Development and the Internet > Rotisserie Feedback

I have very much enjoyed it and hope for more. I needed more time per section, for various reasons, not just because I hoped to spend most time on it at weekends (when it was all over). Fortunately some holiday time overlapped

Initially the Rotisserie posts seemed confusing. With hindsight I feel they narrowed my approach. I prioritised responding to the Rotisserie instead of studying the materials in depth.  Also I had initial troubles navigating. I only found the responses I’d been directed to. I missed some good stuff, that in other circumstances I would have read and possibly replied to.

I felt a responsibility to read carefully and consider responses to items sent to me – even if in the end I did not have time to reply, or even if I didn’t have a particular interest in the post.

I did appreciate it when others bothered to reply to me.

I took more time than for usual discussions.

I found the format interesting. I like the idea of directed questions with a publication date and staged follow up. I think I would rather be presented with all the published answers and choose for myself which ones I take further. I would have preferred a week for initial reading before the Rotisserie started (with notice of the question) The following week could have had the question publication date, and the several stages for response, and allowed more time for the background reading.

Thanks for running this one.

How did your rotisserie discussions differ from other online discussions you've had?

I do not have much experience with networking. When I participated in the web board, I was answering a question. With H20, there is a systematic, action and reflection process. There is a feedback and a reminder where as on the board, there was no one to remind me on my assignments.

Were your posts and the posts of others substantively different that they would have been using other discussion tools?

Of course most of our posts differed substantively. However, I am not quite sure whether or not my friends were using other discussion tools. It was evident that many of the participants had very good exposure with the Internet. Some had real projects, and shared with us actual, or experientialists. The volunteer from Uganda and that one in Yoruba, are excellent projects.

Did you participate more or less in the discussions due to the nature of the Rotisserie discussions?

This is a challenging question. The nature of a rotisserie can convey a multiple or can be taken to mean i) Policy, ii) Commerce or entrepreneurial, iii) Learning, and iv) Technical arena. Me personally, I was impressed with what went on in my mind. I studied/read projects that my group presented. If I was in my office, I could have never dreamed of what was going on. I had a very busy schedule and there isn't an Internet in the office.  

Did you take more or less time writing your answers than you would have on a typical discussion board?

On a discussion board, it takes less time to write an answer. I was already writing comments on some projects on the development gateway. That was a mental piece of exercise. I even met friends and did communicate in the course of doing the BOLD H20 discussions.

The main difference is the structure of the BOLD series and its operations lead by the management team's expertise. In addition the resources and the references are unique. Absolutely, the posts are well thought and and directs the development of the project. This was a special participation for me and I took more time to think and answer.
Any one who particates may as well become an expert on our topic.
THANK YOU. I look forward to realizing the benefits.

I am really impressed with the idea behind the Rotisserie. It is a great way to accomodate busy people already overloaded with lots of information.

... the assignments are short and easy to fit in a busy schedule, and on the other hand if you want to stay in the rotisserie, you can't lag: you get reminded of deadlines. Sure, self-motivation should be stronger than external prodding, but in other discussions, I've often seen interesting topics getting abandoned just because people wanted to have more time to reflect, and eventually gave up responding because others had gone on to a different topic.

One  question, though: what does "rotisserie" mean, actually? It makes me think of chickens being grilled on a spit. A revolving spit and the revolving makes sense in this context - but is that really the image the organisers had in mind?

All the best

Claude

The system is very good for encouraging intelligent commentary, but it does not stimulate community development as much as typical discussion boards. The content of the responses is better than usual. This may be due to the subject matter of the course more than the working of the rotisserie.

The felling of being in a conversation is not as present in this system. I liked the assignment aspect of the rounds. It was a good incentive to stay involved. i would be very interested in seeing the system used to discuss events occurring each day. i think it would be interesting to use the assignments and ratings to work through a more isolated problem that all participants are intimately aware of.

For structured projects I think H2O is a very useful addition to the current set of online interaction solutions.

..is what I said too.

