Wikis for Collaborative Learning and Knowledge Construction

The Principles of Integrated Pest Management Course

Target Audience:

Learners in the Principles of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) course primarily will be US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service employees who have been tasked with duties related to IPM and the decision making process that reduces risk to natural resources, the public, and the environment from pests and pest management activities. Typically these employees will be IPM coordinators, site managers, biologists, environmental contaminant specialists, facility managers, natural and cultural resource managers, concession program managers and public health partners.

Course Scope/Relevant References and Policies

The US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Park Service (NPS) take an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to managing pests on their respective wildlife refuges and national parks. IPM is a science-based, decision making process that coordinates the use of pest biology, environmental information, and available technology to prevent unacceptable levels of pest damage by most economical means, while posing the least possible risk to people, property, resources, and the environment. All pest management activity conducted by the FWS or NPS is required to comply with the Department of Interior 517 DM 1 Pest Management Policy, FWS 569 FW 1 IPM Policy and NPS IPM Policy, along with all relevant federal laws. The federal law which governs the use of pesticides is the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and is overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Learning Objectives and Student Activities:

Learning Objective #1: Review materials under Primary Resources and Additional Resources as
necessary in determining site management objectives and establishing short and long term management objectives at the Antietam National Battlefield.

Instructions: Working independently, you are expected to reflect on the resources provided, and develop site management objectives and establish short and long term management objectives at the Antietam National Battlefield. You will post your project on the course Wiki site. You are encouraged to be as creative as you can to make your Wiki sections appealing to the reader. The project is due at the end of Week 2. During Week 3 each student is required to review and comment on at least three of their classmates Wiki.

     Grading (40 total points):

• 10 pts – Visual appeal and creativity in the design and layout of the Wiki
• 20 pts – Assignment criteria met.
• 10 pts – Feedback to fellow students

Learning Objective # 2: Given a specific pest scenario, develop a pest management strategy to prevent damage to a specific resource, by the most economical means, while posing the least possible risk to people, property, resources, and the environment.

Instructions: Working with a partner (to be assigned by the instructor) select two pest scenarios from the list provided. Each team will be expected to develop sound pest management strategies which meet the criteria of the learning objective above. Additionally, information must be provided about the pest species, its biology, and conditions conducive to support the pest(s) (air, water, food, shelter, temperature, and light), the pests’ pathways, and human and environmental factors, including population levels and phenological data. You will post your project on the course Wiki site. You are encouraged to be as creative as you can to make your Wiki sections appealing to the reader. The project is due at the end of Week 5. During Week 6 each student is required to review and comment on at least three of the other teams Wikis.
    
     Grading (50 total points):

• 10 pts – The project is a collaborative effort in which each participant contributed to the overall success of the project
• 10 pts – Visual appeal and creativity in the design and layout of the Wiki
• 20 pts – Assignment criteria met.
• 10 pts – Feedback to fellow students

Learning Objective 3: Using the 11 Step Integrated Pest Management Planning Process, develop and implement an Integrated Pest Management Strategy for their National Park or National Wildlife Refuge which complies with all Department of Interior, National Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service policies.

Instructions: In groups of 5 students who will work together for the rest of the term developing an IPM Plan. Each group will decide on the specific Management Area for which your group will take responsibility (Museum, Aquatic, Forest, Natural Areas, Structural or Cropland) After the group have chosen their area of focus, check with your instructor to get the topic approved. Your group task will be to produce an IPM Plan which address all of the 11 steps and which complies with DOI Policy. You will post your project on the course Wiki site. You are encouraged to be as creative as you can to make your Wiki sections appealing to the reader. The project is due at the START of Week 8. During Week 8 each student is required to review and comment on at least two of the other teams Wikis.

     Grading (50 total points):

• 10 pts – The project is a collaborative effort in which each participant contributed to the overall success of the project
• 10 pts – Visual appeal and creativity in the design and layout of the Wiki
• 20 pts – Assignment criteria met.
• 10 pts – Feedback to fellow students

Primary Learning Activity Resources:

The Organic Act of 1914, http://planning.nps.gov/document/organic_act.pdf

Antietam National Battlefield Natural Resource Condition Assessment, 2011, Natural Resource Report NPS/NCRN/NRR—2011/413, http://ian.umces.edu/pdfs/ian_report_325.pdf

Antietam National Battlefield Website, 2013, Natural Science,
http://www.nps.gov/anti/naturescience/index.htm

 

Additional Resources:

National Park Service Management Policies 2006, http://www.nps.gov/policy/MP2006.pdf

NPS Park Protection, http://www.nps.gov/protect/

National Parks Traveler. (2012, February 12). Revisiting the Organic Act: Can It Meet the Next Century’s Conservation Challenges? Retrieved from http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2012/02/revisiting-organic-act-can-it-meet-next-century%E2%80%99s-conservation-challenges9441

Integrated pest management (IPM): Definition, historical development and implementation, and the other IPM, [Lester E Ehler, Pest Management Science, Vol. 62, 2006, pp 787–789]

Pesticide Related Resources, US Fish and Wildilife Service, National Conservation Training Center, Conservation Science and Policy Branch, 2013,
http://training.fws.gov/CSP/Resources/pesticides/cd_index.html#top




