-+Reflections+on+Wiki+Assignment

Hi Personal Reflections:

As I mentioned yesterday, here are some of things that I will talk about in my final reflections piece about the Wiki:


 * Creation of the Consultation Document
 * posting of the summaries
 * discussion of the summaries
 * creation of the actually guide


 * Discussion through the wiki - (vs. face-to-face conversations, timing, etc.)
 * interpretation of online messages
 * it's all about relationships


 * Usability/Application of the Wiki process – for making a policy
 * great way to get different people to interact especially if face-to-face conversations are challenging
 * will use for a ProD conversation with staff - may be scary with new technology
 * protocols of communication should be established
 * size


 * Content - Assessment for Learning and it's uses


 * Conveying message on different forms of media
 * frustration vs. portability
 * culture shift from individual performance to shared ownership of final product

 This looks awesome, Roz! Thanks for the ideas. I was also wondering what you guys think about the size of wiki groups - it has been working well with our little group of three, but would it work so well with an entire staff? Would it just be the same people posting messages over and over again - potentially the same people who are eager to share their opinions at the staff room tables?

Also, I was wondering about your last point on conveying messages on different forms of media - do you mean blogs, websites...those categories of communication?

It might also be interesting to discuss the authenticity of this wiki assignment and its discussions - we were being marked the entire time, so even though our discussions have been beneficial and constructive, perhaps somewhere in the back of our minds, we knew that we would be given a grade based on our efforts. How does this change the way in which we have responded to and recorded these messages? Would we need a leader of sorts to supervise, monitor, and evaluate our data and reflections? Would the caliber of the messages be as important as it is for us right now? 

I added a few more thoughts. My biggest thing is the assessment of this piece. The same issue comes up. We're doing group work and yet we are being assessed individually. I am of the belief that this wiki stuff is group work to the extreme in that there really cannot be any individual ownership for anything done. It is a collective effort towards a singular purpose. Upon reflection I really think it goes against the nature of the wiki to split and do an individual assessment piece.  I would have to agree with you about the group assessment. How do you separate the work that's done as a group. I can certainly say that we fed off the ideas of each other to create this document. It was a valuable discussion and with you both helping to ask the critical questions, I would have learned as much about the content of Assessment for Learning and the process of making the guide throught the wiki process. I do agree that we should be assessed as a group. I do think there is a lot of value in the reflection piece. Do we need to speak to Michelle again about how we want to be assessed for this assignment?

Reflection on Wiki assignment - from the perspective of Rosalind Poon

Hi Guys,

I've posted my reflections. I will still work on it this evening, but I fear that I will forget to post it!

Just wanted to thank you both for your thoughtful conversations. I really enjoyed working with you both and hope to see you in the Fall! Darren, you're taking the EADM 501 course (Research Methodologies)? Agata, what are you taking?

Roz

Reflections upon a Wiki

Introduction


 * This is the first time I have ever participated in wiki group and the learning curve has been steep! I have taken many online classes in the past (WebCT), and I have even taught an online class using Moodle, but learning how to use the wiki has probably been the most challenging task to date. I had originally chose to join the wiki group because I wanted to get outside of my comfort zone and I soon discovered that this piece of technology was truly new. I was quite literally “a fish out of water!” The wiki assignment has not only has it allowed me to reflect upon Assessment for Learning from the critical lens of policy, but the frustration has also allowed me to explore how this new technology might be in a future policy process.**

Assessment for Learning


 * Assessment can be a very contentious issue. People have differing opinions about its functions, roles and practicalities. From our online conversations, you can see that Assessment for Learning raises many questions about the purpose of assessment, accountability, and authenticity. The questions and conversations that occurred on the wiki reminded me of the conversations that happen in schools and as such, the wiki has great potential for collaboration as it allows for people to express themselves around a given content area.

It is interesting to note here that the Richmond School District does not have an Assessment Policy. It is currently a work in progress. With assessment being at the heart of evaluation, you would think that a policy would already be in place. This is why preparing the guide for a potential consultation process is extremely useful. I can see myself using these key questions with school staffs to help guide committees and facilitate discussions.

