Hi John,

That's a good question -- something all educators need to reflect on!

In this world of social software, we could reasonably make a case that
learning to use social software is a life skill for the future :-)

It's interesting to note that the overwhelming majority of new account users
in WikiEducator cite the opportunity to learn wiki skills as a major factor
for joining our community -- and we have the data to prove it!

Cheers
Wayne

2009/11/22 john stampe <[email protected]>

> Sorry, I did not quite understand what you where asking. And I will agree
> with Wayne in his response to you.
>
> But I have a question. And this is addressed not just to you, but to
> everyone. Why is it that educators -- the people whose job it is to teach
> students about new technology and concepts -- do not want to learn the
> technology themselves?
>
> I am not taking a position on use, or ease of use, of technology, I am just
> curious why this attitude exists. Thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> http://www.wikieducator.org/User:JohnWS
> http://johnsearth.blogspot.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* 2web3 <[email protected]>
>
> *To:* WikiEducator <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Sat, November 21, 2009 4:58:35 PM
> *Subject:* [WikiEducator] Re: Collaborative Document sharing
>
>
> Thanks for the explanation. I understand all the concepts that you
> just outlined, but this is not what I asked. Let me try to explain the
> problem again.
>
> The target audience of this site are educators. Why educators are
> using it? Because wiki makes collaboration and sharing of the content
> easy, unlike MS Word. But I still consider that they need to be quite
> computer literate to be able to use a wiki site. How many educators
> are NOT using wikis because they need to learn and use a cryptic
> "wiki" language? I think they fall back to the trusted tool, such as
> MS Word and live in the world of pain by collaborating via e-mail. Why
> they use MS Word and Notepad? Because educational content rarely is
> just bland text. And boy they need to print it. And they don't care
> why wiki cannot be easily print, web/HTML/CSS or not. In MS Word it's
> easy, what you see on screen is exactly what gets printed. This
> problem is solved long time ago.
>
> Am I the only one who sees the world this way and everybody else is
> just happy the way things are? Educators, what about the colleagues
> that don't use WE? Am I right or not?
>
> On Nov 20, 11:47 pm, john stampe <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am not sure exactly what your question is, but I will attempt a reply
> anyway.
> >
> > First, I think you are confused a little with some concepts.
> >
> > A text editor is for typing text. It does not directly give you
> formatting. The resulting product is simply a text file. MS Word or
> OpenOffice on the other hand is a word processor, it can add formatting,
> tables, etc. The problem with sharing them is actually in the format used,
> usually each program has their own format. OpenOffice has helped by using
> the standardized XML format.
> >
> > Wiki's and other structured text systems such as LaTeX are another
> different thing. Word processor files contain all the formatting hard coded
> into them, like a binary file. However, for structured text (wikis) the
> files are actually text files with the formatting indictated, like computer
> code. The underlying wiki software then turns that code into what you see in
> your browser (it slightly more complicated, but I won't go into detail).
> >
> > Yes, wikis are not WYSIWYG, but they are simply text formats, not locked
> in formats. But there is being developed WYSIWYG editor for wikis right here
> on WE, it is being tested on our test site.
> >
> > If you understand wiki syntax, then you can actually work on stuff
> offline. It is what I normally do as I do not have a permanent internet
> connection. I write my stuff offline in a text editor using wiki syntax and
> then paste it on to the web when I am connected. Again this is because the
> wiki page is simply a text file. (See here for my guide
> http://www.wikieducator.org/Help:Editing_using_a_text_editor)
> >
> > I am not sure what you mean by rich formatting. Most of the formatting
> problem I think you are refering to is a limitation on html not in the wiki.
> And as most professional designers will tell you what looks good on a screen
> is not what looks good when printed and vice versa. (As the scribus website
> http://www.scribus.netsays "Graphics used on a website are almost always
> unusable for commercial printing".)
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> > John
> >
> > http://www.wikieducator.org/User:JohnWShttp://johnsearth.blogspot.com
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: 2web3 <[email protected]>
> > To: WikiEducator <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Sat, November 21, 2009 1:36:16 PM
> > Subject: [WikiEducator] Collaborative Document sharing
> >
> > I have a somewhat generic question related to editors in general. I
> > feel this discomfort with current state of document creation. Let me
> > explain.
> >
> > In the beginning there were just simple text editors. Then they got
> > more sophisticated, visual, WYSIWYG, culminating with products such as
> > MS Word and alike. This is all great, but the document is stored in
> > individual files (silos) and is hard to share and collaborate with a
> > team. Of course, you can send via e-mail, but then the proliferation
> > of versions and comments makes this kind of collaboration difficult.
> >
> > Then came centralized systems such as SharePoint that allow to store
> > the documents in one place, lock the document so that only one person
> > can edit it. However this again is far from perfect: I cannot easily
> > track the history, who did what, what has really changed. And I still
> > cannot properly comment on the document. But is better than e-mail.
> >
> > Then wikis came along. They made a whole bunch of stuff easy
> > (versioning with diff, easy access to information, search, permissions
> > etc). But they lack several important features a modern editor has:
> >   * They are not truly WYSIWYG. Any wiki is light-years behind Word
> > from editing capabilities. This is a major impediment why wikis are
> > not widely used in our organization.
> >   * They are not easy to work with in offline mode (when traveling on
> > a plane)
> >   * They generally rapidly degrade in performance as more users use a
> > wiki installation
> >   * It is not easy to just send a wiki "document" to somebody,
> > especially to an external partner, when the wiki is on intranet. It
> > has to be opened to external users, security policies need to be put
> > in place etc. E-Mail is just light years easier in this respect.
> >   * Wikis, being web application, poorly support rich formatting that
> > we've come to expect from a Word doc. I cannot easily take a wiki
> > "document", print to PDF and send it to external partner - usually the
> > document will not look professional. And to make it look professional
> > in wiki will take way more time and resources than just to write it
> > from scratch in Word.
> >
> > So here's my dilemma... Can anybody help me point out to a solution?
> > Or if you experience the same issue - share your feelings as well, let
> > me know that I'm not suffering alone.
>
>
>
> >
>


-- 
Wayne Mackintosh, Ph.D.
Director,
International Centre for Open Education,
Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand.
Board of Directors, OER Foundation.
Founder and Community Council Member, Wikieducator, www.wikieducator.org
Mobile +64 21 2436 380
Skype: WGMNZ1
Twitter: OERFoundation, Mackiwg

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org
To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to