Updated: 6/30/2005; 11:31:50 PM.

Mathemagenic


...giving birth to learning...
If you search for mathemagenic that has nothing to do with weblogs try this
    


Earlier | Home | Later

  Monday, July 12, 2004


  Online communication tools: designed for a group, experienced by an individual

Nancy White on something we discussed at CPsquare meeting last month:

There is insufficient experience and practice to slap labels around and make claims that completely ignore a key factor of online interaction technologies.
  • They are designed for a group experience.
  • They are almost always experienced by an individual in the isolation in interaction with their computer.

My experience is not your experience. Further more, it is hard to even describe OUR experience. We romanticize the concept of group interaction, but in truth, it is imperfect, online and offline. And online we donít see the consequences as quickly nor are our communication antennae, trained for millennium to F2F communication, as attuned to online communication. I think we are getting better. I see changes. But I canít see if you are smiling, frowning, curious or pissed off as you read this. And if I want to communicate and engage with you, that matters to me. (If I just want to spout and publish, well, you are out of luck!)

A simple example: smileys look different in all IM tools I use and I never know what is used on another side... It keeps me wondering how my ;) looks at your end...

More on: communities 

  How do you want research results to be shared?

I'm struggling with something and need your thoughts. Aldo and me has written a paper on weblog conversational practices (this is a follow-up for the earlier paper; includes in-depth analysis of actionable sense conversation). It's under review, but (of course!) I want to share it.

I think that the most interesting part of the paper is the analysis of actionable sense conversation: it provides an image of the conversation and illustrates some patterns that would feed well into several discussions around (at least into: complexity of weblog conversations, comments or not, tracking weblog conversations).

There are several options of posting the paper (or parts of it) online:

  • full paper in .pdf (.doc; .html) 
    • pro
      • readers can get an overview of the whole thing
    • con
      • it's not a final version yet, so it's likely to be changed
      • there are only a few people who would read the whole thing
      • linking to/commenting on the whole paper is difficult
  • post part of the paper as a single text (thinking about the data analysis part, which takes 6 pages anyway :), .html
    • pro
      • one place overview of things interesting for the blogosphere
      • easier to link
    • con
      • still too large: less readers
      • commenting is difficult
  • cut paper into pieces and post them as weblog posts (as Alex Halavais did for his chapter on weblogs and learning); could also come in a page a day format
    • pro
      • small pieces: easy to link, to comment and to integrate in other discussions
    • con
      • overview is lost

At this moment I'm trying to choose between last two options (I'll post full paper later anyway), so if you have any preferences, please, let me know.


Earlier | Home | Later


© Copyright 2002-2005 Lilia Efimova.

This weblog is my learning diary. Sometimes I write about things related to my work, but the views expressed here are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.

 
July 2004
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Jun   Aug






Edublog award 2004 as Best Research Based Blog. Click for more details...


Click to see the XML version of this web page. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog. Please, make sure that I recognise your name or you have a nice autorisation message - I tend to decline calls from people I don't know ;)

Locations of visitors to this page