Finding Expertise: Face to Face vs. The Web

In face to face settings, my notion of expertise relies on the source. When someone is telling me information, I want to know the source of the information and how this person became knowledgeable on the subject. Some people I know are continually reliable sources of information, but I still tend to ask questions in order to understand their viewpoints. For example, when I was purchasing a new car, my father strongly recommended that I consider a Hyundai. I know that he is a diligent researcher, subscribes to Consumer Reports and is particularly knowledgeable about cars. But, I still asked him to tell me why. He gave me good information that helped me appreciate this expertise.
Another aspect of expertise is the point of view and the intention for providing information. When my father recommended a car, I knew that he was giving me this information as my father and his intention was for me to have a safe and reliable car. However, if the same information had come from a car dealer, I don’t think that I would have given it as much weight.
Having a personal relationship with experts on the Web is virtually impossible. (Pun intentional.) When I visit sites like blogs and wikis it is difficult to know the source and what makes that person an expert. In this case, I am more critical of the information. I will check two other sites to compare and verify the information. With certain types of research, this can really slow you down when you come across incorrect information or information that is incapable of being verified. When we learned about Sacajawea last year, we found numerous birthdates and dates of death. One site claimed that she had lived to a healthy old age while another claimed that she had died in her early 20’s.
Certain sites are managed by reputable organizations and the same face to face notion of expertise is applicable, like the Center for Disease Control and New York Times. Peer reviewed sites, like Wikipedia, can be considered reliable because they are checked and verified by so many people. My brother, who is beginning his 2nd year of medical school at UF, told me that as a student he uses Wikipedia, but when he is a doctor, he will depend on other sources. I had assumed that he would have a lot of reliable sites for medical information that he and his classmates referred to, but he told me that since Wikipedia is heavily reviewed, it reliable. He compared his notes to entries and they were in sync.

Warning: Whine Ahead, Use Caution

In an effort to support my fellow classmates in EME 6635, I have spent a large amount of time following blogs, responding to posts and attempting participation in the Produsage Projects. I wholeheartedly believe that we are all working with a limited amount of time and an unending amount of tasks.
Please consider this when you post a link to an interesting article or website on your blog. If possible, provide a summary of the key points. This way, busy readers get the best of both worlds. We get the gist of the article in a fraction of the time and then we can choose to visit the link or bookmark it for later.

Not the sharpest knife

Lea Ann's comment hit the nail on the head. In the last 30 minutes of being lost in Diigo, I have felt frustrated and, well, a tad limited (nice way to say dumb). Ack!
So, with Susan and AJ's produsage projects I have a reason to use the collaborative aspects of Diigo. But, for some reason, it's not working. I highlighted an article and shared it on the Twitter account only to lose all the highlighting. Then, I did it again and got the same result. What's my next step? Go to the help section.
Now, I can log in to My Diigo but when I go to the Diigo Help page and try to sign in, it says my username doesn't exist. I can't ask a question without logging in. Then, when I go to another Help tab, it instructs me to download Mindtouch. What is that? The description reminds me of a page from Bruns. Please help. Reaching maximum level of frustration.

Contributing to Produsage Projects

Today I have attempted to contribute to 3 produsage projects that my classmates created. Whew! I am realizing that being a contributor, instead of the creator, is still a challenge, especially when the technology is new. I feel like I am flying blind and it is uncomfortable.
This is something for a future instructional designer to keep in mind when introducing Web 2.0 technologies. In my current situation, I am learning the technology as I support the projects and the risk is low. When I inadvertently posted twice on 2 of the projects, a beginner mistake, it is okay. But, if I was trying to complete a work assignment my frustration would be greater, and the risk is higher.

Rules of Behavior from Wired.com

A friend on Facebook just shared this link with me from Wired.com. The title of the article is "How to Behave: New Rules for Highly Evolved Humans," which apparently implies the use of Web 2.0. The list is easy to read and entertaining. I am sure that all of us have had these thoughts before, especially in the last 3 weeks.