Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Embedding & Sustaining University 2.0


Published on

Slides for a talk on "Embedding & Sustaining University 2.0 " given be Brian Kelly, UKOLN at the University 2.0 conference in Santander on 8 September 2010.


Published in: Education
  • Dating direct: ❶❶❶ ❶❶❶
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Dating for everyone is here: ♥♥♥ ♥♥♥
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Embedding & Sustaining University 2.0

  1. 1. Embedding & Sustaining University 2.0 Brian Kelly, UKOLN University of Bath Bath, UK, BA2 7AY UKOLN is supported by: Acceptable Use Policy Recording this talk, taking photos, discussing the content using Twitter, blogs, etc. is permitted providing distractions to others is minimised. Twitter: Email: [email_address] Blog: Twitter: #uimpuni20 This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat) Delicious tag: uimpuni20
  2. 2. About Me <ul><li>Brian Kelly: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National Web adviser to UK higher education sector </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Based at UKOLN, a national centre of expertise in digital information management and located at the University of Bath </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Involved in Web since January 1993 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>770+ blog posts since Nov 2006 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Over 350 presentations given since 1997 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Current area of interest include Web 2.0, Web standards, Web preservation, Web accessibility, amplified events, … </li></ul></ul>Introduction
  3. 3. <ul><li>Author of peer-reviewed papers on: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web standards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web preservation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web accessibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Peer-Reviewed Papers <ul><li>Peer-reviewed Papers </li></ul>
  5. 5. My Presentations <ul><li>42 talks given in 2009 on Web 2.0, Web accessibility, Web preservation & standards. </li></ul><ul><li>Note use of Web 2.0 technologies & approaches: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS feeds </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Geo-location data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Openness of resources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>Talks given in 2009 Note also use of blogs, video blogs, YouTube, Twitter, …
  6. 6. About Our Funders <ul><li>JISC is the core funder for UKOLN </li></ul>
  7. 7. The Economic Context <ul><li>Public sector organisations across the UK and facing cuts </li></ul>Economic Context Further cuts to be announced in Oct 2010
  8. 8. About This Talk <ul><li>The approaches behind the concept of &quot; University 2.0 &quot; are now becoming more widely accepted . We are now seeing initial uses by the early adopters of Web 2.0 and Social Web services being adopted by mainstream users. </li></ul><ul><li>However the doubts and concerns which were initially raised by sceptics have not disappeared - there are legitimate concerns regarding the sustainability of Social Web services, the risks of changes to terms and conditions provided by commercial providers of services, the dangers of lock-in and possible difficulties in migrating content, services and communities to other environments as well as a variety of legal risks . Such concerns are becoming even more relevant in the context of the global economic crisis and the possibilities that services used to support University 2.0 may not be economically viable . </li></ul><ul><li>In this talk Brian Kelly, a national Web adviser to the UK's higher education community will describe approaches to ensuring the long-term sustainability of institutional use of the Social Web services, technologies and approaches which underpins University 2.0. </li></ul>Introduction
  9. 9. About This Talk <ul><li>This talk: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Provides a brief summary of Web 2.0 and the Social Web with some examples of its use </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Describes barriers to the successful deployment of Web 2.0 in higher education </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Looks at ways of overcoming such barriers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Acknowledging the barriers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Risk assessment and risk management </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Cultural change </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outlines a framework for embedding & sustainability </li></ul></ul>Introduction
  10. 10. Advocacy to Embedding <ul><li>Is this elearning 2.0? </li></ul><ul><li>See </li></ul>
  11. 11. Sustainable House of Cards <ul><li>The sustainable House of Cards – see </li></ul>
  12. 12. University 2.0 & Talk 2.0 <ul><li>University 2.0 can be regarded as: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>User-focused : encourages user participation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Trusts users : who will often wish to do good </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Always beta : experimental; willing to take risks & learn from them </li></ul></ul><ul><li>This talk: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Aims to employ University 2.0 approaches: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Trusing users </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>User-generated content </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>#uimpuni20 Twitter hashtag for comments </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>#que Twitter hashtag for questions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>#humor Twitter hashtag for jokes </li></ul></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Virtual Twitter Protocol <ul><li>For those who aren´t Twitter users (and those who are) </li></ul>Twitter Memo About (#) #uimpuni20 Comments (#) #que To (@) About (@) Message
  14. 14. CLEX Report <ul><li>Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience (CLEX): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Report on “ Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World ” report published May 2009 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Chaired by Sir David Melville, VC of Kent University </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Recommendations that: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ JISC continues to develop a research and support programme into the use of Web 2.0 for all aspects of university business” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ JISC works with the HE funding bodies and Universities UK to explore issues and practice in the development of new business models that exploit Web 2.0 technologies ”   </li></ul></ul>“ No new insights but senior management endorsement of our work in promoting and exploiting the potential of Web 2.0 & the Social Web in HE ”
  15. 15. If Web 2.0 Changes Everything <ul><li>“ If Web 2.0 changes everything, I see no reason why that doesn’t apply as much to professional bodies and universities as it does to high street bookshops ” </li></ul><ul><li>Andy Powell, eFoundations blog, May 2009 </li></ul>But how might Web 2.0 change everything?
