nteresting to hear what's going on among a highly specialised group of researchers in CI. Thinking how much more successful such a research network could be, for building critical mass in (especially) new and rapidly changing research fields. For goodness sake, here we all are re-inventing the wheel - yet even with my "other" hat on as having a central interest in e-Learning strategy (including use of Moodle) at Unitec - and here I am listening to Patricia Arnold from the University of Applied Science in Munich, talking about exactly the same challenges there! Must invite her to the e-Learning Futures Conference (ICeLF) we are hosting at Unitec next year....
27 October 2010
Open educational resources or closed Learning Management Systems - Patricia Arnold
nteresting to hear what's going on among a highly specialised group of researchers in CI. Thinking how much more successful such a research network could be, for building critical mass in (especially) new and rapidly changing research fields. For goodness sake, here we all are re-inventing the wheel - yet even with my "other" hat on as having a central interest in e-Learning strategy (including use of Moodle) at Unitec - and here I am listening to Patricia Arnold from the University of Applied Science in Munich, talking about exactly the same challenges there! Must invite her to the e-Learning Futures Conference (ICeLF) we are hosting at Unitec next year....
Doug Schuler keynote: Community Informatics Research Network, Monash University, Prato Italy
Doug Schuler's keynote at today's conference opening leads me to think the research activity I've engaged in in recent years, as well as the extension of it through the role I take at Unitec (strategically orienting itself very much toward serving community needs) and now being an invited member of the Auckland Computers in Homes Steering Group, positions me well within the ambit of the CIRN network. Here in Prato, Doug's comments to a gathering of internatonal community internet activists are focusing on the need, now, to mobilise as a network rather than continue to have a localised focus. Leadership (shared?) is required, that will help to 'frame' what we do with cyberspace. It's not enough to find community informatics interesting & study it – it needs to be framed it in a larger sense.
This is all timely and good to hear. How do we use what we are learning about CI – how do we focus it on our community? "Civic intelligence", Schuler argues, is ultimately what we are about – trying to increase it – in a collective way.
How do we structure our network? How do we put the sort of structure on our networks that will get the work done without becoming that rigid hierarchy that we don’t like, that has all the wrong features? Dynamic leadership – or no leaders? Alternatives include - issues as nodes; shared projects. How do we organise the technologies we use?
Some possible uses of this more strategic CI approach include that it will enable us to find the information that we need – papers, projects, people, events. It's there but we have to searhc for it. It's not necessarily central, Schuler argues; we can find it – but there’s not a ‘there’ there (with a nod to John Perry Barlow). We could... share policy documents; identify other people with similar interests; develop and test theories; find others with whom to collaborate; facilitate larger research projects less expensively by sharing the load more broadly and intelligently; create and manage projects and campaigns; make our work more accessible to the world as well as more legitimate, necessary possible and effective; build our community.
This all resonates so wel with where I find myself in the terms outlined at the beginning of this post. Schuler suggest that for this new energised CI network to be effective, it needs to be easy to join – eg sign up and you’re on board – with some small commitment (rather than just communicating with the network). In this way we can create an enormous resource.
This is all timely and good to hear. How do we use what we are learning about CI – how do we focus it on our community? "Civic intelligence", Schuler argues, is ultimately what we are about – trying to increase it – in a collective way.
How do we structure our network? How do we put the sort of structure on our networks that will get the work done without becoming that rigid hierarchy that we don’t like, that has all the wrong features? Dynamic leadership – or no leaders? Alternatives include - issues as nodes; shared projects. How do we organise the technologies we use?
Some possible uses of this more strategic CI approach include that it will enable us to find the information that we need – papers, projects, people, events. It's there but we have to searhc for it. It's not necessarily central, Schuler argues; we can find it – but there’s not a ‘there’ there (with a nod to John Perry Barlow). We could... share policy documents; identify other people with similar interests; develop and test theories; find others with whom to collaborate; facilitate larger research projects less expensively by sharing the load more broadly and intelligently; create and manage projects and campaigns; make our work more accessible to the world as well as more legitimate, necessary possible and effective; build our community.
This all resonates so wel with where I find myself in the terms outlined at the beginning of this post. Schuler suggest that for this new energised CI network to be effective, it needs to be easy to join – eg sign up and you’re on board – with some small commitment (rather than just communicating with the network). In this way we can create an enormous resource.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)