Paper
Outline for 158.729 Social-technical System Design and Evaluation
Paper Number and Title: 158.729: Social-technical
System Design and Evaluation
Credits Value: 15 Semester: S1 This page is at http://brianwhitworth.com/158729/
Campus:
Paper Coordinator: Brian Whitworth
Other Contributing Staff: None
Aim:
To introduce students to the increasing importance of social-technical
systems (STS), including the principles of their Design and Evaluation.
Calendar
Prescription:
This course is designed to help students planning research in the design and evaluation of socio-technical systems. It is founded on the premise that one must understand social requirements to design, implement or operate socio-technical system, i.e. human-centred computing. Such systems could be web-based, but include any multi-user application where people interact and affect each other online, including social-network systems, online game worlds and communities of practice. The course will help students develop a research design for an experimental or qualitative study, or carry out a theoretical review, or develop an application.
Learning
Outcomes:
Modern information systems are no longer simply “technologies”. Social-technical systems are computer technologies that also enable social interaction of any type, whether conversation (email), group discussion (chat), joint editing (wiki), trade (electronic markets like E-bay), online learning systems (WebCT or Blackboard) or social networking systems like MySpace. Such systems, in fields like health, education and the community, raise new challenges in design and evaluation. They require a multi-disciplinary approach that combines social and technical knowledge in innovative ways. A student who successfully completes this paper will be able to:
1. Critically read and understand research and knowledge on social theories and principles that affect information systems architecture and design.
2. Use online resources, such as the ACM digital library, to investigate in detail the latest research in an approved area of their choice relevant to this subject.
3. Understand practically the many different types of online social-technical systems, and relate their differences in human goals to the success or failure of their technical design.
4. Major Project. Design and implement a research plan, conduct a theoretical review or develop an example system, as follows:
a) Theory Review. A theoretical review of an agreed aspect of the design of socio-technical systems to the level of a conference paper
b)
Research plan. Design a potential
research experiment, and present the design as a paper, with sample results and
analysis
c)
Example system. An applied project to
design and implement a working section of a socio-technical system that
demonstrates desirable features
The course steps students
through firstly reading and summarizing STS research, then critically reviewing
it, then a practical evaluation and finally to developing a theoretical STS
design proposal, and STS research plan, or an actual STS system.
Prerequisite(s):
none
Corequisite(s): none
Restrictions:
no restrictions
Assessment: Course assessment
(subject to modification) is broken down as follows:
|
Assessment |
Allocation |
Graded Out Of |
|
Assignment 1. Summarize STS
papers |
15% |
15 |
|
Assignment 2. Critically review
a STS paper |
15% |
15 |
|
Assignment 3. Analyse current
STS designs |
20% |
100 |
|
Assignment 4. Major project |
50% |
100 |
|
TOTAL |
100% |
|
Written material:
a. Loose material is not acceptable.
Do not submit assignments with expensive bindings, as you may have to come to
get them back. Your work is not judged by its cover. A single staple in the top
left corner is satisfactory for most printed work.
b. ALL WRITTEN WORK MUST BE
SPELL CHECKED. Bad spelling indicates carelessness or ignorance, and spell
checking is easy to do. For any assignment, any spelling error found that could
have been detected by a spell checker will result in an automatic deduction of
5% out of 100% from the final grade.
All assignments submitted for
this course originate in computer form. Students must retain a copy
on their own computer of all material submitted, as backup in case something
happens to their submitted work. By submitting any material to this course for
assessment, the student authorizes instructors to retain a copy of that
material for grading and teaching. Instructors may reference a part of that
material, or parts of it, given the student involved is anonymous, for the
purpose of instructing other students, and for their learning benefit.
Deadlines and Penalties: Assignments
must be done professionally and submitted on time. Being on time is
part of being professional. Plan to complete assignments with this in mind.