The articles by Marzano, O’Connor and Davies all provided a great backdrop for conversations about assessment for learning and the final resource guide. The key ideas from the articles provided good background information and should to be highlighted and understood before undertaking a consultation process. Assessment for learning (formative assessment) incorporates assessments that occur while learning is underway. These assessments may be used to diagnose student needs, provide students with descriptive feedback, and create goals for improving quality of work and student success. Assessment FOR learning is very different from Assessment OF learning, which simply takes a single snapshot of how a student is doing at a specific point in time. Understanding the differences is important.

In terms of specific classroom assessment feedback, students should be provided with a clear picture of their progress or learning goals. Students should be able to understand how to improve and this should occur in a supportive and encouraging way that allows students to take ownership of their own learning. Assessments need to be authentic and show what students know and understand. Teachers should not penalize for behaviors (lates, plagiarism, being off task, etc.) as this does not accurately reflect knowledge and understanding. This is not to say that behavioral remediation should not take place, but teachers need to consider alternatives to ensure that marks truly reflect learning.

With Assessment for Learning being the buzzword in education circles, continued support through professional development must be encouraged. Every teacher starts at a different place on the assessment continuum, and this is extremely important to understand during a consultation process. Know the clientele you are working with! It is not simply good enough to provide workshops and expect teachers to incorporate assessment for learning into their regular practice. Teachers need to be involved in a community of practice, which allows them to share, collaborate and receive feedback with other link-minded teachers. Long term planning is also important as it tells teachers and students where they have been and where they are heading. The targets need to be clear and priorities need to be set for the long term and short term.

However, assessment is not as simple as it may seem! Assessment is a condensation symbol with multiple meanings that can evoke many different emotions and feelings. To students, assessment is about grades. It separates the top from the bottom; the good from the bad. To parents/guardians, assessment is about achievement and getting into a post-secondary institution or getting a job. To teachers and administrators, assessment is about understanding what a student knows and understands. Different people have different interpretations.

Media also use assessments to create public spectacles. The FSAs are a good example. Every year, the Fraser Institute ranks schools. The data is not used to inform best practice. In fact, teachers rarely (if ever) get to see the raw data. Instead the information is used to pit schools against each other. Those on top get premier status, while those on the bottom get ridiculed. Unfortunately, the FSA results do not show the big picture. It does not consider the composition of schools nor does it show growth over time. For example, a west side school in Vancouver may have high reading and math scores every year. The results are status quo, while an inner city school may show marked improvement over time. However, because the marks continue to be “low,” the inner city school will always be ranked lower and receive bad publicity.

Therefore, as we look at the creation of policy documents, context must be carefully understood. Factors such as background knowledge about assessment, the school culture and perceptions from the school community need to be considered as they all influence the creation of policies.**

The Wiki Process


 * Despite the fact that the Assessment for Learning content was very interesting, the majority of my learning occurred through the process of developing the wiki. There has been a lot of personal growth over the past five weeks. To be quite honest, learning about the wiki in the beginning was extremely frustrating! There were some unkind words expressed in the two week of class! This was truly a great experience because it really contextualized the problems that students and staff face may when introduced to new concept, idea or technology.

Getting started with the wiki was a huge task in itself. I am very comfortable with technology, and the concept of the wiki made a lot of sense – people collaborating online. Unfortunately, getting started was quite a struggle. The online tutorial and instructions were clear and simple. The biggest challenge though, was trying to figure out where to host the wiki. Originally, we thought that UBC had a wiki site, (we later found out it did), but we could not find out how to do this. Thankfully, Darren was able to get the wiki up and running through Wiki Spaces. This was great, and I am very thankful that there was technology guru on our team! If teachers were to develop a wiki on their own, where would they go to create a new wiki and would there be any policies restricting the use of particular sites? To date, the Richmond has no policy on the use of wikis or blogs, but I wonder of policies will need to be created at a later date when the use of these technologies become more prevalent.

The confusion about creating the wiki was really only the start of the debacle. Once the wiki was created, there was learning how to: create a page, post to a page, make changes to a page, start a discussion, respond to a discussion, find a previous discussion, track changes, and monitor who had been on the wiki. It was information overload! Slowly, but surely, I was able to muddle my way through the process. Again, as a fairly confident user of technology, I can only imagine the frustration that teachers new to the technology will have. The gradual release model of teaching (I show you, we do it together, you do it by yourself with support, and you are on your own) will be essential for introducing the wiki.