  16. 16. Web 2.0 and Change <ul><li>Network as the platform : Outsourcing IT </li></ul><ul><li>Social networks : FB, social sharing, … </li></ul><ul><li>Out-sourced digital identity : Who provides it? </li></ul><ul><li>New modes of learning : Social, informal learning, … </li></ul><ul><li>New modes of research : Social research, … </li></ul><ul><li>Reluctance to travel : Environmental issues </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of  funding : Economic issues </li></ul><ul><li>Always beta :  Continual change </li></ul><ul><li>Generational changes : “Google generation” </li></ul><ul><li>Blogs, wikis, social sharing, … : Technologies </li></ul><ul><li>Syndication technologies : Breaking down silos </li></ul><ul><li>Mobile access &always connected : Mobile learning </li></ul>
  17. 17. University 2.0 <ul><li>Out-sourced provision of technologies </li></ul>
  18. 18. Social Networks <ul><li>Focus on individual, not the institution </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>The mobile Webv </li></ul>Mobile Web 4540851506/in/faves-36330829924@N01/ Phone as the students’ learning interface
  20. 20. <ul><li>Doing things differently </li></ul>Innovation
  21. 21. Community?
  22. 22. Openness?
  23. 23. Linked Data?
  24. 24. Remote & Amplified Events? <ul><li>Must lectures only exist only in physical places at a fixed time? </li></ul>
  25. 25. Can we find a way out?
  26. 26. Twitter WWT Protocol <ul><li>Your turn. You have: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>W ritten some notes containing a #eureka moment, #humor or #que </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Now: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Take your note and w alk to someone you don´t know well </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Show them your notes & agree on the best </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Grab the microphone and t alk </li></ul></ul>
  27. 27. The Persistence of Memory by Salvadore Dali. How can we improve our understanding & recollection of events?
  28. 28. What Did @Piscitelli Say <ul><li>Briefly reflect on: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What Alejandro Piscitelli said on Monday </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The impact he had on you </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The things you disagreed with </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Here are my thoughts: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>We are living in a post-Google world. Education needs to recognise this! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Universities has always been in crisis. We can adapt :-) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education & learning is a mashup - taking multiple ideas and using them in new ways. We must have the right to remix </li></ul></ul>
  29. 29. My Thoughts <ul><li>Here are my thoughts: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>We are living in a post-Google world. Education needs to recognise this! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Universities has always been in crisis. We can adapt :-) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education & learning is a mashup - taking multiple ideas and using them in new ways. We must have the right to remix </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 can go wrong, such as loss of many Facebook pages. Web 2.0 is therefore risky. Should Universities take such risks? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 is about the privatisation of learning by large media companies. AVoid at all costs!!! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>My thoughts (or not!) Alejandro doesn´t own the thoughts, the interpreatuons, the misinterpretations, ... </li></ul>
  30. 30. What He Said <ul><li>See </li></ul>
  31. 31. Web 2.0 <ul><li>What Is Web 2.0? </li></ul><ul><li>Marketing term (derived from observing 'patterns') rather than technical standards - “an attitude not a technology” </li></ul>Web2MemeMap, Tim O’Reilly, 2005 <ul><li>Characteristics Of Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Network as platform </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Always beta </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Clean URIs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Remix and mash-ups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Syndication (RSS) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Architecture of participation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs & wikis </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Social networking </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Social tagging (folksonomies) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Trust and openness </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0
  32. 32. University 2.0 Web 2.0 University (2.0) <ul><ul><li>Architecture of participation </li></ul></ul>Expectation of students as active learners, not passive consumers. Universities as democratic institutions. <ul><ul><li>Trust and openness </li></ul></ul>Giving responsibilities to students & staff. Academic freedom. Less of a managerial cultural than in other public sector organisations. Network as platform ??? Subject as the platform, not the institution. But more of a challenge (outsourcing as a threat)
  33. 33. Benefits of University 2.0 <ul><li>Delivery Mechanisms (“network as platform”): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Global outreach : maximise engagement with and impact of ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outsourced services : allowing organisations to focus on their strengths </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Exploits infrastructure : standards (e.g. RSS) & services (Google, Amazon, Twitter, ..) in place </li></ul></ul><ul><li>User Benefits: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Users no longer passive consumers of content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User can create and comment on content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use services they’ll encounter when they leave </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social Web enhances collaborative learning & research </li></ul></ul>
