded blog service as these free external services can easily be used for blogging activities in teaching and learning.

Instant Messaging Wikipedia defines Instant Messaging or IM as a form of real-time communication between two or more people based on typed text. The text is conveyed via computers connected over a network such as the Internet. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? • People don't know they need an IM service until they've got one - then they wonder how they did without it. • IM is already available to anyone who needs to use it - there's no need for IS to provide a service. • There's real value in having a single internal IM service where you can find coworkers (and/or students?) easily. • There's no role for IM in my work - email and telephone are sufficient. • The IM 'presence status' would tell me whether colleagues were around - this would be really helpful. There are also sites like Connotea40 and CiteULike41 that allow scientists to store and search for information about papers using “social tagging42”.

Questions 1. What new Web 2.0 associated applications are most helpful for research pooling initiatives? 2. How can we use Web 2.0 collaborative tools to support the process of obtaining research funding? 3. How can we ensure that the University takes best advantage of Web 2.0 services such as social tagging in its research activities? 4. What kind of support do you need/expect from Information Services to leverage these Web 2.0 associated applications in your research?

5. What do you think are the most serious risks to the University arising from the adoption of Web 2.0 associated applications? How might they be reduced?

39

http://www.blogger.com/start http://connotea.org 41 http://citeulike.org 40

42

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy

31


Appendix 3 List of participants in the consultations and interviews Name

School/Unit

Linda Anderson

linda.anderson@ed.ac.uk

Languages & Humanities

Paul Anderson

paul.anderson@ed.ac.uk

Informatics

Stuart Anderson

s.anderson@ed.ac.uk

Informatics

Si창n Bayne

sian.bayne@ed.ac.uk

Higher & Community Education

Simon Bates Michael Begg Petra Brhlikova

Jake Broadhurst

s.p.bates@ed.ac.uk michael.begg@ed.ac.uk pbrhlikova@gmail.com

jake.broadhurst@ed.ac.uk

Physics MVM LTS Centre for International Health Policy MVM

Morag Brown

morag@ling.ed.ac.uk

Philos, Psyc & Lang Sc

Neil Brown

neil.brown@ed.ac.uk

Informatics

Keith Brunton Johann Bryant Alexis Cameron Jean Carletta Fiona Carmichael James Carr

kbrunton@ph.ed.ac.uk j.bryant@ed.ac.uk alexis.cameron@ed.ac.uk jean.carletta@ed.ac.uk lhcfcs@staffmail.ed.ac.uk james.carr@ed.ac.uk

Michael Clouser

michael.clouser@gmail.com

Denny Colledge

denny.colledge@ed.ac.uk

Martin Corley Martin Crapper Ken Currie Bruce Darby Ed Dee

martin.corley@ed.ac.uk martin.crapper@ed.ac.uk ken.currie@ed.ac.uk bdarby@miscorp.ed.ac.uk ed.dee@ed.ac.uk

Physics Institute of Astronomy EDINA Informatics HSS Support Team Management School & Econ Informatics Library Psychology Eng & Electronics HSS College Office Disability Office IS

32


Name Cameron Dishington Alastair Dodds

School/Unit cam.dishington@ed.ac.uk alastair.dodds@ed.ac.uk

Marshall Dozier

marshall.dozier@ed.ac.uk

Rachel Ellaway

rachel.ellaway@ed.ac.uk

Management School & Econ Moray House School of Education Medical Libraries MVM

David Findlay

d.findlay@ed.ac.uk

Computing Services

Bob Fisher

r.b.fisher@ed.ac.uk

Informatics

Rory Ewins

rory.ewins@ed.ac.uk

Akiko Hemmi

akiko.hemmi@ed.ac.uk

Karen Howie

karen.howie@ed.ac.uk

Higher & Community Ed Higher & Community Education Biological Sciences

Kirsty Gillies

kirstyg@miscorp.ed.ac.uk

International Office

Eric Glendinning

e.h.glendinning@ed.ac.uk

IALS

Alex Graham

alex.graham@ed.ac.uk

Erin Jackson

e.jackson@ed.ac.uk

Kate-Orton Johnson Wesley Kerr

k.orton-johnson@ed.ac.uk wesley.kerr@ed.ac.uk

Pathology Law Social Political Studies Chemistry

Alistair Knock

a.knock@ed.ac.uk

Angela Lamb

angela.lamb@ed.ac.uk

Computing Services

Eric Laurier

eric.laurier@gmail.com

GeoSciences

Hamish Macleod

h.a.macleod@ed.ac.uk

Higher & Community Education

Antony Maciocia

a.maciocia@ed.ac.uk

Abdul Majothi Anne-Marie Scott Stephan Matthiesen Paul McLaughlin Noel Millar

abdul@ed.ac.uk anne-marie.scott@ed.ac.uk stephan.matthiesen@ed.ac.uk paul.mclaughlin@ed.ac.uk noel.millar@ed.ac.uk

Disability Office

Maths IS MIS GeoSciences Biological Sciences Computing Services

33


Name Paul Milne Robert Muetzelfeldt Sara Parvis Jessie Paterson Andy Pryde

School/Unit paul.milne@ed.ac.uk r.muetzelfeldt@ed.ac.uk

Informatics

s.parvis@ed.ac.uk

Divinity

jessie.paterson@ed.ac.uk

Divinity

andrew.pryde@ed.ac.uk

David Reimer

dreimer@holyrood.ed.ac.uk

Janet Rennie

janetr@miscorp.ed.ac.uk

Ruby Rennie

ruby.rennie@ed.ac.uk

Dave Robertson

EDINA

dr@inf.ed.ac.uk

IS Divinity HSS College Office TESOL Informatics

Jen Ross

jen.ross@ed.ac.uk

Higher & Community Education

Dory Scaltsas

scaltsas@ed.ac.uk

Philosophy

Burkhard Schafer

b.schafer@ed.ac.uk

Law

Alan Sloan

alan.sloan@ed.ac.uk

HSS College Office

John Smith

john.smith@ed.ac.uk

IS

James Stewart

j.k.stewart@ed.ac.uk

CSSR

Fiona Vine

fiona.vine@ed.ac.uk

Moray House School of Education

Lorenzo Vingentini

l.vigentini@ed.ac.uk

Psychology

Morag Watson Mark Wetton

morag.watson@ed.ac.uk markwe@miscorp.ed.ac.uk

Library Systems MIS

34

Web 2.0  

some information on web 2.0