Once the foundation for the wiki was created, moving through the summaries and discussions was easy. Conversations were informative and engaging. The summary and key questions were highlighted clearly, but lacked the relationships and face-to-face interaction that I enjoy and value. At times, conversations were disjointed as people were coming and going from discussions at different times. Sometimes you would have to wait days for the next thread of the conversation to continue. Following multiple conversations was also challenging, but also beneficial because you could share and link ideas simultaneously.

There were certainly benefits from being online as it gives people freedom to express themselves at convenient times. Under the veil of technology, more people may have the opportunity to speak and appear. This would be a great process for people who do not physically live in the same area or for people who do not like to public speak. Keeping everything transparent and online also helped to decrease the amount of face-to-face talk time. In fact, the group really only met three times after class, and even these conversations with short, sweet and to the point.

I do however wonder if a decrease in human interaction and the need to follow multiple conversations may be daunting for some people, especially for those who are new to the wiki technology, content (Assessment for Learning) AND consultation process. In a controlled science experiment, the goal is to maintain control and validity, by only changing one variable at a time. To reduce anxiety and confusion, it might be wise to consider this approach and “control” as many variables as possible during a consultation so people are focused on the topic (ie. Assessment for Learning) and not distracted by the process.

Written messages may also be difficult to interpret. Body language, voice intonation and non-verbal cues all contribute to effective communication. Similar to emails, messages on a wiki can be interpreted in multiple ways. No part of the conversations about our Assessment for Learning wiki were ambiguous or confusing, but I can see the potential for misinterpretation. Some people may not write clearly, and/or there may be multiple interpretations to a message. Therefore, if a wiki is used to engage different voices, clear protocol for posting and responding need to be established. Similar to the beginning of the EADM 554 class, where we brainstormed what makes a good class, clear expectations and guidelines need to be delineated right from the start. This way a community of open dialogue can be created.

Once all of the information about Assessment for Learning was posted on the wiki, the creation of the consultation guide was easy. What was amazing was how the quickly the guide came together. Through the discussions about the three articles, the priorities had already been identified. Thus, the basic framework was already there. Once the areas of interest and had been identified, changing and modifying the final document was quick. The fact that multiple people have simultaneous access to a file is truly the beauty of the wiki. It really is a living, breathing document that could be used for any policy topic that requires a consultation. The questions about stakeholders, implementation, measures of success, time periods and location for the consultation are all valid questions regardless of the policy topic.**

Moving Forward: the practical applications


 * The dynamic nature of the wiki has some great potential. It allows for people to collaborate and create a community of learning. It is constantly changing and engaging. Despite the usability and practicality of the wiki, I would not use this technology in schools for a consultation process because there is too much room for misterpretation, accessibility of computers is still limited in schools and the technology of a wiki is still so relatively new, that it may hinder instead of enhance the consultation process.

I am a true believer that making things happens is all about relationships. The friendship, and partnerships that are formed are the things that help to move things forward. Upon reflection on the use of the wiki, one of the main reasons the wiki worked so well, was because we knew each other from class and we had a level of trust that about openness of conversations, the rigor of the research. If I had not known the people in the wiki, I do not think the discussions would have been so rich. I have participated in WebCT classes at UBC in the past, and the online conversations have never been as engaging and I think this is partly due to the fact that a relationship has yet to be established.

Conflicts are always best dealt with face-to-face or at least on the phone. As mentioned earlier, written messages can be misinterpreted. Meeting in person or on the phone at least allows you to read other communication cues. In dealing with policies, conflicts often arise and you should expect to hear differing opinions. Face-to-face conversation allows for mitigation by a facilitator, so that important issues are acknowledged and/or addressed immediately and other issues are not blown out of proportion.

Given the limited access of computers in school, the use of a wiki could be a challenge as access during the school day is limited. This may be due to limited time while teaching or limited equipment access at schools. Thus, if a wiki was used as part of a consultation process, it would be best to have it compliment the traditional face-to-face conversations. This would ensure that all stakeholders had equal accessibility and opportunity to participate in a consultation process. You certainly would not want the technology to be the limiting factor in the discussion of a policy topic. Until there is a cultural shift for the increased use of technology, wikis will serve as a strategy for a consultation process, but will not become as the main medium.

