Web-based Learning Solutions for Communities of Practice

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A Document Reuse Tool for Communities of Practice framework of Palette project (http://palette.ercim. org/) aiming to provide communities of practice with a set of services concerning information production, exchange and reuse; reification of explicit and tacit knowledge about practices and advanced collaboration. The outline of the rest of the paper is the following: Section 2 gives an overview of the benefits of structuring documents and presents solutions to easily produce such documents. Section 3 describes proposed solutions and tools for automating the reuse process. STRUCTURED DOCUMENT PRODUCTION Why Structuring Documents? The goal of this section is to show the benefits of structuring documents. Structured document refers to a document conforming to a pre-defined grammar or schema that describes the permissible document components and their logical organization (Abiteboul, Buneman, & Suciu, 2000). XML is the mark-up language for presenting information as structured documents. The design of XML was driven by the idea to have a generic language for representing data in a self describing way. The latter is achieved by structuring the contents using tags. Every XML application defines its own tags which are described in a DTD or more recently using an XML Schema (World Wide Web Consortium, 2001). The document structure can be utilized to facilitate several issues such as document authoring, document publishing, document querying and browsing, etc. Recent research has shown that during the authoring process of documents as much as half of the time is spent on formatting. A basic principle of structured documents is to separate the structure from its presentation, this shields authors from formatting tasks allowing them to only worry about the content. The writing of documents can then be guided by prompting the required structural parts, and by interactively validating the resulting structure. Another advantage of the structure is that the authoring tool may help the user with powerful commands. According to structure, the tool can automatically update cross-references, and establish a table of content or an index (Furuta, Quint, & André, 1988), (Brown & Cole, 1992). Based on structure, it is easy to achieve replication. Different layout formats such as Word (Doc/ RTF), HTML (for Web sites), PDF (Printed documentation), WML (for wireless devices) could be generated automatically. This greatly facilitates the publishing of structured documents and saves efforts (reuse by replication). Structuring documents clearly facilitates their later processing. In fact, producing a class of documents that conforms to a unique grammar typically enhances the specification of appropriate processing operations on documents belonging to a given class, since processing is uniformly defined for a set of documents and not for individual document. Re-thinking Document Structure However the benefit behind structuring documents, the production of such documents is a long and complex process that generally requires some specific languages mastery and programming skills. The first task is typically to define a document model and to produce its related instance(s). The second task is to convert such document to XHTML (or any other presentation language) for publication and delivery purposes using a transformation language such as XSLT. This process is long, complex and requires being familiar with XML family languages as well as existing editors (such as XMLSpy, etc.). In many cases authors prefer to take another, very different and simpler approach: they write directly Web documents ready for publication, thus missing the benefits of structuring documents. Another obstacle to produce structured documents is the difficulty of their reuse and evolution which 15
equire structure transformation attained typically by writing scripts and code. In order to motivate CoPs to produce structured document, a specific focus is given to provide them with an easy and automatic means to first produce and then reuse structured documents without dealing with syntax problems. This section describes provided solutions to produce structured documents, next section focuses on reuse issues through the presentation of DocReuse tool (http://docreuse.epfl.ch/). In the context of the Palette project, we try to combine the advantages of two approaches: a rigorous document structure, but a simple production and reuse process. The idea is to provide CoPs members with a graphical user interface and allow authors to interact with familiar representations of documents presented as templates. This approach, called template-driven editing, is used by many HTML editors (Dreamweaver, FrontPage, etc.). In most cases the templates are predefined to describe a series of common used documents. The notion of template in our work is intended to guide an editing tool for building structured documents that follow a predefined model (describing the document logical structure). Some variants of the document template production have been described in the literature, as in Haake, Lukosch, & Schummer (2005) where it is applied in the context of literature teaching with a special type of wiki. These wiki based variants require users to learn special wiki languages to produce structured documents. The introduction of document templates in this