I found the discussion tool used in this BOLD series excellent as a busy self employed person, the email prompts were greatly appreciated, the posting and thread reading/analysis was similar to others I've used in this and other forums, but my participation was greater this series than those previously 'attended', mainly because of the email prompts and less than I intended due to work commitments (overload actually) as we were at a quarterly reporting point for businesses here in Australia during the series.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr

Of course, I am new here. When I read (this) reminder on my Inbox  I felt uneasy because, I knew my assignments were sent on time. I had trouble to find the place to write a response to "I am new here" and forced to send as a comment. This is not as a response. I do not see/locate the site where I am supposed to write.
My friend Cherl Langdon -Orr (above) found BOLD series excellent, while I did not have the experience. This means "I am new here"
However, I read good news from home that from 23 to 25 April, there was a technical training to address an ICT problem in Tanzania. The workshop was funded by DfID and the International Institute for Communication Development (IICD). The title, Exchanging local traffic lacally is very interesting. We learnt from our Part 4 (Architecture) of IXPs and their role to solve the Internet connectivity that is expensive and slow. The paper (7 th May) quotes a research data that Africa Internet Service Providers (ISPs)lose over 400 million US$ annually. The money pays for peering of local trafic in international exchange & international bandwidth providers.
The Internet society (Maxwell, C. 2000)the UNESCO paper talked of promises resulting from universal Internet access and issues/challenges related to   the process. I hope that my country will try to solve the problems that are solvable.   Mrs. Swai.

Thank you very much for your acknowledgement that I am new here. When I read (this) reminder on my Inbox I felt uneasy because, I knew my assignments were sent on time. I had trouble to find the place to write a response to "I am new here" and forced to send as a comment. This is not as a response. I do not see/locate the site where I am supposed to write.
My friend Cherl Langdon -Orr (above) found BOLD series excellent, while I did not have the experience. This actually means that, "I am new here"
However, I read good news from home that from 23 to 25 April, there was a technical training to address an ICT problem in Tanzania. The workshop, was funded by the DfID and the International Institute for Communication Development (IICD). The title, Exchanging local traffic locally is very interesting. We learnt from our Part 4 (Architecture) of IXPs and their role to solve the Internet connectivity that is expensive and slow. The paper (7 th May) quotes a research data that Africa Internet Service Providers (ISPs) lose over 400 million US$ annually. The money pays for peering of local traffic in international exchange & international bandwidth providers.
The Internet society (Maxwell, C. 2000) the UNESCO paper talked of promises resulting from universal Internet access and issues/challenges related to the process. I hope that my country will try to solve the problems that are solvable.
Mrs.Swai.

I hope you don't mind the vernacular in my title. But I've seen so many training-discussions peter out here in Old Europe, so it was nice to be egged on, and to be able to read so many interesting posts.

The initial documentation was very well done. I was fascinated by the "hole in the wall" project. I wish our local ICT-in-teaching specialists could/would access it. I sent them the link for the course - let's hope!

Cheers

Claude

Claude,
Glad you enjoyed this.

Hi,

I enroled in this online program when it was midway through its course. Hence I never got a chance to fully participate in the online discussions.

Overall, I find the online adaptation of the Socratic method of discussion and deliberation most enriching. The course documentation is good. The friendly reminders from BOLD helped play the role of an active monitor!

Some deltas:
- Consider having a common login method for the course and for H20. The separate login creation for the latter created a barrier to early adoption.
- Consider hosting an onsite workshop at Cambridge at the end of the session, to give us a chance to put a face to some of the names we see. This could even be rolled into a global workshop, with live telecasts at certain foreign cities - testing ICT's globally and proving the power of virtual collaboration across the world!!

Thanks, Sai

The Rotisserie discussions were great.  I enjoyed participating in them.  I would have liked more time to really digest and think about each area before being rushed to respond.  Since I have participated in other discussion forums, I really didn't find this one much different.  But I did like the fact that we were assigned a specific question to respond to.  This made me feel more a part of the discussion rather than just responding to everything.  I still found the discussion responses to be disconnected, however, like many of the discussion threads that I have seen.  In this discussion thread for example, only a few people really discussed or engaged in someone else's discussion.  People would end up establishing their own agendas and not really engaging the other respondent's idea or thought.  I found this rather disappointing.  

Some people are also still very judgmental, so instead of attempting to converse with another, they would make judgmental statements, such as, " I find this vague," etc.  The reason that we are taking these online courses is to first learn new information and then to be challenged by the course through our thinking and responses to questions posed to us.

I would have spent the same amount of time (and more) for any discussion forum.  I would have preferred to have had 2 weeks for each module to really learn and absorb the information well.  I conscientiously spent a  considerable number of hours reading the materials, taking notes and thinking about the questions.  Sometimes, because of my schedule, I would not have enough time to thoroughly think about questions and to respond.  In these instances, I felt rushed to answer with the time limit imposed on us.  In some modules, I did not get an opportunity to respond and had to move on to the next module.  For example, I had a very busy week during the module on Policy.  I felt shortchanged, because I wasn't able to get to the module until the weekend, and the deadline had passed for my posting.  Further, I had to move on to the next module, in order to stay on track with the course.  Having two weeks for each module with the  timed questions paced evenly and reasonably over the two weeks would be great.  Course developers forget to take into consideration, that many of us taking this course are working professionals on regular jobs and also trying to read the vast amount of material you give us to cover in a very short time period.  A full time student could handle this very easily, but those of us who have very rigorous work schedules had to make great sacrifices to keep up.