If you leave things until the last moment, you are predictably vulnerable to
the unexpected. All assignments due in class (see Timetable) are due at
the beginning of the stated class period. For assessments that involve specific events, like project
progress presentations and the final presentation, no “late” or “redo” is
possible, as part of the desired learning experience is that event. For the
final project, the time deadline for submission is very tight,
so each working day late will reduce the points graded out of by 10, and projects submitted more than two days late
will not be accepted, except under exceptional circumstances. Other
assignments lose 10% for each working day late, and will not be accepted at all
after five days (over one working week late).
Requirements to Pass the Paper: All of the course assessments must be attempted. Also
note that failure to complete any of these requirements will lead to a DNC
unless covered by the Aegrotat Regulations.
Learning
Programme and Schedule: The student will be led through a
process of study that begins with simple readings and ends with a major
project. However the level will be postgraduate, and so students are expected
to study independently at the requisite level.
E-learning Category: Web supported through the syllabus and other
materials available at http://brianwhitworth.com/158729/
Conditions for
Conditions for Impaired Performance: If you consider that
your performance in, or preparation for, an examination, or another compulsory
assessment element that occurs at a fixed time and place, has been seriously
impaired by illness, injury or a serious crisis, you may apply for an impaired
performance consideration. You must
apply on the form available from the Examinations Office, the Student Health
Service or the Student Counselling Service.
Student Time Budget: Information Systems Project is a
15-credit paper. That equates to 12.5 hours of work per week for a 15-week
semester, or the equivalent of over 4 weeks of full-time work (187 hours).
Textbook and Other Resources:
There is no required text as the subject is
so new. However readings are provided
throughout the course for students to download and read.
·
The writing
format required is as described in the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th edition). This "research writers
Bible" offers practical information about the structure of research
articles, grammar and punctuation guidelines, how to properly cite and
reference outside sources, and much more. Students for whom English is a second
language will benefit from many of the language guidelines specified in the APA
Manual. The final written project report must comply with APA style as
described in the APA Manual.
·
For a journal
article: Spark, J.
S., Glow, J. P. and Twinkle, L., (1994). APA format for journal articles.
Management Science, 28(10), 1187-1197.
·
For a book:
Spark,
J. S., Glow, J. P.and Twinkle, L., (1994), APA Format For Books,
·
For a web
site: give
originator, URL and date viewed
In the text
use "(author, date)", then list all citations in alphabetical order
by author at the end of the assignment
Students can also use the Research
Roadmap to help structure their writing.
Timetable
Semester 1: Mondays, 2.00 - 3.50pm in IIMS Lab 1
Note: If it looks
like there is a lot of stuff, that is because there is a lot of stuff – that is
the current nature of the subject. However you only have to pick a section of
this area and focus on that.
|
Week |
Date |
Topic |
Assignments/Readings |
|
1 |
|
Course
Introduction |
Read and Print: This syllabus – and bring to class each week! Begin: Asg 1
Students select paper to summarize (3-4 slides). |
|
2. |
|
Lesson A. Introduction to Socio-technical Systems |
|
|
3. |
|
Students present and discuss: Previous lesson review, and report on week’s readings by all students. |
Present
Asg 1 Paper 1: Report on your first chosen paper Read: Summary Overview of evaluation criteria |
|
4. |
|
Lesson B. Introduction to IT System Evaluation and Design. Lesson slides |
|
|
|
|
EASTER/MIDTERM |
|
|
5. |
|
Students present and discuss: Previous lesson review,
and report on week’s readings by all students. |
Present Asg 1 Paper 2: Report on your second chosen paper Asg 2 Begins.
