‘Mind the gap’. Meeting Adobe Connect 3rd June, 2011
1. Apologies
Sarah and Gerard attended. Apologies from Karley and Jane.
2. Project process
The project will use a collaborative process using a “wiki” approach which will open the project to
anyone interested in the resource and keep it as a living project even after ‘Mind the Gap’ is
complete. This enhances sustainability and inclusiveness. This approach does have an impact on
quality control.

We rejected the idea of having a ‘like’ or ‘star’ rating system like YouTube or Amazon
because we feared that might bias people for or against videos.

We also rejected the idea of an editorial system of rating the videos mostly because of time
and workload implications for the project team, especially after the project has ended.

We decided that quality control would be maintained by the participants who will be asked
to annotate the video they link to or upload, and make a personal comment about why they
recommend the video.

The community that uses the wiki will also maintain quality control ie if an inappropriate
video is uploaded, the community will deal to it.
3. Video categories
We agreed that we would use all 15 categories from the AKO ‘Taking Stock’ report (Appendix 3 page
63-64) rather than the five abbreviated categories that Sarah suggested. We suggest we aim to
collect at least five videos per category. This will encourage us to be focused when we search for
videos. This may sound like a lot, but we can ask all our colleagues and networks to help us.
4. Collection tool/platform
Sarah and Jane are finding the AKO website to be extremely clunky and difficult to work with. It does
not lend itself well to a collaborative wiki approach. Everything added has to be moderated by Sarah
which is time-consuming and will not be sustainable after the project has ended. Sarah feels that
the technology is not user-friendly and will act as a barrier to collaboration, especially for newbies.

Sarah will contact Justin Sampson to ask if there is a simple wiki functionality on the AKO
website that we can use.

If there is not, we have keep the project information on the AKO website but link to an
external wiki.

Sarah will draft up three choices in external wiki including Wikispaces
(http://internationaldayofthemidwife.wikispaces.com), PBWorks
(https://teachingthoughtfullearners.pbworks.com) and Google Sites
(https://sites.google.com/site/mindthegapnz/) and give the project group the chance to
vote on which platform we should use for this project.
o
Wikieducator is probably too complex for newbies although it is a wiki that focuses
on education. A Google Docs file will not host large file sizes.
5. Evaluation process
Evaluation of the project will have two prongs.
1. Once the website is up and running, staff developers will be asked questions about the
resource using a questionnaire:

the wiki - eg accessibility, appearance of the wiki use of navigation, the process of
using a wiki in a collaborative arrangement

content - how staff developers think they will use the videos to support teaching
and learning

What information or video resources are missing?

How you likely to contribute to this website in the future?
2. The other aspect of the project will be to talk to the Southern Hub team to find out how
they felt about the experience of doing this project – how you felt about the virtual COP.
This will be in a focus group, preferably face-to-face at a Southern Hub meeting.
6. Next meeting
Next meeting to be arranged once Sarah has completed a draft ethics application and a decision has
been made on which wiki platform to use.