Hawaii's Cyber Community Issues


Table of Contents :

    Is the Generational Curriculum Improving ?
    Category 1 Rating results of Generation 1 thru 3a of the Generational Curriculum
    Category 2 Rating results of Generation 1 thru 3a of the Generational Curriculum
    Overall Mean Scores (Category 1 & 2) of Generations 1 thru 3a of Generational Curriculum
    General Results :
    Results from Generation 1 :
    Results from Generation 2 :
    Results from Generation 3 :
    Results from Generation 3a:
    Wrapping it up :
    What is the Generational Curriculum ?
    What is it like being part of the Generational Curriculum ?
    Problems ? Does anyone have a problem ?
    Developing a long term program

Is the Generational Curriculum Improving ?

Have the pages of the Generational Curriculum improved in relation to the quality, depth, richness, technique, scholarship, connectivity, site integration,and navigation capabilities ? In order to answer these questions the criterions of quality, depth, richness, and scholarship were group together to form category 1. In addition, the criterions of technique, connectivity, integration, and navigation capabilities were grouped together to form category 2. Within categories 1 & 2, a generalized description of the criterions was then devised :

Note: Generations 1 thru 3a will only be evaluated because Generations 4a & 4b have not been completed yet.



Criterions for Category 1: Quality, Depth, Richness, and Scholarship
Generalized description of criterions:
1. Length of papers: longer papers are usually indicative of detailed writing.
2. Sub headings in papers: more sub headings indicate depth.
3. References (links and their descriptions): degree of comments on links.
4. Detail of topics: the variability of depth found in same reports done by different students.
5. Integration into psychology & science: psychology concepts and making references to other articles.


Criterions for Category 2: Technique, Connectivity, Integration, and Navigation capabilities.
Generalized description of criterions:
1. Links & tags: whether the links serve the function of connectivity (effectiveness or ineffectiveness).
2. Navigation Buttons: Are they present/not present ? Are they effective ?
3. Overall appearance: an objective assessment of the features and overall framework.
4. Special effects: the use of new internet technologies on home pages (e.g., images, HTML language, etc.).
5. Presence of Index or table of content: this has to do with the integration and navigation of the topics.

A rating scale ranging from a possible score of 1 thru 5 was then formed for the two respective categories (1=poor and 5=excellent). The scales are illustrated below:


Criteria 1 (length of paper, sub headings, references with comments, detail of topics, development of topics, and integration into psychology and science):
Poor 1 >>> 2 >>> 3 >>> 4 >>> 5 Excellent

Criteria 2 (links, navigation buttons, overall appearance, special effects, and presence of index or table):
Poor 1 >>> 2 >>> 3 >>> 4 >>> 5 Excellent

Note: each criteria in their respective category will be rated individually.



    Back to top

Category 1 Rating results of Generation 1 thru 3a of the Generational Curriculum


Gen. 1

Gen. 2

Gen. 3

Gen. 3a

Rating Scale: Poor 1>>>2>>>3>>>4>>> 5 Excellent

1. length of Papers

4 4 4 4

2. Sub headings

3 3 4 4

3. References with comments

4 4 4 4

4. Detail of topics

4 4 5 4
5. Development of topics

4 5 5 4

6. Integration into psychology and science

4 4 4 4

Totals :

23 24 26 24

Overall Mean Scores :

3.83 4 4.33 4
    Back to top

Category 2 Rating results of Generation 1 thru 3a of the Generational Curriculum


Gen. 1

Gen. 2

Gen. 3

Gen. 3a

Rating Scale: Poor 1>>>2>>>3>>>4>>> 5 Excellent

1. Links

3 3 4 4

2. Navigation Buttons

3 4 4 4

3. Overall Appearance

2 3 5 4

4. Special Effects

2 3 4 4
5. Presence of Index or table of contents

5 5 5 5

Totals :

15 18 22 21

Overall Mean Scores :

3 3.6 4.4 4.2
    Back to top

Overall Mean Scores (Category 1 & 2) of Generations 1 thru 3a of Generational Curriculum


Gen. 1

Gen. 2

Gen. 3

Gen. 3a

Overall Mean Scores :

3.415

3.8

4.36

4.1

    Back to top

General Results :

There was a noticeable improvement from generation 1 thru generation 3a. Generation 1 recorded an overall mean score of 3.415, Generation 2 received a score of 3.8, Generation 3 received a score of 4.36, and finally Generation 3a received a score of 4.1. Other than a drop of score in Generation 3a, a significant amount of improvement was evident.


Results from Generation 1 :

Generation 1 received the lowest overall mean score (3.415). This low score does not fully indicate the overall value that this generation represents. Since Generation 1 set forth the foundation for other generations, it would be erroneous on my part to only report its low score without giving credit to its scholarly contributions to the Generational Curriculum. Generation 1's reports were informative as well as descriptive (they received a score of 4). To illustrate this point, read a few reports written by Jill Kaneshiro. Generation 1 also scored high in the area of links. Kevin Bogan's page contained many outside links that were relevant to his page. In category 2, Generation 1 received rather low scores in the areas of special effects and overall appearance. Possibly, these low scores reflect the lack of Internet technologies available at that time.