  34. 34. What’s Happening in the UK? <ul><li>UKOLN’s Institutional Web Management Workshop (IWMW) : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>3-day event held annually since 1997 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Attracts ~170-200 participants </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mixture of plenary talks, parallel workshop sessions, barcamps, … </li></ul></ul>What ‘University 2.0’ topics did Web managers discuss at IWMW 2010 held at the University of Sheffield on 12-14 July?
  35. 35. Sheffield Made Us Video <ul><li> </li></ul>
  36. 36. Mobile Web <ul><li>Bristol University’s Campus Assistant project </li></ul>Access to University information about events, timetable, etc. and third party information about bus timetables, etc. using the student’s personal device The future might include Augmented Reality
  37. 37. Disaster Planning Talk by Jeremy Speller, UCL on “It's all gone horribly wrong: disaster communication in a crisis” “ Wordpress can be used to push information to other services”
  38. 38. Use of Social Networks <ul><li>‘ Follow Us On Twitter… Join Our Facebook Group ’ parallel session facilitated by Joanna Blackburn, University of Salford </li></ul><ul><li>Explored opportunities provided by Social Web, associated risks & ways of addressing risks </li></ul>Video summary of session available on IWMW 2010 blog
  39. 39. Mashups <ul><li>‘ FlashMash or &quot;Flash, I love you, but we only have 90 minutes to build a mashup ’ parallel session facilitated by Owen Stephens </li></ul><ul><li>Hands-on session with participants trying to build a mashup which merges two or more sets of information available on the Web </li></ul>Video summary of session available on IWMW 2010 blog
  40. 40. Video Streaming <ul><li>IWMW 20010 was an ‘amplified event’: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Live video streaming </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Official event Twitterer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Access to videos after event </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>
  41. 41. <ul><li>Videos of talks still available, showing speaker and screen display </li></ul>
  42. 42. IWMW 2010 Blog <ul><li>The IWMW 2010 blog was used to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Advertise the event and the talks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide summaries of the sessions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Publish interviews with participants </li></ul></ul>Summaries of talks published on event log
  43. 43. Social Networks <ul><li>Buddypress social network provided in hosted Wordpress blog </li></ul>BuddyPress social network provided on event blog
  44. 44. Reuse of Slides <ul><li>Where possible slides were hosted on Slideshare which allowed them to be easily embedded elsewhere </li></ul>
  45. 45. IWMW10 Event Amplification <ul><li>Amplified event is an: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ event in which talks & discussions are 'amplified' through use of networked technologies in order to extend the reach of the event deliberations ” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The IWMW 2010 event amplification used: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Video stream </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter back channel </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Slideshare </li></ul></ul><ul><li>We stated we would “ treat the remote audience as first-class citizens ” </li></ul>
  46. 46. Online Barcamp <ul><li>Barcamp: user generated conference, open, participatory workshop events, whose content is provided by participants </li></ul><ul><li>But what about the online audience? </li></ul>Review of online barcamp available on IWMW 2010 blog
  47. 47. Twitter Statistics <ul><li>Summarizr service used to provide statistics based on #iwmw10 tweets stored in Twapper Keeper archive. </li></ul>Longer session but also controversial (MS Sharepoint)
  48. 48. Remote Usage <ul><li>Summarizr service updated shortly before event to provide summary of geo-located tweets </li></ul>Number of geo-located tweets: 331 (~9%) 199 geo-located tweets outside Sheffield <ul><li>Note relatively low no. of geo-located tweets possibly due to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Usability issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Privacy concerns </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Battery life </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>
  49. 49. Review <ul><li>We have seen: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses of Web 2.0 highlighted at a national event </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses of Web 2.0 to support an event </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Highlights of work you will be familiar with (?) </li></ul><ul><li>But: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What of the risks? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Are the approaches sustainable? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Do they provide a good ROI? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Will users use the services? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What evidence do we have to justify assertions? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… . </li></ul></ul><ul><li>There’s a need for a framework to assist in selection of appropriate services </li></ul>
  50. 50.
