Skip to main content

Home/ CurtinNet308/ Group items tagged collaborate;

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Kristy Long

Collaboration tools are anti-knowledge sharing? - 7 views

  •  
    The goal of many intranets is to centrally store corporate information so that all staff can share information across divisions, access it and use it to make work-based decisions. This article argues that while there are many organisational benefits that occur from introducing collaborative tools to an intranet, if they are not managed properly they can create information silos, and therefore become tools that support anti-knowledge sharing. The article says the strengths of collaborative tools can also become their weakness. It starts with staff forgetting to publish outcomes or finalised documents produced in a 'locked down' collaborative space to the published area of the intranet. This then potentially causes hundreds of small collaboration spaces containing important and useful corporate information that hasn't been shared with the wider group. It is this fragmentation which makes it hard to find anything. The article argues, "This is the lesson we didn't learn from Lotus Notes and we are repeating it now." (J. Robertson, 2007) Even though some documents might be published to a broader audience, those who don't have access to the full collaborative space they were produced in may lack the context to understand what they are reading and how to use it. That is, the project plan might be a working document held in a permission only collaborative space, but the change management plan might be published. Both need to be read together to provide the user with richer context. "By 'locking up' the knowledge in these spaces, organisations make knowledge sharing harder, not easier." (J. Robertson, 2007) As an intranet manager and member of a professional intranet peer group, I have witnessed this happen in many organisations. These organisations are now spending lots of money and lots of time untangling their collaborative tools. In an unmanaged environment, not only do teams create information silos, but because of the nature of the collaborative too
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    This article emphasises some weaknesses of using collaboration tools in an organisation, such as unmanaged content misplaced in the system, a lack of organizational context for new staff, and irrelevance of search results for staff. This can link to one of my selected article - Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise - which mentions another weakness that is the new solution may not integrate with the organisation's existing system and the existing organisational knowledge may fail to exploit. Long (2011) comments that both organizational teams and the nature of the collaboration tools can create information silos in an unmanaged environment. I agree that no collaboration tool is perfect but I also argue that such tools become a competitive necessity of most organizations because they provide powerful service to simplify business process and reduce cost. As Toole (2000) mentions, a trend for most enterprises is e-business which combines Internet and information technology to manage organizational information and process business geographically. I believe that with the continuous development of information technology, those collaboration tools can be improved and offer better services. Furthermore, organizations need to provide professional staff training on using those tools and make sure everyone follows the same procedure to process information in an effective way. Toole (2000) claims the bottom line of using collaboration tools is that they can deliver "better innovation and lower costs with higher quality products and services". Reference Toole, P. (2000). Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise. Design Engineering, 46(8), 12. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?did=374775371&Fmt=7&clientId=22212&RQT=309&VName=PQD Long, K. (2011). Comments on Collaboration tools are anti-knowledge sharing? Retrieved from http://groups.diigo.com/group/c
  •  
    This article highlights the fact that whilst an organisation can implement collaboration tools there is more to collaborating that just implementing the technical solution and letting the staff collaborate without governance or guidelines (Till, 2005). The article raises that without leadership and guidance the tools that are designed to assist the business can actually work against it with multiple silos of content occurring, often with duplicate information which is not managed appropriately. For example the same piece of content could appear in more than one silo and be different as different teams are managing each of the sites (silos). Further, staff who are unfamiliar with a particular site are likely to create another instance of a site to avoid a conflict of an existing site. The article raises the issue of knowledge management at the corporate level being neglected and business risk that becomes a side effect of poor knowledge management. For many organisations, the intranet search engine is the quick win to locate information amongst multiple team sites however that is only masking the issue at hand (Brauns, 2004) and the information architecture of the intranet or sites needs to be addressed from an organisational wide approach and identify which information needs to be keep separate and implement a solution to meet the business needs. Reference Brauns, M. (2004). Moving Beyond Search. EContent, 27(7/8), S8-S9. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global database Till, J.G., (2005). Don't blame the technology. Information World Review, (213), 28. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global database..
  •  
    The article argues that it exists some disadvantages with using those collaboration tools, while collaboration tools were introduced to an intranet of organization. The article argues that it could cause the unmanaged content misplaced, lacking of context, and create information silos as it is not widely used, and therefore, at the end the article gave the conclusion is that collaborate tools can result in anti-knowledge sharing during the daily collaborative work. In fact, when providing team members with some effective e-business collaboration tools and spaces to manage organizational information and communicate each other, team members are also provided with professional knowledge about how to use those tools and spaces in an effective way.(Toole,2000). Team members need actively know how to use the collaboration tools within the group of organization, and learn how to find the important information in the "shared context" and catch up with what's going on with updated context in collaboration spaces before members started using these tools and spaces.(J. Robertson, 2007) I don't agree with that collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing. Each technological product has its own disadvantages a certain extent, but updated technologies have been improving better services. So, users need find ways to solve the problem with using those collaborative tools in effective ways, in order to achieve the successful collaborative communication among members in the group. Minimize the risk and maximizes the benefits are the key points in the organizations for a better collaborative results. Reference: Robertson, J. (2007). Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing? Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_antiknowledgesharing/index.html Toole, P. (2000). Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blen
  •  
    Kristy I was taken aback by the article but it also reminded me of my time working in a construction company. Many large-scale huge projects require the joining together of organisations (designers, architects, constructors) and professionals who previously competed for construction work. That is why there is much hype around creating a knowledge-sharing culture. This is described as making knowledge sharing a 'norm' (Gurteen, 1999), which means it is an accepted and agreed upon practice in the collaboration of any kind that things are disclosed and not hidden. We know this of course sometimes for politics or self-gain does not work. However, as construction clients do demand many firms to complete a project, knowledge sharing tools must not be anti-knowledge sharing. I will give you an example, which is in the public domain, of an example. I found on one project the issue of context that Robertson (2007) talks about in his article to be important for the sharing of records. The project I did ended up being published, but the situation was the sharing of important construction data. Each manager kept records of materials used on their own laptops and PC's as spreadsheets. No wonder there was confusion when they were told to merge them to share what had been done. They referred to it as 'Spreadsheet Culture' (Nycyk, 2008). They simply did not want to share how much material was being used. Although that suggests a culture issue, Excel can be a collaborative tool but it is obviously anti-knowledge sharing if every manager uses it differently. This is what they did, hence why the simple use of this tool in the wrong way prevented not only a sharing culture to develop but resulted in top management writing into their duty statements they had to use the new central database. References Gurteen, D. (1999). Creating a knowledge sharing culture. Gurteen, Retrieved April 15, 2011 from http://www.gurteen.com/gurteen/gurteen.nsf/id/ksculture Nycyk, Michael (200
  •  
    The article described collaboration tools obstruct knowledge sharing if organisations do not manage tools well. I am interesting in this article as theme of the article is an alert for me. There is an association between collaboration tools and knowledge sharing. They work as train and rail. The knowledge needs collaboration tools such as Intranet, Internet or other systems share them to most of user. Trains need rails for running. Thus collaboration tools are rails and Knowledge is trains. They cannot work appropriately once they miss each other. However, railway requires particular planning before it builds up and maintenance after railway is running. The planning ensures railway is working efficiency and safety. Collaboration tools also require particular planning. Robertson (2007) mentioned in his articles, collaboration tools can be anti-sharing once tools are without management, planning and maintenance. Suarez (2006) argue in his blog that e-mail is not a powerful collaboration tools. I think what he argued is about how people using e-mail tools. E-mail is not a powerful collaboration tools because no one performs collaboration function well from e-mail. This is the same logic as collaboration tools. Collaboration tools can be an issue of knowledge sharing once on one control or manage tools. We should make sure collaboration tools are not only store all the knowledge only. Reference Robertson, J. (2007). Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing? Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_antiknowledgesharing/index.html Suarez, L. (2006). Email: The Good Enough Collaboration Tool - Is It Really? Retrieved from http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/elsua/email-the-good-enough-collaboration-tool-is-it-really-11473
  •  
    This article emphasises some weaknesses of using collaboration tools in an organisation, such as unmanaged content misplaced in the system, a lack of organizational context for new staff, and irrelevance of search results for staff. This can link to one of my selected article - Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise - which mentions another weakness that is the new solution may not integrate with the organisation's existing system and the existing organisational knowledge may fail to exploit. Long (2011) comments that both organizational teams and the nature of the collaboration tools can create information silos in an unmanaged environment. I agree that no collaboration tool is perfect but I also argue that such tools become a competitive necessity of most organizations because they provide powerful service to simplify business process and reduce cost. As Toole (2000) mentions, a trend for most enterprises is e-business which combines Internet and information technology to manage organizational information and process business geographically. I believe that with the continuous development of information technology, those collaboration tools can be improved and offer better services. Furthermore, organizations need to provide professional staff training on using those tools and make sure everyone follows the same procedure to process information in an effective way. Toole (2000) claims the bottom line of using collaboration tools is that they can deliver "better innovation and lower costs with higher quality products and services". Reference Toole, P. (2000). Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise. Design Engineering, 46(8), 12. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?did=374775371&
Kristy Long