Additio

Wiki's: Pros and Cons for Adult Learners

After reading the material related to Wiki’s this week, if I were to ask you to share one theme that resonated throughout the various chapters and articles what would it be? I would bet that most of you reading this will agree the theme most often presented, when discussing the benefits of wiki use in adult education, would be collaboration. In The Professor’s Guide to Taming Tecnology (2011), Pooneh Lari states that one of the most powerful aspects of wiki use in adult education is the collaborative and community-building power they foster. Lari goes on to reference Clancey (1995) defining a community of practice as any group of people who work together to accomplish some activity which usually involes collaboration between individuals with different experiences (p. 124). The benifets for adult learners is also emphasied by Lipponen (2002) who believes the use of wiki’s in group work and collaboration assists in sharing knowledge and increases knowledge expertise among the community of practice (p. 125). West & West (2009) state that wiki’s are designed to help groups collaborate, share and build online content, and are esspecially useful for distance learners who are seperated by time and distance.

I do not believe anyone can argue with the views of these authors as it relates to the intent, or capability, of wiki’s as a technology tool designed to deliver upon each of these goals related to adult education. I found the journal article by Hazari, et. al. (2009) very useful in providing some valid conclusions related to the pedagological value of wikis. What stood out to me was the section on the theoretical foundation of the study, and in particular the Engagement Theory, since it is most specific to technology based teaching and learning (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999). The authors go on to say that the wiki addressess all of the components of the theory by providing an opportunity for involving cognative processes for problem solving in a group environment that encourages shared ideas, dialog, interaction, decision-making and presentation (p. 189).

It’s easy to see that the wiki is a technology tool that is well suited to meet the challenge of fostering collaboration, interaction, community building and so forth. But what if the learner does not use the tool to it’s fullest? What if their particular learning style is simply not suited for collaborative learning? The more I read this week the more I thought that an Independent Learner, one who prefers to work alone, who was forced to always work collaboratively within a group, might simply lose motivation. This is just one challenge instructors face when designing activities that may rely too heavily on one particular technology. I went back to the text from the Teaching Online in Adult Education course, by Tina Stavredes (2011) and re-read the section in Chapter 2 related to the social styles of adult learners. Anthony Gersha and Sheryl Riechmann developed the Gersha-Riechmann Student Learning Styles Scale in 1996 to describe how learners interact with the instructor, other learners and the learning environment (p. 17). I don’t really want to get too deep into this topic, I simply wanted to point out that one of the major flaws of using wiki’s may simply be that it does not fit the learning style of many online learners.

If you choose to write a reply to this post, I would ask one favor. Please go to the Learning Style Survey and take a quick survey to determine your learning style. Let me know what your learning style was and offer your insights on who well your style fits the use of wikis in learning activities.

Thanks!

Gary

Clancey, W.J. (1995). A tutorial on situated learning. In J. Self (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers and Education (Taiwan)(AACE) (pp. 49-70). Charlottsville, VA.

Hazari, S., North, A., Moreland, D. (2009). Investigating pedagogical value of wiki technology. Journal of information systems education. 20(2). 187-198.

Kearsley, G., & Schneiderman, B. (1999), Engagement Theory: A Framework For Technology Based Teaching And Learning.

King, K. & Cox, T. (2011). The Professor’s Guide to Taming Technology. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

West, J. and West, M. (2009). Using Wikis for Online Collaboration: The Power of the Read-Write Web. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Stavredes, T. (2011), Effective Online Teaching: Foundations and Strategies for Student Success. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

The Pros and Cons of Using Blogs in Adult Education

In the article” Content Delivery in the 'Blogosphere'” (http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume5/Brescia.pdf), Brescia and Miller (2004) outline four benefits of student blogging:

 

1.       The use of blogs helps students become subject-matter experts.

2.       The use of blogs increases student interest and ownership in learning.

3.       The use of blogs gives students legitimate chances to participate.

4.       The use of blogs provides opportunities for diverse perspectives, both within and outside of the classroom.

 

While this is my first venture into blogging, I have realized each of the benefits above throughout my adult education journey. I see the blog as a combination between journaling and discussion post activities which I have had the opportunity to use in online classes.  I can certainly see the advantages of the blog as it incorporates the interaction of the discussion post with the reflection aspect of the journal.  My favorite part of all my online classes is the opportunity to share thoughts and ideas with my fellow classmates and to learn from their unique perspectives.

Teresa Carter mentions several challenges related to blogging in this week’s reading. From the instructor’s perspective, the task of reading all of the students’ blogs is daunting if not managed well (2011, pg. 93).  Additionally, the development of blogs may not be intuitive to students, thus creating the need for “how-to” instruction as needed (pg.  95). I will add one additional challenge that I personally am struggling with and that I am sure there are others who share my feelings.  I have resisted diving into the social media “pool”, so the idea of posting my thoughts in a very public forum is actually a little scary.  I am very interested in hearing if there are others out there who have resisted diving in, or am I the final hold out?

 

Ferdig, R. E., & Trammell, K. D. (2004). Content delivery in the ‘blogosphere’. THE Journal, 31(7), 4-20.

Carter, T. J. (2011). Blogging as reflective practice in the graduate classroom. In K. King & T. Cox (Eds.), Teaching with digital media: Best practices and innovations in higher education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publications.