  51. 51. Use of Social Networks <ul><li>BuddyPress social network for IWMW 2010 was little used </li></ul>
  52. 52. A Sceptic’s View <ul><li>“ People won’t use Social Web services – Social Web is for trivial personal uses” </li></ul><ul><li>“ The services aren’t sustainable” </li></ul><ul><li>“ What about privacy, data protection?” </li></ul><ul><li>“ What about copyright infringements and other legal concerns?” </li></ul><ul><li>“ I don’t want my data trapped in such services?” </li></ul><ul><li>“ We’ve no money  We need to focus on core activities” </li></ul>
  53. 53. Reshaping Gartner Curve <ul><li>Chasm </li></ul><ul><li>Failure to go beyond developers & early adopters </li></ul><ul><li>Need for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Advocacy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Listening to users </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>This talk looks at approaches for avoiding the chasm and shaping the curve
  54. 54. Need For Advocacy <ul><li>RIN Report gives two barriers to uptake of Web 2.0: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of clarity around benefits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Concerns about quality & trust </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Recommends: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Raising awareness of tools & services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Publicising examples of successful uses & good practices </li></ul></ul>
  55. 58. Do You Have Examples? <ul><li>Your advocacy. Can you: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide evidence of, say, effective use of Twitter? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>If so have you: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Publicised such examples? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Invited feedback and comments? </li></ul></ul>
  56. 59. Evidence of Twitter’s Benefits <ul><li>Keynote talk at OZeWAI 2009 conference given in Melbourne in January 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>Afterwards two tweets received: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ @briankelly enjoyed your presentation this morning about a holistic approach to accessibility #ozewai ” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ @briankelly Fantastic talk this morning, I will come up and say hi at lunch ;) “. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>This led to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Discussions at conference </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Awareness of how their expertise complement mine </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Their contributions to a subsequent peer-reviewed paper </li></ul></ul>
  57. 60. Evidence of Twitter’s Benefits <ul><li>Blog post on “ It Started With A Tweet ”: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tweet received from @slewth </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Looked at her Twitter profile </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Followed link to her blog </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Similar interests so made contact which led to joint paper </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Follow-up post on “ You Have 45 Second To Make An Impression ” described how paper won prize at W4A 2010 conference  </li></ul>Examples of evidence of how Twitter can develop professional networks which can lead to tangible research benefits
  58. 61. Advocacy & Listening - Example <ul><li>Twitter: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Liked by many early adopters </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need to explain its potential to others </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need to understand & address concerns </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Approach taken: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs posts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Listening to responses </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Briefing documents </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Monitoring reactions </li></ul></ul>
  59. 62. But It May Not Be For Everyone <ul><li>Should everyone: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Give talks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Write papers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Write software </li></ul></ul><ul><li>If not, should we expect everyone to use social media? </li></ul><ul><li>Those who are most willing to </li></ul><ul><ul><li>share details of other’s ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>share their own ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><li>may be Belbin “resource investigators” &“plants” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ I agree that a Plant/Resource Investigator combo is perfect for the stereotypical blog author ” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Social Web tools are perhaps more readily adopted by individuals with certain characteristics than other ” </li></ul></ul>
  60. 63. What Do You Use? <ul><li>What Web 2.0 tools do you use regularly? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs (reading) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs (writing) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wikis (Wikipedia) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What other Web 2.0 aspects do you use? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Creative Commons for your materials </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commenting on other people’s blogs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allowing your content to be syndicated </li></ul></ul>
  61. 64. Evidence of Perceived Barriers <ul><li>Series of Web 2.0 workshops has provided evidence of the barriers to effective use of Web 2.0 services </li></ul>
  62. 65. The Barriers Barriers Sustainability of services Data lock-in Data protection, privacy, … Personal concerns Lack of interest: colleagues Costs Accessibility Difficulties in selection Inappropriate content Does it deliver expected benefits? Lack of interest: users Lack of expertise
  63. 66. What Barriers Have You Found? <ul><li>Have you: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Used services which disappeared? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Used services which changes their T&Cs? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Had difficulties in getting your data out? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Had difficulties and had no Help Desk to provide support? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Forgot the service’s username / password? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Worried about information, photos, … of you on Social Web services? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>