I liked a lot of the questions posed to us for discussion and wanted to really have enough time to conceptualize my theoretical analysis of the scenario or the model. Some questions, however, were pretty broad and vague, such as the first policy question.

All in all, this was a great online course.  I thoroughly enjoyed it and felt good about the fact that this time around I was able to participate in the discussions.  In past courses, my time constraints did not allow me much time for participation after spending hours reading the materials and visiting the assigned links.

I do hope that these courses continue because I am learning much and my knowledge and expertise in intellectual property and Internet issues and development is growing tremendously.  Thank you for providing us with these opportunities.

I agree with the comments in the above post. This post caused me to think once more about the qualities of our online discussions.  I again want to say that my greatest frustration was with not being able to clarify or to answer questions about my post posed by my responder.

I think it would be useful if, in addition to having a second week for readings, it would be useful to use this week to have the module instructor actually look a some of the prior week's discussions and comment on key areas of agreement/disagreement, possibly correct or clarify any points via our module page and then 'rotisserie' out a few new questions based on the discussions. I think that this would deepen the thinking and improve the course quite a bit without too great an effort.

I too hope these courses continue—it was a wonderful opportunity!

I like this idea, though I know from experience that the larger the class size, the more difficult it becomes to respond to everyone.  Perhaps, the instructor could post a reflective piece after reading everyone's comments and then address particular responses in this one posting.  This would not interfere too terribly on the instructor's time.  It takes an awful lot of time to be interactive in these on-line discussions.  A wonderful experience, though when time permits!  

For the most part, I  quite enjoyed using the Rotisserie for this class. I felt that, as was likely intended, it did indeed cause me to participate more frequently than I might otherwise have done.
It legitmized my participation when the class was considering topics upon which I might have ordinarily felt too 'un-expert' to comment.

But I do have a few comments—some about the Rotisserie, some about the Course—which I've made below and, in some cases, on the Webboard:

1. It would be nice to get more than one response upon which to comment  OR the possibility to select one response from several responses. I've received several posts where I am just not sure how to respond (either post is  off-topic or unclear); this has been frustrating on occasion.

2.  I admit that I am not personally inclined to critique posts, especially in an ansynchronous internat'l forum.

In such a situation the constraints of the Rotisserie means that one can't ask quickly for clarification on the post. I don't feel very comfortable giving criticism or issuing a *quite contrary* opinion to a post in an environment where there are large possibilities for my misunderstanding the author's intent. In some ways this is optimal yet in other ways, it is not.

So I think that real debate over contentious subjects would probably be more likely to occur in a synchronous chat, where clarification and questioning can occur.

3. I  didn't check Webboard until quite late. I missed some of the content (chat times, etc) that was placed there. I had assumed that Webboard had equivalent (though less discursive) content than H20. As I found out, this was not true.

4. I am a bit frustrated by the layout of the discussion threads and wish that there was an easier way to see all comments for a thread.

Also the thread headers often are quite compressed (only a few words) and then go for several lines, with the entire thread thus spanning several scrolls and go quite severely right across my screen.

5. It would be nice to have all the materials available ASAP and to be able to start the reading and responses as soon as the topic is announced—except where this wouldn't be a good idea instructionally.

6. I also yesterday wanted to add clarifying comments (in answer to questions from my responder) on the thread for my response but found that I couldn't. This was a bit of a bummer.

7. I found that, for myself, in the context of having a week to read and to reply, I didn't do many (okay, almost none) of the Assignments. The pull of the Rotisserie caused me to allocate my limited time to that medium when push came to ...pull/shove. ; - )

8. It would be nice to have an ending online chat for the course.

All in all, however,  I can see using the Rotisserie for other projects that I might design and have already suggested that colleagues take a look at it.

Thank you so much for your helpful suggestions.  

We actually included chat in the first years of our online programs.  There are some limitations, however; the different time zones make it difficult for everyone to participate at one time; many firewalls are configured to block it; connection time is extremely expensive in most developing nations; and it's hard for our small staff to support discussion 24x7. So we chose not to offer it with this program because we wanted everyone to have fairly equal access.

To respond to some of your points:

1.  I liked having an assigned question.  This made me feel like an integral part of the course, rather than most distance learning courses- where you simply perform ritual, read the material and plug in a response.  The assigned question made the course more interactive.  A good idea might be to give us an option to answer any 1 question from a set of responses.

