Group items tagged

Project: Carousel! » How to organise a successful student protest using online tools The author of this article is Pontus Westerberg is a member of the Project Carousel! Team, "a student-led online community working under the auspices of the Centre for Media and Film Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London". This brief article advises student protesters which online tools may be useful for organising protests and keeping protesters informed. The recommended tools include Twitter, blogs, video, plus online mapping tools. The article also recommends creating a central node, such as a website to tie all these disparate elements together, and as an example links to the UCL occupation page (http://www.ucloccupation.com/), which shows an example of this being done. Westerberg gives an overview on the use of Twitter hashtags to organise protest conversations, making them easier to keep track of, citing examples of these such as the #demo2010 that was used to organise conversations around the student protest that took place on the 24th October 2010. The 140 character limitation imposed by Twitter, also makes Blogs an attractive online tool for protest, offering a forum where ideas and issues can be disseminated and discussed in a lengthier format. Westerberg also provides examples showing the effectiveness of images and video in getting a message across, and indicates that there are benefits in utilising humour and encouraging user generated content. Overall the article provides basic information, but links to quite a few interesting examples of sites and tools that are being used by the student protest movement in the United Kingdom. References: Westerberg, P. (2010). How to organise a successful student protest using online tools. Retrieved from: http://www.projectcarousel.org/2010/11/how-to-organise-a-successful-s

This article from the Project Carousel website is a step by step guide describing how to organize "a successful protest using online tools" (Westerberg, P. 2010). It was created specifically for student activists however it would be adaptable to many forms of online collaboration since it shows efficient strategies for creating independent networks using free web services and social networking tools. This is similar to a guide describing how to create localized 'cell' based networks from 'Tools to help the Revolutions Part II - Online resistance cell organization', an article that I have posted to Diigo. Both of these guides explain practical methods for creating and working across decentralized networks, focusing on free online resources and web services. They also identify the primary need for a central point of contact (or node) which is connected to multiple communication and content sharing websites (as satellite services). These methods of collaboration describe "local cells that keep in touch through their decentralized networks" (anon, 2011), yet they are also effective ways to organize, manage and create widely accessible and secure channels for global communications. Both articles show techniques that allow a group to form strong and flexible networks with like minded people from across world. Refeences anon. (2011) 'Tools to help the Revolutions Part II - Online resistance cell organization'. Anonymous Hamburg. 23rd of February 2011. Available from: http://hamburger-anon.blogspot.com/2011/02/tools-to-help-revolutions-part-ii.html Westerberg, P. (2010). How to organise a successful student protest using online tools. Available from: http://www.projectcarousel.org/2010/11/how-to-organise-a-successful-student-protest-using-online-tools/

Project Carousel is a 'student-led online community based at the Centre for Media and Film Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London' (Project Carousel, n.d.). The article was written Pontus Westerberg in 2010, during the student protests regarding student fees. It was written as a how-to guide to help would-be protesters make the most of social media to add their voices to the campaign in an open, transparent way. Westerberg is less informational and more instructional in his advice to establish a profile using popular social media tools like Twitter, with hashtags, creating a blog and making videos, making a particular point to be humorous at the expense of authority. 'Do something funny', suggesting that positive attention may be garnered through fun and humour. Unlike the Anonymous movement, Project Carousel appears to endorse, if not outright encourage, transparent participation with user-generated content and boldly putting faces and names toward the campaign. The points made in the article may seem obvious, but new inductees to the social media mechanism, eager to participate, would find these easy-to-follow steps a clear guide to joining the protests and being heard. Though not a crowd-funding or crowd-sourcing tool, it does provide a useful guide to generating interest from 'the crowd', be it a personal project or a community-conscious endeavour.. Westerberg, P. (2010). How to organise a successful student protest using online tools. Project: Carousel!. Retrieved from http://www.projectcarousel.org/2010/11/how-to-organise-a-successful-student-protest-using-online-tools/.