However, wikis do have a lot of practical application. The fact that many individuals can collaborate simultaneously online is truly unique and a model we need to move to as we move forward with new content and technology. Despite my reservations with using a wiki for a consultation process, I will definitely experiment with this technology with my district study groups, networks and subject departments at the schools. I may even try it with my online students next September! Right now, the key to successful use of the wiki will be smaller groups who can support and help each other understand and manipulate the technology.**

Conclusion


 * Learning to use the wiki has been a great experience. I certainly appreciated the challenge to move technologically out of my own comfort zone. The process itself brought up some great questions about assessment (ie. how/why should we be assessed as a group?), policy consultations and the use of technology, which I will apply to my work as I work with various staff and students.

Upon reflection, the only thing I would change about the assignment would be the reflection piece. Given that we were focusing on Assessment for Learning, it would be have been fitting for us to post our reflections online, respond to the reflections and finally, make one group reflection based on the feedback from each other. The group debrief, collaboration and reflection piece were probably the most beneficial for the application of our own practice. **

Reflection on Wiki assignment - from the perspective of Agata Kroondyk

Agata's Wiki Reflection:

    __INTRODUCTION: ____DEVELOPING A WIKI WEBSITE __ Darren Gock, Rosalind Poon, and I have started a wiki group in our EADM 554 Administration and Educational Policy course. Our requirements were to form a small group, explore a particular subject, and share policies to do with that subject. Throughout this exploration, we were meant to summarize one article each and respond to the ideas presented by each group member on the wiki website. The topic we chose to discuss is assessment, and we focused specifically on Assessment //for // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;"> Learning. The three articles discussed were Anne Davies’ chapters seven and eight from //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Making Classroom Assessment Work // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">(2008), Robert J. Marzano’s chapter five from <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Ahead of the Curve: The Power of Assessment to Transform Teaching and Learning //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">(2007), and Ken O’Connor’s chapter two from //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">A Repair Kit for Grading: 15 Fixes for Broken Grades // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">(2007). <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">The following paper debriefs my perspective on our experience. I firstly and most briefly discuss the content of our wiki articles: Assessment //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">for // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;"> Learning and its strategies in schools. Next, I consider the usability and application of the wiki process, outlining the commendations and recommendations of using a wiki website. Then, I consider the creation of our final product – a consultation document that could potentially be used for policy making. And finally, I discuss the use of media as a mode of communication, and I come to my conclusions about the use of our wiki for policy making. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">
 * <span style="font-size: 13pt; color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; msobidifontfamily: Arial;">

**__<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">ASSESSMENT //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">FOR // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;"> LEARNING AND ITS USES __ <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">The content of our wiki process was beneficial and helpful within our group. The articles chosen and discussed cover a variety of aspects regarding Assessment //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">for // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;"> Learning, and the topics presented are pertinent and relevant across many subject areas. It is useful that Rosalind, Darren, and I teach different subjects, across different districts, including public and private schools, so each of us was able to bring different perspectives to the table. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Davies’ chapters discuss the necessity of professional development to successful assessment and teaching practice. Davies further discusses the notion that all educators are at different points along a learning continuum, and therefore cannot be expected to work at the same pace. She states that, “overcoming this barrier to success requires professional development plans to be multi-year, multi-layered, and differentiated, and to include an evaluation plan” (Davies, 2008, p. 54). Just as our students require constant feedback, so, too, do we require feedback on our growth and progress as professionals. Davies further discusses the differentiation in professional development that is required for all teachers, seeing as we are not all at the same starting point. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Next, Marzano’s chapter considers four researched-based findings regarding effective classroom assessment and feedback: Firstly, classroom assessment feedback should provide students with a clear picture of their progress on learning goals and how they might improve; secondly, feedback on classroom assessment should encourage students to improve; thirdly, classroom assessment should be formative; and finally, formative classroom assessment should be frequent. Futhermore, Marzano outlines a simple five-step process that can be followed when implementing the above four findings. The most interesting aspect of this article included the use of scales and rubrics to evaluate data. Marzano argues that his approach to assessment, “has the potential not only of increasing the specificity and rigor of tracking and reporting student learning, but also of enhancing student learning because of the explicit feedback it provides to students and parents” (Marzano, 2007, p. 124). <span style="font-size: 13pt; color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; msobidifontfamily: Arial;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Finally, O’Connor’s chapter covers six of his fifteen ‘fixes’ for broken grades. He claims that students’ grades should reflect nothing but student achievement, that is, “make them reflect only student performance in mastering the public, published learning goals of the state/province/district/school. This is the only way that grades can act as clear communication” (O’Connor, 2007, p. 19). In other words, teachers should not take off marks for behaviour-based discrepancies such as handing in work late, plagiarazing, and being absent from class. He also mentions that group work should never be graded, nor should extra credit work inaccurately inflate students’ grades. All of these ‘fixes’ fall under the strategies used for Assessment //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">for // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Learning, and combat the ‘broken grades’ we are currently giving our students. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">I particularly appreciated Davies’ perspective on professional development, and teaching teachers to assess effectively, because we are left to our own devices so often, and her chapters truly communicate a collaborative effort within staffs to learn together and assess effectively. Furthermore, I could see myself using Marzano’s scales for marking in my classroom. The content of his chapter is practical and usable. Overall, O’Connor’s ‘fixes’ are somewhat daunting because they can be perceived as a long list of ‘things //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">not // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">to do,’ while many teachers apply these ‘broken’ strategies in their classrooms daily. Of the three articles, O’Connor’s was the most patronizing, telling teachers what to do, without offering much practical information on how to exactly fix these ‘broken grades.’ <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">
 * <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">