Students are given a paper to critically review Read: Some implications of Comparing Human and
Computer Processing |
|
6. |
|
Lesson C. Review of HCI design and Evaluation
principles Lesson C slides |
|
|
7. |
|
Students present and discuss: Previous lesson review,
and report on week’s readings by all students. |
Asg 2 Concludes. Submit paper review and present. Read: Generating agreement in
computer-mediated groups For more: Asg
4. Major Project Begins: Decide your major project group
and goal |
|
8. |
|
Lesson D. Designing for interpersonal relations and
communication Slides or Slides |
Asg 4. Major
Project Synopsis due: Submit
project synopsis |
|
|
|
Students
present and discuss Asg 3: STS
Evaluation |
Read: Legitimate by design, and |
|
10. |
|
Lesson E. Designing Online Social Systems |
|
|
11. |
|
Student presentation(s) and discussion of previous lesson |
|
|
12. |
|
Lesson F. Course wrap up and any final
presentations |
|
Note: Students will not necessarily study all the
papers provided, but are expected to read the papers relevant to their chosen
topic area. Guidance will be provided throughout the course on what is and is not
relevant if this is not clear initially.
Plagiarism:
As part of your report print a cover sheet with your
name, due date, submit date, title, and the following statement of academic
integrity: "I
declare that this research study is entirely the product of my own work and
that it has not been taken from the work of others. When the work and ideas of
others have been used in the study, the work has been properly cited in the
text.", and
then sign it below. An
electronic copy of your final report may be submitted to turnitin.com to
evaluate the report for plagiarised content.
Proposed
Feedback and Support for Student Learning:
Grievance Procedures: A student who claims that he/she has
sustained academic disadvantage as a result of the actions of a University
staff member should use the University Grievance Procedures. Students, whenever
practicable, should in the first instance approach the University staff member
concerned. If the grievance is unresolved with the staff member concerned, the
student should then contact the
Additional Information and Advice:
Lesson D tries to cover a lot: Media
Richness Theory, Social Information Processing theory, to rational task
theories (e.g. Coordination Theory, Process Loss/gain theory), multi-level
theories (e.g. TIP theory, Channel Expansion Theory), interpretivist theories
(e.g. hermeneutics), interactive theories (Critical social theory), social
theories (Social Identity Theory) and a cognitive multi-level theory. Models of
information exchange, beginning with a simple sender-message-medium-receiver
model. What is meaning exchange? Types of information exchange: rational
discourse, relationships and group action. The environment properties that can
affect information exchange (asynchrony, anonymity etc).
Likewise Lesson E covers Introduction to basic utility (economic) theory. Why seeking
individual utility fails in interactive situations – review of prisoners
dilemma situations which are common in real social interaction. The limits of
rational analysis. Why people “waste” time getting to know other people. Social
presence theory. How people use relationships, reputation and trust leverage
the value of cooperation. Importance of familiarity, similarity and empathy.
Designing recommender and advisor systems, and systems that allow the
development of trust, relationships, and inter-personal cooperation between
people.
“Socio-technical” combines social theory and technical practice, e.g. theories from but not limited to the FIRST LIST below and application(s) from but not limited to the SECOND LIST:
FIRST LIST: Some Social/psychological Theory Perspectives
- Active knowledge systems
- Anthropological models
- Applied pragmatics
- Archeological and history models
- Collaborative working environments
- Communication and meaning theory
- Community informatics
- Contextual theory models
- Criminal and social justice theories
- E-business, E-government, E-politics, E-health etc. perspectives
- Educational/learning theory - Game theory
- HCI theory, human sensory processing and recognition models
- Interpersonal relationship models
- IT design models, and IT quality evaluation
- Language/action theory
- Leadership theories
- Media choice theories
- Negotiation and conflict models - Open source theories
- Organizational communication modeling
- Political models, theories of social rights and obligations
- Pragmatic web theory
- Semantic modeling
- Small group theory
- Sociological models and social philosophy
- General systems theory
- Technology appropriation theory
- Technology acceptance or social diffusion theories
- ANY OTHER SOCIAL THEORY
SECOND LIST: Possible Technology Application Areas
-- Information Management
Systems: Browsers, Search engines, ListServs,
Web-crawlers, Portals
-- Human Expression Systems: Home
pages, Virtual museum/art gallery,Online music
publishing, Online books/journals, E-zines, Blogs, Online news
-- Interpersonal Relation Systems:
Email, Internet phone (e.g. Skype),Video-phone and
conferencing, Instant messages, Chat, Social networking, texting
-- Group Interaction Systems: Wikis, Bulletin boards, Group writing systems,
Collaborative tools, Commenting systems, Online voting, E-governance, Online
leadership, Online norms, Communities of Action, Group membership systems,
Online democracy, Communities of Practice, Online multi-player games, Online
cooperatives
-- Trade and Business Systems:
Electronic markets, Recommender systems, Enterprise information systems, Job
markets, Work flow systems, Web-bots (buyer/sellers), End-user license
agreements (EULA),Online barter systems, RFID systems.
