Woodland Owner Networks and Peer-to-Peer Learning - Presentation Transcript
Woodland Owner Networks and Peer-to-Peer Learning Eli Sagor University of Minnesota Extension Shorna Broussard Allred Cornell University Maureen McDonough Michigan State University Small-scale Forestry 2009 Morgantown, WV
Project Origins
Outline
Networks and peer-to-peer learning
Current projects
Building a network
Next steps
What is peer-to-peer learning?
Everyone a teacher, everyone a learner
One-on-one or group
Learner driven
Peer-validated
Different ways of knowing
Rationale: peer networks
Preferred source of info & advice
Accessible
Efficient
Structural network theory
Social memory
Heterogeneity
Resilience
Learning
Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
Structural network theory
Social memory
Heterogeneity
Resilience
Learning
Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
Structural network theory
Social memory
Heterogeneity
Resilience
Learning
Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
Structural network theory
Social memory
Heterogeneity
Resilience
Learning
Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
Diffusion models: two-step flow Source: Watts & Dodds 2007, J. Consumer Research
Diffusion models: network Source: Watts & Dodds 2007, J. Consumer Research
Reachability / network distance
Networks in which more actors (info sources) are reachable across short “distances” can more easily access and distribute information
Bodin, Crona, and Ernstson 2006
Oh et al. 2004
Social learning
One actor proactively seeking new information from another. Optimized in large, low-density networks.
Social influence
One actor persuading another to adopt a viewpoint, belief, or behavior. Optimized in small, dense, “tight-knit” networks.
Other social network concepts
Weak ties: Distant, infrequent contacts. Most efficient for codified knowledge
Strong ties: Close, frequent, trusted contacts. Most efficient for tacit knowledge
Reagans & McEvily 2003 Granovetter 1973
Some roles to foster peer-to-peer learning
Organize learning space
Moderate information
Support volunteers
Support organizations
Davis Role: Organize learning space
Role: Moderator
Role: Support volunteers
Role: Strategic network support
Creating efficient connections where they’re missing.
Current projects
Egocentric network analysis: MA, MN, Finland
Master volunteer program evaluation
Social marketing
Qualitative case studies: US, Australia, Finland
Strategic networks
Network optimization: Positions and roles
Egocentric networks
Who do you turn to for advice? -Family, peer, professional -Location -Opinions -Network density
Type and nature of peer influence
Research questions
What are the outcomes of different models of peer-to-peer outreach?
What kind of information flows through woodland owner networks, and how?
How and why do outcomes differ from alternative programs?
How does participation affect network size and access to trusted information?
Forest Landowner Networks in New York Shorna Broussard, Cornell
What did you do, in part, as a result of your contact and communication with a NYMFO?
Take home messages: NY
Positive experiences with MFO peers
Common topics: land characteristics goals stewardship using a professional forester
Common behavior outcomes: seeking information setting goals hiring a private consulting forester
A qualitative case study approach
Cases
Western US Extension master volunteer (e.g. Master Woodland Stewards)
Midwestern US woodland owner co-operative
Eastern US community-based organization
Landcare, Australia
Homophily, heterophily, and structural equivalence
Homophily: “She’s just like me.”
Structural equivalence: “We’re in similar situations”
Relationships between homophily, structural equivalence, influence, trust, information flow, and behavior?
Roles: Two-step flow model
Roles: network model
Building a network
Symposium photo
Symposium photos
Symposium photo
Symposium: Priority issues
How to start a new network.
What would it take to grow existing networks?
Gap analysis: Where (or for what audiences) is this not happening?
How to evaluate success, including return on investment?
Other peer-to-peer research: Outcomes, roles
How to integrate into existing programs?
How to build and support our network?
Public policy changes needed to support this?
How to leverage other Federal (not necessarily forestry-related) programs?
Ning site screenshot
Future directions
Mapping woodland owner social networks
Measuring social network effects on woodland owner behavior
Developing a practical toolkit for program organizers
Building the network
Project steering committee
Brett Butler , US Forest Service FIA / NWOS
Mark Buccowich , US Forest Service, NA
Shorna Broussard Allred , Cornell University
Karl Dalla Rosa , US Forest Service, Co-op Forestry
Dylan Jenkins , TNC Pennsylvania
David Kittredge and Paul Catanzaro , UMass Amherst
Amanda Kueper , University of Minnesota
Jim Johnson , Oregon State University
Maureen McDonough , Michigan State University
James Malone , AL Treasure Forest Assoc.
Don Mansius and Kevin Doran , Maine Forest Service
Eric Norland , CSREES
David Robertson , Virginia Tech
Join us! http://WoodlandOwnerNetworks.ning.com or http://bit.ly/10G9ky Eli Sagor, [email_address]
0 comments
Post a comment