    Back to top

Results from Generation 2 :

Generation 2 made considerable improvements over generation 1. In category 1, there was a noticeable improvement in the area of development of topic. Lori Morita's reports were a prime example of this. In category 2, Generation 2 made significant improvements from Generation 1 in the areas of overall appearance, special effects, and navigation buttons. The use of home page backgrounds as well as images were great tools utilized by students of this generation. Once again Lori Morita's page demonstrates this point. Furthermore, the topical indexes of this generation impressed me. Nitsa McCarthy's topical index provides a prime example of the well constructed indexes you will find in this generation.

    Back to top

Results from Generation 3 :

Generation 3 proved to be the generation that had made the most improvement. In every area of Category 1, this generation either equaled or exceeded generation 2. In the area of development of topic generation 3 did extremely well (they scored a 5 !). A report by our own Sherman Lee is a prime example of this marked improvement. Once again, in every area of Category 2, Generation 3, equaled or exceeded Generation 2. In addition, there was a significant improvement in the area of overall appearance. Generation 3 utilized images as well as color backgrounds to make their home pages aesthetically pleasing. An example of this can be found at Heather Roylo's page. Finally, I was impressed by the topical indexes generated by this generation (see Garrett Chun's topical index).

    Back to top

Results from Generation 3a :

Generation 3a's scores fell in both categories. In the areas of detail of topics and development of topics generation 3a (score of 4) came one point short of Generation 3. Furthermore, the overall appearance of their pages seemed rather generic; there was even one page that didn't contain a single report. However, the topical indexes of Generation 3a were well constructed (see Rhanele Ring's index). It is the opinion of this writer that since Generation 3 was a summer course, the students didn't have the luxury of time on their side. Through my own personal experience in this course, I have come realize that time is an important asset. It takes time to learn the intricacies of HTML language as well as proper Web page design.

    Back to top

Wrapping it up :

The progress of Generations 1 thru 3a is moving along nicely. There were notable marks of improvement in the overall appearance and special effects utilized from one generation to another. In addition, there was a steady improvement in the areas of development and detail of topic(s). Once more it must be emphasized that the low scores of generations 1 & 2 are not indicative of their scholarly worth. Generations 1 & 2 endured the trials and tribulations of being the first two Cyber-Psychology classes ever to explore and become a part of the Generational Curriculum; this is where their true worth lies. In the case of Generation 3a, they simply didn't have enough time (6 weeks). It was remarkable that they were able to nearly sustain the same level of excellence that Generation 3 had accomplished in a semester.

    Back to top

What is the Generational Curriculum ?


Searching for Oral and Written Communicative Competence was an article authored by Dr. Leon James. Upon completion of this article, I was able to appreciate and understand the rationale behind the creation of the Generational Curriculum area. Dr. James believed that college students needed "oral and written communicative competence". In order to foster this type of "communicative competence", Dr. James determined that "authenticity" had to be present first. In 1960 Dr. James got to put his theory in action, he developed a teaching program for the Dade County, Florida school district. This program would allowed teachers to provide an "authentic learning environment" for classes that contained Spanish and English speaking students. With an "authentic learning environment" established, the process of acquiring communicative competence could take place. Dr. James gave credit to psychologist Kurt Lewin, who's theory on "group dynamic forces" allowed him to discover that social forces can be manipulated (creating an authentic learning atmosphere), thus promoting the acquisition of "communicative competence".

With that theory in mind, in 1975 with the help of Dr. Diane Nahl, Dr. James set up the Generational Curriculum at the University of Hawaii . The Generational Curriculum is a site that consists of an array of writings authored by students in Dr. James's psychology classes dating back from 1975. The teaching approach used in the Generational Curriculum was to foster the acquisition of "oral and written communicative competence".

Currently the Generational Curriculum possess works of Dr. James' Traffic and Cyber-Psychology classes. In addition, The Daily Round Archives consists of students' reports dating from as far back as 1975.

    Back to top

What is it like being part of the Generational Curriculum ?

Linda Wong of generation 1 expressed nothing but positive comments for the Generational Curriculum. She also made a very good point, "In conclusion, what I would say is that the whole experience is beneficial and yes, it is fun, but you have to pay your dues for it."
Tina Smith of generation 1 believed that being part of the Generational Curriculum has equipped her with valuable computer skills. Personally, I strongly agree with her on this point.
Robin Miller of Generation 3 stated, " As far as conflicts go, I think the best thing to do to overcome them is to try to keep a positive mental attitude. It is hard sometimes when your computer freezes or something is going wrong and you can't figure out what. But, if you keep a positive mental attitude and don't let it beat you, you will realize it is not that difficult after all." If I had a penny for every time my Mac froze up I would be.... well not rich, but let's just say I would have a lot of pennies. But seriously, these are wise words that everyone should learn to apply to in their own lives.

