assessment 2: context analysis martin hoffman, sr ... · edtc 677 building online communities dr....

Assessment 2: Context Analysis

Martin Hoffman, Sr.

Charlene Mason

Heather Nydam-Fragapane

New Jersey City University

EDTC 677 Building Online Communities

Dr. Laura Zieger

EDTC 677 Building Online Communities Dr. L. Zieger Assessment 2: Context Analysis Group 2: Hoffman, Mason, Nydam

2

Introduction

Quality Matters™ (QM) is a non-profit organization, nearly ten years in the making,

which offers research-based quality assurance to educational institutions and publishers that

support online and blended education. QM works with an international base of institutions to

define, promote and support quality online course design. QM provides tools for developing,

maintaining, and reviewing all types of online coursework and materials. QM offers workshops,

professional development, training, and academic programs. QM also provides a set of rigorous

standards, QM Rubrics, and a process for evaluating courses and materials leading to

certification as a quality course or resource. QM combines best practices and research literature

to ensure that their rubrics for success are continually up to par and provide the best support.

QM principles of quality fall into four categories; continuous, centered, collegial, and

collaborative ("Quality Matters™," n.d.).

QM is a cyberspace based organization. Most employees operate from remote locations;

therefore the organization’s nature is in itself an online community. QM also supports online

communities on social media such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. Their general website is

available for everyone to view however to be part of the various in-house communities and to be

privy to news, media, events, and research a person or organization must sign a subscription

agreement and pay the associated fee. QM is in their young life-cycle for online communities.

They are seeking to grow this part of their organization by meeting the needs of their current

members and those that participate in their online training and courses. QM does not emphasize

formal metrics at this time, as they base the majority of their metrics on the participation of those

in their social media online communities and the surveys offered at the end of a course review.


3

The organization is in the process of developing and employing a new business program to better

track the metrics within their online communities.

The K-12 Program of QM is a recent addition to what Ms. Christine Voelker called a

“wonderful and eclectic hodgepodge” of organizations committed to applying the QM principles

in online education in the elementary and secondary levels (C. Voelker, personal

communication, February 13, 2015). Ms. Voelker remarked that the secondary rubrics have

already been created and adhere to Common Core Standards, a feature that members required

(Ash, 2011, p.6). Additionally, QM is looking to ascertain “best practices” in blended learning”

which is currently more prevalent in secondary education than online coursework. The

organization’s strategy for elementary education is to research and identify quality models of

student learning experiences that utilize learning management systems such as Edmodo or

Schoology.

Quality Matters™ Goals for Establishing an Online Community

One of the goals of QM’s online community is to provide professional development

opportunities which serve to guarantee the quality of course design while offering educators a

chance to gain experience and credentials as peer reviewers and course designers. This offering

is presented in a very collegial environment where the focus is on course quality and continuous

improvement not faculty evaluations and judgments of individual instructors (Quality Matters™,

2014).

The establishment of a supportive, non-threatening environment facilitated by technology

tools that assist in the delivery of course material as well as training is set forth as a clear

parameter for members. “As early as 2005, leaders of the QM Program began inviting and

subsidizing research focused on the impact of Quality Matters™. Emerging themes from the


4

impact of quality course design mirror the goals for members in the online community. Themes

include (1) learner satisfaction, (2) student learning, (3) professional growth, and (4)

organizational impact” (Shattuck, 2012).

According to one QM employee, the “big three” hopes for their online communities are:

“...to encourage and foster a culture of engagement, to promote and present information of

interest to our community across all of our platforms and to position ourselves as thought leaders

in the education space.” To do this, they maintain both public and private communities using a

variety of platforms in an organic configuration that “grows” as needed. For instance, in early

2015 a new platform called Basecamp was added to the existing configuration. This platform is

for the exclusive use of Statewide Lead QM Coordinators and QM employees. This platform

was selected based on specific needs of the defined user group. QM does not try to build

communities around tools, but rather selects tools to build community (B. Daniel, personal

communication, February 16, 2015).

Quality Matters™ Actions for Meeting Goals

Membership by subscription, brand (logo) recognition and certification (both apprentice

and master level) suggest an exclusivity that may be appealing to members of this online

community. Creation of a campus climate and structure that promotes teaching learning is one

reported use of QM tools in meeting goals for its members (Quality Matters™, 2014). The

evaluation tools and techniques are preserved for the application for which they were designed

and not open to customization by the general public with no training. Custom, automated tools

are available for members to manage their own reviews

Technology stewards for QM have effectively employed the evolution of technological

tools in advancing the organization’s mission. The informative and navigable website is linked


5

to the popular social media tools in use today and a secure area is provided for subscribers,

which includes blogs, learning management systems, and connections to support personnel.