No collaboration without communications - 7 views

  •  
    While web 2.0 technologies have been around for awhile now, many organisations are still in an experimental phase. There are all too often rare wins and rare examples of it being used correctly to fulfil a strong business need or solve a business problem. This article argues that organisational collaborative tools such as social intranets etc will not be embraced or used to their full potential if employees do not already communicate with each other - i.e. have a structure, management style or physical layout that supports them to communicate. As the article states, "The existence of collaborative tools does not automatically imply that people will collaborate or collaborate effectively." (A. Broomhall, 2009) This makes sense. In a working and professional environment, most staff are more guarded in their communication (depending on the culture of the organisation of course) and less reluctant to use collaborative tools like they might as strangers on the World Wide Web. If the fundamentals of communication are working well in an organisation and already exist (ie. people have met face to face, have already established communities, have trusted relationships where they share information) they are then more likely to collaborate online. There are several intranet features which can be used to strengthen these communication paths and employee relationships: - staff directory - news channels - social news sites. It is these types of technologies (available on most intranets) which can help encourage the development of communication networks, and in turn support the use of collaborative tools. Reference: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    This was a very thought-provoking article and I was especially interested in how the author stated "The existence of collaborative tools does not automatically imply that people will collaborate or collaborate effectively" (Broomhall, 2009, para. 5). In one of the articles that I posted on wikis in education by Deters, Cuthrell, & Stapleton, J. (2010) they noted that without proper preparation of students and specific guidelines that the success of the wiki would be in doubt. I believe that this can be related to this article by Broomhall. Without proper preparation and planning online collaboration can fall flat and fail. I don't fully agree with Broomhall (2009, para.6) when she says "It is a simple concept, but if people are not already communicating with each other, then there is little chance they will feel comfortable enough to share their knowledge online." I believe that there are many instances where online collaboration between strangers can take place most effectively (not least of which is this exercise in learning on DIIGO!). Waltonen-Moore, Stuart, Newton, Oswald & Veronis (2006) concluded in their study on an online learning environment that it is possible for virtual strangers to collaborate and successfully complete their work. I would agree that it comes down to good planning, facilitation and monitoring of any online collaborative environment in order to make it successful. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Deters, F., Cuthrell, K. & Stapleton, J. (2010). Why Wikis? Student Perceptions of Using Wikis in Online Coursework . Journal of Online Teaching and Learning 6(1). Retrieved from http://jolt.me
  •  
    This article by Broomhall (2009) also explores the notion that, simply implementing collaborative software into an organisation does not necessarily mean that it will be used. Collaborative tools like wikis may seem easy to use by those that use wikis like Wikipedia, although it does not mean that everyone within the organisation will have the confidence or skills to use the wiki or understand the purpose of using the wiki for collaboration or communication within the organisation. This article is a small and easily understood article that is relevant to explain the main issues that may arise in an organisation that is using collaborative tools like wikis in content management and communication. This article compliments the articles like Clarke's article (2007) "Collaborative authorship with Atlassian Confluence" and Stackpole's article (2008) "Wikis that work: Four IT departments get it right" about wikis as it ensures, that when implementing a wiki the organisation understands the importance of ensuring that "the basics of communication are established" (Broomhall, 2009) and that "staff share a common understanding of the organisation, its functions, organisational structure and its role in the broader industry" (Broomhall, 2009). Staff that have an understanding of the role of the company will be more likely to understand how open collaboration can assist the organisation and how their use, can assist in creating communication between other departments and staff from other locations, thus breaking down silos that may exist and enable the promotion of a sharing culture within the organisation. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html
  •  
    References: Clarke, R. (2007). Collaborative Authorship with Atlassian Confluence. GlinTech. Retrieved from http://www.glintech.com/downloads/Collaborative%20Authorship%20with%20Atlassian%20ConflueCon.pdf Stackpole, B. (2008). Wikis that work: Four IT departments get it right. Computer World: the voice of IT management Retrieved 13 April, 2011, from http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9118878/Wikis_that_work_Four_IT_departmdepa_get_it_right
  •  
    Thanks Kristy for your article. When we talk about collaborations tools in organisations, we pay more attention on the collaboration tools more than human factor. What I found in my articles are focus on tools. My comments think about how to choose appropriate tools, how to develop and manage tools. However, we should not ignore the origin of knowledge sharing. It is base on people's communication. I agree with Broomhall (2009), if people are not already communicate with other, they do not feel comfortable share the knowledge online. It is like we do not borrow our money to stranger. Therefore, collaboration tools should work as communication tools at the same time. Tools are something which need human's practice, especially collaboration tools. If no one uses collaboration tools, we cannot see any collaborative activities inside. Tools are not collaboration tools anymore. Broomhall (2009) noted some channel of communication, such as intranet, staff directory. The channel which I am interested is social site. Social site is not a communication channel. I found that in my research is informal sharing place an important role in organisations. Organisations not only benefit from formal records or information. They can get more benefit from informal channel. Informal sharing should be part of collaboration tools have to concern. Reference: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html
  •  
    Thanks for providing this article, Kristy. I agree with Broomhall that just because collaboration tools have been put in place, it does not guarantee that these tools will be utilised or even used in the manner in which they were intended. However I also don't agree that "if people are not already communicating with each other, then there is little chance they will feel comfortable enough to share their knowledge online." (Broomhall, 2009.) I think that Net 308's Blackboard discussion forums, although not extremely lively, are an example of strangers communicating with each other and sharing knowledge. Successful forums and even groups on Flickr are comprised of those that have not met in real life nor communicated with each other prior to utilising the collaboration tool they are part of. Although I will agree that successful collaboration required the right collaboration tool and proper facilitation of such, the main factor in success or failure of online collaboration comes down to common purpose or interest. Without that fundamental element, at least at the beginning, I believe success to be far fetched and difficult to achieve. I agree that a staff directory would aid in the success of collaboration in the organisation Broomhall refers to in this article. I feel that an ice breaker activity as outlined by Augar, Raitman and Zhou (2004.) of sorts would also benefit. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Augar, N., Raitman, R. & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 95-104). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/augar.html
  •  
    This is an interesting article that brings up some great points on the importance of communication regarding collaboration. I totally agree with the author, communication within an organisation is vital in order to collaborate effectively. The main problem companies experience when implementing online collaboration tools, is the objections many employees have when introduced to these new tools (Foster, 2009). Fear, uncertainty, resistance and concerns are some of the issues companies have to deal with as employees are asked to go from being a passive consumer of online information to becoming a creator of content by posting discussions, comments etc. that anyone can view. Foster (2009) suggests that businesses should spend more time thinking about the impact of these changes on their employees. In order to deal with the different issues employees may have, Foster suggests organisational change management. Like Broomhall, Foster (2009) highlights communication as the common element whether the change is coming from the top of the organization or from the bottom. The article is a useful resource for this project as it focuses on the importance of communication when organisations are implementing collaborative tools. Broomhall (2009) argues that employees need information about internal changes and external influences which may impact their daily work. As Broomhall points out, the existence of collaborative tools does not automatically imply that people will collaborate. References Broomhall, A. (2009). No Collaboration without Communications. Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Foster, D. (2009). Collaboration Technology and Organisational Change. Retrieved from http://gigaom.com/collaboration/collaboration-technologies-and-organizational-change/
Kaye England

