El30 - Community (Week 7)
Continuing on with my quest to experience the remainder of el30 before work begins again, today I'll write a bit about my thoughts about the topic of Week 7 which was community.
From the course page for the week:
The interesting thing for me with this topic is that I sort of had an "AHAAAA!" moment (didn't quite scream it though...the all-caps was more for effect 😜). My aha moment revolved around my dissertation proposal and the concept of collaboration in MOOCs and what came to mind is that there needs to be a certain amount or type of community to exist in order for working together to happen...well...maybe... I guess I can't go too far with this line of thought until I look at the literature because I might be told I am biased 😉. In any case, it is something that I need to dive a little deeper into in the coming weeks.
So, in the community video chat of the week (link; the Peter Forsyth video isn't loading) there were a number of a questions that came up about community. I don't think that many were answered since it seemed like an open brainstorming session (which is fine), but I thought that my take on this week would be continue the open brainstorming session and maybe attempt to answer these questions from my own learning perspectives.
What is a minimal viable community?
I suppose the first question I have is: what type of a community is this? I think a community can be successful, at least initially, with only a handful of members. If pressed for a number I'd call it 4-5 members. The example I can think of here closely-knit cohort members, or a small group of students who progress through a program of study in similar pace even though they might not be in a cohort. In my case one such example is the cohort I am in for my doctoral work. Out of a cohort of about 13 members (I've lost count since we've added and subtracted to our cool group over the years) we have 7-8 who are quite engaged in our cohort community, and the rest participate from time to time as life ebbs and flows.
What are markers of community?
You know, I have a hard time defining such markers. In the discussion the hashtags was brought up as an example. Another example was a shared space such as google docs, a facebook group, or even something like an IRC channel. While these certainly can be markers of community, I think that community is more than a space (even the hashtag is a space marker IMO). A space is certainly required as an incubator for the community, and if we go by Actor-Network Theory, the space can influence how the human actors act within that space, but for me the hallmark of a community is activity of some sort. The space can be a base to jump off from when the community is active, and it can be an archaeological space for the time the community disbands or dies. An example of such archaeology is diving into the Usenet archives to see what communities did back when they used Usenet. Hence the marker of community for me is (1) more ephemeral and (2) more qualitative in nature, things such as relationships, feelings, learning, and entertainment
What is a community? Who is a member?
I suspect that this is quite difficult to answer. Some communities (like #el30) are open and anyone can conceivably be a member. Other communities, like those of professional associations are closed by requiring members to pay dues. Even when someone pays dues and is able to access a community, does that make them a member though? Or are there other pre-requisites to membership? For example does there need to be some sort or hard declaration of membership from the person being inducted into the community? In #el30's case, registering for the Daily? or posting a blog? or retweeting something? If a tangible aspect exists, what does this mean for lurkers? I guess the question is this: is community membership something that is provided from outside of a person (membership conferred) or something that is from within (membership declared or claimed)? A good example came from the discussion and that is the example of person reading a book that others are reading concurrently, but one person who is reading is not contributing to the discussion of the book (IRL lurker) - is he a member of that community?
How do you meet each other to form a community?
This is something that might come from my own dissertation work. I suspect that there are many ways in which community can be formed. I think part of it is serendipity (e.g., my own chance encounters with people from MOOCs over the last 8 years), and part of it might be through our own social networks (person A introduces person B to person C to some sort of community). This is definitely something that requires a deeper probe though.
What are the core elements of a community? What brings people together?
In the discussion the example of the EU was brought up, more specifically the EU being a solution to avoid the horrors experienced by various European nations in WWII; however this is more ideological and not everyone is on-board with ideology first; so the initial steps were at first tangible elements and they were practical - namely an economic union. Downes posited that in some communities there is some sort of attractor. In the original MOOC (CCK) that attractor was George Siemens (according to Downes), and for some (the 'core' group?) it was the fact that the course was a 3-credit course at the University of Manitoba. I would say that the attractor is probably a lot of different things to different people. Depending on what you want to get out of the community, your attractor will vary.
Finally, there were two things that caught my attention. There was a discussion around the distributed web after the obligatory discussion of platforms (such as facebook) and the control we cede over to them. The question came up as to whether community formation is made more difficult if there aren't any centralized areas like facebook? What is the role of a platform in community creation? I would go back to my previous answer and say that this can be analyzed a bit through ANT, but also the platform is that starter space, or incubator (if you will). People can, and do, move onto other spaces once initial connections between human elements are formed. An example of this is CCK where people met on Moodle but they formed together in other spaces during and after the MOOC.
As far as distributed networks go, IMO distributed works well for the techies like some of us with an initial starter pack of connections. It's harder for people, like my family in Greece, to be on a distributed platform. They may lack the know-how to set something up for themselves, and even if some of them do have this know-how, discoverability is an issue. Hence iMessage, Fb messenger, and facebook being 'important' in those communities if you want to be connected.
Last but not neast: Downes called EL30 "not a course, but a massive social event" - I wonder what the attributes of a course are.
So, that's it for me this week. What do you think?