Recent research into the use of Edmodo and Schoology for elementary coursework demonstrates

a forward thinking approach in advancing online learning. The utilization of such a myriad of

technology tools provides community members with a lens to view authentic changes in their

community and respond to these changes.

Quality Matters™ Online Community Metrics

Mr. Benjamin Daniel, Digital Communications and Social Media Manager for Quality

Matters™ ™ explained that his organization had access to many quantitative metrics regarding

the use of digital tools by QM supported online communities, and that those metrics could be

useful for “...gauging the quality of the content we’re sharing and its efficacy for our

audiences…” but that such metrics did not give a full picture of how well online communities

were really supporting the goals of the organization. Despite the fact that Mr. Daniel was, quite

reasonably, “…leery of attempting to assign a numerical value to something that is inherently

qualitative” (B. Daniel, personal communication, February 16, 2015) certain metrics regarding

social media sites are publicly available. Based on these public metrics, as of Saturday, February

21, 2015 Quality Matters™ ™ had 1,221 Total Page Likes on Facebook, 1,104 Followers on

LinkedIn and 2,013 Twitter Followers (see appendix B).

It was interesting to note that the number of Likes and Followers on Facebook and

LinkedIn were similar but the number of followers on Twitter was higher. A cursory literature

review did not find many articles addressing the general ratio or relation of Facebook/LinkedIn

Likes/Followers to Twitter Followers, however a paper presented in 2014 at the International

Conference on System Science did address social media use by 31 cities and "On average, there


6

are about 154,000 likes for each city using Facebook." but "The average value is about 55,000

followers per city using Twitter." It is also interesting, but perhaps not germane; to note that

more of the cities studied had Twitter accounts than Facebook pages despite the fact that more

people seemed to engage with Facebook pages than Twitter feeds. (Mainka et al., 2014, p. 1721)

In a briefing paper from 2013 comparing Facebook Likes to Twitter followers of major political

parties in England, the number of Likes was also larger than the number of Followers (Bartlett et

al., 2013). Thus, in the absence of evidence that other organizations tend to have more Twitter

Followers than Facebook Likes, asking Quality Matters™ personnel to offer an opinion as to

why they show an opposite tendency from the limited other data available might be a worthwhile

follow-up question.

Ms. Voelker, K-12 Program Director, reported that the primary metric used to assess the

efficacy of the QM process was survey data obtained from exit surveys from coursework as well

as surveys related to course design ratings. She commented on one measure of success as “word

of mouth” referrals which are the result of satisfied community members recruiting new

members on the strength of their experiences and recommendations (C. Voelker, personal

communication, February 13, 2015). This reliance on survey data for assessing whether

community objectives have been met aligns with QM’s own community of practice of peer

review.

Conclusion

Quality Matters™ is a successful organization. They are successfully re-evaluating their

needs as an organization and how they can better serve their online population, participants, and

followers. QM is seeking to use their online communities to improve their product and to share

their research with those who are seeking quality online course and programs. QM is an ever


7

evolving organization and they are continually making an effort to meet their goals for

maintaining successful online communities. QM is in the process of developing a business

information program to better track their metrics, as they realize they need to have this

information as a growing online community. Knowing their metrics for online communities is

their next logical step considering the majority of their organization is base online. QM is also

expanding their population base beyond the post-secondary educational realm to include the K-

12 setting, as this is a growing population incorporating online coursework and establishing

online communities of learning.

It is recommended that QM continues to be reflective of their organization and their

online communities. They need to develop a comprehensive system to track the people and

participants in their communities, and how they are using QM communities and products. QM

will need to develop tools and platforms that are easy for the participants to use and navigate.

The tools and platforms will need to evolve as their online communities move from the

beginnings to a more mature stage. Additionally, the members of the technology department will

need to steward the online community to encourage commitment, encourage appropriate

contributions, and regulate behavior.


8

References

About the world cafe. (n.d.). Retrieved February 21, 2015, from The World Cafe website:

http://www.theworldcafe.com/about.html

Ash, K. (2011). Crafting e-curriculum that inspires. Education Week, 30(15), 5-6.

Bartlett, J., Bennett, S., Birnie, R., & Wibberley, S. (2013, April). Virtually members: The

Facebook and Twitter followers of UK political parties. London, UK: Demos.

Burch, B. (2015, February 20). [Telephone interview by H. Nydam].

Daniel, B. (2015, February 16). [Telephone interview by M. Hoffman].

Kraut, R. E. (2011). Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mainka, A., Hartmann, S., Stock, W. G., & Peters, I. (2014). Government and social media: A

case study of 31 informational world cities. Hawaii International Conference on System

Sciences, 47, pp. 1715-1724.

