Janet Salmons

We'll get started May 1, but feel free to introduce yourself so we can get acquainted. You can view a short greeting from me: 

I look forward to interacting with you in May! I am planning a number of synchronous and asynchronous events and hope for a lively exchange.

Warmly,

Janet

1. Janet Salmons
2. I've had a couple of experiences with badges, and have heard conference presentations about them-- otherwise, minimal.
3. I have a couple of interests: 1) Within higher ed, graduate ed, for distinguising work in discussions. 2) In more informal peer exchange, in my work with educators/grad students, for building connections with and among my network of interested folks.
4. Home: Boulder, CO. Home page: http://www.vision2lead.com 
5. At last year's TCC conference (see http://tcchawaii.org/call-for-proposals-2013/), Learning TImes set up a badge system. See: http://www.learningtimes.com/what-we-do/badges/. I thought it was very cool. At online conferences (or learning events like this) you are always competing with participants' everyday life + work. Badges gave an incentive to participate. They also distinguished between, and incentivized types of participation. 

Hello Sylvia and everyone,

Sorry for my late response!

You asked:

• What have you liked about SCoPE? 
  I like the sense of community, and the diversity of the community. While social media is fun, this format, to me, allows for deeper exchange and continuity.

I like the seminars-- giving and either participating or reading. The forum to email features of this platform allow for both in-depth posting and casual reading.

• What would you change? 
  Not much!
   
• What are your ideas for future activities?
  I would like to see more seminars on research-oriented topics as well as the instructional approaches typically covered. I would like to see more focus on graduate-level teaching and learning.
  
  I would like to see some more in-depth classes, perhaps longer than the 2-3 week seminars. 

• How has SCoPE helped you?
   I feel connected with others of like mind.
   
• How do you think SCoPE can be improved to have more impact?
  I am not sure how to create the opportunity for more in-depth, engaged seminars with consistent participation. On one hand, making seminars free means they are open, on the other hand perhaps a small fee (and honorarium for facilitator) might encourage those who sign up to make an effort to consistently participate. 
  
  It would be interesting to create some tie-ins with writing and publishing. Might SCoPE be a place where one could find research and writing partners, contributors, etc.? Perhaps developing relationships with relevant journals and/or publishers? Or even e-book distributors for self-publishing? 
   
• Where do you see the community going in the next few years?
  I  hope the community will grow and that it can foster improved teaching, learning and research!

I generally suggest a consistent approach. So either use the video, or not. Advantages, besides non-verbal cues, include the greater potential for synchronicity...in Cases I discuss the degree of focus regardless of whether or not the tools allow for real-time exchange. Simply, if you can see the person you know they are there paying attention, and not trying to chat with 3 other people! For one thing, you then know whether the person is thinking about the answer, or doing something else.

I think the visual exchange helps to create a natural exchange and build trust and rapport. So even if you are not specifically collecting data about the nonverbal cues, facial expressions etc., you can use the video part to further your process.

While there are common guidelines, members of IRB committees rotate so some members may have more e-research background than others. I advocate for very clear explanations of the research design and intentions so anyone can understand it.

The CITI Modules include one on Internet Research that includes some basic aspects of Internet research ethics.