Facebook & Blackboard: comparison of learner perspectives

Different systems, different purposes – but how do they compare as learning environments? We undertook a survey of students at the University, asking whether they learned from their use of the systems, whether they made contact with other students through them, and how often they used them. Although it was a small scale survey, the results are quite enlightening and quite surprising. Blackboard is populated with learning material, has all the students on a module signed up to it, a safe environment (in terms of Acceptable Use and some degree of staff monitoring) and provides privacy within the learning group (plus lecturer and relevant support staff). Facebook, on the other hand, has no learning material, only some of the students using the system, and on the face of it, it has the opportunity for slips in privacy and potential bullying because the Acceptable Use policy is more lax than an institutional one, and breaches must be dealt with on an exception basis, when reported. So why do more students find people on their courses through Facebook than Blackboard? And why are up to 50% of students reporting that they have learned from using Facebook? Interviews indicate that students in subjects which use seminars are using Facebook to facilitate working groups – they can set up private groups which give them privacy to discuss ideas in an environment which perceived as safer than Blackboard can provide. No staff interference, unless they choose to invite them in, and the opportunity to select who in the class can engage. The other striking finding is the difference in use between the genders. Males are using blackboard more frequently than females, whilst the reverse is true for Facebook. Interviews suggest that this may have something to do with needing to access lecture notes… Overall, though, it appears that there is little relationship between the time spent engaging with Blackboard and reports that students have learned from it. Because Blackboard is our central repository for notes, any contact is likely to result in some learning. Facebook, however, shows a clear relationship between frequency of use and perception of learning – and our students post frequently to Facebook. Whilst much of this is probably trivia and social chit chat, the educational elements of it are, de facto, contructivist in nature. Further questions need to be answered - Is the reason the students learn from Facebook because they are creating content which others will see and comment on? Is it because they can engage in a dialogue, without the risk of interruption by others?

Development and illustrative outputs of the Community Integrated Assessment System (CIAS), a multi-institutional modular integrated assessment approach for modelling climate change.

This paper describes the development and first results of the “Community Integrated Assessment System” (CIAS), a unique multi-institutional modular and flexible integrated assessment system for modelling climate change. Key to this development is the supporting software infrastructure, SoftIAM. Through it, CIAS is distributed between the community of institutions which has each contributed modules to the CIAS system. At the heart of SoftIAM is the Bespoke Framework Generator (BFG) which enables flexibility in the assembly and composition of individual modules from a pool to form coupled models within CIAS, and flexibility in their deployment onto the available software and hardware resources. Such flexibility greatly enhances modellers’ ability to re-configure the CIAS coupled models to answer different questions, thus tracking evolving policy needs. It also allows rigorous testing of the robustness of IA modelling results to the use of different component modules representing the same processes (for example, the economy). Such processes are often modelled in very different ways, using different paradigms, at the participating institutions. An illustrative application to the study of the relationship between the economy and the earth’s climate system is provided.

Institutional sustainability: at what price? UNDP and the new cost-sharing model in Brazil

By the turn of the twenty-first century, UNDP had embraced a new form of funding based on ‘cost-sharing’, with this source accounting for 51 per cent of the organisation’s total expenditure worldwide in 2000. Unlike the traditional donor - recipient relationship so common with development projects, the new cost-sharing modality has created a situation whereby UNDP local offices become ‘subcontractors’ and agencies of the recipient countries become ‘clients’. This paper explores this transition in the context of Brazil, focusing on how the new modality may have compromised UNDP’s ability to promote Sustainable Human Development, as established in its mandate. The great enthusiasm for this modality within the UN system and its potential application to other developing countries increase the importance of a systematic assessment of its impact and developmental consequences.

Analysing institutional partnerships in development: a contract between equals or a loaded process?

Partnerships are complex, diverse and subtle relationships, the nature of which changes with time, but they are vital for the functioning of the development chain. This paper reviews the meaning of partnership between development institutions as well as some of the main approaches taken to analyse the relationships. The latter typically revolve around analyses based on power, discourse, interdependence and functionality. The paper makes the case for taking a multianalytical approach to understanding partnership but points out three problem areas: identifying acceptable/unacceptable trade-offs between characteristics of partnership, the analysis of multicomponent partnerships (where one partner has a number of other partners) and the analysis of long-term partnership. The latter is especially problematic for long-term partnerships between donors and field agencies that share an underlying commitment based on religious beliefs. These problems with current methods of analysing partnership are highlighted by focusing upon the Catholic Church-based development chain, linking donors in the North (Europe) and their field partners in the South (Abuja Ecclesiastical Province, Nigeria). It explores a narrated history of a relationship with a single donor spanning 35 years from the perspective of one partner (the field agency).

The politics of CAP reform: Trade negotiations, institutional settings and blame avoidance

In this article we argue that the conclusion of the GATT Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture and the subsequent role of the WTO has changed the international context of CAP policy-making. However, comparing the three latest CAP reforms, we demonstrate that pressures on the CAP arising from international trade negotiations cannot alone account for the way in which the EU responds in terms of CAP reform. The institutional setting within which the reform package was determined also played a crucial role. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the CoAM seems to be a more conducive setting than the European Council for undertaking substantial reform of the CAP. We suggest that the choice of institutional setting is influenced by the desire of farm ministers and of heads of state or government to avoid blame for unpopular decisions. When CAP reform is an integral part of a broader package, farm ministers pass the final decision to the European Council and when CAP reform is defined as a separate issue the European Council avoids involvement.

Timing and the holding periods of institutional real estate

Literature on investors' holding periods for securities suggests that high transaction costs are associated with longer holding periods. Return volatility, by contrast, is associated with shorter holding periods. In real estate, high transaction costs and illiquidity imply longer holding periods. Research on depreciation and obsolescence suggests that there might be an optimal holding period. Sales rates and holding periods for U.K. institutional real estate are analyzed, using a proportional hazards model, over an 18-year period. The results show longer holding periods than those claimed by investors, with marked differences by type of property and over time. The results shed light on investor behavior.