  64. 67. The Barriers Are Real! <ul><li>Personal example using </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A record of books I’ve read (data gathered from Amazon) </li></ul></ul>Need to monitor small signals which may greater significance later <ul><ul><li>Others have complained </li></ul></ul>My data was exportable via RSS but (a) how usable is this and (b) how obvious is this solution? Barriers <ul><ul><li>Amazon interface broke in Feb 2008 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But there is an export function … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… which is broken </li></ul></ul>
  65. 68. Changes to T&C <ul><li>Ning Social Network used to support IWMW 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Withdrawal of free service announced in 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>Service withdrawn in August </li></ul>To continue using Ning, you must  select a plan  by August 20, 2010. Plans start at just $2.95/month ...
  66. 69. Lest You Forget <ul><li>If you ignore your social network it may attract spam comments </li></ul>
  67. 70. Privacy, Data Protection, … <ul><li>Digital cameras, mobile photos, camcorders, … are increasing volume of photos / videos being taken and being published online. </li></ul><ul><li>But what about issues such as: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Privacy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Data protection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Confidentiality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>Barriers
  68. 71. Inappropriate Content <ul><li>Inappropriate content might include: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Spam comments on blogs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pornography </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Misleading information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Illegal content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>Barriers Over 250,000 spam comments submitted to the UK Web focus blog from Nov 2006 – June 2008
  69. 72. Beware The IT Fundamentalists <ul><li>We need to avoid simplistic solutions to the complexities: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Standards Fundamentalist: we just need XML </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Source Fundamentalist: we just need Linux </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vendor Fundamentalist: we must use next version of our enterprise system (and you must fit in with this) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accessibility Fundamentalist: we must do WAI WCAG 1.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User Fundamentalist: must do whatever users want </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Legal Fundamentalist: it breaches copyright, … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ownership Fundamentalist: must own everything we use </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perfectionist : It doesn't do everything, so we'll do nothing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Simplistic Developer : I've developed a perfect solution – I don't care if it doesn't run in the real world </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 : It’s new; its cool! </li></ul></ul>Barriers
  70. 73. Addressing Barriers <ul><li>How do we address such barriers: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ignore them and take risks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Refuse to engage with Web 2.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Or adopt a balanced approach: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Assess and manage risks </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Staff development </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>New media literacy / Transliteracy </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Evidence-based policy-making </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Clarification of purposes of services </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Re-interpretation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sharing solutions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Clarification of responsibilities </li></ul></ul></ul>Possible Solutions Embedding & Sustainability framework
  71. 74. Interoperability Issues <ul><li>What happens if Social Web services host your data and: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>You can’t get the data back out? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>You only get the unstructured or poor quality data back out? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>You can’t get the comments, annotations, tags out? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>There’s a need to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ensure data export capabilities or </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Upload data from an alternative managed sources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Understand limitations of data export / import and make plans around limitations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perhaps accept limitations </li></ul></ul>Possible Solutions
  72. 75. Blog Case Study (1a) <ul><li>UKOLN blogs hosted in The Cloud: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>UK Web Focus </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rambling of a Remote Worker </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>JISC PoWR </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>JISC SUETr </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>Project blogs Personal professional blogs Managed cessation of JISC PoWR blog See “ Approaches to archiving professional blogs hosted in the cloud ” iPres 2010 paper
  73. 76. Blog Case Study (1b) <ul><li>Processes: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Announcement on impending freeze </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Removal of dynamic widgets (e.g. live Twitter feeds) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Analysis & publication of statistics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Closure post </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>XML dump taken (for possible migration) </li></ul></ul>