**__<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">USABILITY AND APPLICATION OF THE WIKI PROCESS __ <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">The use of the wiki was, overall, a positive experience. It increases voice among participants, most especially, and it is an effective way to involve individuals who are unable to interact face-to-face due to distance, location, or other possible reasons. For example, I was out of town for a period of time during the use of our wiki, yet it did not pose any problems to our consistent discussion. Furthermore, the wiki also provides people with the opportunity to discuss any issue at any time of the day. For example, Rosalind, Darren, and I seemed to be working on slightly different schedules with work and other extra-curricular activities, so we would log on to the wiki at different points in the day. Patterns developed as to when each of us would respond. This enabled a steady and constant discussion, where every time each of us logged on, there was bound to be some discussion page to edit or reply to. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Overall, I would be interested to see the wiki being used in classrooms and among staffs in schools; however, I have some reservations about the process. The fact remains that most users of wikis will face many challenges. In our group, we had the benefit of working with Darren, who is a technology department head at his school, and thus was the one to set up the wiki for us, and help us through the process. We also found it helpful to have Brian Lamb from the UBC technology services present the various uses of wikis in one of our classes. Therefore, it is evident that much Professional Development would be necessary among staff members and students who would be using wiki websites. Furthermore, a simple start-up session would not be all that is required; there would need to be some sort of a support staff to move the process along continuously - even daily. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Another challenge presented by the use of wikis is a speculation that users would need to have a lot of time to keep up the communication on the site; otherwise, discussions will fizzle. If a group member posts a discussion and nobody responds to it for two weeks, then the relevance of that discussion has perished. The original poster of a discussion topic may not even look to see if somebody has responded on their page after a period of a few days. Thus, constant communication is key. But, do people have that much time to dedicate to such a process? Is the wiki worth it, or is it just another thing to tack on to the ‘list of things to do’? <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Furthermore, the organization of the topical pages and their respective discussions was challenging. Every time I logged on, it was quite difficult to figure out whether or not the pages I started had been replied to or not, and when there were three or four different discussions started on different pages, then it was difficult to find them. Sometimes I did not respond to a page until three days later, simply because I had not found that discussion thread before that time. This could be a problem with the type of wiki we decided to use – the wikispaces website – or, it could be a challenge found on most other wiki websites. In any case, it would have been more efficient and effective to have a clearer layout and organization in respect to discussion pages. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">In all sincerity, although I enjoyed the process, and knowing that I cannot speak for Rosalind or Darren, the main reason I kept so up to date on the wiki, is because I knew we were being graded on it. Moreover, having only three group members, I found it much easier keeping track of the postings. If a staff of fifty or sixty were to try to communicate on a wiki website, I fear it would just be the same people posting messages over and over again - potentially the same people who are eager to share their opinions at the staff room tables anyway. Thus, I would like to discuss the authenticity of this wiki process and its discussions. Even though our discussions were beneficial and constructive, perhaps somewhere in the back of our minds, we knew that we would be given a grade based on our efforts. I wonder how this has changed the way in which we have responded to and recorded our messages. I also wonder if the caliber of messages would be as important among a staff or student body, as they were to us; would people abuse the system or write inappropriate comments? <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Therefore, it becomes evident that there would need to be policies in place around the use of the wiki. Moreover, there would definitely need to be a leader of the wiki to supervise, monitor, and evaluate the data and reflections presented. In our group, we did not have a leader to monitor our progress, or guide us through to conclusions. While hashing out ideas with colleagues has its benefits, I would have found it more useful to have a bit more guidance with the content on the site. It was difficult to come to conclusions based on our discussions within the wiki. It seemed that it was simply a montage of opinions, questions, and experiences. Most of the questions we posed to one another were never thoroughly answered. Sometimes, when I would spend a considerable amount of time on a particular discussion page, my questions would not get answered, or the discussion would simply move on to another topic. I found this part of the wiki very frustrating. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Nevertheless, I appreciated the readings, ideas, and discussions that Rosalind and Darren brought forward. They, along with the challenge of trying to figure out the wiki process, kept me on my toes and made me think outside of my regular comfort zone. Again, the process was very valuable among a small group such as ourselves, but I have reservations about how this would work among larger groups. In any case, this has spurred my interest in wikis, and I will certainly keep my eyes and ears open to wiki websites in the future. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">
 * <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">

