Woodland Owner Networks and Peer-to-Peer Learning

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    Master volunteer programs are very common in Extension natural resources. These programs are built on the two-step flow model.

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    Woodland Owner Networks and Peer-to-Peer Learning - Presentation Transcript

    1. 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
    2. Project Origins
    3. Outline
      • Networks and peer-to-peer learning
      • Current projects
      • Building a network
      • Next steps
    4. 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
    5. Rationale: peer networks
      • Preferred source of info & advice
      • Accessible
      • Efficient
    6. Structural network theory
      • Social memory
      • Heterogeneity
      • Resilience
      • Learning
      Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
    7. Structural network theory
      • Social memory
      • Heterogeneity
      • Resilience
      • Learning
      Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
    8. Structural network theory
      • Social memory
      • Heterogeneity
      • Resilience
      • Learning
      Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
    9. Structural network theory
      • Social memory
      • Heterogeneity
      • Resilience
      • Learning
      Crona, Bodin, and Ernstson 2006 Network density Reachability Centrality Betweenness / modularity
    10. Diffusion models: two-step flow Source: Watts & Dodds 2007, J. Consumer Research
    11. Diffusion models: network Source: Watts & Dodds 2007, J. Consumer Research
    12. 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
    13. Social learning
      • One actor proactively seeking new information from another. Optimized in large, low-density networks.
    14. Social influence
      • One actor persuading another to adopt a viewpoint, belief, or behavior. Optimized in small, dense, “tight-knit” networks.
    15. 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
    16. Some roles to foster peer-to-peer learning
      • Organize learning space
      • Moderate information
      • Support volunteers
      • Support organizations
    17. Davis Role: Organize learning space
    18. Role: Moderator
    19. Role: Support volunteers
    20. Role: Strategic network support
      • Creating efficient connections where they’re missing.
    21. 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
    22. Egocentric networks
      • Who do you turn to for advice? -Family, peer, professional -Location -Opinions -Network density
      • Type and nature of peer influence
    23. 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?
    24. Forest Landowner Networks in New York Shorna Broussard, Cornell
    25. What did you do, in part, as a result of your contact and communication with a NYMFO?
    26. 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
    27. A qualitative case study approach
    28. Cases
      • Western US Extension master volunteer (e.g. Master Woodland Stewards)
      • Midwestern US woodland owner co-operative
      • Eastern US community-based organization
      • Landcare, Australia
    29. 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?
    30. Roles: Two-step flow model
    31. Roles: network model
    32. Building a network
    33. Symposium photo
    34. Symposium photos
    35. Symposium photo
    36. 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?
    37.  
    38. Ning site screenshot
    39. 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
    40. Join us! http://WoodlandOwnerNetworks.ning.com or http://bit.ly/10G9ky Eli Sagor, [email_address]

    + esagoresagor, 5 months ago

    custom

    232 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 232
      • 232 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 0
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories