Xin's House

Self-Organization

2004-12-05T17:38:00.000-08:00

Screenshot1 (ants)
Screenshot2 (flocks)
Observations
These two simulations of social insects (see screenshot1 and screenshot2) I played reflect how flocks and ants act in their societies respectively. Birds look for those who can accompany them to form flocks. And ants forage for sources of food and provide needed information to others. I found when I changed parameters there would produce different effects. For example, when I adjusted the “minimum separation” to the largest, flocks are close to each other and move towards various directions, which make it difficult to discriminate various flocks. Another example is that when I decreased the “vision” to the smallest, flocks move very fast and it is hard to see clearly their motions. As well, when I played the “ants” model, the same situation happened that behaviors of ants are decided by the parameters. For instance, when I made the “evaporation-rate” the highest, ants move without leaving chemical trails. When the “diffusion-rate” is higher, ants diffuse faster to more various directions; when it is lower, ants only diffuse slower to some direction.

The result of changing parameters is reasonable, since we can expect similar results happened in the human society once some parameter that decides human beings’ behaviors change. Actually, all social activities are similar so that what is going on in the real world is like that happens among the social insects. For example, when people come to a new environment and begin to know new friends, firstly they will look around and be familiar with the environment. At this time they will get to know everybody like birds first fly without a rule. After a longer touch, they will know somebody among the social community better and find those who they are more interested, which is like the process that birds are looking for their partners. Then they will contact with these people more often and build closer relationship with them, which is like that the beginning non-regular flocks at last become several regular sub-flocks.

Implications
Now a new theory --- the Online Self-Organized Social System (OSOSS) is achieving more attention of educational researchers. The paper “Online self-organizing social systems: The decentralized future of online learning” thinks that OSOSS allows “large members of individuals to self-organize in a highly decentralized manner in order to solve problems and accomplish other goals”. In the paper “Sociability and scalability in online learning environments”, it is suggested that a desired learning outcome is that the most important social interaction will be in promoting student achievement of the outcome, and OSOSS can offer an environment that facilitates such social interaction. Meanwhile, researchers also point out that “communities self-organize in a manner similar to social insects”. “Self-organization as an explanatory framework for social phenomena is most often used in the context of social insects as ants or bees”. So, by observing how the insect society works, inferences about how OSOSS in the human society runs can be obtained.

First, OSOSS needs to have enough number of members participating. In the society of ants, if the number of ants decreases, the rate of searching sources of food will drop accordingly. Self-organization here requires interactions among insects. And the massive number of interactions that occur between individual ants is the key that enables them collective to self-organize. So “there must be sufficient interaction between system users for self-organization to occur”.

Second, OSOSS needs to have a leading person who will facilitate the interaction. In the society of ants, one ant first leaves a chemical trail that other ants can follow to find the source of food. In OSOSS, such a person who acts first and can motivate others is necessary. He is like the one who post a message in the Usenet newsgroup first. Besides, the message can motivate others to join in the discussion. In the society of ants, every ant has the same aim to find the source of food, which can unite all ants together to actively response to what the first ant does. So, a clear and solid learning objective is important for OSOSS users to get together and act for the same purpose.

Third, OSOSS needs to provide users with various “routs”. In the society of ants, there are different directions that ants can go for food. If the diffusion rate is low, ants only focus on limited sources of food and cannot find more existing in other directions. Moreover, in the society of flocks, if the flocks cannot be separated they will be too close to move as smaller-scale flocks. Similarly, in OSOSS, there needs to have different sub-groups that can make large-scale users separated and diffused.

Fourth, the interaction in OSOSS needs to be moderated. At first, each bird flies towards different directions, which is not regular. This kind of activity is like what happens in a Usenet newsgroup that some posting is non-sense. Thus OSOSS need to have “a moderation system in order to help the community self-sustain”. For example, the websites slashdot (http://slashdot.org/) and kuro5hin (http://kuro5hin.org/) that implement OSOSS allow users “meeting certain criteria have the ability to ‘moderate’ or evaluate the quality of individual comments”. Through a meta-moderation system, users can create a posting, make comments on others’ postings and control the quality of postings, which is also the most salient difference of OSOSS from mailing lists or Usenet newsgroups.

Though by referring to the self-organization of social insects we can conclude its implications on OSOSS, behaviors of human beings are more complex than those of insects. OSOSS still has a series of problems like how to motivate users to interact actively and how to mediate interactions between users.

More Gaming

2004-11-28T13:57:00.000-08:00

According to Merrill’s first principle, the learning result of effective instruction needs to have five components. Now considering these components in the environment of the Lineage, we can find that the game to some extent constructs a learning environment that follows Merrill’s first principle.

1. Learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems. In the Lineage, players are in an environment that simulates the real world, which not only has similar physical constructs like valleys, islands, and houses but also has social networks like the blood pledge, different classes, and different levels. Under such an environment, players need to solve practical problems like having more hunting, communicating with others and taking care of themselves.

2. Learning is facilitated when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge. Our new knowledge is always acquired based on our previous knowledge. A good learning needs to build a connection between learners’ new and old knowledge.

In the Lineage, if you want to get a higher level you need to do that step by step so that you have to gain some fundamental experience/ability first and then to have complex experience/ability. Besides, your higher-level experience/ability is connected closely with your lower-level experience/ability. For example, in the Lineage most activities are hunting. When I first went to hunting, I didn’t know that I had to get refreshed every time I was hurt. Then through practicing more I knew that point so that I would make myself replenished like having a lot of meat, having heal potions, etc. Thus my experience is accumulated step by step and from less difficult to more complex.

3. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner. The presentation of information in the Lineage interface mainly includes the presentation of general information like the HP, MP, EP, the presentation of guides like the information presented when players ask a non-participant or make some action and the presentation of interactions like your communication with other players. For example, when you first entered the interface of the Lineage, the game would not tell you what to do. You had to ask the non-participants and they would tell you what to do and how to do. But if you could not find the key person you would waste a lot of time on idling in the valley. So, the demonstration of new knowledge in the Lineage is not like that in the classroom. Most time players have to explore the knowledge by themselves.

Fortunately, the way players gain information is not limited to the synchronous presentation. They can read the manual and get tips through offline discussion with other players. Moreover, their communications with other players are effective to make them acquire useful information. For instance, when I played the Lineage this week I met a peer player “xeric” who helped me a lot to enhance my level. “Xeric” first said “hi” to me. When I knew that he was already level 10, I asked how he could do that. He said “more hunting” and invited me to go to the singing island to kill stronger monsters. I followed his guide and got a fauchard at the singing island, which made me stronger. Then I hunted with him and soon enhanced to level 8.

4. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learner. The Lineage focuses a lot on the practice of players. The practice mainly includes self-motivated practice and peers-motivated practice. Self-motivated practice refers to that players practice motivated by themselves, and peers-motivated practice means that players practice motivated by their peer players. For example, when I played the game at the beginning, I was urgent to improve my level and had a strong motivation. However, when I played a lot and found my progress was slow I felt bored and tired. Right this time I met “xeric” who greeted me first and invited me to hunt with him, which inspired my willing to practice more again. Actually when I played the Lineage, I felt that I kept getting new knowledge like playing tips and applying them.

5. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world. The paper “Replaying history: Engaging urban underserved students in learning world history through computer simulation games” said, “when students perceived the game as in their interests, helping them express ideas they believed in or investigate questions they cared about and defined who they were in the world, the game was more easily appropriated”. The Lineage just constructs such an environment that players can find their interests, explore new knowledge, apply what they learn and combine them into their playing.

From some perspective, playing the game is like a learning procedure though there are not classrooms, teachers, and textbooks. Different from the classroom learning, the learning happens here is more self-motivated, that is learners are driven mostly by their own goals and mediated by the game rules. Besides, learners collaborate more during this kind of learning, thus reputation, trust, and responsibility influence the facilitations of the learning. So, learning through games faces a problem that how to integrate learning resources into the game environment and allow learners to develop deep learning away from just playing the simulation.

Lineage

2004-11-20T19:27:00.000-08:00

I have to say that this assignment is so fabulous that I enjoy it very much. Here is “my” basic information.

Name: ISB
Race (Class?): women knights
Class: knights
Weapons: dagger, sword, arch, arrow, shield, …
Appearance: beautiful, heroic, and fabulous. http://www.lineage.com.cn/images/qishi.gif

Actually at the beginning I want to be an elf, which is my favorite creature. However when I logged in the game in default I am a knight and I don’t know how to change to another class. So I choose to be a knight, whatever, I have not many ideas about the game and being anyone is new and interesting for me. Actually the environment and scenario of the game look very familiar for me since I played one similar Chinese game before, besides, I read a little of the manual before I played this game, so first I did not think it hard for me to get proficient.

However, it is obvious that I had not much experiences of playing this game and moreover I was too self-confident and brave, right when I have been launched to the hidden valley, I could not wait to enhance my level. After I successfully killed couple of rabbits, I walked to the forest and tried to kill the deer and bear, which caused the most embarrassing way I died --- died in the hand of the bear and within 30 seconds. Having gotten a lesson, I thought I had to be well prepared to begin the game. I read the manual for beginners carefully and followed the instruction of the manual step by step. My procedure of getting promoted was getting smooth. After I have been trained in the training field and kept attacking a dummy, I soon reached the level 5. Then I picked the “green” monsters to be my training objects and killed tons of them. But immediately I realized this way to enhance my level was slow. I started to try to kill a “blue” monster. The first time I failed since my HP dropped to 0, which also made me know I needed to keep a high HP during the fighting. So, once my HP fell below 30 points I went back to the entrance of the training field and got a treatment from the healer, besides, sometimes I also had couple of “less healing potions” or meats to get recovered after being hurt. During the playing I only communicated to one peer player. He seems to be a beginner too, so we both focused on getting stronger and had not much to communicate.

Most of my experiences are from getting killed, meeting difficulties (problems) and playing more. For example, when I killed a boar, I knew I could get meats from it. If there were more monsters I killed, the more adena I could get. The playing process is like practicing a lot, getting killed, having lessons and again practicing more, getting killed, having new lessons.

Synthesis 2

2004-11-13T19:31:00.000-08:00

If we want to study the relationship of identity with trust, accountability, cooperation and so on. I think first we need to be aware why people hide their real identities of the real world in online environments. First, somebody maybe wants to keep his/her privacy. Second, somebody doesn’t want to be responsible for their online behaviors. In other words, they think they won’t be punished even when they make mistakes. Third, many people who spent a lot of time on the online communities like Usenet newsgroups, MOOs, blogs actually have some psychological or mental needs, which also lead them to conceal their true identities to achieve what they cannot realize in the real world. With the elimination of real identities, the feelings of being shy, embarrassed and so on also disappear. They can feel free to talk to each other and exchange ideas and even emotions. Finally, somebody expects to set up a new image that can hide his/her shortcomings and address his/her merits.

On the other hand, being able to hide one’s true identity in online environments also causes deception. However, we cannot say that everybody who uses anonym or pseudonym online is cheating. In the paper “Identity and deception in the virtual community”, the author thought a pseudonymous message that may come with a wealth of contextual information about the sender is different from a purely anonymous message that stands alone. Actually from a macro perspective, people communicate online as how they do face-to-face. The only difference is that there is a media---cyberspace between them. If we can trust people who communicate with us through the phone, why cannot we trust the interactions in online environments? For example, in Usenet newsgroups, people can share their ideas, knowledge and emotions regarding one specific topic. Nearly all the online activities are resulted from the participations and interactions of true people. Every event or every conversation happened online involves some kind presentation of true selves, though it is true that somebody shows two different selves in the real world and the virtual world respectively. Even if there exist two selves in two different environments, the self in the virtual world actually is also true, which shows the other perspective of one person.

I don’t think we can valuate the extent of one person’s truth during the online conversations or activities by using the criteria that we judge him/her in the real world. In our real life we can tell the identity of one person like he/she is a male/female, father/mother, a student or an accountant, however, in the cyberspace we are not sure the age, the gender, the professional affiliation of one person. Besides, in the virtual world, the way to identify one person also changes. According to the paper “Identity and deception in the virtual community”, the online identifications mainly use conventional signals rather than assessment signals, which include the account name (ID), language, and signature.

Improving the online identification system can be an approach to increase the trust between people. But not all trusts need to be built on the awareness of identities or true identities. When people communicate online with somebody they did not meet in the real life, they always would like to ask “where you are”, “what you do” and so on. Somebody even would ask your true name, school and age. So, there are different extents and kinds of online identifications, if you just want to find your commonalty and share the same interests, you don’t need to know each other’s identities and even virtual identities (with the process of your interactions you might know each other’s true identities). But if you would like to trade something with somebody or cooperate with somebody, you maybe want to have more knowledge of his/her identity, so as to build trusts during your interactions or co-operations. If you are interested in somebody and want to build some relationship with him/her in the real life, then you need to be aware of his/her true identity. The problem here is more than issues regarding trusts. Moreover, as the above has said, the criteria to identify one person online can be different from that in the real world. We can trust somebody according to his/her online identification without knowing his/her true identity. Since the connections of trusts, accountabilities, and co-operation are close, the same rule works for the relationships of identities with those issues.

“New ways of establishing and of hiding identity are evolving in the virtual world” (see the paper “Identity and deception in the virtual community”). I believe a set of system with new theories, rules and orders for solving the problems regarding online identities, trusts, co-operations and so on will evolve in the virtual world.

IRCed online

2004-11-06T16:06:00.000-08:00

The network I connected to
DALnet

The channels I hung out in
#chineseonly #chinese

The differences between IRC and LambdaMOO interaction
IRC is a multi-user synchronous communications system. It allows people to choose which person or group of people they wish to see the activity of, and to whom they wish their own activity to be transmitted (see the paper “Electropolis: Communication and community on Internet Relay Chat”).

IRC and LambdaMOO have some attributes in common. Both of them have a friendly and approachable interface. For example, in IRC every channel means a topic or a group and in LambdaMOO every “room” refers to a specific group. These settings are close to communications in the real world. In both applications users can chat in real time, talk to many people at once or send private messages, and show actions as well as express opinions freely.
However, after hanging out in these two online environments, I found that there are differences between IRC and LambdaMOO interactions.

First, a lot of activities in LambdaMOO depend on collaboration and are based on Multi-user interactions. However, in IRC, most activities are still based on a two-way interaction. When I entered a channel in DALnet, though there are above twenty users, nearly nobody talked in the shared window. I think many of them chatted with one another by opening another window. So, it seems that in IRC people prefer talking with one specific person rather than chatting with a group of people. That there are enforcements on cooperation in LambdaMOO can explain the difference on this perspective between LambdaMOO and IRC.

Second, LambdaMOO is more like a real communication than IRC. Users can have a much richer experience in LambdaMOO than they can in IRC. In LambdaMOO, users may have an illusion of a real space since they can meet each other in a dorm room, a restaurant, in the middle of the street and so on. Besides they can operate something like a box, a note pad, a street sign, etc. However, IRC is more similar to other chatting tools, except that in it users can show actions and it is based on a multi-user shared interface (actually now many chatting tools like MSN or ICQ also have these functions). This difference may be cause by the different communication environments in LambdaMOO and IRC. Because the landscape of LambdaMOO comprises a geographical area such as a university or a building, communications take place somewhere and involve the manipulation of some objects. The interaction between users and environments occurs through metaphor. In the virtual world of LambdaMOO, setting exists as a series of textual indications of the real world.

Third, LambdaMOO can be programmed, compiled, and saved while it is still running. However, in IRC to do the same things it must be shut down, hacked, recompiled, and started up again. So, LambdaMOO can make a sense of community permanence for users, which cannot be made by IRC.

The MUD/MOO

2004-10-31T19:29:00.000-08:00

A MUD (Multiple User Dimension, Multiple User Dungeon, or Multiple User Dialogue) is a text-based computer program which users can log into and explore. The MOO (MUD Object Oriented) is developed from the MUD, which has more functions than the MUD. It enables users to build rooms and create objects. One room is a metaphor of a group or a topic like that in newsgroup, which makes users who are separated geographically interact and collaborate in a shared conceptual place. For example, in LambdaMOO, users can chat with friends, meet new friends, and look around. Compared to other online environments like newsgroup, blogs, and listsev, the MUD/MOO provides chances for users to exert their imaginations and efforts and also make users’ personal issues integrated into the social environment.

The features of the MUD/MOO
First, as I think, the MUD/MOO can facilitate users’ cooperation. It provides a text-based virtual environment, within which users can share and communicate. A collaborative environment is not just composed by a shared place, which also needs within interaction and communication. Within the MUD/MOO, users are forced to cooperate sometimes. For example, activities within the MUD/MOO always require users to create objects and environments. It means that users have to cooperate to build up a shared environment. Besides, within the MUD/MOO, there is a strict class system. Different classes have different rights. In order to get promoted, the lower classes have to resort to the help and elevation of the higher classes, which also compel the cooperation between users.

Second, the MUD/MOO can facilitate users’ communication. Users can use an anonymous name or log in as guests, and people within this virtual environment don’t know the background of each other, which to some extent makes their communication easier. Different from the communication in newsgroup, in the MUD/MOO you can find who is online at the same time as you and then you can contact them directly like paging them. So, most interactions in the MUD/MOO are synchronous. If you ask a question there will be somebody who will answer it soon. Under such an environment, users are free to ask questions without fears of being laughed and worries of no answers. Now some MUDS/MOOS are specifically designed for learning computer programming. Some users think playing MUD/MOO games is useful for learning computer language.

Third, the MUD/MOO can support users’ construction. In other virtual environments like newsgroup, users can not change the environment. But the MUD/MOO provides a virtual frame (like the frame of a “house”), based on which users can create artifacts and environments (like the “rooms” and “objects” inside the “house”) that they think worthwhile.
Fourth, compared to other online environments, the MUD/MOO can bring users more fun. For example, in the virtual “swimming pool”, users can splash each other, watch others diving and dunk somebody, etc. The communication within the MUD/MOO is very interactive and close to that in real environments, which also makes the MUD/MOO more interesting.

The ability to create artifacts
As above have said, the ability to create artifacts make the way people communicate with each other more living, interactive and interesting. The artifacts (rooms, trails, buildings, furniture, etc.) play an important role in mediating the interactions.

First, the close-to-reality environment makes itself familiar to users thus facilitate interactions. Below there is a paragraph describing a virtual university created as a MUD/MOO.
“These are the entrance gates to *** University. To the north you can see a carved stone archway leading to the tree lined mall of the campus. To the south, you can hear the rumble of traffic on Bovine Way.”
By reading above texts, though there is not a multimedia interface, users can form the environment in their minds by their imaginations and perceptions.

Second, being able to interact with the artifacts makes interactions approachable. In the virtual environment built within the MUD/MOO, users can “operate” the within objects. For example, they can create “classrooms” and “write” on the “blackboard”.

Moreover, within the MUD/MOO, users can have different activities in different environments. It makes interactions more attractive. For example, in a MUD/MOO environment, there maybe have a living room, a kitchen, a pool, and even a smoking room. The activities users have in these places are characterized by the features of them.

The different speech modalities
In the MUD/MOO, there are different speech modalities like the emote and the page besides the room conversations. Various speech modalities make the MUD/MOO more like a real world. Besides, they make it possible to interact in different methods. As the paper “THE MODAL COMPLEXITY OF SPEECH EVENTS IN A SOCIAL MUD” says, “the emote, combined with the social responses to objects and geography, allows for a complex user culture on MUDs”. The author divides the emote into five categories: (a) conventional action, (b) back channels, (c) byplay, (d) narration, and (e) exposition.

The implication of the MUD/MOO in instruction
1. Instruction can be facilitated in a shared online environment that is close to the social environment.
2. Initiative learning can be achieved in the virtual environment with virtual objects that is close to the real environment with real objects.
3. Literacy can be cultivated and improved in a text-based environment.

Synthesis1

2004-10-24T20:19:00.000-07:00

I had one experience of buying a book on eBay. That is a pleasant experience since the shipping was very fast and the book is kept as well as what the seller claims. Actually that is my first time and only time of buying stuff on eBay. Before the transaction, I had worries that are mainly about the quality and the shipping procedure of the good. But I didn’t fear that the seller would violate the rule and not send the good. Since there is a third party in the transaction --- eBay that is responsible for its success, I can request eBay to supervise and urge the seller if I don’t receive the good. Besides, I paid the money to eBay rather than the seller, which reassure me that maybe I can get my money back if the seller deserts the rule. Anyway, it is not a big deal that is only 30 bucks. So I even have not exactly read through the reputation profile of the seller and click the “check out” to finish my side of the transaction.

Now when I look back that experience it seems that I trust eBay more than the seller. And to some extent, I even assume that it is normal that there will be some problem of the good. So when I get the book timely and it is in a good condition, I am even surprised and have not expected that. So in my case, the relationships between cooperation, incentives, reputations, and trust are as the figure 1 shows.
1. The reputation of eBay made me trust eBay. Also, the reputation of the seller made me trust the seller. However, the main factor that led me to trust eBay or the seller is my personal view on trust, which is to trust big company more than personals.
2. No doubt, my trust influenced me to buy the book on eBay. But besides that, my need for the good and its good price also motivated me to buy it.
3. My incentives to buy the stuff on eBay finally made me to cooperate with the seller and eBay. Since I did not buy other stuff from the same seller and from eBay any more, the connection ends at the cooperation.

In a word, in the case of trading on eBay my personal value is in a big effect on my online behaviors. And the reputation here has a few influences on my decision but they are not great. There maybe a reason to explain this that I only had one transaction on eBay. So if there are more transactions, I think I will consider more of the reputation of sellers. Anyway, whatever how credible the online auction is I just will buy small and cheap stuff rather than big and expensive ones, which is determined by my view on trust.

Then how about other people? According to the readings, when we discuss the trust online, first we need to consider how we trust in the real world. First, the history of past interactions has impact on trust. Second, the prospect of future interaction creates an incentive for cooperation, which may cause a new round of trust. So the rule of trust is similar as for everybody that there needs time to set up trust and good behaviors in the future to strengthen it. With this respect, it is more difficult to build trust among strangers who communicate online. Under this situation, somebody put forward the idea of “reputation systems” that “seek to establish the shadow of the future to each transaction by creating an expectation that other people will look back on it” (see the paper “Reputation Systems”). The reputation systems of eBay are built based on this theory. As I think, the relationships between cooperation, incentives, reputations, and trust regarding the transaction on eBay can be shown as the figure 2.

Different from the figure 1, here first, reputation is an important factor to influence trust. Besides, their relationship is like a circulation. Any one of the circulation can affect each other. For example, good or bad cooperation has an impact on reputation systems and then may strengthen or cast shadow on future interactions. Based on my experience, I still think:
1. One’s personal view on trust can influence his/her behaviors regarding trust online. For example, to build a wholesome reputation system, auction sites need to develop ingenious feedback systems that enable sellers (and buyers) to build reputations from satisfied customers. The favorable Internet-based feedback systems are to “get buyers to provide feedback with reasonably high frequency and to provide it honestly” (see the paper “Trust Among Strangers in Internet Transactions: Empirical Analysis of eBay’s Reputation System”). The statistics suggest that most buyers provide positive feedback rather than problematic feedback and nearly half of them don’t provide any feedback. This behavior regarding the feedback is hard to explain because everybody has his/her own values. Maybe that somebody provides feedback is because of courtesy. Maybe that somebody does not offer feedback is because he/she is afraid of retaliation. But how about if somebody thinks it natural that there will be problems of the transaction?
2. There are number of issues that can cause one person’s incentives to trade online or communicate online. So trust is not the only factor that makes people cooperate online.

Basically, the rule of trust and reputation online is similar to that offline. However, people will behave different in these two worlds. Even when a wholesome reputation system is built, how many people would like to trade the car online? How many people would like to buy apparels online? Besides the issues regarding trust and reputation, maybe there are more that to explain above phenomena.

I am the fan!!!

2004-10-17T15:05:00.000-07:00

My Favorite
1. Mossley
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/1979789/1/
2. BluEyes
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/382140/1/
3. DrKerryWeaver
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/2074129/1/

My Story
Lonely Night Again
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/2096656/1/

Reflection
As I think, there are various causes in different respects that make fan fiction so popular.
1. From the perspective of writing contents, what draws people to the media (like TV show, movie, book, animation) also attracts them to write fan fiction. Why they choose fan fiction rather than other fictions? They love the characters, the stories, the styles and something regarding the specific TV show, movie, book and so on. So they create their own pieces of fiction based on some of these media. For example in the area “TV show > CSI”, most authors are fans of CSI. They wrote their stories because they would like to supplement what CSI did not show us, or edit some scenario that didn’t satisfy them, or explore deep into some character’s mental world.

2. With the respect of the writing form, advantages of the online communication make people prefer fan fiction.
First, creators of online writings feel free to write. They can control the length of their writings, which can be just one short piece or have couple of chapters; they may choose any topic on which they have inspiration to write something; they may extend their imagination and not necessary limit to one genre. Anyway, they don’t need to follow specific requirements like writing class assignments. They have a broad and free space to exert their talents.

Second, there is a communicating environment that can motivate writers. Writers’ writings were reviewed by readers all over the world. Responses of others can motivate them continue writing and improve their writings. One hand, the positive feedbacks will encourage the writer to keep writing. For example, most comments of readers will say “cannot wait for the next part, please update soon.” On the other hand, readers’ negative feedbacks or suggestions will stimulate or illuminate the writer to create better writings.

Third, it is easier to find those who have common interests with you. Thus you will feel more motivated to write. For instance, the fanfiction.net, which provides the function of adding “favorite authors” and “favorite stories”, can help somebody be friends. Based on this, some writers already developed to co-workers for the writing. They cooperated to create a series of fictions. To some extent, the collaborative relationship will monitor and facilitate their creations.

3. I believe those who wrote online actually loved writing. So their inherent emotion on the writing makes them write, though some of them may not like writing class or work assignments. I have several friends who like the writing since they can express their feelings and thoughts through written words. When the writer is writing, actually he/she is creating his/her own world that can realize what he/she trust true and correct.

4. We also cannot exclude that somebody write fan fiction for some specific purposes, like we did in this class and non-native English speakers wrote for improving their English writing.
Analyzing why fan fiction is so popular can also be harnessed to improve formal instructional uses of technology.

As above has suggested, the online environment will make people prefer writing online. So if a welcome learning environment is created, learners will love learning. This environment includes:

1. Connection with real world/practice. For example, fan fiction is based on our interested media. If the learning materials are designed to be relevant with learners’ practical experience, learners might feel glad and comfortable to accept them.

2. Loose atmosphere. With loose atmosphere, learners can feel free to say, to write and to learn. They will regard learning as an interesting thing rather than an enforced assignment with a lot of requirements.

3. Communication space. Learning is not a lonely activity, which needs communication with others. First, no doubt, feedbacks whatever positive or negative will motivate people to some extent. For learners, they need timely feedbacks from their teachers and peer learners. Besides, collaborative atmosphere can help learners find those who have common interests with them and build learning groups. Further can supervise and facilitate every member in the group to explore the learning contents.

4. Enforced measures. Loose atmosphere does not mean loose management. I believe formal instructional activities actually have mandatory meanings. For example, teachers can establish rules of the class, manage learners’ accounts and registrations, and ask them to post online periodically.

I think everybody can be a stuff to learn better, just like who wrote online actually loved writing. So for formal instructional use, we need to provide a nice learning environment that can cultivate everybody.

Edublogging

2004-10-11T01:41:00.000-07:00

The five blogs

1. HeadspaceJ http://headspacej.tripod.com/blog.html
2. EDtech http://david.davies.name/weblog/categories/edtech/
3. Weblogg-ed http://www.weblogg-ed.com/
4. D'Arcy Norman @ The Learning Commons http://commons.ucalgary.ca/weblogs/dnorman/
5. Online Learning Update http://people.uis.edu/rschr1/onlinelearning/blogger.html

My interested topics

My interested topics are how we use technologies in education. New technologies are keeping emerge and it is unavoidable that they will be used in education. Many researches have shown that technologies have a worthwhile educational impact. That is they can improve learning and teaching. So for instructional technologists, presently we need to consider more about how to use them in education effectively than whether they are useful in education.

More specifically, I care about how to use blogs in the instruction. What role will blogs play in the instruction? Are blogs additions or will they replace other learning tools? What specific use would blogs have? Should we use them combining with other teaching technologies/methods or use them independently? What situation is more proper for us to use blogs? Etc. As I browsed the edublogs and read around them, I found that most of them discussed the new technologies and proposed using them in education. Besides, most arguments were come up from people’s thoughts rather than practices, and everybody seems to have his own opinions.

So I think we need to explore further how to apply technologies including blogs, learning objects in education not only from theoretical level but also from practical level. Actually, some researchers (see the paper “Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher education sector”) already pointed out that we need to integrate blogs into the instruction by being concerned with the pedagogy.

Educational use of technology

I believe that educational use of technology is interesting, valuable and prospective. But as everything has its two sides, I also think technology would bring risks. Anyway, I don’t think the use of technology in education is pointless and unbelievable since to date various technologies have been applied into education and they have shown their significant and worthwhile use in education.

First, emerging technologies have impact on our life, which also influence the way we collect and manage information. Actually learning is a procedure of processing information. Learners can not avoid being affected by technologies on their learning. For example, with the emergence of the computer, we begin to read electronic documents rather than paper works. Teachers can transform the syllabus, readings and assignments into electronic formats and make it cheaper and more convenient for learners to acquire.

Second, technologies not only make the learning cost decrease and learning easier to be accessed, but also bring lots of conveniences to teaching. For instance, teachers replace web pages with blogs to put on instructional information, since blogs are easier for them to use and they don’t need to grasp computer languages or tools for creating web pages.

Third, technologies also make modern and scientific instructional ideas be realized. For example, computer-based instruction provides chances for learners to think independently and construct knowledge by themselves, which matches the thoughts of individual learning and constructivism. Moreover, now online communities make the collaborative learning easier to be implemented.

Fourth and also the most important, just as the educational use of technology comes into being from mass training of employees, as I think the most promising use of technology in education will be in lifelong learning. In the paper “Educational Blogging” Stephen Downes said that “the process of reading online, engaging a community, and reflecting it online is a process of bringing life into learning”. Since the ultimate objective of education is to teach learners how to learn, technologies can exert themselves a lot in education for achieving that aim.

On the other hand, technologies would bring risks. For example, how we motivate learners to use new technologies for learning; how we monitor learners while technologies make learning more various; how we guarantee the privacy policy with the emergence of new technologies. Besides, education itself will block the use of technology in education, like David Carraher suggests shortcomings of education could be addressed through weblogging technologies. So the use of technology in education needs to be paid more attention.

Time report

Totally, I spent 9 hours browsing the list of edubloggers, selecting five edublogs and reading them.

Blog Hopping

2004-10-02T22:00:00.000-07:00

The URLs and names of the five blogs
Images and Words: Welcome back my friends, to the show that never ends.... http://www.livejournal.com/users/rush2112/
Verticalpixels: Live in the world of your dreams
http://verticalpixels.blogspot.com/
Cor Baby, That's Really Dr. Elvis Toad!
http://www.livejournal.com/users/drelvistoad/
镇守爱情 [Nothing can stop us] (A Chinese Blog)
http://www.blogcn.com/user17/ericeva/blog/3950506.html
Ruth Changed the Name of Her Blog: I'm here to tell you how boring my life is
http://thecoolestever.blogspot.com/

Reflections
When I get to touch the blog first, I think it is similar to other social softwares like newsgoups. However, after I use the blog for a while I find it has its own characteristic, which is not only different from real life communications but also different from other social softwares like newsgroups.

Firstly, blog is an environment for personals or groups to express or communicate their thoughts. With this respect, it is similar to newsgroups. But if we look at the blogs from a broader respect, they are groups that are built up through assembling couple of independent groups by links or other methods. Comparing blogs with newsgroups, every group within newsgroups is an intrinsic group, which depends on people’s participation, otherwise, it will be nothing if everybody leaves the discussion; but every blog is a self-existent stuff, which is still a blog even without communications with outside environments like other people, blogs and groups.

Secondly, the term “blog” comes from the “log” that is an everyday recording of sailors. So blog originally refers to recording something happened everyday. But at present good blogs also record thoughts on some things other than only things. For example, some bloggers describe their everyday experiences that others also might experience, which still can draw readers’ attention since there are insightful and specific thoughts behind those common things.