Millington, R. (2012). Buzzing communities: How to build bigger, better, and more active online

communities. FeverBee.

Quality Matters. (n.d.). Retrieved February 21, 2015, from https://www.qualitymatters.org/

Quality Matters. (2014, September). Quality Matters Overview [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved

February 21, 2015, from https://www.qualitymatters.org/applying-rubric-

15/download/QM_Overview_for%20Current%20Subscribers_AE2013.pdf

Shattuck, K. (2012, May). What we’re learning from Quality Matters-focused research:

Research, practice, continuous improvement. Annapolis, MD: Quality Matters.

https://www.qualitymatters.org/what-were-learning-paperfinalmay-18-


9

2012dec2012kspdf/download/What%20we're%20learning%20paper_FINAL_May%201

8,%202012_Dec2012ks.pdf

Voelker, C. (2015, February 13). [Telephone interview by C. Mason].

Wenger, E., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities.

Portland, OR: CPsquare.


10

Appendices

Appendix A - Group Documentation

In seeking to gather information for this assignment, our group had a Google Hangout on

January 29th

, 2015. Our group discussed the parameters of the project and ideas for online

communities that we would be interested in gathering information. We decided to reach out the

founding members of the Stewardship Council of the World Café at the suggestion made by

member Heather. Charlene and Martin both did research about the World Café, and it was

agreed by all members that their mission was a fit with our purpose of leadership, technology,

and communication. Martin drafted a skeleton introduction letter for us to adapt and send to our

prospective interviewees. Charlene sent her letter to Anne W. Dosher, President, Martin sent his

letter to Bo Gyllenpalm, and Heather sent her letter to Amy Lenzo, founder and Secretary.

Charlene received no response from Ms. Dosher. Martin received a reply from Dr. Gyllenpalm

indicating that his schedule precluded participation. He stated that he had written about this

topic previously and that the material should already be available on the Internet. He indicated

that if an interview was actually necessary Martin could try contacting Amy Lenzo to see if she

would be willing to participate. Martin stated that another group member had already reached

out to Ms. Lenzo and requested any other suggestions. Dr. Gyllenpalm then suggested

contacting Jacob Voit. Unfortunately Mr. Voit also indicated that he was unable to participate.

Heather received a response from Amy Lenzo expressing she could not help our due to limited

internet access due to being out of the country.

With the lack of success with the World Café, the group, via email, agreed to Charlene’s

suggestion of contacting members of Edmodo. Former CEO Crystal Hutter and co-founders Nic

Borg and Jeff O’Hara were contacted through the Edmodo Support Community and to date; the

group has received no reply from any of the contacts at Edmodo.

On February 10th

, 2015 our group met again via Google Hang-Out discussed some other options

for online communities. Martin suggested a non-profit organization that is at the beginning of

their online community lifespan, Quality Matters™. Charlene sent her letter to Christine

Voelker, K-12 Program Director. Martin sent his letter to Benjamin Daniel, Digital

Communications and Social Media Manager for Quality Matters™ ™. Heather sent initial letter

to Julie Henn, Director of Technology and Chief Information Officer. Heather sent her second

letter to Angie Peirpont, Technology Specialist.

Christine Voelker participated in a 35 minute phone interview with Charlene on February 13,

2015. Recording could not be retrieved due to technical difficulties.

Benjamin Daniel, participated in an interview with Martin on Monday, February 16, 2015. The

interview started at approximately 10:20 AM and lasted for 30 minutes. The interview was

recorded and a transcript is attached to this document as Appendix D.


11

On February 17, 2015, Charlene, Martin and Heather met in a Google Hangout to discuss their

findings from the interviews to assign the various sections of the Assessment to the group

member. A Google Document was established for the group members to share their work. The

group members also established a timeline for uploading and sharing information for a final

review before submission.

On February 19th, 2015, Heather received and email response from Angie Peirport to reach out

to Jule Henn or Barbara Burch. Due to time, Heather consulted with Martin and Charlene to

decide if it was worth reaching out to Barbra Burch for the third interview. It was agreed that

Heather should make the last moment effort to secure an interview. Heather sent out an email to

Barbra Burch and was able to secure a 30 minute telephone interview on Friday, February 20,

2015. This interviews transcript is attached to this document as Appendix E.

On February 21, 2015, group members completed their sections and collaborated via Google

Doc’s group chat. Group members reviewed the completed assignment and it was submitted to

TurnItIn, subsequently to Dr. Zieger via Blackboard on February 22, 2015.