context is only possible through the introduction of new wiki language extensions to describe the templates, which also augments the learning curve for users that wish to edit or evolve the templates. In our work we propose editors for multimedia content and try to encompass the whole reuse process. To address these issues, an editing tool and a language were developed in the context of the Palette project. The tool (Amaya web editor: http:// www.w3c.org/Amaya) makes editing templates and instances easier and simpler. The language, 16 A Document Reuse Tool for Communities of Practice called XTiger (Extensible Templates for Interactive Guided Edition of Resources: http://www. w3.org/Amaya/Templates/XTiger-spec.html), allows semantic XHTML and document structure to be clearly described. Amaya uses descriptions expressed in XTiger language to help authors to produce valid instances. The XTiger language describes a generic structure under the form of a template. A template is a document with some fixed contents and “holes” where the user can insert information. A template defines the skeleton of the document. It declares components that are specific to the kind of document. By filling the template, the user produces in a transparent manner a class of structured documents (so-called instances) that share the same characteristics. The XTiger language offers more advanced features such as typing and type references as in XML schema language which facilitates a modular construction of document, by sharing reusable pieces of structure. More technical details and examples of templates could be found at http:// www.w3.org/Amaya/Templates/. Making Existing Resources Structured In our work we mainly propose solutions to automatically reuse and make evolving structured documents (see next section). Through CoPs interviews and synthesis (available in the context of Palette project), we noticed that although CoP members are motivated to produce structured documents, they also express the need to reuse existing resources in (semi) automatic manner. Much of the available CoPs’ data that we focus on (e.g., contact information, course scheduling, publications, meeting minutes, etc.) already reside in HTML pages, and the challenge is to entice users to make the effort of structuring the available data. For this we develop the template-driven structuring tool. The key idea underlying the tool is to address a scenario where the data comes before the
Page 1 and 2: www.dbebooks.com - Free Books & mag
Page 3 and 4: Director of Editorial Content: Kris
Page 5 and 6: Editorial Advisory Board Anil Aggar
Page 7 and 8: Table of Contents Preface .........
Page 9 and 10: Chapter 11 An Organizational Knowle
Page 11 and 12: Detailed Table of Contents Preface
Page 13 and 14: Chapter 6 Using Storytelling as the
Page 15 and 16: Chapter 11 An Organizational Knowle
Page 17 and 18: Chapter 17 A Process-Oriented and T
Page 19 and 20: xviii Preface For more than ten yea
Page 21 and 22: xx (Greece) - by focusing on the pa
Page 23 and 24: xxii Advances reported in this book
Page 25 and 26: This chapter discusses the prelimin
Page 27 and 28: which will ultimately influence the
Page 29 and 30: Table 2. Facilitator 2 feedback SOL
Page 31 and 32: “Focus on reading peers’ posts
Page 33 and 34: • Feedback must be useful and for
Page 35 and 36: Schunk, D. H., & Lilly, M. W. (1984
Page 37: able to others (Wenger, 1998). With
Page 41 and 42: are often manually encoded on a cas
Page 43 and 44: context within the target template.
Page 45 and 46: tives have been negotiated with CoP
Page 47 and 48: Brown, H., & Cole, F. C. (1992). Ed
Page 49 and 50: 26 ABSTRACT Chapter 3 Tackling Acce
Page 51 and 52: Figure 1. Web-based GUI of eLogbook
Page 53 and 54: Figure 2. System flow for the email
Page 55 and 56: submission or validation of deadlin
Page 57 and 58: Figure 7. Body of the email of crea
Page 59 and 60: The email-based eLogbook interface
Page 61 and 62: 38 Chapter 4 Supporting Communities
Page 63 and 64: and to the contextualization of thi
Page 65 and 66: such meetings the CM practitioner n
Page 67 and 68: non-virtual spaces, candidate tools
Page 69 and 70: Compendium allows CoP members to cu
Page 71 and 72: lowing synchronous update of both C
Page 73 and 74: around the shared goal to enhance t
Page 75 and 76: community of farmers which is used
Page 77 and 78: REFERENCES Brown, J. S., & Duguid,
Page 79 and 80: est attain the educational goal. Th
Page 81 and 82: And here is where new technologies
Page 83 and 84: tion of such paths delivers a longe
Page 85 and 86: Figure 2. A snapshot of an activity
Page 87 and 88: Figure 3. A view of the course mult
Page 89 and 90:
Henry, G. (2004, September). Connex
Page 91 and 92:
defines a CoP as follows: “Commun
Page 93 and 94:
ested in learning from each other i
Page 95 and 96:
nize clearly how to begin a story,
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 2. Story Development Phases
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 3. Story Designed to move Em
Page 101 and 102:
2. Some differences in JavaScript i
Page 103 and 104:
However, bringing in a new practice
Page 105 and 106:
Backbase. (2008). AJAX in enterpris
Page 107 and 108:
through continuous learning (Rosenb
Page 109 and 110:
do with web-based collaboration sys
Page 111 and 112:
Artificial Intelligence. More preci
Page 113 and 114:
approaches concerning social networ
Page 115 and 116:
REFERENCES Ackerman, M. S. (1998).