Thirdly, as I observe, some blogs are similar to personal writings or group writings, which emphasize expression of self-opinions rather than discussions. Except technical topics and requests, most blogs are like this situation that bloggers post their own stories, ideas or just messages and leave them for others to make comments. In newsgroups, most wonderful contents are from the messages posted by subsequent posters. Subsequent posters disagree with the arguments of earlier posters and refute them. Then earlier posters stand out and defend themselves and the roles of subsequent posters and earlier posters keep exchanging. At last, some of such communications run away from the original topic. However, the issuances and evaluations within blogs are not even, which means that the first poster and after posters are in a non-symmetrical environment. The “strong” first arguments and the “weak” after remarks make the blogs be more like expressions rather than discussions.

Fourthly, another feature of blogs is their peace compared to newsgroups and chatting rooms. Though many bolgs are very popular, the atmosphere of them is not as “hot” as that of newsgroups and other online forums.

By comparing blogs with other social softwares (mainly newsgroups), their distinct cultures are concluded. Actually, like how participants of newsgroups express and communicate, the way bloggers speak is similar. Generally they use informal expressions. They also use highlight and a lot of excalmatory marks to address some points. Besides, there are “tons” of links within blogs.

The blogs, like other social softwares, provide the freedom and convenience for people to express and communicate, to ask and reply, and to refute and defend. Most importantly, they extend (or change to some extent) people’s life, role and many other respects through virtual communities.

Time report
I spent 2 hours finding the five blogs and 6 hours reading and exploring them. So the total time is 8 hours.

The number of hours I spent last week

2004-09-28T16:01:00.000-07:00

I am not sure whether we need to report hours we spent last week. However, in case of missing something of the assignments, I'd like to add it here. Totally, I spent nearly 5 hours on looking around the archive of Google groups and reading one specific thread discussion.

Thread Mini-analysis

2004-09-27T08:51:00.000-07:00

The URL to the thread
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=zh-CN&lr=&ie=UTF-8&th=5d17e1764c9cf2f

A brief thread summary
There are thirty-two messages in this thread. Among them, the beginning six messages focused on the question a person put forward --- where a new website builder should start. Some people gave responses and provided their suggestions regarding this question. The message seven broke the discussion by a request on looking for somebody who can create a website for providing medical information, which only got one reply. Then from the message ten, people began a discussion on preference in Html or Xhtml or Xml to start learning website building. Some people thought that Xhtml has limited use, and some others disagreed with it and pointed out the obscure points those people made. At the end of the thread, one person answered the first question again and also mentioned adopting Xhtml for website validation, which caused disagreement of another person.

All in all, this thread contains “requests for information, replies to requests, discussions of the validity and accuracy of replies, and further questions prompted by the discussion”.

What motivates the responder(s) to participate
First, it is the relative experiences that motivate the responders to participate. Most responders mentioned their own learning experiences. For example, one responder said that he learned by “Right click > view source”. Another responder said that he “learned by looking at pages and seeing how stuff was done.” As I think, this request caused people to think about their own experiences. So they have something to say according to their knowledge.

Second, it is the instinct of responding to questions that motivate the responders to participate. When there is a question, I think as a human being we all have the instinct of replying it if we know how to answer. Especially when somebody doubts the points you made, you definitely will give some responses. In this thread, most latter messages belong to this situation that one person posted a message that caused another’s request and he explained his points further.

Third, it is the disagreements that motivate the responders to participate. Actually, I think this is the major factor that causes the discussion. If all people agree the statement, there will not have discussions and the discussion will end soon. Since there are different ideas on the same problem, there are participations in the discussion. Most messages in this thread are like this case that people disagree the others, point out the obscure points, and correct the inaccuracy and so on.

Moreover, sometimes that responders participate the discussion is also because they want to support others. There also exists agreement besides disagreement.

It is definitely that people participate in the discussion is because they have common interests, but with the respect to one specific topic like a thread, there are more reasons rather than just similar interests since why people choose attending the group “comp.infosystems.www.authoring.site-design” already shows that they have the common interests in this field.

Reflection
Now that we know why people participate in the thread discussion, how can it guide us to design online community?

First, an attractive environment should be created first. “CatB” paper suggested use a bazaar style that can make users find the values of developing present design. It is like a question in a thread discussion that can cause disagreement among people and needs further correction and polish. “CatB” paper pointed out “to build a development community, you need to attract people, interest them in what you’re doing, and keep them happy about the amount of work they’re doing”.

Besides, the paper “Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooperation and Conflict in Computer Communities” also pointed out that only participation is not enough to make newsgroup successful. We need to increase the quality of the participation, which needs to be active, continuing and meaningful.

Sometimes, though we create an environment that can let people involved in, its success still depends on whether people would like to participate. Here the rules of decorum maybe effect. Members of the Usenet are hoped to abide by the local norms and culture that govern decorum.

Experience of Surfing Newsgroups

2004-09-19T15:23:00.000-07:00

My overall impressions of the whole newsgroup archive
It is my first time to use the google groups and also the first time to participate in totally English newsgroups. My overall impressions of the whole newsgroup archive is:
1. It is amazing that there are tons of groups and you can discuss any topic you can think through the web.
2. Google groups did a good job of classifying categories and sub-categories, besides, the function of searching helps me a lot find my interested groups from thousands of groups.
3. Though “google groups” provides strong functionality, there are some disadvantages of it. First, after I posted messages, I could not read them right now and I had to wait for nearly 3-9 hours to read others’ responses. Moreover, I cannot manage my account on the homepage of “google groups” (no logging in, logging out, no difference between guests and users, anyway, maybe newsgroup do not need these things), so every time I have to re-search my participated groups. What if I join in hundreds of groups? I don’t know whether these issues bring inconvenience to you guys, but they really did for me.