**__<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">CREATION OF OUR CONSULTATION DOCUMENT __ <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">The creation of our consultation document came quite easily and naturally. As the entire wiki process was quite organic for our group, so, too, was the making of our final policy document. We simply wrote out our thoughts in different colours, and deleted or added ideas as we saw fit. We had no discussion about the sections in which the document has been divided; they just came about through our various ideas and input. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Our policy document is divided into seven sections: Scope of Process, Stakeholders, Time Period and Location for the Consultation Process, Implementation of the Consultation Process, Implementation of the Assessment Policy, and Measures of Success. Again, these headings simply came forward through our discussions, and they were the logical topics to discuss for our subject matter. Based on the summaries that were brought forward by each group member, and our discussions and questions that were developed from those summaries, the considerations now within our final policy document seemed obvious to include. What makes this process so significant is that if Darren, Rosalind, and I sat down six weeks ago to try and create a policy document, I am confident that, despite our efforts, we could not have developed the same final product. The //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">process // <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">of the wiki and discussions is the integral, organic part here. The contributions brought forth daily truly amalgamated and built on one other. Thus, the final document produced has many important considerations for policy-making. If I had to create a policy, personally, I would feel confident consulting the document we created. <span style="font-size: 13pt; color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; msobidifontfamily: Arial;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> **__<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">MEDIA AS A MODE OF COMMUNICATION __ <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">My wiki experience was a positive one, but there is nothing that beats face-to-face contact. With the wiki, there is much wait time and, as a result, time wasted. Furthermore, face-to-face communication typically results in respectful, thorough, and authentic discussions. Despite our communication on the wiki, it was deemed necessary for us to meet in class as well. Meeting face-to-face to discuss our queries and hesitations was much more conclusive than simply chatting online. That being said, having gotten the chance to work with Rosalind and Darren both online and in the classroom, strengthened our relationship and increased our knowledge base. If used, then, I would highly recommend the wiki as a supplementary resource to regular classroom contact. When used hand in hand, a significant learning curve is possible. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">
 * <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">
 * <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">

**__<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">WORKS CITED __** <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Davies, A., Herbst, S., & Parrott Reynolds, B. (2008). //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Transforming Barriers to Assessment for // //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Learning //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">. Courtenay, BC: Connections Publishing Inc. 53-80. <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;"> <span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Marzano, Robert J. (2007). Designing a Comprehensive Approach to Classroom Assessment. In Douglas Reeves (Ed.), //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">Ahead of the Curve: The Power of Assessment to Transform Teaching and Learning //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">(pp. 103-125). Bloomington, Indiana: Solution Tree.

O'Connor, Ken (2007). //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">A Repair Kit for Grading: 15 Fixes for Broken Grades //<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif;">. Portland, Oregon: Educational Testing Service. 19-49.