  74. 77. Blog Case Study 2 <ul><li>IWMW 2009 Blog </li></ul><ul><li>The IWMW 2009 event blog: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Also frozen </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Policies described </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Statistics provided </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Links to resources provided </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Links to future events maintained </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dynamic widget remove </li></ul></ul>
  75. 78. Social Network Case Study <ul><li>Ning used to host IWMW 2008 event social network </li></ul><ul><li>Email received on 16 Aug 2010 with 5 days notice of closure </li></ul><ul><li>Actions: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>WinHTTrack used to mirror resource </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Summary of usage to be documented (little use) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local copy then to be deleted </li></ul></ul>
  76. 79. Slideshare – OK so Far? <ul><li>What happens to your slides if Slideshare disappears? </li></ul><ul><li>Approach taken to risk of loss of access mechanism: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Master copy held on managed environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Info on master on title slide and metadata </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CC licence & download available – many copies </li></ul></ul>
  77. 80. Is Remote The Problem? <ul><li>We’ve seen: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Remote services which are lost </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Remote services which change their terms and conditions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>We’ve also seen the effort needed to main content : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Remove spam </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Manage access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Migrate content </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Do we conclude: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Remote service may have demonstrated value </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Now need to implement services in-house? </li></ul></ul>
  78. 81. The Individual’s Blog (1) <ul><li>Auricle blog: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Launched at Bath Uni in Jan 2004 by head of e-learning team, Bath </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High profile & public visibility by early adopter & evangelist </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Today: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>It’s disappeared from Bath Web site </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lost after evangelist left, new staff arrive, new priorities, concerns over security, … </li></ul></ul>
  79. 82. The Individual’s Blog (2) <ul><li>Auricle reborn: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Further Google revealed the blog has been reborn </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New domain ( </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New engine (Wordpress) & look and feel (but old engine still available) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New content being added </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Old content still accessible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Preservation is helped by: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Continued access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Motivated & skilled owners </li></ul></ul>
  80. 83. Being Realistic <ul><li>Options in light of the credit crunch: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Let’s build up an empire now which will be embarrassing to close down </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Let’s use issues of ownership, stability, privacy, … to stifle discussion of 3 rd party solutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Let’s explore a blended approach (a 3 rd way?) </li></ul></ul>
  81. 84. The Pilot was a Success … <ul><li>Following a very successful pilot project the JANET Collaborate prototype site will shortly be retired. </li></ul><ul><li> … </li></ul><ul><li>This retirement has come about as a result of difficulties in maintaining the prototype beyond its intended lifetime. We are now looking at how to add the functionality into the JANET service portfolio in order to provide an improved feature set based on the requirements gathered in the pilot. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>We understand that some fans of the prototype site may be disappointed by this news. We apologise for this and at the same time thank all the users of the prototype for their strong, enthusiastic support during the pilot. </li></ul>
  82. 85. Managed External Services <ul><li>We’re seeing greater take-up of email in the cloud </li></ul>Cloud computing - Hope or Hype? , From A Distance blog, 4 Nov 2009, Chris Sexton Discussions about managed cloud services now mainstream
  83. 86. Photo from Guardian Online 3 July 2010 X
  84. 87. The 1 – 9 – 90 Challenge <ul><li>Participation Inequality: Encouraging More Users to Contribute </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In most online communities, 90% of users are lurkers who never contribute, 9% of users contribute a little, and 1% of users account for almost all the action. (Jakob Neilson, Oct 2006) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Potential Benefits: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Globalisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cross-fertilisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unexpected benefits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maximising impact </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Potential Dangers: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Globalisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mono-culture </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unexpected dangers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Loss of impact </li></ul></ul>We need to accept that Cloud Services will play an important role in higher education