-- Health Support Systems: Diagnostic
support systems, Patient record systems, Out-patient support systems, Patient
empowerment systems
-- Learning Support Systems: Online
learning systems, Asynchronous Learning Systems, E-learning practices, Help
agents, Video teaching, FAQ's and Help-boards, Training and tutorial systems
-- Anti-social systems: Spyware, Phone-home systems, Spam, Unwanted software
installs, Spoofing, Phishing, Identity theft, Hacking
tools
Traditonal Design vs Socio-technical Design
Socio-technical
design BEGINS with either human or social processes and uses these to enlighten
design. In contrast traditional design begins with technology or information.
For example, consider the following review of the college of science web site,
which is solely based on how best to organize the web sites information. In contrast,
an STS analysis would begin with the sort of tasks users want to do, which for
example varies depending on whether the user is a. A student, b. a staff
member, or c. a prospective student or parent. An STS design might let users
identify themselves as student, staff or public, and organize the web page
accordingly.
==============================
Hi Everyone
I have been
working over the past couple of days on grouping information for display on the
http://sciences.massey.ac.nz/sciintra/CoSER/sci_dev/default.asp
is a reorganisation of the current College homepage with disciplines down the
right hand side
http://sciences.massey.ac.nz/sciintra/CoSER/sci_dev/default2.asp
has the disciplines in the centre of the page and Schools, Institutes and
Campus Locations in the right hand columns
I have come
up with a list of suggested categories for the centre of the front page
Please feel free to comment on the
list, particularly if you feel anything is missing or if any of the headings
listed are incorrect or do not encompass your area correctly. For example
it could be debated that science in the topic above would encompass
everything in the list. From the allocations within the Massey Database
from which I extracted the list, Science seems to be assigned to everything
that does not fit the other topic headings listed. If a new grouping is
required then that too is welcome to be suggested. http://sciences.massey.ac.nz/sciintra/CoSER/sci_dev/documents/CollegeTopics.xls
contains the list of topics that
will be displayed inside the categories above. The next task is to
allocate these topics to the correct headings, and also to the correct
institutes, which I will need your help with. I have filled in some of
the table – primarily from the Database with editing to include some of the
topics that were generalised. Please excuse my ignorance if some of these are
incorrect – they are meant as a guide only and need to be correctly allocated
with your assistance before I can proceed. Here are the rules that I
have applied to the list:
I have not yet endeavoured to
allocate the items for sites but would appreciate your assistance in this
task, as I am aware that specific topics can be located at particular sites eg
Vet in Palmerston North only With your help, together we can
make our information easier to find at College Level Thanks=============================== |
Some references
·
Berners-Lee,
T. (2000). Weaving The Web: The original design and ultimate destiny of the
world wide web.
·
Raymond, E.
S. (1997). The Cathedral and the Bazaar.
http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/.
·
Tenner, E. (1997).
Why Things Bite Back. New York: Vintage Books, Random House.
·
Wheatley,
K. L., & Flexner, W. A. (1991). The pitfalls of portability ... or ... Why
more is not better. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 24th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences
·
Lessig, L.,
2000. Cyberspace's constitution, In: Lecture given at the American
·
Agre, P. E.