Page 117 and 118:
the describing more than one cluste
Page 119 and 120:
eing ‘online’ or ‘offline’
Page 121 and 122:
communication tools, see Weinberger
Page 123 and 124:
learn community booked 147 meetings
Page 125 and 126:
102 Live Virtual Technologies to Su
Page 127 and 128:
Annotating FM text chat transcripts
Page 129 and 130:
community members were discussing t
Page 131 and 132:
chats taking place at this time, on
Page 133 and 134:
ing its course. During an extended
Page 135 and 136:
Dourish, P. (2006). Re-space-ing pl
Page 137 and 138:
INTRODUCTION 114 Individual Learnin
Page 139 and 140:
116 Individual Learning and Emotion
Page 141 and 142:
Emotional Processing 118 Individual
Page 143 and 144:
The Paradigm of CSA 120 Individual
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
128 Chapter 10 From ‘Collecting
Page 153 and 154:
aforementioned gap. In particular,
Page 155 and 156:
it into the discussion. This means
Page 157 and 158:
high degree of support for emergenc
Page 159 and 160:
When resources are used in a collab
Page 161 and 162:
Figure 7. Instance of the collabora
Page 163 and 164:
Transformation Rules During the tra
Page 165 and 166:
Grudin, J. (1996). Evaluating oppor
Page 167 and 168:
legitimacy provided by online educa
Page 169 and 170:
have all of the modules implemented
Page 171 and 172:
Figure 5. Process used to classify
Page 173 and 174:
Table 1. Number and percentage of l
Page 175 and 176:
152 An Organizational Knowledge Cir
Page 177 and 178:
CONCLUSION Our practical goal is to
Page 179 and 180:
156 Chapter 12 Using Web-Based Tech
Page 181 and 182:
visual clues and the ability to eas
Page 183 and 184:
should focus on developing engaging
Page 185 and 186:
experience, particularly in an onli
Page 187 and 188:
CONCLUSION Distance education repre
Page 189 and 190:
Roblyer, M. D., Davis, L., Mills, S
Page 191 and 192:
to further increase.” (Allen & Se
Page 193 and 194:
Figure 1. in moving from a real-tim
Page 195 and 196:
Catalonia, Spain. The institutions
Page 197 and 198:
Discussion It is clear that adjustm
Page 199 and 200:
Table 3. Adjustment to Teaching Pre
Page 201 and 202:
Comparisons between face-to-face an
Page 203 and 204:
neous, as noted by this instructor.