  85. 88. Re-interpreting Accessibility <ul><li>Web 2.0 services may not comply with WCAG 1.0 accessibility guidelines: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>But many Web 1.0 sites fail to comply too </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The guidelines themselves are flawed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>We can: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Make use of WCAG 2.0 guidelines (much better) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Seek to address the accessibility of the purposes of the digital services, rather than the digital resources themselves: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Blended accessibility for blended learning </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Holistic accessibility </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>See papers of Accessibility 2.0, Holistic Accessibility, … </li></ul></ul></ul>
  86. 89. Just-In-Time Accessibility <ul><li>Amplified events: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enhance accessibility for those who may find travel to events difficult </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>May be regarded as infringing WCAG accessibility guidelines </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Our approaches: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Using “reasonable measures” required in legislation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Exploiting technical innovations e.g. iTitle Twitter captions </li></ul></ul>
  87. 90. Sustainability Framework <ul><li>Proposed sustainability framework </li></ul>
  88. 91. Policies <ul><li>Institutional policies: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Determined by governance model </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Influenced by: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Organisational culture </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Discipline cultures (e.g. arts vs sciences) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wider issues (e.g. economic factors, political factors, local & regional factors, …) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Implications: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>One size doesn’t fit all </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Importance flexibility & of change control </li></ul></ul>Policies
  89. 92. <ul><li>Experience at Croydon Council illustrates the need for lightweight and flexible policies </li></ul>Lightweight Policies Mosman Council provides an example of a lightweight policy for Twitter Policies
  90. 93. Social Media Policy <ul><li>Essex University have recently announced their social media policy </li></ul>The accompanying advice supports developments of best practices
  91. 94. Risks and IWMW 2006 <ul><li>Risk assessment approach initially developed for IWMW 2006 </li></ul>Risk Management
  92. 95. Risks and IWMW 2006 <ul><li>Summary of the risks </li></ul>Risk Management
  93. 96. Risks and IWMW 2006 <ul><li>There are also risks in doing nothing </li></ul>Risk Management
  94. 97. Copyright Risks <ul><li>R = A x B x C x D </li></ul><ul><li>where </li></ul><ul><ul><li>R is the financial risk; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A is the chances that what has been done is infringement; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>B is the chances that the copyright owner becomes aware of such infringement; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>C is the chances that having become aware, the owner sues; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>D is the financial cost (damages, legal fees, opportunity costs in defending the action, plus loss of reputation) for such a legal action. </li></ul></ul>Note this is a device aimed at providing a new way of looking at copyright issues
  95. 98. Legal Risks <ul><li>Factors to bear in mind: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Commercial use: a rights owner who later becomes aware of the use of their work may be more likely to pursue an action for infringement of copyright than if the work is being purely used for educational purposes. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Particularly sensitive subject areas: music, geographic data, literary works by eminent authors and artistic works including photographs and drawings. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Is there any track record of the contributor ignoring legal niceties in the past? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Is there any track record of a particular third party having complained before? </li></ul></ul>
  96. 99. Reducing the Legal Risks <ul><li>Approaches: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Have clear and robust notice and take down policies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Have procedures with a clear address given for complaints </li></ul></ul>Example from JORUM Procedures to Deal with Queries, Alerts and Complaints
  97. 100. Towards a Framework <ul><li>“ Time To Stop Doing and Start Thinking: A Framework For Exploiting Web 2.0 Services ”, Museums & the Web 2009 conference </li></ul>Intended Purpose Benefits Risks Missed Opps. Costs Risk MInimisation Evidence Biases Subjective factors <ul><li>Sharing experiences </li></ul><ul><li>Learning from successes & failures </li></ul><ul><li>Tackling biases </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul><ul><li>Application to existing services </li></ul><ul><li>Application to in-house development </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul>
  98. 101. Using The Framework <ul><li>Use of approach in two scenarios: use of Twitter & Facebook </li></ul>Organisational Fb Page Intended Purpose Benefits Risks Missed Opps. Costs Risk MInimisation Evidence Twitter for individuals Marketing events,… Large audiences Ownership, privacy, lock-in, effort Marketing opportunities Low? Workflow Community support Rapid feedback Org. brand Policies Low? Marketing, community
  99. 102. “ When The Axeman Cometh” <ul><li>Questions senior managers may be asking: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What third party services are being used across the institution? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What are the risks to the institution if services are not sustainable? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How should such risks be minimised? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How should we respond? </li></ul>
  100. 103. The Audit <ul><li>Memo </li></ul><ul><li>From : Pro VC </li></ul><ul><li>To : Heads of departments </li></ul><ul><li>Following the news of the loss of services hosted at MicroScape at the XYZ University demise heads of department are required to provide: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>An audit of use of third party services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A summary of associated risks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A description of risk management strategies </li></ul></ul>
  101. 104. Openness?