12

Appendix B - Public (Social Media) Communities with Metrics

Quality Matters™ Facebook Page Like Metrics

1,221 Total Page Likes on Facebook

Quality Matters™ ™ LinkedIn Follower Metrics

1,104 Followers on LinkedIn


13

Quality Matters™ ™ Twitter Follower Metrics

2,013 Twitter Followers


14

Appendix C Private (Members Only) Role-Based Communities

Quality Matters™ ™ Coordinator Area (Password Required)

Lead Quality Matters™ ™ Coordinator Basecamp (Password Required)


15

Appendix D Interview Transcript-Martin Hoffman

Transcript of a call between Martin A. Hoffman, Sr., doctoral candidate at New Jersey City

University and Benjamin Daniel, Digital Communications and Social Media Manager for

Quality Matters™ ™ on Monday, February 16, 2015 beginning at approximately 10:20 AM.

This transcript has been edited for brevity. Pauses, repeated words or phrases, stutters and

fillers have been removed. A copy of the original recording is available upon request. 00:01

MH - I’ve just started the recorder going and I do want to reiterate that my name is Martin

Hoffman and I am a doctoral candidate at New Jersey City University in New Jersey and I am

associated with Quality Matters™ as the Statewide QM coordinator for the state of New Jersey

but this discussion has nothing to do with is purely for my schoolwork. BD – Right! MH - I'm currently taking a class called “Building Online Communities” and I have been very

interested in Quality Matters™’ online community and online presence and I saw your name and

position on the QM web site and although we haven't spoken before I thought based on your title

you would be a great person to talk to about QM's involvement in online communities. I do have

you on a speakerphone so that the recorder will work but I’m the only one in an enclosed office

at the moment. BD – That’s fine. MH - there are no right or wrong answers did any of these questions and in fact I’m hoping that

this will flow more like a discussion. BD - Okay

MH – Okay, great! So can you talk a little bit about your position at QM?

BD – Sure. My title is Digital Communications and Social Media Manager at QM however I’m

responsible for all of our outward facing communications. So, for example, content posted to

our website; everything across all of our social media platforms including Twitter, Facebook,

LinkedIn and YouTube; and other communication related information including print and

electronic collateral and advertising. I either have a hand in it or am directly responsible for it.

Insuring the content…could you hold on for just a second please…? So sorry! MH – Absolutely!

BD – Thank you.

----- Long pause, extraneous noises diminished perhaps a door or window was closed? -----

BD – Good morning! MH – Good morning.


16

BD - Sorry about that. Yeah, I’m responsible for all of our outward facing communications

including print and electronic collateral and all of our messaging across our social media

platforms including YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. MH – Ok. Well, I have “liked” QM on Facebook and I appreciate the communication that goes

out with articles of importance for our field and I often share those on Facebook with my friends

so I feel that QM has sort-of provided, you know, has vetted some of these. There’s just too

much news for me to read as a single individual out there but when I see something on my

Facebook feed from QM that's an article of importance I know that it's been pre-vetted almost

than then I share it with my friends. How does this tie in with your idea of digital community?

04:15

BD – Well, one of the interesting and frustrating things about the online environment is the

speed with which information is posted and re-posted. What we try to do at QM is to vet, in as

much as we are able to, to ensure that we’re responsive and can pretty easily anticipate our

audiences’ needs. We try to vet the copy that we post. We tend to post copy from previously

vetted media outlets including the New York Times, Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside

Higher Education, and the like. One of the disadvantages is you can quickly fall behind the

curve when it comes to content that our audiences seems to be engaging with and are looking for

either leadership or commentary from QM on it. It’s very important that we’re careful not to vet

or otherwise repurpose content that might be construed as supporting one position or another

whether it might be the possibility of conflict. Now this isn’t always possible but one of the

things about leadership, I think, is you are necessarily going to have issues with certain

constituencies while potentially being in the good graces of other constituencies but what you try

is to walk the line that’s right there in the middle where you’re either repurposing or showing

leadership on content where audiences seem to be engaged with or interested in without seeming

to come down on one side or the other of that content that might be construed as inflammatory. MH – Ok. BD – We just, we try to walk that line; more often than not we’re able to. MH – There are certain discussions I just won’t have on Facebook, [laughs] or any other

public…

BD – Right, right! MH - …outlet. Religion [laughs]…

BD – Sure, sure! MH - …gender issues…

BD – Usually we want to avoid any of that “third rail” stuff, no politics, no religion, nothing

around matters of the Bill of Rights or so-called rights or anything like that. What we try to do is

stick to content in our space; stuff around online and blended education specifically and

education and reform and education technology more generally.