Page 205 and 206:
11. Ensure that instructors and stu
Page 207 and 208:
Swan, K., & Shih, L.-F. (2005). On
Page 209 and 210:
INTRODUCTION Museums of the past so
Page 211 and 212:
ties (including internet resources)
Page 213 and 214:
Figure 4. The mobile AR system. ©
Page 215 and 216:
untold potential, as the individual
Page 217 and 218:
in extended episodes of playful lea
Page 219 and 220:
8 at the left shows a real experime
Page 221 and 222:
spectrum in order to specifically d
Page 223 and 224:
Knowledge Learning: Pre-test High a
Page 225 and 226:
eceiving better learning results. T
Page 227 and 228:
Figure 18. Figure 19. learning appr
Page 229 and 230:
The teachers felt that the visit to
Page 231 and 232:
Ilola, L., Lakkala, M., & Paavola,
Page 233 and 234:
210 Chapter 15 A Proposed Framework
Page 235 and 236:
212 A Proposed Framework for Design
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
230 Chapter 16 An Agent System to M
Page 255 and 256:
common place (Hillery, 1955). The d
Page 257 and 258:
the local area. Because of this, as
Page 259 and 260:
Figure 3. General architecture cons
Page 261 and 262:
Deliberative-Social Level In this l
Page 263 and 264:
- The person uses knowledge previou
Page 265 and 266:
Figure 7. Showing and sorting resul
Page 267 and 268:
EVALUATION OF THE PROTOTYPE Once th
Page 269 and 270:
support knowledge management but it
Page 271 and 272:
Malhotra, Y. (2000), «Knowledge Ma
Page 273 and 274:
INTRODUCTION 250 A Process-Oriented
Page 275 and 276:
252 A Process-Oriented and Technolo
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
exploration and review the attempt
Page 289 and 290:
Defining Features of the IntelCitie
Page 291 and 292:
Figure 1. Integrated eGov services
Page 293 and 294:
portals to merely provide links to
Page 295 and 296:
experiential learning and, therefor
Page 297 and 298:
274 decision-making and develop the
Page 299 and 300:
towards the back-office functions,
Page 301 and 302:
Table 4. Step-wise logic of the ser
Page 303 and 304:
Table 6. Feedback responses to the
Page 305 and 306:
tals, but as particular types of eG
Page 307 and 308:
software consists of a set of enabl
Page 309 and 310:
solve problems associated with the
Page 311 and 312:
ecruitment was organized mainly aro
Page 313 and 314:
The global structure of the activit
Page 315 and 316:
ITPF (during the 2002 crisis) and f
Page 317 and 318:
growth of tax revenue generated som
Page 319 and 320:
and so forth. They confront the cha
Page 321 and 322:
community of practice members. Faci
Page 323 and 324:
It is my belief that these networks
Page 325 and 326:
Tuomi, I. (1999). Corporate knowled
Page 327 and 328:
to accomplish meaningful interchang
Page 329 and 330:
306 Chapter 20 Conditions and Key S
Page 331 and 332:
308 Conditions and Key Success Fact
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
330 Compilation of References Abdul
Page 355 and 356:
Balasubramanian, S., & Mahajan, V.
Page 357 and 358:
Buckingham Shum, S. (2007). Hyperme
Page 359 and 360:
Curwell, S., Deakin, M., Cooper, I.
Page 361 and 362:
Dretske, F. (1991). Explaining beha
Page 363 and 364:
Gebert, H., Geib, M., Kolbe, L., Br
Page 365 and 366:
Han, J., & Kamber, M. (2001). Data
Page 367 and 368:
Jain, A. K., & Dubes, R. C. (1988).
Page 369 and 370:
Klijn, E., & Coppenhan, J. (2000).
Page 371 and 372:
Loyarte, E., & Rivera, O. (2007). C
Page 373 and 374:
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web
Page 375 and 376:
Roberts, J. (2006). Limits of commu
Page 377 and 378:
Sharda, N. (2006). Applying movemen
Page 379 and 380:
Tailby, R., Dean, R., Milnerm, B.,
Page 381 and 382:
Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J., &
Page 383 and 384:
360 About the Contributors empirica
Page 385 and 386:
362 About the Contributors is also
Page 387 and 388:
364 About the Contributors Loïc Me
Page 389 and 390:
366 About the Contributors 1984) he
Page 391 and 392:
368 About the Contributors Christin
Page 393 and 394:
CoPs, key success factors in the cu
Page 395:
R Reactive Level 236 REGRET reputat
show all

Web-based Learning Solutions for Communities of Practice

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?