The URL of one discussion I participated in
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=zh-CN&lr=&ie=UTF-8&th=f0c976e6db4e29ac

A brief summary of the discussion I participated in
After searching around and looking around for a while, I chose the group “rec.travel.usa-canada”. I posted a message “southern CA” for inquiring about recommendations of good places in southern CA for visiting in the winter holiday. It is nice that some people gave me responses and really good suggestions. One person advised me to go to the Newport Beach and quit the visit of LA and San Diego. Right now another person disagreed this person that visiting the beach during the winter is not proper, but he also suggest me not to visit LA and San Diego. Then I gave them a “quick” response to explain my ideas of this trip, which is to take a quick view of south CA and definitely I will visit that two famous cities. This response made the discussion in a dispute, which was already away from the topic. It is obvious that people who replied me so far prefer visiting the nature rather than big cities (some of them call our difference as the cultural difference). Or maybe it is not appropriate for me to put forward such a question on the newsgroups since I can get better answers through searching the google. All in all, so far I did not acquire consistent responses to my question through the google newsgroups. Though the discussion is still in process, I will quit looking for the answers through it and I already decide to turn to the google search engine for help.

The number of hours I spent in the archive
Totally, I spent nearly 7 hours in the archive. Exactly, I spent nearly three hours exploring the archive (2:30 pm --- 3:30 pm, Friday, 9:15 am --- 10: 15 am, Saturday, 3:30 pm --- 4:30 pm, Saturday), and nearly four hours participating in the discussion and looking around (10:20 pm --- 1:50 am, Saturday & Sunday, 1:30 pm --- 2:00 pm, Sunday).

Reflection
This experience is wonderful since I tried a new thing, but to tell the truth, I still prefer Chinese newsgroups rather than English newsgroups (sorry for that), which is not just because Chinese seems more familiar for me but also topics in those newsgroups are more familiar for me.

The biggest problem of using the newsgroups for me is the language and culture obstacles. It is ok for me to post messages in English, but sometimes I feel lost when I read American slang and phrases in the responses. More important, it seems that I loss my personal hobbies in the newsgroups. I am interested in cooking, but when I entered relative groups, I found nearly all of the postings within them addressed the western food with a lot of specific terms that I am not familiar. I am also interested in movies, but those movie stars and movies they are talking about seem to be out of my knowledge. I also tried to search for topics that are closer to my culture. Actually, google groups provide newsgroups in Chinese. However, those kinds of groups are a little narrow that only focus on discussing a few topics. Besides the difficulty of finding my interested groups, I also met the difficulty of discussing further with other people since we had different thoughts that caused probably by our cultural difference. I think here I also need to be responsible for the problem since I need to be more active to accept different cultures, however, what do the newsgroups need to do for us internationals? Do the google newsgroups really involve people all over the world (maybe just for some topics and for English-speaking countries)? See the responses of my posting: “You speak English? How on earth did you get in?” People congregate online since they can inquire, share more information and find their belongings, which is basically same whatever for Chinese newsgroups or English newsgroups. But when language and culture differences block our communications through the newsgroups, can we ask for and share more information? Can we find people in the same camp? It is worthwhile to think more about how to extend online communications for more users.

My Personal History --- Use of the Internet and Social Software

2004-09-12T13:08:00.000-07:00

1999-2000
I cannot remember exactly when I first used the Internet. But I remembered before the year 2000, I seldom used the Internet, because then at my home my personal computer was not connected to the network yet, and at the school (Central China Normal University) there were a few accesses (most of them were not free) to the Internet. Maybe my friends introduced the Internet to me or I knew it through the newspapers, broadcasting, TV or other medias.

Summer, 2000
I began to use the social software introduced by my cousin, which is an online chatting tool like ICQ. During that time I also registered my first E-mail address and browsed the web pages of Chinese websites a lot.
New use: OICQ (an online chatting tool), E-mail, WWW.

Fall, 2000
I began to use the online forum introduced by my friends, which we called BBS then. Besides that, I also started to use FTP to upload and download files. This time I was not very familiar with the Internet and was trying to use it well. When I had questions I always asked my friends, which made me get a rapid progress in using the Internet.
New use: BBS (online forum), FTP.

2001
I built the network at my home, which made my computer get access to the Internet through dialing the phone. It was more convenient for me to contact with my friends (through both instant messaging and email) and get information through the Internet. Meanwhile I also began to use the Internet to search learning resources like the academic journals (Chinese).
New use: search engines.

2002
This year I used the Internet a lot and registered my MSN and Yahoo account. I really appreciated that the Internet helped me a lot on preparing for the GRE, applying for the universities of USA, doing my researches and so on.
New use: MSN (online chatting tool).

2003
It is great in this year that I can chat with my families and friends who are in China by the audio and video through the Internet.
New use: online audio and video chatting, online newsgroups, mail-lists, Blog, videoconference.

2004
I began to use the WebCT. And had my first blog for this course.
Couple of weeks I just watched the 2004 Summer Olympic Games broadcasted in Chinese channels through the Internet.

After I came to the US, it seems that I cannot live without the Internet. I would surf the Internet for reading news, checking my e-mails, reading electronic academic articles, searching good deals, managing my bank accounts, registering for courses, and even taking courses online (like this course), etc. Besides, I also used the social software a lot to communicate with my families and friends wherever they are. The Internet has been a necessity in my life for both professional and personal aims.

My history of the use of the Internet and social software got behind of the history of the Internet and social software. However, it is fortunate that I caught up with the development of the Internet and social software and took advantage of them in my life and career.

Hello world!

2004-09-04T19:05:00.000-07:00

Hello everybody,

Nice to meet you here.

Xin