Factiva - 2 views

  • Novel way for using technology. By PETER LELONG, VINCE SUMMERS. 500 words31 July 2002Hobart MercuryMRCURY26English(c) 2002 Davies Brothers Limited STUDENTS in years 5 to 8 are helping to write a great online novel called Billy Bathtub. As confidence grows in the use of online learning technologies, we are seeing the range of activities made available for students continue to develop. The adventures of Billy Bathtub, supported by the Department of Education, is a topical case in point. Author Damian Morgan is currently engaged in writing a novel, online, in collaboration with Tasmanian students during second term. A teacher and writer for many years, Damian has been working with students from around the state in recent weeks. On the completion of the novel in August, Erica Wagner, a publisher with Allen & Unwin, will be editing the novel for publication. The contributions of the students who participated in developing the story will be acknowledged. The partnership of writer and editor in an online collaborative project with schools around Tasmania is certainly a new and innovative way of engaging students from years 5 to 8 in the writing process. With the completion of four drafts of chapter one completed, the author posted a number of questions on the forum to engage students to take an active part in writing the story with him. "I know this is the story of Will Reynes, but do I call him Will or do I call him I?" Morgan asks. One of the many responses which he received: "I think if the story is going to be written in the present tense it should be written in the third person, but if it is in the past tense, the first person. I personally find stories easier to read if they are written like that." The story revolves around the adventures of Will Reynes, who we first meet in chapter one as he tries to rescue his window-cleaning mother from a high-rise building, where she has become entangled in her safety harness. In chapter two, Will, is with his father in a frantic rush to the airport, to meet an important scientist who comes complete with a large ceramic elephant. Students involve themselves in the writing of the novel by submitting ideas through the Discover Education online forum. The author responds to the suggestions from the students. This interaction between author and reader in the development of a novel demonstrates a very good use of the technology. Schools can also engage in online chat sessions with the author by booking time with him over the web. Alternatively they can invite him to visit their classroom. The Discover web site provides a link to download the software, Microsoft Comic Chat, for the online chat segment of the project. Once configured this program provides a secure online environment for students to communicate with the author. The story will continue to unfold with contributions from students until the end of August. To take part visit the Discover web site at http://www.discover.tased.edu.au/ billybathtub/. Document mrcury0020020730dy7v000nc
  •  
    Even though this article from The Mercury (Hobart) is nearly 9 years old, I believe that it is very interesting, and the first time that I have been aware of an online collaboration to write a children's novel. It also shows that online collaboration need not be complicated. Sometimes we overlook the simple in order to engage in the latest popular online trend or something that is seen to be technologically complex. This article shows how sometimes a simple online collaboration tool works best. The collaboration involved students from grades 5 to 8 and was coordinated by author Damian Morgan. Damian received a grant from the Tasmanian government to undertake the collaboration project. Collaboration for the project was undertaken in an online forum and through online chat sessions. Over a period of time students contributed and collaborated with Damian in order to write the novel. Collaboration can take many forms and often we don't realize that we are engaged in it, I suspect that the children in this project were having fun, learning and collaborating all at the same time and had little notion of it! It is interesting that access to the forum is still available and in fact it details the collaborative conversations between students and Damian. The forum is still available at the following URL: http://forum.education.tas.gov.au/webforum/student/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=97 Final and draft versions of the novel are available at the following URL: http://odi.statelibrary.tas.gov.au/Resources/Framer.asp?URL=%2F2002%2F2%2F010%2Fdefault.htm&ID=00215534 References: Lelong, P. (2002, July 31). Novel way for using technology. The Mercury (Hobart), p. 26. Retrieved from http://global.factiva.com
  • ...2 more comments...
  •  
    This resource directly links to my topic of crowdsourcing as it discusses a crowdsourcing project which involved young students having the ability to write a novel in a collaborative manner. Students were part of the process of writing 'The adventures of Billy Bathtub'. The article highlights some of the key benefits of crowd sourcing: non-professionals can make important contributions. Anyone can contribute, in this case, despite their age, their input was deemed valuable. It is important to consider that this project occurred in 2002; the nature of the online context was vastly different to today, and we can see this with the design/appearance of the project's online forum. In http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/07/creative_crowdwriting Gorski (2007) explored two popular examples of collaborative novel writing using crowdsourcing. 'A million Penguins' and 'These Wicked Games' also allowed a group of people to write the novel. However unlike 'The Adventures of BillyBathtub' they did not rely on a forum, but rather wiki technology and were also very open and allowed anyone to make edits. Due to this chaotic structure, i believe 'The Adventures of Billy BathTub' was more successful because it was more controlled and restricted. 'A million Penguins' and 'These Wicked Games' faced many issues including vandalism. Many contributors were also contributing content to chapters without bothering to read what was happening in the narrative. However as stated by Jeremy Ettinghausen (publisher of 'A million Penguins') the project was mainly a experiment to see what would happen if anyone could edit and write a novel (A Million Penguins - The More the Merrier, 2007). This article suggests that collaborative narrative writing can be successful if organizers implement some degree of crowd control and impose certain restrictions to avoid chaos, spam, and vandalism.
  •  
    References: A Million Penguins - The More the Merrier.(2007, February 1). Retrieved from http://thepenguinblog.typepad.com/the_penguin_blog/2007/02/a_million_pengu.html Gorski, K. (September 7, 2007). Creative crowdwriting: the open book. Wired Online. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/07/creative_crowdwriting
  •  
    Hi Kaye, thank you for your interesting article and comments. Following is mine: This article is a good example of how people use internet to communicate and collaborate, which is similar to one of my readings: The American Pain Foundation (APF) and The HealthCentral Network Collaborate to Develop Enhanced Internet Resources for People with Pain. Both articles explain how people are connected by Internet to share ideas, gain information, and interact with each other through a website. Both websites mentioned in these two articles are open for general users, such as year 5-8 students and patients with pain, who may not have professional skills on Internet, so these websites are designed to be simple and user-friendly. Such websites let users easily focus on gaining information and collaboration without technical issues. As Kaye (2011) claims, "a simple online collaboration tool works best". In addition, this article shows the trend of using Internet to improve learning efficiency and allows communication and collaboration after school. As students' contribution will be available to view once they enter it to the website, Internet not only makes collaboration across time and geographical boundaries by global networking but also encourages students to contribute to their projects with more flexibility. Furthermore, as students normally access to Internet at home, this makes learning in a more relax and intimate environment. As Pelton (1996) mentions, online learning allows students to move from a passive learning to an active learning mode. In short, online collaboration helps student to achieve learning goals more efficiently with powerful and user-friendly features. Reference: England, K. (2011). Comment on Novel way for using technology. Retrieved from http://groups.diigo.com/group/curtin_net308 Pelton, J. N. (1996). Cyberlearning vs. the university: An irresisti
  •  
    Thanks Jiawin and Cathy for your comments. It was a very interesting project wasn't it and I agree with you Cathy that one of the reasons that it was successful was probably due to the way it was controlled and organised - not like some of the examples in your readings (which were very interesting by the way). Jiawin - I read your articles too with much interest and would agree that the Internet is a powerful tool as it allows the sharing of ideas and information. Sometimes I think that people are afraid of engaging in some of these new online collaboration tools - but there is much to be gained by simply 'having a go'!! Thanks, Kaye
Matthew Hewett

Reference 2: Opening minds: Cultural change with the introduction of open-source collab... - 2 views

  •  
    Subject: How online collaboration has affected the software development industry Reference 2 Opening minds: Cultural change with the introduction of open-source collaboration methods ABSTRACT As open-source software becomes accepted worldwide, open-source collaboration and development methods are also gaining greater momentum. Collaboration based on the open-source paradigm is increasingly being used to improve multisite development and teamwork inside companies. Drawing on experience in projects for improving multisite collaboration, this paper explains how we evaluate communication and collaboration problems, assess obstacles to change, and facilitate the change by introducing employees to the benefits of the collaborative model over traditional development projects in a workshop setting. This method has proven to be a valuable ''mind-opener'' and helps identify specific obstacles that need to be addressed as part of the introduction of open-source development and collaboration methods. The paper concludes with lessons learned for facilitating the introduction of these methods in an organization. (Neus, 2005) Full document available from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386734 Bibliography Neus, A. (2005). Opening minds: cultural change with the introduction of open-source collaboration methods. IBM systems journal, 44(2), 215. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386734
  •  
    Review of article - Opening minds: cultural change with the introduction of open-source collaboration methods This article reviews a different part of collaboration in the software development environment than the other articles. It looks at how software development collaboration works in the open source environment or at least that part of open source environment where developers do not all use the same development tools to develop a project. It is a detailed and well researched article that has been peer reviewed and that looks at the theories behind open source development and why it is different from traditional collaborative software development. One of the main differences between this article and my others it than it focuses more on the cultural and social aspects of collaboration in developing software and tends to see collaboration as much looser and less controlled than in traditional software development. The article does not focus on particular tools for collaboration when writing application code but sees the collaboration as more of many individuals working independently and mainly collaborating on documenting what is going on using software such as a a wiki as a content management system. This is much less controlled than traditional collaborative software development and quality control in this case is done by maintaining a detailed version history using the wiki. Neus, A. (2005). Opening minds: cultural change with the introduction of open-source collaboration methods. IBM systems journal, 44(2), 215. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386734
  •  
    This article is important in the discussion of collaboration tools like wikis as it explores, the importance of having a collaborative culture within the organisation to ensure that communication and collaboration occur. This article relates to the other articles about wikis as the main purpose of the wiki is for communication and content sharing, easily and efficiently. If the organisation does not support open source collaboration then the wiki will not succeed in its purpose. This article by Neus & Scherf (2005, p. 216) explores the idea that the main limitations in the implementation of open source software is the people of the organisation and not the software. It is therefore imperative, that if open source software is implemented, then the organisation ensures that the people of the organisation are encouraged to communication and collaborate with the new software. This article is interesting as it highlights that simply implementing new collaborative software into an organisation does not simply mean that will be used at all. Organisations tend to forget that people have been performing tasks in a traditional manner so an organisation that originally used top down management cannot assume that the people of the organisation will not be suspicious of the new flat hierarchy in collaborative tools like wikis. This article illustrates this type of suspicion with the change in management styles by stating "it is not sufficient for management to stand up and proclaim that open collaboration is a good thing" (Neus & Scherf, 2005, p. 220) and people always want to know "what's in it for me" (Neus & Scherf, 2005, p. 220), illustrating that when implementing open source collaboration software like a wiki, organisations need to ensure that the culture is one that supports and encourages collaboration and communication. References Neus, A. (2005). Opening minds: cultural change with the introduction of open-source collaboration methods. IBM s
Michael Nycyk

Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey Deve... - 5 views

  •  
    Kumar's work has a reasonable amount to offer in terms of a resource; his research gives more clues to the perceived effectiveness of Google Docs users have towards it as a collaborative tool. He has chosen to use the effective research method focus groups with semi-structured questions. Perhaps the useful part of investigating Google Docs as a collaborative tool is how he selected students at the university site who were in many disciplines. Thus he was able to elicit some good insights into why Google Docs is so praised as a collaborative educational tool. One finding was that students preferred Google Docs as a time saving tool where no formal meetings took place. Although the students were on campus, it was surprising that they felt they would rather use Google Docs then all meet to work on a project. The other finding was that the acceptance of this Web 2.0 collaborative technology was greater amongst students that had previous experience with Google Docs or other similar software. Another major advantage found by Kumar (2009) was that overall using such collaborative tools increased interest in the subject matter of their particular discipline. The concept that new technologies add value to existing practice was also interesting. Although Kumar was not clear on this concept, what students indicated this was the case, such a statement suggests that using Google Docs is linked to increased interest in a subject and in turn a desire to succeed. The weakness of this resource is Kumar is not clear of this link; however, as an article to show that Google Docs is of value equating collaboration tools with increased productivity shows how potentially valuable using them can be.
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    References Kumar, S. (2009). Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey development. In D. Remenyi (Ed.) Proceedings of 8th European Conference on E-learning, Italy, 308-314. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://web2integration.pbworks.com/f/Undergraduate+Perceptions+of+the+Usefulness+of+Web+2.0+in+Higher+Education.pdf
  •  
    I was interested in this article as I work in an academic institution (75% of our students are external) and it is a very topical subject for us at the moment. It was of interest to note that many students "expect to learn with new technologies and because higher education should prepare students for the workplace of the future" (Kumar , 2009, p.308). In terms of the use of Google Docs as a collaborative tool in academic institutions I think that we are only just beginning to see the benefits of this type of online collaboration. Google Docs, as stated by Edwards & Baker (2010, p.836) "can be used to save valuable time that would be otherwise spent e-mailing, revising, saving, e-mailing back etc.". Google Docs is a relatively new collaborative tool but the benefits to both lecturers and students are very evident, as anything that saves time and engages students is worth using. It was interesting that Kumar (2009) said that the use of Wikis was not a popular online collaborative tool - although it was easy to see the possibilities of its use. In one of my resources I looked at the positive use of wikis in educational settings as they "assist students in learning new content and support them in connecting new knowledge with personal experiences" (Deters, Cutherell & Stapleton, 2010, Discussion section, para.2). Successful online collaborative work is not necessarily a time saver or a short cut but approached positively and with good planning and leadership I believe that it will become an efficient and well used educational tool. References: Deters, F., Cuthrell, K. & Stapleton, J. (2010). Why Wikis? Student Perceptions of Using Wikis in Online Coursework . Journal of Online Teaching and Learning 6(1). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no1/deters_0310.htm Edwards, J. T., & Baker, C. (2010) A Case Study: Google Collaboration
  •  
    My reading of it Kaye is that Kumar found that was the case at the time the study was done, but I am sure if he redid the study that would be less of an issue. I see Wikis are being quite popular now. Also I agree with your point, it is not always about time saving but if one spends the time learning it, it can be a useful tool for education. Our experiences in this course with Ning last year and the online conference proved that.
  •  
    This article is interesting as it highlights the benefits of using collaborative tools in higher education for teaching and learning. Although, it is also interesting how the article mentions wikis as one of the collaborative tools and then Kumar (2009, p. 6) then omits wikis as part of the group focus discussion as the students involved in the focus group had not used wikis in their personal life nor on campus. What is more interesting about this reasoning by Kumar (2009) is that it was not explained to students about the use of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a very popular wiki used as a reference tool both in studies and personal life, so it is hard to comprehend that the students in this focus group did not draw any correlation to Wikipedia and the use of wikis. This article also supports the benefits in using a wiki for both, organisations and for teaching and learning as Kumar (2009) highlights how a wiki "improves students writing" (Kumar, 2009, p. 3) and also engages students to collaborate across disciplines (Kumar, 2009, p. 3). The majority of articles supporting wiki use as a collaborative tool have highlighted how the ease of use allows for communication and collaboration, whilst also focusing on the culture of sharing within these two groups. Therefore, wikis are a great collaborative tool, although it is important to also create a sharing culture and provide guidelines when implementing the use of a wiki so, that the participates will use it to support the organisational culture or teaching and learning outcomes in collaborating and communicating with fellow peers or colleagues. References: Kumar, S. (2009). Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey Development. In Proceedings of 8th European Conference on E-learning (ECEL), Italy, retrieved from http://web2integration.pbworks.com/f/Undergraduate+Perceptions+of+the+Usefulness+of+Web+2.0+in+Higher+Education.pdf
  •  
    Yes Michael - I agree - things are constantly changing and evolving on the Internet and as you say if Kumar did the study again it would be a different outcome. Cheers, Kaye
  •  
    This paper articulates through research and data analysis from although relatively small focus group the effectiveness of using new technologies 2.0 to enhance learning of students from different background in their respective disciplines. This is as same topic as one of my discussions with article Art Education, Collaboration and the Internet. It talks about internet technology integrates into contemporary education. New generation communicates and shares information differently in current technological society. Computer literate generation are different from earlier generations who rely mainly on books and printed materials. Collaborative online activity as an educational endeavor is involving people from different areas to work together.(Harris, 1999). Internet is also being used in region of high education that adopts Web2.0 to help students learning for their self-study and group projects and leverage strategies. (Kumar, n.d). Not only for undergraduate students, but also those students from high schools and colleges, all gained the benefits of new technologies across disciplines in order to achieving their teaching and learning purposes of education. For high education, I completely agree with that Google Documents is very popular among the students for collaborative projects or assignments, because I often use Google document for my topic research and reference as well. I also believe that the internet generation's familiarity with new media undoubtedly will make this way easier for teachers to craft effective learning experiences and to use such tools to engage students. Reference: Harris, J. (1999). First steps in telecollaboration. Learning and leading with technology. 27(3),54-57. Roland, A. (2003). Art Education, Collaboration and the Internet. Retrieved from http://www.artjunction.org/articles/arted_collab_internet.pdf Kumar, S. (n.d). Undergraduate Perceptions of the Usefulness of Web 2.0 in Higher Education: Survey Development. Re
Shan Shan Cheung

Email: The Good Enough Collaboration Tool - Is It Really? - 4 views

  •  
    This is an interesting blog that debate e-mail is a powerful collaboration tool or not. I totally agree with Suarez (2006) that e-mail is a very powerful communication tool. We can receive every mail whether are junk mails or useful mails. Others could receive a mail within few minutes from someone who live at the other side of world. In addition, people receive wide range of information from e-mail. However, I am not completely agreed that we miss out the point of collaboration and knowledge management once we define e-mail is good enough collaboration tool. Suarez (2006) mentioned how people have managed e-mails. Although nine people read e-mails, only a person knows the content of e-mails, is able to trace out particular e-mails and uses e-mails. Thus e-mail is not powerful collaborations tool. My opinion is the argument misses the essential elements of knowledge sharing. It is human. No matter the knowledge sharing tools or other collaboration tools, they also require human's management. If no one sends mails in electronic format, e-mail would not be at society anymore. The nature of e-mail still is collaboration tools. Organisations should focus on human is well use e-mail system and the information that inside e-mail system. This is a human base procedure. Reference Suarez, L. (2006). Email: The Good Enough Collaboration Tool - Is It Really? Retrieved from http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/elsua/email-the-good-enough-collaboration-tool-is-it-really-11473
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    I was interested in this article as much of my research for the assignment has made the same argument that this article makes. And that is, Email may be great for communication but is most deffinately not at all useful for collaboration. As Luis Suarez states, most will file the email away and will be unlikely to find it later. He also states that new people to the project wont have those emails. The article by Stackpole (2008) talks about the use of wiki's as great online collaboration tools that help users to organise projects and separate them from eachother. Many of the points addressed in this article are almost exact responses to the issues with email. As stated above, those users who join a project late wont have the email. Stackpole (2008) explores this notion by talking about new members being able to catch up on the development of a project easily without having to sift through hundreds of emails. The wiki page will give the most current information as well as show the progress in a neat logical way. Saurez also states that the ability to find information/changes in emails is challenging as one has to search / sift through their emails. As stated above wiki's allows users to easily see these changes without having to try find the five or ten emails it was discussed in. Stackpole (2008) also notes that changes/updates/information and separate projects can all be kept in the one place. However, if one was to send an email to 10 different people, perhaps only some would actually click reply all (in which the response is sent to all recipients) therefore if one was to click just reply, only the initial sender would see the response, thus information is too scattered as some have less access. With a wiki it is all in one spot for everyone to reference. While reading Saurez's article I strongly agreed with his arguments, and Stackpole (2008) article backs up the notion that email is not a strong collaborative tool, that doesn't mean it is not a strong
  •  
    I know someone who works in information management and, to prevent duplication, they have dedicated procedures, spelling out who is supposed to archive emails and documents. As I understand it, only the original sender submits a copy to the file, cc copies can be deleted.
  •  
    Thanks Shan as I enjoyed reading this article. The question of whether the good old email is a good enough collaboration tool is an interesting debate. I beg to differ that email is not a powerful collaboration tool. I am part of an organisation where are main communication and collaboration happens through emails. We plan, organise, discuss and share documents through emails. I will list some functions vital to our organisation that email provides: 1. Organisation - You can track and organise responses through email by clicking on the latest responses. The latest email often contains the conversation from previous users as mentioned my Samantha in her response. Who said what and at what time can also be noted. 2. Document sharing - Just like any collaboration tool, you can attach and send any document in any format to the group in your network. The only area traditional email clients falls short is real-time editing. Google Gmail provides this function by incorporating Google Docs with the Gmail Service. This makes it a powerful online collaboration tool where content editing is incorporated into the email system. 3. Records - Like modern collaboration tools, emails can be archived and searched. Though we meet up on monthly basis, my organisation can be classified as a virtual team. As a virtual team, email is a powerful collaboration tool for us. Thanks once again, a great article related to my topic of collaboration within organisations.
Ran An

The Role of Collaboration in Organizations - 1 views

  •  
    As we know that collaboration is one process of participation in a group project or between organizations. This article elaborates the factors of effective influences in developing collaboration process of organizations in order to achieving the desired results for organizations, such as the skills of leadership, communication, sustainability, participation etc. (Hogue, st al, 1995), and internal communication, external communication, membership, and goal setting. (Borden ,1997). The article also explored that the importance of networking collaboration in areas of organizations cooperation and collaborative relationship. I agree with that the building and developing the trust is the vital skill for leaders to nurture the collaborative relationship between organizations. Trust is the basic element for all kinds of collaborative projects. The purpose of the collaboration is what the leaders and stuff in the group seek to create, so ensuring a clear and understood goal for collaborative groups and organizations is also an important issue. In order to establishing a successful collaboration within organizations, trust, freedom with bring different perspectives to bear to solve problems and provide with positive change, and considering of culture and work environment and so on are supportive points to manage the organizations as a successful whole. So, for collaboration to be successful between organizations there must be clarity, direction and communication. Reference The Role of Collaboration in Organizations.(2010). Retrieved from http://collaboration-tools.org/business/the-role-of-collaboration-in-organizations/ Hogue, T. Perkins, D. Clark, R. Bergstrum, A. Slinski, M. & Associates. (1995). Collaboration framework: Addressing community capacity. Columbus, OH: National Network for Collaboration.
Mandy Burke

