Week 1 readings

Intro:
The introduction was about defining virtual community and the boundaries that are in it. Wesley Shumar and K. Ann Renninger discuss the components that make up an online community of professionals with common interests. An online community is much like a real community of professionals, in that there is the contribution and sharing of ideas among community members. A virtual community differs from a face-to-face gathering because it allows interaction to be both more flexible and durable over time due to the Internet's archive and retrieval functionality. There isn't one set of criteria to define an online community. A physical community can be defined by a mutual topic of interest, occupation of a physical location and shared resources, and social organization among its members. These qualities either don't exist or else factor in less quantities when trying to define the more open and ephemeral boundaries of an online community which is more of a social arrangements among members. Shared mutual interests as symbol and activity reflects the nostalgia or ideal spirit of the group against the actual reality of modern times or specific circumstances. These communities of people share a common kinship despite differences in class, job definition and location. The forms of communication that take place in these types of online communities are almost mythic in nature in that at no point in history could this communication taken place in the physical world. An online community might be perceived as some sort of electronic town hall. But it is precisely because there is no physical presence in a virtual community as opposed to its physical counterpart that engagement within the community itself becomes much more pronounced online. It's not enough just to be present there must be constant and supplied content provided in order for the community to exist and thrive. When presented online this content is no longer limited online by time or space: e-mail conversations between individuals can be shared and archived; sounds and images can be stored and accessed at will; even language barriers and geographical locations can be eliminated altogether. In an online community, communication itself is multilayered. Archiving ability means a conversation that took place a year prior can be saved and shared among all members, it can be added to and expanded upon. It redefines not only what people say, but meaning of what the group as a whole can do together. It eliminates the concept or need for a hierarchical organizational dissemination of information. Communities themselves become more fluid as the individuals who make up the community have the ability to alter the discourse and boundaries of what exactly the community represents.
Chapter1:
This chapter explained that there was a site called MOO and it was great in the beginning but didn’t seem to build in room for growth or change with their participants. They had good communication with their participants and definitely mentored and built strong personal relationships but did not anticipate or prepare for the growth, change, and new needs of the community. They stated how they will do things better this next go around. The idea that they will make the community open to anyone is going to help most I believe. Then as people move on there can be someone to take their place in the community. I don’t feel like they addressed the fact that people are most likely not going to be lifelong members. It seems like they still have that as an expectations which I think will limit them again. They still seemed focused on keeping very defined boundaries between different groups of people. I think this too is a limitation.
Chapter2:
The reading about the young children participating in the virtual community pointed out that we have a need that needs to be addressed. It stated that girls are more likely to be intimidated with their skills and ability to learn and use the technology. I came away from this reading thinking I need to expose my little girl as early as I can and encourage her to abilities. She is 4 and has a membership to Jumpstart. She is able to turn the computer on, log on by herself and play for hours. She is very confident with her laptop. I will continue to praise and encourage growth.
Chapter3:
The math forum was the most interesting of the reading for me. It is set up without expectations or boundaries. It takes the information that the participants give (questions, comments, surveys) and builds itself based on those ideas. It seems to be ever evolving. I think from the previous readings this is what MOO should have done. Because it lets kids be involved it would seem that they may find a place to continue to grow, make life long acquaintance and build and foster their love for math. The previous readings showed us that a web site may not have lifelong participants but it seems in a situation like this you may go back even later in life. For example the teacher that was unsure of geometry. One aspect that may contribute to the lifelong participant may also be the emotional stability of the site. The protocol setup is what I see as extremely important. It makes things consistent and like the reading states they don’t appear to be passing judgment so they build confidence and trust inside the site. One thing that really stood out to me was the fact that the first teacher was very unfamiliar with technology and internet usage. The site was friendly enough that she was able to build her confidence and start taking advantage of other uses on their site over time. She didn’t continue to use only one idea and get stuck there. I personally find myself doing that on many of the sites I go to for my nursing information. I like the sites that are easy to navigate and build on themselves where they basically make you look deeper each time you get on, it doesn’t seem so overwhelming and before you know it you can utilize the entire site and navigate without effort. The fact that this site doesn’t disregard things as “topic drift” but recognizes them as a need is great. Another interesting statement was when they described participants as “takers”. That is how I would describe myself on most sites. I would like to be a giver and participant as they have described their community members. It shows how dynamic this site is because you can fall into any of these roles and still have a purpose on their site. The main idea I got from this reading was that they met people where they were, they did not limit their abilities. They can be anything from novice to expert an d participate on many different levels and move back and forth through those ranks as they wish.
Time:
The article was not specific to any site or person. It just acknowledged the fact that people are not coming home to watch TV and if they are they are on line after to talk about it with their peers. It pointed out that the way people interact now over the internet is changing our views, activities, and our involvement in the world.