(2001). Changing places: Contexts of awareness in computing. Human-Computer
Interaction, 16. http://www1.ics.uci.edu/~jpd/NonTradUI/SpecialIssue/agre.pdf
·
Jones Q., Ravid G., and Rafaeli S., 2002, Mass
Interaction, Information Overload and Computer Mediated Communication
Tools. Submitted to Information Systems Research.
·
Jones, Q., & Whitworth, B. (2002). Initial thoughts on
a different kind of space: Measuring architectures and discourse coherence.
Paper presented at the Computer Human Interaction Discourse Architectures
Workshop,
·
Ackerman,
M. S. (2000). The intellectual challenge of CSCW: The gap between social
requirements and technical feasibility. Human Computer Interaction, 15,
179-203.
·
Erickson,
T., & Kellog, W. (2000). Social translucence: An approach to designing systems
that support social processes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human
Interaction, 7(1, March), 59-83.
·
Geen, R.
G., & Gange, J. J. (1983). Social facilitation: Drive theory and beyond. In
A. P. V. K. M. D. H. H. Blumberg; Hare (Ed.), Small Groups and Social
Interaction (Vol. 1, pp. 141-153).
·
Friedman,
B., Howe, D. C., & Felten, E. (2002). Informed Consent in the Mozilla
Browser: Implementing Value-Sensitive Design. Paper presented at the Hawaii
International Conference on the System Sciences,
·
George, J.
F. (1996). Computer-based monitoring: Common perceptions and empirical results.
MIS Quarterly, December, 459-480.
·
Stefik, M.
(1997). Trusted systems. Scientific American, March, 78.
·
Turoff, M. (1991).
Computer-mediated communication requirements for group support. Journal of
Organizational Computing, 1, 85-113.
·
Bales, R.
F. (1950). “A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction.” American
Sociological Review, 15, 257-263.
·
Hogg, M. A.
(1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness, Harvester,
Wheatsheaf.
·
Hackman, J.
R. and C. Morris (1983). "Group tasks, group interaction process, and
group performance effectiveness" In: Small Groups and Social
Interaction. H. H. Blumberg, A. P. Hare, V. Kent and M. Davis, John Wiley
and Sons Ltd. 1: 311-345
·
Grudin, J.
(1994). “Groupware and social dynamics: Eight challenges for developers.” Communications
of the ACM, Jan, 37(1), 93-105.
·
Lee, A. S.
(1994). “Electronic mail as a medium for rich communication: An empirical
investigation using hermeneutic interpretation.” Management Information
Systems Quarterly(Jun), 143-157.
·
Lea, M.
(1991). “Rationalist assumptions in cross-media comparisons of
computer-mediated communication.” Behaviour and Information Technology, 10(2),
153-172.
·
McGrath, J.
E. (1991). “Time, interaction and performance (TIP): A theory of groups.” Small
Group Research, 22
·
Nunamaker,
J. F., A. R. Dennis, J. S. Valacich, D. R. Vogel and J. F. George (1991, July).
“Electronic meeting systems to support group work.” Communications of the
ACM, 34(7), 40-61
·
Pinsonneault,
A., Barki, H., Gallupe, R. B. & Hoppen, N. (1999). Electronic Brainstorming:
The Illusion of Productivity. Information Systems Research, June, 10(2),
110-133.
·
Reid, F. J.
M., V. Malinek, C. J. T. Stott and J. S. B. T. Evans (1996). “The messaging
threshold in computer-mediated communication.” Ergonomics, 39(8),
1017-1037.
·
Carlson, J.
R. & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Channel expansion theory and the experiential
nature of media richness perceptions.
·
Benbasat,
·
Dennis, A.
R. and J. S. Valacich (1999). "Rethinking Media Richness: Towards a Theory
of Media Synchronicity". Proceedings of the 32nd
·
Daft, R.
L., R. H. Lengel and L. K. Trevino (1987). “Message equivocality, media
selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems.” Management
Information Systems Quarterly(Sep), 354-366.
· DeSanctis, G., M. S. Poole, G. W. Dick