Four Trends in Enterprise Video Conferencing - 5 views

  •  
    Due to the global financial crisis, companies globally have been finding ways to cut costs. Instead of staff travelling to attend meetings, businesses rely on methods such as video conferencing to assist in facilitating meetings with geographically dispersed teams. This article published on the technology blogging site Read Write Web discusses four main trends in regards to video conferencing. The four trends stated are consumerisation, mobility, interoperability and providing a social layer. Mobility and the social layer are interesting trends when thinking about collaboration via video conferencing. Smartphones being released are beginning to include video conferencing as a standard functionality. Through the use of smart phones, mobility allows team members to participate and collaborate whilst on the move. It unshackles team members from the restraints of being restricted to an office. For team members that travel regularly being able to videoconference from hotel rooms or other offices through their smart phone provides them with flexibility previously not seen. Social layers being added to software is becoming the norm (Flinley, 2010). The social layer extends video conferencing beyond just audio and video. By adding social layers to videoconferencing software, users are able to communicate in the one location rather than utilising multiple platforms. A social layer provides "social networking, instant messaging, voice and video into one system" also including the ability to share files. By encapsulating all means of communication in the one destination, team members save time and recording communication becomes easier. References: Finley, K. (2010). Four Trends in Enterprise Video Conferencing. Read Write Web. Retrieved on 12 April 2011 from http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2010/10/trends-in-enterprise-video-conferencing.php
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    I was interested in this article not only from a business perspective but also from an educational perspective. Video conferencing is something that we would like to use in the presentation of information literacy classes to off campus students in our library. The four trends that Finley (2010) discussed that of consumerization, mobility, interoperability and social layer are trends that will see video conferencing used much more in both business and educational settings (as well as for personal use of course!). Giesbers, Rienties, Gijselaers, Segers & Templeaar (2009) present an interesting case study of two virtual teams. One of the teams used video conferencing and the other team used online forums for their project work. The conclusion of this study was that there were no perceived advantages in the group that used videoconferencing. The debate then became about the advantages and disadvantages of asynchronous and synchronous communication. I for one am a reflective thinker - I like to be able to think things through and respond in my own time - so asynchronous communication suits me well. Synchronous communication such as videoconferencing can put more pressure on people to respond immediately. The key component in the videoconference group that stood out though, was the difference in leadership. It was more obvious in that group who the leader was and that seemed to make a difference to the group. Suduc, Bizoi, Filip (2009), conclude in their study that web conferencing requires much more leadership and organisation than other forms of collaboration. However, with that in place they say that there are many advantages to this type of collaboration, including, cost, time saving, reduction in travel and facility costs, improvement of decision making and communication. I definitely think that video conferencing will become more and more immersed in our day-to-day business and educational functions in the days to come. References: Finley, K. (201
  •  
    This article introduces some video conferencing applications, such as Cisco, Skype, Nefsis Basic, BlackBerry Playbook, and Google Voice, and shows how they are used as collaboration tools in enterprises. Burke (2011) summarizes that the use of such tools helps to establish instant communication, save travelling time, and cut business cost. One of my selected articles, iManage Unveils the First Multi-Platform Collaborative Content Management Suite, announces a new Internet content management application suit called iManage WorkSite MP which is an online collaboration tool as well. Both video conferencing tools and Internet content management applications are network-based, so users' contributions will be available instantly, and shared information can be distributed globally. Both of them aim at improving business efficiency, reducing cost and resource, and finally developing organisational service and product quality. While video conferencing tools focus on communication by audio and video, Internet content management applications, such as iManage WorkSite, has more to do with information management, such as text, image, and spreadsheets. It can be said that online collaboration tools can facilitate meetings among team members geographically, provide access to shared knowledge and ideas, and manage organisational information effectively. I argue that the combination of both video conferencing and content management tools can offer a comprehensive service to an organisation to compete in the global economy. As Fedorowicz, Laso-Ballesteros, and Padilla-Melendez (2008) state, the development of online collaboration "will facilitate multidisciplinary innovation and reduce barriers and inefficiencies among people working together"(p.1). Reference: Fedorowicz, J., Laso-Ballesteros, I., & Padilla-Melendez, A. (2008). Creativity, Innovation and E-Collaboration. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 4(4). Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.
  •  
    I was first interested in this article from personal, and educational experiences with one of the tools mentioned. (Skype) The article explores the idea that Video conferencing can be used to cut costs in this growing financial crisis. A family member of mine uses the tool to collaborate with business partners as it is a much cheaper and easier option than flying all over. It is also easier to quickly update somebody without the high cost of international phone calls. the article explores other benefits of using the tool for business, such as the ability to use it on the move and the ability to combine it with social networking tools. Through personal experience, having family that live in another country, the tool is helpful to share photos, information, and to merely see each others faces, something that is much more beneficial than a phone conversation. This then brought me to an article by Mark Blankenship, in which he talks about a skype lecture he gave to a group of undergraduates. He states "They listened, took notes, asked questions, and engaged in discussion. Except for the fact that I never shared a physical space with them, my experience with the students was remarkably similar to the experience I've had with students in the actual world" therefore perhaps developing a fifth trend in which users feel that video conferencing enhances the ability to act as a real face-to-face mechanism, in which the social element is not hugely different than that of a real social interaction. Also proving to be more than just a one-on-one tool, as it can be used to interact with a group of students to aid in learning where a guest speaker is unable to attend the physical lecture. References Blankenship, M.. (2011, March). How Social Media Can and Should Impact Higher Education. The Education Digest, 76(7), 39-42. Retrieved April 17, 2011, from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=5&did=2253484511&SrchMode=1&sid=14&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VTyp
  •  
    This article provides a high level overview on video conferencing in a corporate setting and discusses four main trends, such as consumerisation, mobility, interopability and the social layer. It discusses Skype and how quickly it is gaining a business market share in in comparison to other enterprise tools such as TelePresence and WebEX. The success of Skype is due to the fact that it is so easy to use and allows users to share desktops so they are "virtually" in the same room. Mobility is also a main driver for video conferencing. When we consider that every laptop has a webcam, the potential for mobile video conferencing is immense and not just limited to tools such as the iPhone using the Facetime protocol. Add to this that the workplace is changing with more people working remotely either from home or travelling on business and the potential for video conferencing is growing as we need to connect with colleagues and clients. In essence I think video conferencing is the way of the future, however interoperability with devices has the potential to create issues until a standard or protocol is defined much in the same way TCP/IP was defined as the global standard for web traffic in 1983 (Microsoft, 2005). Presently devices can "talk" to each other if they use the same protocol, however there are many protocols emerging at the moment and no industry set of rules that all protocols must adhere to. Reference TCP/IP background. (2005). Retrieved April 15,2011 from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc775383(WS.10).aspx
  •  
    This article introduces some video conferencing applications, such as Cisco, Skype, Nefsis Basic, BlackBerry Playbook, and Google Voice, and shows how they are used as collaboration tools in enterprises. Burke (2011) summarizes that the use of such tools helps to establish instant communication, save travelling time, and cut business cost. One of my selected articles, iManage Unveils the First Multi-Platform Collaborative Content Management Suite, announces a new Internet content management application suit called iManage WorkSite MP which is an online collaboration tool as well. Both video conferencing tools and Internet content management applications are network-based, so users' contributions will be available instantly, and shared information can be distributed globally. Both of them aim at improving business efficiency, reducing cost and resource, and finally developing organisational service and product quality. While video conferencing tools focus on communication by audio and video, Internet content management applications, such as iManage WorkSite, has more to do with information management, such as text, image, and spreadsheets. It can be said that online collaboration tools can facilitate meetings among team members geographically, provide access to shared knowledge and ideas, and manage organisational information effectively. I argue that the combination of both video conferencing and content management tools can offer a comprehensive service to an organisation to compete in the global economy. As Fedorowicz, Laso-Ballesteros, and Padilla-Melendez (2008) state, the development of online collaboration "will facilitate multidisciplinary innovation and reduce barriers and inefficiencies among people working together" (p.1). Reference: Burke, M (2011) Comment on Four Trends in Enterprise Video Conferencing. Retrieved from http://groups.diigo.com/group/cur
  •  
    Video conferencing as one of online collaboration tools, able to change the way people communicate as well as their perceptions towards the work day in nowadays. Video conferencing has become a part of communication strategy, this article shows that about 37% of Skype users use the service for business purpose, which is they use Skype to make conference video that is more convenient and less traveling cost, users would be able to meet up without consuming traveling time which normally required in order to meet face to face. I found out this article are useful in terms of explaining the way video conferencing been used in business as well as introducing 4 new trends on how people use it, and as resources itself, it is credible enough, this article took from ReadWrite Enterprises web sites that mainly focusing on business purposes. By relating on my own topic, which is talk about the use and features of social bookmarking site (delicious), video conferencing as well provides specific features in order to facilitate the video conference, hence users would be able to use the features and communicating online, same as the way delicious using it special features, such as tags, where people would be able to collaborate their bookmarks as long as they are sharing and using same tags. As for value, this article shows and recommends how useful video conferencing is and there is multiple ways and benefits we could get by using it online. References: Finley, K. (2010). Four Trends in Enterprise Video Conferencing. Read Write Web. Retrieved on 12 April 2011 from http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2010/10/trends-in-enterprise-video-conferencing.php
Kaye England