<span style="color: rgb(128,0,128); line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; msobidifontsize: 13.0pt;">

Reflection on Wiki assignment - from the perspective of Darren Gock

**Introduction** Throughout this course I have been introduced to and discussed many ways in which policy is created. Creation of policy through a wiki process is one method that was not presented formally through any articles and sounded like an interesting proposition. I am grateful for the opportunity to undertake the process first hand and share the experience. I have chosen to reflect upon this project from the perspective of adopting a policy of using a wiki for policy creation. I think it can be seen through a lens of positions of power. I will make observations of how this power is gained and loss through appearance, disappearance, and discourse of individuals involved in the process. **Beginnings** The initial start to the project was a tentative one. No one from the group ever participated in a wiki group let alone started one from scratch. There were many questions to be asked. How does one start a wiki? What are we supposed to do on the wiki? What is the ultimate purpose of using the wiki? We were initially waiting for direction from Brian Lamb. However, I decided to do some investigation on my own and determined that we just needed to take the plunge. I chose to use Wikispaces because of its free usage policy and the apparent ease of use. I invited my partners to the wiki that I created and we were on our way. At this point in the process I feel that I put myself in a position of power in the project. As Fielding (2004) would comment that this power is created through the compliance of those who perceive themselves without power. The power in this case is represented by the knowledge of creating a wiki. I can honestly say that a bid for power was not the motivation behind my actions, but nevertheless it produced this unintentional result. Evidence of this positional power is evident in the fact that I was able to create structure and protocol to the use of the wiki before anyone else without consultation or collaboration with my group members. I set the direction of the final product in its initial direction. Upon final reflection I feel that the final project did not deviate far from this. I am not trying to give myself more credit than I deserve and in fact I will state how this position of power shifted later on in the wiki process. What I want to establish is an observation of how the wiki process which could be seen as a tool for a critical approach to policy can be actually be used as a tool for the traditional perspective. Being “first out of the gate” or setting up an environment of uncertainty around the wiki process would allow one to define the problem and structure the solution. A process of policy creation can be given the appearance of being inclusive through using a wiki, when the actual initiation is exclusionary. Despite the potential for initial imbalance in power I believe the nature of the wiki process has the ability to rectify this. As familiarity with the technical aspects of the wiki process increased among the members of the group, I observed an increased presence of voice on the wiki. Any power that may be initially held is tenuous due to the fact that anyone can add and edit what is on the wiki site. Opinions can be discussed and directions modified to reflect the will of the group. This being said, it still requires all parties involved to agree to and understand the spirit of the wiki process. There needs to be collective will by all to participate and willingness to accept change and positive criticism. **Process** Given the newness of the wiki process to the entire group, protocols were established on how we would use the wiki for the project. We decided to make pages for main ideas and use the discussion areas as the forum to discuss the ideas. Another advantage to the wiki process was naturally discovered through the timing of our discussion contributions. We found that our schedules varied enough that a turn based process evolved. Each member was able to be heard because they could contribute when it fit their schedule. This also relieved the pressure of finding a common time to meet in person or even online. For a time sensitive situation this could be seen as a disadvantage as there is a time lag between the thoughts of group members. Having the time and ability to contribute to the wiki can be seen as another source of power. If one is able to critique, defend, modify, and add more often than others, they could be seen as having more voice on the issue at hand. Ones perspective can be given more weight by the mere quantity of posts that one is able to contribute on the topic. A singular yet valuable contribution by a member could potentially be loss in the shuffle. In the discussions it was interesting to observe the different styles of expression by the group members. Personality and understanding of goals were conveyed through the content of the writing. The power gained or loss in the policy making process can be dependent on how well one is able to write and convey their intended ideas. There is the danger of one party “ventriloquating” discourse as de Castell and Jensen would argue (2006). The ability of all stakeholders to communicate well with the same discourse is crucial in maintaining power balance. The strengths of any tool can only be fully recognized when the potential weaknesses are also taken into account. If the primary strength of a wiki is its open and flexible nature, it can be argued that this openness can become its greatest weakness. The scope of discussion can become too broad and core purpose can be loss. Protocols are necessary to maintain dialogue progression towards the goal. Without structure the process can be stalled or steered in a direction of symbolic policy which does not really address the issue.