[Part 1] This article brings together a number of links to UK student protest sites. Reading this and related articles it becomes clear that the students protesting about the UK government's fee cut policy are willing to use any tools at their disposal. Their primary aim has been to collaborate with, and inform supporters of offline physical protests; predominantly marches and occupations. The article itself is posted on the movements.org website, a non profit organisation whose stated mission is to identify, connect and support grassroots digital activists from around the world. The support offered by movement.org goes beyond the mere publication of articles and offers advice to individuals and groups on how to choose and best use digital tools. It is interesting to see the number of freely available digital tools that student protesters have used to disseminate information: Facebook, Twitter, websites, blogs, Google maps, YoutTube, open calendars and Flickr are all part of the student protesters' arsenal. Fast adoption of new technologies seems to be one of the strengths of the UK students' movement. Recently, for instance, student protesters in London used the new "Sukey" application, a conglomeration of tools like google maps, twitter and SMS, to avoid clashes with police (Kingley 2011). Google Maps too have been a useful tool and have been utilised to show the locations of upcoming protests, the map posted at http://www.feesprotest.com/ gives a good indication of the nationwide spread of student dissatisfaction, while at the same time hyperlinking to fairly detailed information for each locality and directing viewers to facebook protest pages for up to date information and interaction.

[Part 2] References: 30th November Here We Come. (2010). Retrieved from: http://www.feesprotest.com/ Cullum, B. (2010). NETWORKED PROTESTS IN THE UK: hOW OLD AND NEW TACTICS ARE BEING USED TO FIGHT RISING TUITION FEES. Retrieved from: http://www.movements.org/blog/entry/networked-protests-in-the-uk-how-old-and-new-tactics-are-being-used-to/ Kingsley, P. (2011). Inside the anti-kettling HQ. Retrieved from:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/02/inside-anti-kettling-hq?INTCMP=SRCH

This article takes a case study approach using qualitative and quantitative survey questions to measure the difference between pre and post uses of Google Docs. The research problem was based on the observation that Web 2.0 collaborative technologies were initially causing hesitation. However, upon consistent use in the context of an online course, students changed their minds about the usefulness of Google Docs. Both researchers intended to measure undergraduate levels of self-efficacy and undergraduates perceptions of using these collaborative technologies. The study had 18 respondents to the survey. Although the researchers acknowledged Google Docs limitations in the robustness of the software, they argued that this would make no difference to the perceptions of the undergraduates using it. The results of the study are somewhat unremarkable and predicable, yet support the idea that Google Docs is very useful for collaborative student work. There were major differences pre and post use of Google Docs that were significant. A majority of students felt their level of self-efficacy, that is confidence to use the software, was much higher after undertaking the course. The second hypothesis also showed the majority had positive perceptions of using Google Docs both in the course but significantly in future studies and workplaces. Although the researchers reported mostly positive results about the use of Google Docs, one issue clouded the results. Not being able to access the documents when offline is perceived as a major impediment in the collaborative process. Overall this study may seem somewhat bland and predictable; however, it supports much positive and negative criticism of Google Docs in the ability to foster and impede the learning of the students using it.

I have used Google Docs on many occasions for education purpose both as a teacher and a student. As a teacher I had found that Google Docs provided a tool that created group work with ease. Student where able to contribute to ideas and develop learning outcome far more than the unit outline proved for. The article here proves that through the efforts of many working on the same document improves as more contribute ideas and ads greater value to the document. Your comment about the uselessness of Google without online access does provide problems when it comes to the digital divide. We in the western world still have areas that suffer from digital divisions as well as those in less fortunate countries. However tools like Google docs can contribute to the cost of entry to CMC as there are no licensing fees required and programs such as the one laptop per child that aids in the narrowing of the digital divide(OLPC, n.d). As a student I have done one project with Google docs and currently using Google docs in another project. The reason for the choice to use Google Docs was mainly the reason cited in this article. Although the article was limited in what Google docs can actually do and takes on the assumption that we know what it can do. It is more about how it can be used in education. I recently used Google docs to collaborate with my family in arranging my mother's funeral. The outcome was very smooth as each member collaborated amicably on the document that may have been a family feud if handled face to face. References OLPC. (n.d). OLPC's mission is to empower the world's poorest children through education. Retrieved 15th April 2011, from http://one.laptop.org/about/mission Edwards, J.T., & Baker, C. (2010). A case study: Google collaboration applications as online course teaching tools. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), Retrieved April 3, 2011, from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no4/edwards_1210.htm

Your comment about the uselessness of Google without online access does provide problems when it comes to the digital divide. We in the western world still have areas that suffer from digital divisions as well as those in less fortunate countries. However tools like Google docs can contribute to the cost of entry to CMC as there are no licensing fees required and programs such as the one laptop per child that aids in the narrowing of the digital divide(OLPC, n.d). - that is 100 % right and that causes some disadvantages yet being free if connectivity can be gotten in any form then it has the potential to educate in any society that has networking. More work needs to be done to get to those areas, but I also argue that income might also be a factor and age. Nevertheless, GD if networking is there can provide the benefits of sharing and working on projects, it is just a case of making sure those that need it can get access to it in some form.