17

MH – Now, when I re-share that material, if I just do a direct share it expands the QM presence,

the QM brand, because I believe that when I share that it says that Martin has shared this from

Quality Matters™ although it might be a small link at the top it is there. However sometimes I

go to the article directly and click the share button there and it wouldn't have the Quality

Matters™ brand. Does that make any difference to you as the Social Media Director?

BD – Well, on the one hand, certainly we would like for the QM name and brand to be

expanded, but in a way that affirms our commitment to quality assurance in online education and

in a way that positions us as thought leaders in the education space. So we are not of the mind

that “all publicity is good publicity” some is demonstrably bad. MH – [Laughs] BD – There are metrics that support the fact that it’s bad so we try to stay away from them.

Certainly we would like for users to repurpose our content and to engage with us in that way, but

not in such a way that’s going to besmirch or otherwise disparage the QM brand or our position

as thought leaders in education. MH – Absolutely. Now, the other thing, and I’m focusing on Facebook only because it’s a

platform that I’m familiar with, but the other thing that I’ve done, and it’s very rare but just

recently I actually commented on something that QM shared. What is your, you know, in your

professional capacity, and you mentioned metrics a minute ago, do you look a shares? Do you

look at number of comments? Are those important with the, in the, concept of online community

or just by providing valuable content to your members do you feel (or your subscribers) do you

feel you have done your job, or do you really want that two-way engagement and what metrics

do you look at to judge those, to judge that?

BD – That’s a great question. That is an excellent question! We look at several metrics to

measure our, for instance, levels of engagement with our audience. Of course we look at tweets;

I mean we look at shares, favorites and re-tweets for Twitter. Specifically for Facebook of

course we look at likes and we look at re-shares we also look at the total number of, we also look

at the total number of times an object has been sent anywhere, whether that be an email, via

LinkedIn or whatever. What we’re finding is that different channels serve different purposes for

us. When it comes to Facebook it’s largely a platform on which people like to talk to us.

Facebook and LinkedIn are where we see the largest kind, the largest levels of sustained and

thoughtful engagement; where you’re seeing lots of comments and you’re seeing lots of likes.

So those metrics are important right now for us in gauging the quality of the content we’re

sharing and its efficacy for our audiences. Are they finding it useful? Do other people find it

useful? And, as a practical matter, how are they perceiving QM and its position in so far as

repurposing what likes and shares would seem to indicate is valuable content anyway. 11:17

MH – Ok, that, that’s really the type of stuff that we’re supposed to be studying in this class right

now. BD – [Laughs]


18

MH - You mentioned sustained dialogue or sustained engagement. So I commented on

something QM shared and I did not set out to be inflammatory nor do I think anything I posted

was. It was probably more “preaching to the choir” as they say than anything else. But let’s say

somebody took offense and came back at me and then maybe a few more people jumped in kind

of, I don’t know, the digital version of a bar fight and [both laugh] eventually there were a lot of

people involved in this topic. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

BD – I want to make sure that I’m answering your question correctly. Do…are you asking if it’s

Ok if something we post leads to the kind of spirited discussion to which you just alluded, or are

you asking do we seek to post that kind of content as a rule? I just want to be sure we’re on the

same page. MH – Oh, I think you were pretty clear that you’re not out to post that content as a rule…

BD – Yeah, right, Ok. MH – So the first one. BD – Ok, well, it hasn’t been the case, thank goodness, that we’ve had any conversations so far,

and I’m going to pat myself on the back a little bit here and say it’s a testament to my ability to

scrutinize and carefully vet content (but that is not true), we’ve just been lucky [both laugh] I

think so far in that we’ve not posted anything objectionable to date. In the event, however, that

we were to post something that might lead to the kind of conversation of which you’re alluding

we’d attempt to engage in a reasoned and thoughtful way with the members of our audiences

who might take issue with the content we posted. One thing it’s important to understand about

QM is we’re sort-of Switzerland when it comes to online education and lots of the issues that are

roiling folks in the online and blended education space and education more broadly. We want to

assure that courses are of the highest quality. We don’t believe in things like a “final grade” or

“pass/fail” those aren’t the kinds of, that’s really not how we operate. What we want to do is

foster an environment in which continuous improvement and quality assurance become the rule

rather than the exception. As such it’s not really in our interest to come down on one side or the

other of an issue. What we want to do is ensure the best possible outcomes for learners. We

want to continue to do research on how we might improve learner outcomes in online and

blended education but what we don’t want to do is to foster an adversarial environment because

that’s anathema to what we try to do. MH – Right. And I was just thinking, certainly I wasn’t trying to do that either, but I did post a

comment, and if somebody took objection to that…

BD – Oh my. MH - …or took a contrary position - I don't think anybody would take objection to what I said or

I wouldn’t have said it but took a contrary position…

BD – Right.