The Generational Curriculum experience proved to be a positive experience. Students were able to gain confidence and learn valuable computer skills. One good point brought up was the fact that students have to pay their dues in order to survive. But in the end they are rewarded with a sense of accomplishment. As for myself, I have enjoyed being part of the Generational Curriculum. I must admit that the work was long and tedious, but the end results were well worth the effort. I leave this class with the ability to construct a home page (HTML language and Web page design skills) as well as a better understanding of the Internet.

    Back to top

Problems ? Does anyone have a problem ?

Linda Wong of generation 1 had problems from the onset. Linda says, "When I first began to create my three files using emacs, I ran into several problems. The biggest and most frustrating one was when I would try to save the file. From the information in my notes, I would type C-x then C-c. After typing C-x, the bottom of the screen would show "C-x". Then when I would type C-c, it didn't say anything about saving and would just kick me out of the emacs." What did Linda do ? She e-mailed Dr. James and Kevin. Fortunately, Kevin was in the lab and was able to assist her. This example clearly illustrates the value of the Generational Curriculum. The Generational Curriculum fosters an environment that allows students to seek out each other or their professor if they need help.

Yoon Whan Cho of Generation 2 experienced being lost in Cyber-Space when she first began using Netscape. Yoon Whan says, "I felt lost in the Net. I felt like I was loosing the interest for a short time and got scared because I was worried what if I develop a phobia." Yoon Whan was able to realize that patience was the key to any new learning experience. What a great revelation (and I'm not being sarcastic) ! If only I was able to realize this when I first began navigating around the Net two years ago.

Robin Miller (Generation 3) like Yoon Whan Choo was also able to develop coping skills. Robin says, "...if you keep a positive mental attitude and don't let it beat you, you will realize it is not that difficult after all." Wise words to live by.

The most common problem I found was the initial difficulty in learning Unix commands and the use of Netscape by first time users. Like with any new experience there has to be a period of initial adjustment. (I guess that's why UH provides a withdrawal period for students who can't adjust). What makes these Cyber-Psychology classes special, is the fact that we are a learning community. Students are able to contact each other by e-mail as well as having many opportunities to work with fellow students in the computer labs. Furthermore, students also have the convenience of e-mail to keep in contact with Dr. James if they have any questions and/or problems. Most of the professors here (UH) provide students with only office numbers. On the other hand, Dr. James provides his students with his e-mail address, office number, and home number. With these types of resources, it is virtually impossible to fail this class.

    Back to top

Developing a long term program :

In order to accommodate the growth of the Generational Curriculum a staff of competent personnel must be assigned. I propose a management team be assigned as caretakers of this site. The management team (this can be a 499 class) would consist of students that have taken part in Dr. James's Traffic and/or Cyber-Psychology classes before.
The duties of the team would be:
1) To work with Dr. James and produce a "mission statement".
2) To work with Dr. James and develop a well structured plan that would ensure the fulfillment of the "missions statement".

Note: Every semester there will be a new management team. The new team along with Dr. James will determine if a new missions statement is needed.


The management team would be structured as follows :

1) Dr. James would appoint a Manager.
The manager would have to possess excellent leadership and communication skills. The manager would also have to possess competent skills in all areas of the Internet (HTML, Java, concepts, Unix, page design, etc.).

2) Dr. James and the Manager would hand pick a crop of assistant managers based on their demonstrated abilities in previous Traffic and/or Cyber-Psychology course(s).

Once the management team is formed they would be assigned to committees. The committees would be responsible for carrying out specific task(s) that would ultimately result in fulfilling the "mission statement".

Committees would arrange weekly meetings on their own. A weekly general meeting would be conducted by the manager. At this meeting progress reports as well as discussions would be held. Another weekly meeting would be conducted by Dr. James, at this meeting progress reports would be given by each committee. In addition, the manager would have to meet with Dr. James once a week to discuss the overall direction that the team is headed in.

I believe that this program will result in the Generational Curriculum maintaining its functionality. The only problem with this program lies in the lack of continuity due to the inflow of new management teams every semester. Perhaps, the psychology department could actually hire a student management team to alleviate this potential problem.

In the future the organizational integrity of this site may suffer due to the enormous amount of pages and reports that will be added. If this site becomes difficult to traverse, it may lead to the degradation of its "authenticity". In my opinion, the Generation Curriculum is one of the most valuable sites on the internet. I feel confident that the management program I have proposed would be the best possible solution to insure the Generational Curriculum's survival and success.

Note: if you wish to see the potential problems that the Generation Curriculum may face in the future you can read my report 4

.
    Back to top


Go back to my homepage


Email me