2.  The real time chat would be difficult for everyone based on their schedules.  I think that just notifying the person who posted a message that a response has been provided is sufficient for them to go and take a look and respond again, if they have more to say or need to clarify.  The H20 already has this capability and it worked well for me.

3.I use WebBoard in my courses now.  It is a good discussion forum, with some shortfalls.  I liked the H20 in some unique ways, such as its ability to send assigned questions to participants; and, the fact that you can set a time limit, in the case of using it for exams and timed assignments.  I personally would like to know more about it's utility from a manager's perspective.

4.  I did find this aspect of H20 frustrating.  I really had to figure out how to see all the discussion threads.  This was somewhat problemmatic.

5.  I like the paced steps in the course.  I just need to focus on the topic at hand and not move ahead.  I like to digest a segment well first.  I recommend that each module be extended to 2 weeks so that we have sufficient time to really diigest material and think deeply about responses.

6.  I believe you can clarify your comments by going to the editing button.  I did this and it worked.

7. I agree there is insufficient time to read all the materials and then respond in the time parameters currently in place.  More time is needed to do this course well.

8. The online chat is fine, but here again, many people will not be able to participate due to schedules.  A possibility might be on a weekend afternoon, such as Sunday.

i am afraid i joined the discussion far too late. so i can not make a contribution that would be appropriate. from what i see it looks quite good. good interface and easy to use. sorry i can not say another more at this time.

Nevertheless, three assignments were enough to convince me that such an ordered discussion has important advantages over "free" ones, in that everyone has to speak up, as it were. Others have asked for more time of reflection and greater flexibility, to let people produce better-researchhed answers. There's a point in that, sure, but all too often a freer formula means that the floor is always occupied by the same handful of people who are quicker and more self-assertive.

Cheers

Claude

I like the concept, but it assumes you'll 'want' to respond to what you are being requested to respond to.
I think a simple what you like and don't like survey upfront BEFORE the start of the rotisserie would help the 'system' understand who should get what types of questions and so forth.

So, rather than helping me respond like I wanted to it made me feel like I was waisting my time responding to others that I didn't wish to, thus taking away from finding those that I would have engaged further with.

Being part of this community,  i think the participants should respond to what is requested by the project leader. The system clearly identifies the procedures for active involvement and the assesments that come along. I believe the requests were designed to enable participants to add value with new ideas to the projects development, however limited to participant's active and productive involvement.
There are areas that may be improved on the backend of the projects as matchmaking the participants for further engagement is one example. Second, the ideas that are shared in trust should be evaluated, considered for development given the timelines for implementation. I believe the system works in accordance with other development platforms where i had the chance to identify common concentrations. Also, competitive structure among participants may foster innovation and new ideas,thus,this requires an award system.
One participant may find other participants looking at the user profiles however, biographies should be enriched with CV's.
Knowledge Management
Participant Relationship Management
Product Development Teams
New Business Development Teams
References Development Teams
ScoreCards for Participants
Affiliation Development Teams
Expertise Development Teams
Technical Support Teams
Legal Support Teams
IPR Support Teams
Venture Capital Teams

may be segmented and recommended for further involvement.

I am new here. I'll post more responses later.

Thank you very much for your acknowledgement that I am new here. When I read (this) reminder on my Inbox I felt uneasy because, I knew my assignments were sent on time. I had trouble to find the place to write a response to "I am new here" and forced to send as a comment. This is not as a response. I do not see/locate the site where I am supposed to write.
My friend Cherl Langdon -Orr (above) found BOLD series excellent, while I did not have the experience. This actually means that, "I am new here"
However, I read good news from home that from 23 to 25 April, there was a technical training to address an ICT problem in Tanzania. The workshop, was funded by the DfID and the International Institute for Communication Development (IICD). The title, Exchanging local traffic locally is very interesting. We learnt from our Part 4 (Architecture) of IXPs and their role to solve the Internet connectivity that is expensive and slow. The paper (7 th May) quotes a research data that Africa Internet Service Providers (ISPs) lose over 400 million US$ annually. The money pays for peering of local traffic in international exchange & international bandwidth providers.
The Internet society (Maxwell, C. 2000) the UNESCO paper talked of promises resulting from universal Internet access and issues/challenges related to the process. I hope that my country will try to solve the problems that are solvable. Mrs. Swai.