  102. 105. Openness & Risk-Taking <ul><li>Government to cut public sector funding by 20-40% </li></ul><ul><li>How should we respond: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sharing our experiences in order to avoid duplication & learn from mistakes (“ all bugs shallow to many eyes ”) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Thinking globally (or nationally) whilst acting locally </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Open as the default </li></ul></ul>
  103. 106. Avoiding Duplication <ul><li>Various reports commissioned </li></ul>Senior managers perspective Technical perspective Domain perspective User perspective Service Provider’s perspective
  104. 107. Duplication Across HEIs <ul><li>Need to minimise duplication of effort at institutional level </li></ul>How many Social Web policy documents will be produced across the 160+ UK HEIs? Need to avoid unnecessary replication of effort
  105. 108. Need To Create & Share Content <ul><li>Is it realistic to ask for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1 blog post per month on completed and planned activities? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 post per week? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Can we build up a shared knowledge base: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>160 universities x 2 contributors / team x 52 weeks = 16,640 posts / year </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Questions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Are support departments (Web teams, IT Services, Library, …) failing to share? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Is tax-payers money funding unnecessary duplication? </li></ul></ul>
  106. 109. Ease of Access <ul><li>Why isn’t focussed UK HE content more easily accessed within sector? Work to support better access to Web team blogs starting shortly </li></ul>
  107. 110. Academic Library Example <ul><li>Search across UK HE Library Web sites </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Implemented to support specific project </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bottom-up, not top down </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Documented on Tony Hirst’s blog </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not widely known  </li></ul></ul>Mobile interface. Also find links to ‘my’ organisation
  108. 111. Where’s The Content? <ul><li>Need to encourage more writing & sharing resources, ideas & plans. </li></ul>“ Frances is right - why not think nationally? There are so many variations of services provided by public libraries depending on each local authority. There's no consistency, and little joined up thinking. ” Also true of Universities? Threats to UK Public Libraries
  109. 112. Sustainability Framework <ul><li>Stepping back and seeing the bigger picture </li></ul>Advocacy <ul><li>Engaging with early adopters </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting early mainstream users </li></ul><ul><li>Listening to concerns </li></ul><ul><li>Refining uses & advocacy </li></ul><ul><li>Openness of advocacy </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul>Embedding Sustaining <ul><li>Gained evidence of value </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting mainstream users </li></ul><ul><li>Observing patterns of emerging best practices </li></ul><ul><li>Documenting risks assessments </li></ul><ul><li>Openness of embedding processes </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul><ul><li>Using the evidence </li></ul><ul><li>Encouraging late mainstream users </li></ul><ul><li>Implementing risk management </li></ul><ul><li>Openness of sustainability processes </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul>
  110. 113. Conclusions <ul><li>To conclude: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 and University 2.0 can deliver tangible benefits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But there are risks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>And there are risks in doing nothing or sticking with existing approaches </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The risks need to be assessed & managed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Key aspect of University 2.0 is openness, not technology </li></ul></ul>
  111. 114. Conclusions The future is exciting - but organisations will need to address the challenges. Acknowledgments to Michael Edson for the Web Tech Guy and Angry Staff Person post / comic strip
  112. 115. Questions <ul><li>Any questions </li></ul>