19

15:03

MH - …and it did result in a dialog, hopefully a collegial one were many viewpoints were

expressed with this promote or would it detract from QM’s mission and goals. In your opinion!

It’s a hypothetical situation, it hasn’t happened so…

BD – Sure, sure. Could you ask the question one more time, please?

MH – Ok so I engage with a piece of content you share, and I express an opinion it’s my opinion,

not QM’s and someone else has a different opinion and posts that. So now we've got a dialog

hopefully a collegial dialogue with differing opinions from users not from QM. BD – Right, right. MH - Would this type of dialogue, which would appear on a QM Facebook or LinkedIn page,

because it, they were comments on your, on a post you posted would that promote or would that

detract from QM's mission of fostering course quality?

BD- Oh, gosh! I think that we encourage communications between and within our social media

communities. No, I think that that would be awesome but what we don’t want to do is be

perceived as sort of an ivory tower in which dissenting opinion is not encouraged. What we

want to do, one of the things that makes, I think, QM and our professional development so

valuable is the fact that we are a collegial collaborative environment in which folks from

disparate spots in, along the education spectrum get together and foster consensus relative to

what quality might mean for an institution and how to develop a high quality online or blended

education course. So in that spirit of collaboration and collegiality no, we definitely want folks

in our environment to be engaged with one another. Now, that’s not to say we want cat or dog

fights. We want people, in the way that you just described, to be collegial in their disagreement

and to attempt to find a middle ground, but no, we absolutely encourage that kind of

collaboration in and amongst our colleagues in the education space. MH – And, you know, by using Facebook and LinkedIn, two tools that I use, I know that those

tools, or those platforms, however you want to phrase it, they allow for that, they…

BD – Yes. MH - …they exists so that that can happen but I haven’t seen a whole lot of comments or replies.

I think a lot of people do mostly what I do, is re-share the content that you thoughtfully posted

and, you know, I’ve often mentioned in some of my classes the “80/20 rule” (not that it’s a real

rule)…

BD – Yes. MH - How do you, how, I guess one of the things our teacher threw out there is the Lurker to

Leader conversion. I’ve argued with some of my classmates that a lurker is indeed a member of

an online community…

BD – Sure!


20

MH - …even if they never post. But my teacher is interested in what happens when a, and has

asked us to pay attention to, what happens when a lurker becomes active and, and do you have

any thoughts on that or can you expound on lurker to leader conversion?

BD – Sure, absolutely! 19:00

BD – That’s an interesting position. What we at QM think is any level of engagement marks

you as a member of that community. Now, some people…what we don’t know…and I guess

this is what sort-of differentiates us from maybe other folks who are looking for hard and fast

purely quantitative data…is what these lurkers are doing when they’re on the social media

platforms. Are they having conversations with their friends in real life about the stuff that we’re

posting to our networks? Are they otherwise engaged with the content? Is there something that,

like you, they’re discussing in their classrooms? Are they having conversations with their

colleagues? So I’m leery of attempting to assign a numerical value to something that is

inherently qualitative. I think that it’s entirely possible that conversations and engagement of the

type of which is not clearly measurable are happening outside these communities and so we

encourage folks to come and take a look at us and see what we’re about and do what they will

with the content. MH – And that’s fantastic. In addition to, we’ve talked about Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter…I

was recently invited by a Marijane to join the lead QMC Basecamp site. Would you consider that

to be part of the larger QM online community?

BD – Absolutely. One of the things we’re finding from our Lead QMC Basecamp is that they’ve

wanted another space specific to Lead QMCs in part because those concerns Lead QMCs pick up

might not have immediate import to the broader QM community, so they’ve gone in, so to speak,

and have engaged straight away in a way that we hadn’t seen previously so it was a great idea to

engage with them on Basecamp and so far we have been pleased at the level of engagement and

some of the great feedback we’ve been receiving from participants. MH – Cool. And I’m going to be involved in that. And I’m excited. One of the things that…I

just finished a chapter in our textbook that talked about interoperability and it really broke it

down into tools, platforms, environment…they went into a lot of pedantic stuff [laughter] that

I’m sure I’m going to “need to know for the test” but as someone who does this sort of stuff

every day I was just, like, “Ok, give me a break”, but one of the points I did take away from the

chapter was, you know, Ok, somebody posts something in Basecamp and you really think that

that's appropriate for a wider audience or vice versa you’ve posted something publicly, you’ve

tweeted something and now you want it in the Basecamp. How do issues of interoperability

impact…was there consideration in the selection of tools or was it just “let’s pick the right tool

for this job and we’ll worry about how it works with the other tools later?