**“Final” Document** Since there were time constraints on this assignment, our group had to limit our final product of the process of policy making via a wiki to the rudimentary stages. Despite this limitation, I would argue that our group experience was an authentic attempt at the wiki process. Through the reading and discussion of the articles we were able to have meaningful discussions around assessment. As I have discovered throughout this course, there are many more questions that need to be posed before any real answers can be provided. This idea fit into our final document quite well. The three articles discussed all revolved around assessment and yet each provided a different perspective on how to address it. The summaries and guiding questions generated discussion that pertained to the document. The discussions were given the additional focus of trying to put the ideas that were brought up into the final document. This was a very dynamic process that was exciting to see. There were points that were leading to further investigation and I could see where the ability to continue providing links to additional and previous read articles would help facilitate this. However, we had to reign in our discussions while recognizing that the potential of a richer document existed. The final document evolved into a guideline for a consultation process around assessment policy. Its intended use would be as a preliminary source of information necessary to take a critical approach to policy creation. It contained six areas of exploration an individual or group should consider before formally going through the consultation process. The six areas of consideration were scope, stakeholders, time period and location, implementation of consultation process, implementation of assessment policy, and measures of success. I like how the sections in whole attempt to address the stages one would go through in creating policy. It may not be an exhaustive list, but definitely a good start. I am also pleased that the document does not going into too fine a detail at this point. It leaves openness for one who would choose to use such a guideline to apply it to their specific situation. Given the organic nature of document creation in the wiki process and the successful creation of a final piece despite the constraints, I would propose that our final product is not final at all. In fact the wiki environment allows for perpetual modification as different stakeholders are allowed to contribute. Policy that exists in the wiki environment can constantly be reviewed to ensure that it continues to suit its purpose. The problem of old policy to address new situations can be avoided. The policy document can progress as the needs and opinions of those involved change. **Wiki as a Method of Policy Creation** Our group initiation to the world of the wiki was the idea of “planning a camping trip”. The wiki was shown to be an excellent tool to collaborate and share ideas towards achieving a common goal. It was presented as a more efficient way to communicate and allowed all parties involved to participate. All of these traits are valued in policy creation and thus a wiki does sound like a good tool to use. One of the issues to using a wiki for policy creation is time. Although it was shown that a wiki process is capable of creating a shared document in a short time, one would question whether a //good// policy can be created in a hasty manner. There is a critique of quick policy creation as is the case with policy created to address moral crises. I think that well thought out policy is given the time to be conceived and developed. I believe that my group enjoyed a fairly successful experience in using the wiki. This can be contributed to the fact that we were all enthusiastic and motivated about trying this “new” way of collaboration. The small size of our group also contributed to the quick consensus on many issues. However, theses two aspects that worked in our favour could produce a much different outcome under different circumstances. Planning a camping trip is a simple goal that everyone can usually agree upon. However, policy around assessment or any other educational issues can be much more contentious. There are many competing interests that stakeholders bring to the table that a policy document could be pulled in a variety of directions. One could argue that the strength of a policy would be in its ability to be pulled in various directions and still serve its intended purpose. Perhaps a policy that does not survive the rigorous scrutiny of a wiki is one that needs to be rethought. Meaningful policy will include multiple stakeholders. With larger numbers of contributors the turn-based process that we followed would become more complicated. The process would be much slower if multiple voices took turns to hear each other. A new approach would need to be taken in order for everyone to hear and be heard in a timely manner. I believe that the biggest obstacle to wiki use for policy is the required culture change around creating such a product. Under such a collaborative model the stakeholders would have to be willing to have shared ownership and responsibility. A certain degree of control would have to be given up by all individuals in the process. No longer would any one group be able to claim sole ownership and credit nor pass on blame. **Conclusion** The success of using a wiki as a means of policy creation is promising. There are many advantages to using the wiki model that prior models cannot replicate. Shared contribution and opportunity of voice are critical keys to policy creation. However, along with these advantages there exist new difficulties that need to be considered. There is still the potential for stakeholders to disappear due to the technological emphasis of this method. If this is to become the de facto method of policy creation, it will be interesting to see how the discussions will change in future educational policy courses. <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;"> References Fielding, M (2004). ‘New wave’ student voice and the renewal of civic society. London Review of Education, 2:3, 197-217 Castell, S & Jenson, J. (2006) No place like home: Sexuality, community and identity among street-involved “Queer and Questioning” Youth. //Revue des Sciences de L’Education de McGill, 41(3)//, 226-248.