Social Networking Tools to Facilitate Cross-Program Collaboration (EDUCAUSE Quarterly) ... - 1 views

  •  
    Two tools are discussed in this article, a 3D virtual world for teaching and learning called the AET Zone and ConnectYard, a collaborative tool that integrates different forms of online communication. Although AET Zone has some benefits and has been useful in the teaching programme at the Appalachian State University, it is the second tool that offers more opportunity for those needing to collaborate. As a collaborative tool used in an educational setting, ConnectYard provides as its basis for success a social constructivist viewpoint. Learners construct their knowledge through social and cultural settings (Kim, 2001). ConnectYard provides an online collaborative setting allowing students to learn together. One of the main attributes of the tool is that it is able to interact easily with existing social networking tools such as Facebook and Twitter, text messaging and even email. The advantage of this is that members do not have to get to know a new technical application - they can use whatever they are most comfortable with. Another feature of this tool is that students are able to contribute even if they do not have an Internet connection. Students can collaborate using mobile phones, allowing them to connect anywhere, anytime (ConnectYard, n.d.). The ConnectYard widget is embedded within a web page, interfacing with other networks (Howard & Wallace, 2010). Using ConnectYard gives collaborative members a choice about what tool they use at whatever time they want. As stated by Howard & Wallace (2010, last para.), "The use of social networking tools allows our students to engage in a level of collaboration that would be awkward, if not impossible, without a means to communicate effectively". ConnectYard is an effective, easy to use collaborative tool, which offers flexibility, privacy and builds community.
  •  
    References: ConnectYard (n.d.) retrieved from http://www1.connectyard.com/ Howard, B & Wallace, P 2010. Social Networking Tools to Facilitate Cross-Program Collaboration. EDUCAUSE Quarterly (EQ) 33(4) retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/SocialNetworkingToolstoFacilit/219139 Kim, B. (2001). Social Constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Matthew Hewett

Reference 3: Continuous Coordination: A New Paradigm to Support Globally Distributed So... - 0 views

  •  
    Subject: How online collaboration has affected the software development industry Reference 3 Continuous Coordination: A New Paradigm to Support Globally Distributed Software Development Projects by David Redmiles , André Van Der Hoek , Ban Al-ani , Tobias Hildenbr , Stephen Quirk , Anita Sarma , Roberto Silveira , Silva Filho , Cleidson De Souza , Erik Trainer ABSTRACT Along with the rapid globalization of companies, the globalization of software development has become a reality. Many software projects are now distributed in diverse sites across the globe. The distance between these sites creates several problems that did not exist for previously collocated teams. Problems with the coordination of the activities, as well as with the communication between team members, emerge. Many collaborative software engineering tools that have been used to date, in global software development projects, exhibit a fundamental paradox: they are meant to support the collaborative activity of software development, but cause individuals and groups to work more or less independently from one another. The underlying issue is that existing software engineering tools, such as configuration management repositories, issue trackers, and workflow engines, separate time and tasks in concrete but isolated process steps. Designing tools based on the premise that human activities can be codified and that periodic resynchronization of tasks is an easy step reflects poor understanding human nature. We therefore propose a new approach to supporting collaborative work called Continuous Coordination. Underlying Continuous Coordination is the premise that humans must not and cannot have their method of collaboration rigidly dictated, but should be supported flexibly with both the tools and the information to coordinate their activities and to collaborate in their activities as they see fit. In this paper, we define the concept of Continuous Coordination, introduce our work
  •  
    Review of article - Continuous Coordination: A New Paradigm to Support Globally Distributed Software Development Projects This is quite a useful paper about current issues relating to the collaboration of software development and though it does not appear to have been published it is still a well-researched review of the topic. It focuses on the developing technology and changing methods of collaboration when developing software. It reviews a number of issues such as coordination issues that may arise between different sites that are working on a collaborative project together and looks at why these issues arise when developers and designers are working with current versions of collaborative software. It further focuses on why these issues arise and then reviews some of the software that is currently under development that may fix these issues. The software that it reviews includes YANCEES notification service that is an automatic publication/subscribe service for keeping software collaboration coordinated; Palantir workspace awareness tool that is an enterprise-level integrated analysis platform that works on a client/server model; Ariadne that is a tool for the collaborative searching/analysis of databases/source code and the graphical visualization and tracking of such searches; the TriVis which is a utility for graphically tracing collaborative software development and interactions and finally WorldView which is similar to TriVis but can extend from visualising design models to high level representations of development team interactions. Overall this is a very interesting article about the future direction of software development collaboration Redmiles, D. V. D. H., André; Al-ani, Ban; Hildenbr,Tobias; Quirk, Stephen; Sarma, Anita; Silveira, Roberto; Filho, Silva; De Souza, Cleidson; Trainer, Erik Continuous Coordination: A New Paradigm to Support Globally Distributed Software Development Projects. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/dow
Sheila Bonsu

Convofy Is A Workplace Collaboration Tool Centered Around Documents And Images - 0 views

  •  
    Convofy wants to go beyond being a private Facebook and Twitter to let companies collaborate around content like web pages, images PDF files, PowerPoint files, Word Files and Excel (Tsotsis, 2011). Convofy claims to be the most private powerful social network enabling organisations to communicate, collaborate and share more easily and effectively than ever before. Convofy combines the functionality of twitter, Facebook and Google Docs. Networks within an organisation can post ideas, links, and files, and their followers can comment on them. Convofy also provides on-the-go communication and collaboration by making it available for mobile phones in the form of application. In a market research conducted by Research and Markets in 2009, organisations viewed applications such as Web, audio, and video conferencing, messaging, and document collaboration as critical components of an effective collaboration strategy ("Meeting the Enterprise Collaboration Challenge: Vital to the Success of the Distributed Organization," 2009). The research then concluded effective collaboration is no longer a "nice-to-have," rather it is a critical requirement for success in the modern economy ("Meeting the Enterprise Collaboration Challenge: Vital to the Success of the Distributed Organization," 2009). Though there have been enterprise collaborative tools launched over the years, Convofy claims to be the powerful. We will just have to wait and see. Reference: Meeting the Enterprise Collaboration Challenge: Vital to the Success of the Distributed Organization. (2009). 1. Retrieved from Business Wire website: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20090724005305/en/Research-Markets-Meeting-Enterprise-Collaboration-Challenge-Vital Tsotsis, A. (2011). Convofy Is A Workplace Collaboration Tool Centered Around Documents And Images. 1. Retrieved from TechCrunch website: http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/06/convofy-is-workplace-collaboration-centered-around-documents-and-images/
Michael Nycyk

How organisations collect, manage and share resources through Internet and other Techno... - 41 views

Yes you do post comments on here but it has been made very difficult because there are two groups but just ignore that and post here.

collaborate; collaboration; collect; manage; information; internet; resources;organisation;

Samantha Clews

Using a Wiki to Enhance Cooperative Learning in a Real Analysis Course - 4 views

  •  
    This is an analytical article in which the writer, Elisha Peterson, discusses the use of Wiki's in her mathmatical undergraduate course. The wiki-based software, wikidot, allowed her students to post questions as well as work collaboratively on assignments. In the article the author outlines the ways in which the wiki was specifically helpful for her class. She believes that it helped to improve participation by her students. This nturn helped students to feel more at ease when they saw what other students assignments were about. She also talks about their collaborative glossary of terms, in which each student had to post two definitions. She found that because of the collaborative nature, the students posted more than the required. It was also interesting to note that students were able to comment and correct other students work, which in turn ensured they werent studying the wrong material. However it seems that what was the most important for her class was the the compatibility wikidot had with their typesetting tool LaTeX. This made typing out mathematical equations an ease instead of students having to scan written material to the site. it seems that another positive of the site is the fact that it shows the logged time of each student, and therefore shows how much time they spent online either merely reading or perhaps editing (and what they edited was shown as well). I feel the most important part of her analysis is the feedback from her students. When examining the feedback it was obvious to see that many students believed that the online collaboration helped them when it came to studying for exams. I believe this would be a great way to get help from other students; you are able to address your question to a whole group of people instead of just one person (the teacher) this way students will get answers much quicker. It seems that the only issue behind the use of a wiki is the fact that students are unable to edit a page at the same time, however it s
  •  
    Online collaboration has already proved its worth in software production and in the business models of various websites and organisations (eg. Wikipedia). This article provides a good example of how online collaboration can be worthy of inclusion into course material. In this example, students in the author's maths class benefited from extending their small community into an online space because students could correct each other's glossary entries and gain guidance by looking at other students' projects online. While it would have been possible for these students to collaborate offline as well, I found it interesting that various properties of the Internet seemingly made online collaboration easier than offline collaboration. For example, students could access the Wikidot page even outside of class time. Built-in features of the wiki such as forums, syntax for 'definition lists', hyperlinks, and LaTeX further assisted communication online. Having completed units involving the use of online collaboration tools (including Wikidot), I've observed that the usefulness of online tools is inevitably limited by how many students actually participate. While Ye and Kishida (2003) postulate that a 'community of practice' motivates participants to learn through participation, I would theorise that the allocation of marks to collaborative tasks is the most effective motivation for students to participate. Indeed, the author finds that tasks to which marks are allocated had excellent participation rates, while the forum, for which use was not compulsory, was used by only a few students. References: Ye, Y. & Kishida, K. (2003). Toward an Understanding of the Motivation of Open Source Software Developers. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering. Accessed April 15, 2011, from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=776867
  •  
    This article discusses the author, Elishia Peterson's experience in creating and maintaining a wiki for her mathematics students to use during their semester. Peterson describes the tasks and activities she assigned the students in order to utilise the online collaboration tool that is Wikidot and was satisfied with the level of student involvement. (2009). Peterson is also forthcoming in any negatives and shortfalls she experienced during the course of the semester period, including the issue of more than one person working on the page at a time (which locks the other out and they are thus required to wait their 'turn') and that having to learn how to use the Wiki properly also took up a little extra time. Despite these minor issues, Peterson explains that the wiki created a more "streamlined student - instructor" relationship and that the communication kept the students engaged. The ability to post course material and answer questions on the wiki, along with the activities assigned to the students, created an environment where the students were able to work together. Peterson does mention that the use of the discussion board may have further enhanced the experience for her students but she found the board largely ignored perhaps as there was no grade requirement to utilise that specific tool. This reminds me of Broomhall's (2009) observation that just because a collaboration tool is available, does not mean it will be used. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Peterson, E.. (2009). Using a Wiki to Enhance Cooperative Learning in a Real Analysis Course. Primus : Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 19(1), 18-28. Retrieved April 17, 2011, from ProQuest Education Journals. (Document ID: 1642644011). Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=1&did=1642644011&SrchMode=1&sid=10&Fmt=4&VI
Kaye England