My friend C.C.Yen,
How are you?
I am pleased that you and me share the same project. I am new here. I'll post more responses later. Did you like the BOLD 2003 Development and the Internet? I had a very illuminating experience. Of course there were times I could not find a place to post my comment. I am congratulating myself today; I could locate where to post my assignment with least disturbance. Tomorrow is the dead line. Do you think that you could possibly meet the dead line my friend?  
I have not have the time to read the threads or add to threads. Those module notes are knowledge and sometimes when I respond to board or rotisserie, I make some references. I am not sure about your country but from your name, I assumed that much work has been done within the Internet. I hope we can collaborate   so that I learn and like wise do some work in my home area. Next time I sign in, I'll try to see your response. Your friend Mama Swai.

In fact I was impressed with the whole rotisserie format. At the beginning I have to acknowledge that it took me some time to get acquainted with the system. But overall, the experience was great on several levels. It was engaging in the way the different participants were linked to each other, which created a strong platform for reflexion. It was not like if you were just writing posts, but it provided enough room to think in proper ways about the issues and the way participants were able to disseminate their points among each other. In terms of learning, the accent was also highlighted by positioning a technological touch that enabled cross-thinking and mostly this trans-cultural framework that in ways gave us a glimpse about the universal context under which issues of development and human progress should be taken with pro-active and participatory measures.

Please explain how you see the technology enabling cross thinking.

What was original here is the fact that we did not receive all the posts of all the participants, what is usually borring. Beeing asked to answer or react to a particular aspect of the debate was a wise strategy and I think this approach should be better developed. I think that this aspect of the thing made me more participate to the discussion because I had to concentrate myself on one aspect instead of having to read a lot of writings. In fact, I did not take more time writing. But the fact that I had to react to precise questions made me give the essential of all that I could give in a more elaborated way.

I would like now to make a proposal. Should the series undertake a further step in which maybe we will concentrate on particular and precise aspect of ICTs in developing countries. For instance, we should discuss how to elaborate relevant projects using ICTS for development, etc..

Please describe your experience with the Rotisserie during this BOLD series.  How did your rotisserie discussions differ from other online discussions you've had?
Because I was assigned topics and posts to respond to I commented on and paid attention to posts that I might otherwise have ignored. This did not stop me from also commenting on posts that I was interested in but not assigned to. Perhaps because the system increases exposure to others viewpoints the responses are less argumentative, and more inquisitive. There seemed to be fewer dogmatic discussions and more respect for different views. This sometimes caused some posts to lack critical focus, but this seemed to be self correcting so that as the series progressed there was less empty laudatory rhetoric and more focused ‘problem solving’.
However the system has a problem, how does one respond to an incomprehensible post, or a completely off topic or off the wall post.
Were your posts and the posts of others substantively different that they would have been using other discussion tools?  
The posts of most participants were considerably longer.
Did you participate more or less in the discussions due to the nature of the Rotisserie discussions?  
More
Did you take more or less time writing your answers than you would have on a typical discussion board?
More.
Additional Comments
The question is how to ensure that everyone is on the same page so that meaningful discussion can take place. While the readings undoubtedly helped in this series in which participants were self selected and motivated it is not clear that this approach would work with other groups. Perhaps computer assessed comprehension tests of reading would assist this in more conventional education settings.

What was the consequence of rating other peoples' posts?

The option to mark as best post per project is not very useful since one can really only determine this after one has made all the posts. Also some cultures are uncomfortable with anything as self congratulatory.

I would agree whole heartedly with the poster's comment vis a vis rating 'my best post.'  A comment: I personally wasn't comfortable with this self-rating at all; it feels a bit  boastful and also a bit risky in a largely anon. environment.  

I also wasn't that comfortable rating the posts of others as I didn't really feel that we had a clear enough measurement standard established. I tended to rate a 0 or a 1; 0 if okay or unclear; a 1 if quite to the point and well-argued.

And I didn't really see any change in the 'Interesting Threads' listed as the course progressed and indeed, IMHO, there were many more interesting threads than were listed for the module.

Rotisserie confused me initially. Even now I am not sure if I understand the small details of how it works. I was surprised that one of the discussions was closed by the time I could answer.
Involved more time and longer posts than normal -- which is good.
But this also means that the discussions were more formal -- which may not be good always.

I suppose if you were in the classes this would be less of an issue. I would like to know how the number of points that could be awarded was determined and whether they were adjusted during the course.

I agree, the quality of the responses is in part a reflection of the way the system works. It was very nice to see responses that were the product of thought rather than primarily reactionary. The combination of the H2O system and the traditional discussion board was a very good attempt to provide tools for a wide range of end users. The participation in H2O compared to the discussion board seems to be a very nice indicator of it's success.