BD – Well, yeah, what we try to do is to take into account the user first and foremost. I think

you can run into some difficulty when you attempt to build around a platform or around a

specific product or service. So what you always try to do is to take the user into account first and

see what their needs are. See about how their needs relate to the broader community needs is


21

this something about which we’re seeing posts across our social media networks is this

something that the broader community is discussing? And then, you do the research and try to

find some way to ensure things work together. Of course best case would be a holistic solution

that incorporates many, most if not all of the platforms that your users have said they wanted, but

by and large what we try to do is to work from the user perspective first and then try to design a

solution around that. MH – Perfect. I love that and I think I’ll definitely use that quote in my paper. [Laughs] ‘Cause

that’s…

BD – Ok, good! MH - …that’s my personal opinion as well. But I’m finding, at the doctoral level, 20+ years of

experience means nothing unless you can find another expert to support that, so…and I

appreciate your position as an industry expert taking this much time to talk with me. I'm

enjoying the conversation but I know I called in late. Do you have a couple more minutes?

BD – Absolutely. MH – Ok, so let me look at the questions that I needed to answer. I didn’t want to just ask these

questions outright; I kind of wanted to have a conversation or dialogue and not just give you an

essay test here! BD – Sure, sure. 25:00

MH - What is Quality Matters™ seeking to accomplish through their online community? was

question one. And I think you addressed that pretty clearly when you talked about the mission

and goals of QM as an organization. I'm assuming that’s what the community, the online

communities are there for, is to promote those mission and goals. Is there anything that I missed

with regard to QM’s, specifically QM’s, seeking to accomplish with the online community?

BD – No, I think that pretty much covered it. Just to hit the high points: to encourage and foster

a culture of engagement, to promote and present information of interest to our community across

all of our platforms and to position ourselves as thought leaders in the education space. Those

are the big three. MH – Ok. Next one, What actions have Quality Matters™ taken towards accomplishing these

goals? I think those are pretty obvious, you mentioned a variety of tools you use. BD – Right. MH - Anything else? You also have, when you log into the QM website there’s also a

coordinator's discussion area I believe. BD – Yes.


22

MH – There’s certainly the training… I’m familiar with a lot of that…

BD – Sure. MH - …as a QMC. Anything else that I missed there other than the social media and more

closed environments like the Basecamp and what’s on, behind, the login on the web site?

BD – No, I think you’ve covered everything. MH – Ok, and the last one was: What metrics does QM employ to understand their progress

towards these goals? and she suggested: issue turnaround time, customer satisfaction, external

participant numbers and activity, and I think you really covered that one very well when you

talked about the fact that, you know, QM does not have a goal of x-many hits or x-many click-

throughs it has a goal of fostering communication and continuous course improvement…

BD – That’s correct. MH - …and you can't necessarily quantify that. BD – Right. MH – Lurker to leader conversion we talked about specifically. Speed/quality of question

answering…I’m not, again she doesn’t know who we’re, the teacher doesn’t know who we’re

interviewing or what communities we’re looking at…

BD – Sure. MH - …so certainly there are communities that exist to answer questions, medical community,

say I got this rash can the community identify it…

BD – Yes. MH - …that’s not what QM is about is my take, is my feeling on this. BD – Right. Right, although I will say, what we are trying to do is across, at least Twitter for

right now is to push certain members of our community to ask questions there, particularly those

questions related to access to some of the tools we’ve referenced, some of the stuff you see as a

QMC, QM data and tools related to professional development. If you’re having any trouble

logging in, password recover, things like that, but that’s a nascent initiative, there’s nothing,

that’s not something that we’ve undertaken in an organized, concerted way. But we are asking

for those people that we see are engaged on those platforms consistently, that maybe rather than

submit a ticket and go through the ticketing process, just shoot us a quick message on our QM

technology Twitter feed and what we’re finding is, for those people that use it, we’ve gotten

good responses from the level of responsiveness they’ve received from QM. So that’s good. But

again, it’s not something in which we’re engaged in a consistent, or in a consistent way, not as

yet.


23

MH – Ok, fantastic! So those were the three questions I have to absolutely address in my write-

up. My next step is to transcribe this conversation which will probably take me quite a while

[both laugh] I will certainly send you a copy of the transcript as soon as I have it done and then I

have two colleagues who were talking to folks at QM as well trying to get not necessarily a

different perspective but multiple perspectives on community. BD – Yes. MH - It is interesting I’m one of the few folks from higher ed. in this doctoral cohort so they're

very focused on K-12 and it’s wonderful that QM has that K-12 rubric as well. I'm really, you

know, thrilled that you were able to take this amount of time with me today and I really

appreciate it. BD – Absolutely. Well, thank you for your call and I’m glad I was of some use to you. I hope

that your doctoral studies continue to go well. MH – Thank you very much! BD – Alright, enjoy the rest of your day. MH – I will, you too! BD – Thank you. MH – Bye, bye! BD – Bye! 30:30


24

Appendix E Interview Transcript - Heather Nydam

Heather Nydam-Fragapane (HN) - Interviewer

Barbra Burch (BB) - Coordinator of Research at Quality Matters™ - Interviewee

This interview was conducted by phone and permission to record was not granted. The interview

transcribed as the interviewee spoke.

