Characteristics of Technology
|
Table B 2.
Wood Education and Resource Center, USDA
Electronic Commons Program Teams
Characteristics of technology
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Project Name
|
Primary agency
|
Communication medium
|
Technology used
|
Characteristics
|
|
Augusta Springs |
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Department of Forestry |
Informational Web site |
Collaborative format developed by Virginia Tech Computer Sciences Dept. |
The collaborative format of this Web site allows registered users to upload text and pictures without having to know HTML or Web site management. It was meant to be updated by K-12 students and teachers who visit Augusta Springs and the natural resource educator from the regional forest service; however, as of November 2006 the Web site was only updated by the project lead and his interns. |
|
Cooperative Weed Management Area |
The Nature Conservancy, Indiana |
Webinars and teleconferences |
WebEx hosted by Genesis
Originally they were going to use Purdue University distance education system, but that required people to travel to certain locations, thus defeating the purpose of eliminating the need to travel. |
The WebEx system allows users to upload their PowerPoint presentation and move through it on their own. It displays participants alphabetically, but does not display their affiliation, which would be nice to know. It allows participants to “raise hand” to indicate that they have a question and send messages via chat rooms either to the whole group or just selected participants. Because everyone can see who is participating, it enables them to contact each other if they desire so.
The project lead selected WebEx because Nature Conservancy already had a contract with them, so they did not have to go through the process of technology selection.
In addition to Webinars, they were simultaneously presenting their classes via a teleconference, which increased the cost but was necessary as people with MACs could not log on to the Webinar. This also allowed people who were not technologically savvy to simply download the application ahead of time from Nature Conservancy’s Web site and go through by themselves while listening to the teleconference. This method worked well for the team as it eliminated frustrations experienced by the users who were not able to connect to the Webinar. Giving users more than one option was considered key to the overall success of this project. |
|
Demonstration of a Community of Practice to Enhance Economic Development |
Northeast Minnesota Forestry Industry |
Web pages, on-line plant visit reporting forms, Webinars, chat rooms, e-newsletters, a library, and archives |
Web site will be hosted by the Northern Tier High Technology Corridor,
Breeze was used for Webinars and online meetings. |
Although the project lead was very satisfied with the functionality of Breeze, he also stated that it became a problem when some of his team members did not have access to high speed Internet. |
|
Forest Resources and Ecology: A Distance Educational Model |
Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest |
Existing Web site and Interactive Television (ITV) network |
The ITV network employed by this project was already present in the school districts they were serving. The project lead sought to enhance ITV’s use and therefore provided initial training to teachers to ensure their willingness to participate. They found that by providing additional incentive (offering educational credit for attending the class) they were able to motivate teachers to engage with the system and thus participate in their project. |
|
|
Native Plants Learning Network |
The Nature Conservancy, Michigan |
Information coordination Web site, virtual field trips, information database, monthly Web casts |
Instantly Global but originally used Breeze for Web casts
Web site available through the Stewardship Network |
The project originally used Breeze through their contact with Michigan State University, so when the university switched to Instantly Global (IG) they were also forced to use Instantly Global. The project team thought that both programs were equally good, although they both had their advantages and disadvantages.
The biggest advantage of IG is that it can be used by PC and MAC users alike, which is not the case with Breeze. IG also has a slide preview, which is helpful when going through a presentation. On the other hand you cannot manipulate the screen and the chat window is rather small. The project lead found IG more intuitive and better suited for computer novices. There were several features that they missed such as being able to see participants in chronological order. IG is Web based so uploading is not a problem and different hosts can control the presentation even if they are not in the same room.
The main disadvantage of switching between these two programs was that they lost their archived presentations. |
|
Promise of Place Interactive Web site |
Shelburne Farms and Green Mountain National Forest |
Web site |
They were able to hire an IT manager who assisted them with selection of technology and a vendor. Although it delayed the design of their Web site, the team knew that having the person who will be tasked with managing the Web site be part of the selection process was key. |
|
|
Sustaining White -tail Deer and Forests |
University of Georgia Cooperative Extension |
Web site |
Modeled after existing encyclopedic Web sites such as Forest Encyclopedia Network |
Because of the university setting, the team had experienced IT personnel on board, which was very helpful when designing the Web site. In order to ensure proper content, they reached out to their contacts and via a snowball method received feedback about the need of the community they were targeting. |
|
Web-based Learning and Technology Transfer
Historic Wood Structures |
University of Minnesota
Natural Resource Research Institute |
Webinars |
Breeze |
The project leads were satisfied with Breeze as it allowed them to manipulate what people saw on the screen, it allowed them to move everyone through the presentation and it also allowed the project team to share and collaborate on documents. Both project leads were comfortable with the technology, although they both stated that having previous experience as a participant was helpful in knowing what works and what does not in this type of distance education. Overall, they were very positive about their experience. |