Building Creativity: Collaborative Learning and Creativity in ... - 3 views

  •  
    This article by Peppler and Solomou (2011) looks at creativity and collaborative learning within an educational 3d virtual game for children aged 9-16, called Quest Atlantis. Their study in particular looks at Quest Atlantis's Architecture Unit where "individuals can actively contribute to their virtual environment and, in turn, shape the experiences of other players in the game through the creation of 3D architecture" (Peppler & Solomou, 2011, p.3). It is a fascinating study at how Questers engagement with each other and the game itself produced creative collaboration. Students had to choose an architectural team to work on, and then commence building in a 'sandbox world'. In the sandbox Questers "exchange ideas with others while in the process of constructing their own buildings" (Peppler & Solomou, 2011, p.5). The article provides a wonderful example of collaboration between Tina and Elle, two middle school students and how they exchanged ideas and spurred each other on in their building quests. Gresalfi, Barab, Siyahhan & Christensen (2009, p.30), explain such collaboration by saying "… they are able to share and contrast different ideas and opinions supporting a full appreciation both of the power of the conceptual tools they engage, and of themselves and their peers as people who use these tools". The use of a 3D online environment offers a unique and exciting way for users to engage and collaborate. Peppler and Solomou (2011, p.22) suggest that "those in leadership positions can capitalize on social media tools like Ning, Second Life, or other types of software that allow them to create their own social media environment specific to their community's needs". This article shows that all kinds of people and organisations can use social media to collaborate and work creatively to produce a desired goal.
  •  
    References: Gresalfi, M., Barab, S. A., Siyahhan, S., & Christensen, T. (2009). Virtual worlds, conceptual understanding, and me: Designing for consequential engagement. On the Horizon, 17(1), 21-34. Retrieved from http://inkido.indiana.edu/research/onlinemanu/papers/gresalfi_horizon_2009.pdf Peppler, K., A. & Solomou, M. (2011). Building Creativity: Collaborative Learning and Creativity in Social Media Environments. On The Horizon, Vol. 19(1), pp.13 - 23. Quest Atlantis (2011) Retrieved from http://atlantis.crlt.indiana.edu/
Matthew Hewett

Reference 1: Online Collaboration and Agile Software Development - 2 views

  •  
    Subject: How online collaboration has affected the software development industry Reference 1: Online Collaboration and Agile Software Development By Doug Poirier, January 11, 2007 ABSTRACT Agile software development requires input from all team members, and such collaboration is most effective when everyone participates. (Poirier, 2007) Full document available from http://drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/196900197 ThinkTank software is available from http://www.groupsystems.com/ Bibliography Poirier, D. (2007). Online Collaboration and Agile Software Development. Dr.Dobbs Retrieved from http://drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/196900197
  •  
    Review of article - Online Collaboration and Agile Software Development This article is in an online magazine http://drdobbs.com and is aimed at software developers. The article is not peer reviewed but is by a software developer writing for other software developers in a well-respected magazine. It does not initially focus on using collaborative software development tools but looks at the issues and problems that affect remote groups attempting to collaborate on developing software without the assistance of collaborative software. It is written in an easy going manner and the author talks about issues that he has personally experienced. It then starts to focus on the issue of collaborative software and on the online collaboration tool called ThinkTank that is available from GroupSystems (http://www.groupsystems.com) and reviews details the use of the software in a trial setup. At this point a number of features of the software are outlined and screen dumps showing some of the features of the software are also included. A review of the article and a latter review of the GroupSystems website did make it clear that the ThinkTank software is more of a collaborative meeting software rather than software that developers use to collaborate when doing actual programing, but it is still a useful piece of software for developers to use when communicating between multiple sites. Poirier, D. (2007). Online Collaboration and Agile Software Development. Dr.Dobbs Retrieved April 8, 2011, from http://drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/196900197
Emily Murphy

Collection of Activity Data for SourceForge Projects - 2 views

  •  
    My topic is the collaboration practices of open source software development. OVERVIEW: This article compiles data taken from online OSS-management tool SourceForge, and provides an excellent overview of the features, advantages, and limitations of this particular tool. SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/) is an online tool that facilitates collaboration on Open Source Software (OSS) projects. Among the most significant tools that SourceForge provides are forums discussing each project, a file-release tool, a basic task management system, the ability to post documentation (eg. instruction manuals) online, and the all-important Concurrent Versions System (CVS). This article goes into satisfying detail of how CVS works and why it is advantageous to software developers, explaining the CVS process as follows: 1. CVS holds the current version of a program's source code, and allows developers to 'check out' (i.e. download) this source code so that they have their own version to play around with. 2. Once done, developers can 'commit' (or upload) their changes. If possible, the CVS automatically merges this code with any other changes that have been made since the code was checked out. 3. The CVS system retains a copy of all previous versions of the code, and thus allows reversion to previous versions, as well as the existence of multiple 'branches' of the same source code. The main advantage of the CVS tool is that it "[allows] multiple developers to be working on the source code at the same time without conflict" (p. 6), although teams are may be limited slightly by SourceForge's basic task management system which "lacks capabilities for resource and personnel management" (p. 4). SourceForge is one online tool that greatly aids in the co-ordination of open-source projects. Any software developer considering the use of a pre-made online tool for collaboration would bene
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    Although my topic is crowdsourcing and not OSS, SourceForge is actually a strong example of crowdsourcing online. The website is simple, clean and easy to use. One of its main advantages is that it has a clear user friendly structure and offers developers useful features such as a clear summary and reviews of a piece of software. Open source software collaboration is an example of crowdsourcing because the crowd is in charge of shaping the nature of the product or system in question. In this case improvements and changes to software codes are influenced by a range of people with different skills and knowledge. These individuals are not necessarily industry experts, but rather a range of people with varying degrees of expertise. Going by the statistics in this article, SourceForge.net is proof that crowdsourcing works and can provide useful and sustainable results if a stable, reliable and controlled system such as CVS is made available to 'the crowd'. According Christley and Madey (2005, p. 1) SourceForge.net "is the word's largest open source software development website with the largest repository of open source code and applications available on the internet". This article is quite technical in nature, so it doesn't really explore reasons behind why people choose to engage with websites such as SourceForge.net. According to Veale (2005) people are motivated to make contributions online even though there is no payment involved. This differs from collaborative sites such as www.made.com and www.designcrowd.com. Veale (2005) argues that payment is no longer a primary motivation; individuals contribute for free because they get something out of this. One of the benefits of contributing to OSS projects is being able to improve something and use it for yourself or just being able to be a part of a community. This article is a useful resource for exploring open source software platforms and crowdsourcing.
  •  
    References: Veale, K. (2005 December 5). Internet gift economies: voluntary payment schemes as tangible reciprocity. First Monday, special issue #3. Available: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1516/1431.
  •  
    Great points! In reading about OSS collaboration, I have found that as well as the benefit of being able to improve something for one's own use, participants are motivated by the learning opportunities and the opportunity to satisfy their own ego.
  •  
    This article elaborates some overviews about data SourceForge which is from online OSS-management tool, with its characters, advantages, and limitations. SourceForge is a very altruistic platform to benefit people for the development of software tools. It is good example of a social networking platform that is geared towards producing collaborative work, which is productive. Its purpose is not entertainment or socializing, but its about bringing together people with specialized skills and providing the framework and tools to allow people to work on a product in a virtual workplace. I don't totally agree by collecting statistics on the software development process,especially one that is non-commercial and can potentially be worked on by any member of the public to be a totally useful study. Software was development which is not a static work flow. There are many standards, development methodologies, languages, platforms, not to mention the human factor that can make interpolation results of the data difficult. However, I strongly believe the success of SourceForge Projects is not the collaborative effort that causes success, but those developers to press ahead and work on their masterpiece. There are some projects that are very successful, but on the whole a majority of the projects are half started and incomplete. There have been many studies in the past to try to quantify the efficiency of Software Engineering and to date. There is no ideal solution to completing a Software Engineering Project. It is still a maturing engineering discipline.
  •  
    This article reviews SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/) which is an Open Source software (OSS) development tool and provides free services to Open Source developers. By explaining how SourceForge collect, manage and apply activity data, this article points out the strengths and weaknesses of SourceForge as an online collaboration tool. An (2011) comments that the purpose of SourceForge is to bring "together people with specialized skills and [to provide] the framework and tools to allow people to work on a product in a virtual workplace". This feature is similar to Optimize Solutions which is mentioned in one of my selected articles: Optimize Solutions launches to help professional services organizations better manage - projects, resources, expenses. Both SourceForge and Optimize Solutions are collaboration tools with powerful functions for data management and user communication. With their network-based interface, distance is no longer an issue for collaboration and interaction among users. SourceForge deals with data and statistic; and Optimize Solutions manage various business resources, such as documents, images, and spreadsheet. While SourceForge is open for users to develop softwares, Optimize Solutions is used within an organization and external clients for business purposes. Although these two applications offer services in different fields, they both aim at enabling global collaboration and improving processing efficiency. I believe that with the development of information technology, especially online collaboration, such applications will be widely used in most organizations and for personal use. Reference: An, R (2011). Comment on Collection of Activity Data for SourceForge Projects. Retrieve from http://groups.diigo.com/group/curtin_net308?view=recent&page_num=1
Emily Murphy