BB: Hi, this is Barbra.

HN: Hi this is Heather Nydam. Thank you for taking the time so last minute to speak with me.

BB: Absolutely.

HN: Let’s begin with a brief description of what your responsibilities are at Quality Matters™

(QM).

BB: The organization is supported by research. I try to keep track of all the research and keep

the data base. We have an online data base and over 600 references for faculty to use to design

quality online courses and programs. Our purpose is providing quality assurance for online

learning and quality online courses through the use of rubrics. We also do research on the impact

of online courses for the faculty and the impact on the students. I coordinate all of that. As an

institution we try to stay ahead of the curve. We are looking to work at the program level;

looking at the online program as a quality design. Looking for new ways provide quality on line

programs.

HN: From the research stand point of view, what do you think the organization is seeking to

accomplish through online community?

BB: To increase awareness in online communication. Everyone who is doing it does not have to

reinvent the wheel. Provide research for all organizations and institutions. Research tool kit, to

hone in on a good research questions for courses. To provide quality assurance and best

practices for institutions. Work with a lot of educational institutions that want to do research for

education. Trying to be helpful with all the products and services and reach out and support those

doing research for successful online courses.

HN: So basically, you are doing all the research and giving access to these institutions and

organizations on how to run a quality show.

HN: What actions are being taken towards accomplishing these goals of a successful online

community?

BB: I think we are trying to do a lot of different things; two newsletters one for College and one

for K-12. Visiting the website is open for everyone. However to receiving the newsletter requires

a subscription through (not heard by the interviewer).

HN: I am sorry, what kind of account?


25

BB: A myQM account to participate in the programs and subscribe to newsletters. Other forms

of communities for QM are through social media. Linked In and liaisons between schools and

organizations. On Twitter and Facebook. Started an association for instructional designs. A lot

of professional instructional designers helped to start a website. Faculty community for QM for

mentoring and training. And we try to have different communities for the various groups;

Workshops, professional development, online courses.

HN: What metrics does QM employ to understand the progress for meeting the goals? It can be

any of these components: turnaround-time, customer satisfaction, external participant numbers,

lurker to leader conversion, speed/quality of question answering.

BB: In terms of the metrics we are not sophisticated. We are able to see the number of

participants. We watch tweets and posts. And base efforts on those. The IT department is

working on business information through tracking the kind of user rate and where we are getting

more participation. When someone comes to the organization it is hard to say what prompted

them to sign up through QM. It is difficult. Occasionally, we can survey but we cannot do that

every time. Surveys after course reviews. The feedback we receive is mostly from online

surveys following a training or workshop. Looking forward to business information system from

the IT department and adding it to our research. Who is using our communities? How are they

using our communities? How did they find out about us? And, how can we improve upon them

for those people who repeatedly comeback?

HN: Are there any personal views you want to share about online communities? Or your

thoughts, in general, about online communities.

BB: They are here to stay. Pervasive part of everyone lives, the reach of the online communities.

How many more people are actively engaging in online communities throughout their daily

living? Online Communities is the logical progression for QM. To serve people better through

the appropriate online communities. It is a good thing and it makes sense since our organization

is focused on online courses and programs. We embrace diverse perspectives from all different

places and different people.

HN: Do you have any questions or comments regarding this project?

BB: I am surprised the questions are all the same and all the people are from the same

organization. It would seem there would be a significant amount of overlap

HN: Our group decided to attempt to interview people from different departments of QM to,

hopefully, have some diversity and some similarity. We are seeking the personal perspectives of

online communities from the individuals in regards to their positions at QM and how they view

the online communities pertaining to their work.

BB: I look forward to seeing the final project.

HN: Once it is graded it will be posted to my website that is my portfolio for my course work. I

will contact you when it is posted.

BB: I want to see how it is posted in the on-line.


26

HN: I can’t thank you enough for taking the time to speak with me. I am truly appreciative.

BB: You’re welcome. Have a good night.

HN: Thank you, you too, have a great night.


27

Appendix F Originality Report TurnItIn.com

assessment 2: context analysis martin hoffman, sr ... · edtc 677 building online communities dr....

Documents