From the course page for the week:
"The traditional concept of community was built on sameness, on collections of people from the same family, speaking the same language, living in the same place, believing the same things. The fundamental challenge to community is to make decisions on matters affecting everybody while leaving to individuals, companies and institutions those matters not effectively managed by consensus."
The interesting thing for me with this topic is that I sort of had an "AHAAAA!" moment (didn't quite scream it though...the all-caps was more for effect 😜). My aha moment revolved around my dissertation proposal and the concept of collaboration in MOOCs and what came to mind is that there needs to be a certain amount or type of community to exist in order for working together to happen...well...maybe... I guess I can't go too far with this line of thought until I look at the literature because I might be told I am biased 😉. In any case, it is something that I need to dive a little deeper into in the coming weeks.
So, in the community video chat of the week (link; the Peter Forsyth video isn't loading) there were a number of a questions that came up about community. I don't think that many were answered since it seemed like an open brainstorming session (which is fine), but I thought that my take on this week would be continue the open brainstorming session and maybe attempt to answer these questions from my own learning perspectives.
What is a minimal viable community?
I suppose the first question I have is: what type of a community is this? I think a community can be successful, at least initially, with only a handful of members. If pressed for a number I'd call it 4-5 members. The example I can think of here closely-knit cohort members, or a small group of students who progress through a program of study in similar pace even though they might not be in a cohort. In my case one such example is the cohort I am in for my doctoral work. Out of a cohort of about 13 members (I've lost count since we've added and subtracted to our cool group over the years) we have 7-8 who are quite engaged in our cohort community, and the rest participate from time to time as life ebbs and flows.
What are markers of community?
You know, I have a hard time defining such markers. In the discussion the hashtags was brought up as an example. Another example was a shared space such as google docs, a facebook group, or even something like an IRC channel. While these certainly can be markers of community, I think that community is more than a space (even the hashtag is a space marker IMO). A space is certainly required as an incubator for the community, and if we go by Actor-Network Theory, the space can influence how the human actors act within that space, but for me the hallmark of a community is activity of some sort. The space can be a base to jump off from when the community is active, and it can be an archaeological space for the time the community disbands or dies. An example of such archaeology is diving into the Usenet archives to see what communities did back when they used Usenet. Hence the marker of community for me is (1) more ephemeral and (2) more qualitative in nature, things such as relationships, feelings, learning, and entertainment
What is a community? Who is a member?
I suspect that this is quite difficult to answer. Some communities (like #el30) are open and anyone can conceivably be a member. Other communities, like those of professional associations are closed by requiring members to pay dues. Even when someone pays dues and is able to access a community, does that make them a member though? Or are there other pre-requisites to membership? For example does there need to be some sort or hard declaration of membership from the person being inducted into the community? In #el30's case, registering for the Daily? or posting a blog? or retweeting something? If a tangible aspect exists, what does this mean for lurkers? I guess the question is this: is community membership something that is provided from outside of a person (membership conferred) or something that is from within (membership declared or claimed)? A good example came from the discussion and that is the example of person reading a book that others are reading concurrently, but one person who is reading is not contributing to the discussion of the book (IRL lurker) - is he a member of that community?
How do you meet each other to form a community?
This is something that might come from my own dissertation work. I suspect that there are many ways in which community can be formed. I think part of it is serendipity (e.g., my own chance encounters with people from MOOCs over the last 8 years), and part of it might be through our own social networks (person A introduces person B to person C to some sort of community). This is definitely something that requires a deeper probe though.
What are the core elements of a community? What brings people together?
In the discussion the example of the EU was brought up, more specifically the EU being a solution to avoid the horrors experienced by various European nations in WWII; however this is more ideological and not everyone is on-board with ideology first; so the initial steps were at first tangible elements and they were practical - namely an economic union. Downes posited that in some communities there is some sort of attractor. In the original MOOC (CCK) that attractor was George Siemens (according to Downes), and for some (the 'core' group?) it was the fact that the course was a 3-credit course at the University of Manitoba. I would say that the attractor is probably a lot of different things to different people. Depending on what you want to get out of the community, your attractor will vary.
Finally, there were two things that caught my attention. There was a discussion around the distributed web after the obligatory discussion of platforms (such as facebook) and the control we cede over to them. The question came up as to whether community formation is made more difficult if there aren't any centralized areas like facebook? What is the role of a platform in community creation? I would go back to my previous answer and say that this can be analyzed a bit through ANT, but also the platform is that starter space, or incubator (if you will). People can, and do, move onto other spaces once initial connections between human elements are formed. An example of this is CCK where people met on Moodle but they formed together in other spaces during and after the MOOC.
As far as distributed networks go, IMO distributed works well for the techies like some of us with an initial starter pack of connections. It's harder for people, like my family in Greece, to be on a distributed platform. They may lack the know-how to set something up for themselves, and even if some of them do have this know-how, discoverability is an issue. Hence iMessage, Fb messenger, and facebook being 'important' in those communities if you want to be connected.
Last but not neast: Downes called EL30 "not a course, but a massive social event" - I wonder what the attributes of a course are.
So, that's it for me this week. What do you think?
Comments