Open Source Everywhere - 1 views

  •  
    My topic is the collaboration practices of open source software development. OVERVIEW: Open source software has popularised the concept of free, open collaboration through the huge success of projects such as Linux, Apache, and Mozilla. This article from Wired Magazine explores how the concept of open source, propelled by the success of OSS projects, is being applied to all aspects of information compilation, from free scientific journals, to liberally-licensed gene-transfer technology, to freely-editable encyclopaedia Wikipedia. Although this article takes a somewhat liberal interpretation of 'open source', it does a good job of explaining the origins and future of the open source ethos. It also pinpoints two factors behind open source's success: the rise of the Internet, and general exasperation with stifling intellectual property laws. By concentrating on open source as "a broad body of collaborators ... whose every contribution builds on those before" (p. 1), this article successfully links the concept of open source with the broader theme of online collaboration. Open source software developments, along with other incarnations of open source such as Wikipedia, are prime examples of the power of online collaboration. Relying on the work of semi-anonymous participants and loose organisational mechanisms, open source projects create something of value without many of the restrictions of intellectual property. As exemplified in this article, all kinds of organisations can learn from the success of open source's collaborative online approach.
  •  
    I wanted to comment Emily on what a fascinating example of collaboration this is and a good resource to share. The open source software movement, particularly Linux, was one of the first online examples of the gift economy at work as identified by many anthropologists. Indeed, what makes some scratch their heads when trying to get others to collaborate on projects is the eagerness of those to contribute without reward to the programming process. Much has been made of the fact that niceties are attended to in the community, such as making sure the other programmers know what you did on the code. Anthropologist Coleman (2004) commenting on Project Muse shows not only the power of collaboration practices, but also how political they can get. For example to clarify this point, Zeitlyn (2003) studied the motivations of programmers who get involved in such collaborations. Much open source work is built on an ideal and goal, it is just that the sheer size of these collaborations make them very interesting in the way they are organised and executed. I do think mass scale collaborations such as Red Hat are different to Wikipedia. To me Wikipedia is somewhat anarchistic. There are rules but there is no actual valued goal; not everyone is out improve Wikipedia, whereas Linux has a greater degree of concern for the end goal, which is often being the alternative to Windows. I enjoyed reading all your postings on this issue and it seems that both Zeitlyn and Hertel et al did a lot of work to try to understand open source software and collaboration practices. References Coleman, G. (2004). The Political Agnosticism of Free and Open Source Software and the Inadvertent Politics of Contrast. Anthropological Quarterly, 77(3), 507-519. Zeitlyn, D. (2003). Gift economies in the development of open source software: Anthropological reflections. Research Policy, 32(7), 1287-1291.
Kristy Long

Communities of Practice: Knowledge Management for the Global Organization - 20 views

I read this article with great interest as I am about to establish a Community of Practice among intranet authors in my workplace. Our intranet authors are spread over many geographical sites and ...

communities of practice CoP intranet collaboration innovation community

Bianca F

The Virtual Newsroom: An International Online Collaboration between Broadcast Journalism - 0 views

  •  
    Although I am not sure if a YouTube video link is alright for this assignment I felt it was a great source for the topic of online collaboration in student education and learning. Coomey envisioned an online global collaboration of journalism and broadcast students from different universities and in the year 2000 set out to accomplish this project in collaboration with other universities around the world. Many obstacles were in the way of success however, mostly technical, and highlight the evolution of online collaboration technologies. Computer access in 2000 was not as readily available as it is today in 2011, bandwidth was slow and internet connections were unreliable. Time differences between the students in their respective countries was also an issue as for this project, chat rooms were used as the main collaboration tool. Coomey ultimately says the collaboration effort was not really a collaboration as the students weren't able to work together due to these technical issues but rather they were only able to discuss their projects after the fact. Now in 2011 as most of the technological issues have been solved and also with the development of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. A new project called the Global City is now in it's maiden form and the website can be found here http://www.theglobalcity.org/. With the continuing evolution of online collaboration tools an the innovation of users we can see that many of the obstacles and boundaries once faced are slowly able to be dissolved, which opens up new opportunities and experiences to students around the globe. References: Coomey, M. (2010). The Virtual Newsroom: An International Online Collaboration between Broadcast Journalism Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPAtVVKwzPw
  •  
    As a journalism major having spent the last two weeks working 9am to 6pm newsroom shifts to produce our newspaper's first edition for 2011, I find myself particularly drawn to this topic. Putting aside its unreliable air-conditioning and sticky keyboards, the short tempers of sleep-deprived students and the threat of vitamin D deficiency...working in the newsroom proved to be one of the most socially creative and genuinely rewarding environments I have experienced. And I can say with certainty- it wouldn't have been the same online. I am an enthusiastic advocate for the news media to embrace the online sphere and enable its consumer to "archive, annotate, appropriate and recirculate media content in powerful new ways" (Jenkins, 2004). The convergence of news online presents an exciting opportunity for audiences to interact with the news in "increasingly participatory" (Dueze, 2007) ways such as Facebook, Twitter and Youtube (Coomey, 2011). There are noticeable positives to an online newsroom: reporters can publish their work immediately and from anywhere, the capacity for international voices, and not having to rent office space or purchase on-site equipment. According to a 2005 survey into the roles of journalists in online newsrooms (Magee, 2005), organisations expect their journalists to multi-task- writing, producing multimedia, and publishing their work- an overload which may dilute the quality of the product. A traditional newsroom has its journalists physically and mentally there, and the atmosphere is intoxicating. It's noisy, you bump into people, and there's always someone microwaving Chinese food. You don't need to wait for someone to come online to reply, or get tripped up by faulty programs and Internet connection. It's a hive of imagination and collaboration. Someone will walk past and offer their suggestions on a better layout, people call out for a headline or editing suggestion, others showing photographers and
Kaye England

JOLT - Journal of Online Learning and Teaching - 1 views

  •  
    This article looks at another popular online collaboration tool in educational settings - the wiki. A wiki is a good choice for online collaboration because it is easy to set up, monitor and for most students easy for them to use. Deters, Cutherell & Stapleton's (2010) article looks at a study of the use of two wikis in particular, PBWiki and Wet Paint. Benefits when collaborating on a wiki are that can author, edit and find information very easily, making wikis especially helpful in the educational setting. Whilst this study overwhelmingly supports the use of wikis, they did identify a number of issues, which can be overcome. It is important that the wiki has instructor or teacher support. The teacher needs to set up guidelines, rules and examples for students to read before the wiki exercise begins. There can also be some technical issues with Wikis - but once again with good technical support these issues can be overcome. The study revealed that most students enjoyed using a wiki and the response was overall very positive. Not only did the students participate as part of their studies, but they could see how it would be possible to use wikis in their own teaching practices. Wikis are a wonderful tool that can be used in many settings and as stated by Deters, Cutherell & Stapleton's (2010, Discussion section, para.2), "in online learning situations, wikis assist students in learning new content and support them in connecting new knowledge with personal experiences".
  •  
    References: Deters, F., Cuthrell, K. & Stapleton, J. (2010). Why Wikis? Student Perceptions of Using Wikis in Online Coursework . Journal of Online Teaching and Learning 6(1). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no1/deters_0310.htm
  •  
    This article is a good case study on the benefits of using a wiki for teaching and learning. Since, wikis allow playful creation, flat hierarchies, simple rules, flexible scheduling and diverse participates (Ebersbach, 2008, p. 24-25) it is a great collaborative tool to use in teaching and Learning for students of any age. It would also be more appropriate for teaching staff to start implementing the usage of wikis or collaboration tools for teaching and learning as younger generations are digital natives and use web technologies regularly for communication and collaboration with peers. This article is also a good source to support the argument of using wikis for teaching and learning as it highlights and illustrates the support that students have towards teaching and learning outcomes, with the data illustrating that the majority of students found wikis to be useful for "teaching and learning and for collaborative problem solving" (Deters, Cuthrell & Stapleton, 2010, p. 5). Therefore, highlighting how a wiki allows for asynchronous use for students as many university students may study in a range of modes that include part time or distance modes, thus ensuring that all students regardless of time, space and location can collaborate and communicate both with other students and their facilitators for problem solving. References: Deters, F., Cuthrell, K. & Stapleton, J. (2010). Why Wikis? Student Perceptions of Using Wikis in Online Coursework . Journal of Online Teaching and Learning 6(1). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no1/deters_0310.htm Ebersbach, A. (2008). Wiki Web collaboration Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/content/q08xw7/#section=226612&page=1
1 - 20 of 96 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page