(2001) This is a critical view about the internet and education. Peter Macinnis Speaks with Robyn Williams (ABC Science National Radio) about the evolution of Technology and how technology takes 20 plus years to become an accepted technology. Macinnis shows the analogy of the printing press, steam trains, telephone,radio and TV development and then compares the internet.  He claims you need to take the rear view mirror approach to see what the trends are.   One interesting point that Macinnis makes is that the examination process of education is still ran by the old school where the generation today have a whole new literacy in Internet communications. He also criticise how the Internet is organised and there is some work needed to add metadata to the already exciting data on the web.  I find this a good argument as search engines rank results based on several factors other than truth and reliability.     Williams, R. (Writer). (2001). The Internet and Education [Radio ], ABC Science. Australia: ABC Radio National.

REFERENCES ABS. (2007). 8146.0.55.001 - Patterns of Internet access in Australia, 2006, Australian Bureau of Statistics. First Issued November 29, 2007. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8146.0.55.001Main+Features12006?OpenDocument Downes, S. (2007). The Future of Online Learning and Personal learning Environments. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from: http://www.slideshare.net/Downes/the-future-of-online-learning-and-personal-learning-environments NSWDET (2009). Social Learning 2.0 Concepts and Visuals. Uploaded by the NSW Department of Education and Training March 2009. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/etalbert/sociallearning20-concepts-and-visuals-mar09# Williams, R., and Peter Macinnis (2001). The Internet and Education. Ockham's Razor, Radio National. Broadcast Sunday May 6, 2001. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s289416.htm

It is good to go back and examine Peter Macinnis's point of view. Reminds me of the exercise of examining Clifford Stoll's (1995) view on what the internet was to become, which of course was mostly wrong. Macinnis seemed to have predicted the unorganised nature of the information on the internet (ABC Radio, 2001) which to an extent does exist now. This is one reason I believe is important to address in terms of internet collaboration especially in education. Collaborating is about organising information into a presentation form for all students collaborating within a system. But that must be with a gatekeeper, namely the teacher or lecturer or tutor who can intervene when needed. Michael Green (ABC Radio, 1999) in an earlier view on that show quoted Fred Bennett who urged computers to teach students without an intermediary, namely a tutor or teacher. Whilst tertiary education is underpinned by self-reliance, I wonder if such views back then apply now. In collaboration, does the lecturer decide to be strictly a hands off non-interventionist given that their students are mature and can think for themselves? Or does the lecturer, given the high demands of departmental, research and publishing commitments, become part of the student group collaboration? In my resources, Google Docs seems to raise more issues about information use which suggest students place a high value on organised information which makes sense to them. I feel that Macinnis should revise today if inaccurate information is the real problem. We had virtual communities were information could be corrected, but with Web 2.0, Wikipedia being the most obvious example, we can correct what is wrong. I do agree with Tessa that social media overall seems to be quite behind in the way it is being diffused across educational sectors. Collaboration tools such as Facebook etc will be used by students anyway so it seems odd that the resistance still exists. This interview is a good resource to reflect on how f

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.

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

This paper discusses the issues around eLearning and communication Technology. It cover how freeware skype  is an ideal tool for communication in education an suggest methods of how to use Skype for the learning outcomes. 7 Instructor Recommendations for Skype UseSchedule the students' Skype subscription in the class orientation. The sooner studentsare exposed to the technology, the better they'll adjust to the unique learning experience.Organize a pre-class training session for a subset of the entire class. Instructors canschedule a meeting with a group of class "trainers." These trainers then teach theirown group members skills.Divide students into groups of four. A Skype conference call can only take up to fiveparticipants. If needed, reserve a seat for the instructor for tracking/coaching purposes.Provide technology use protocols ahead of time. For instance, if someone accidentallyhangs up, the conference call initiator (usually the group leader) can immediatelyadd him back in to the meeting.Keep group deliberations on the record using additional tools. Skype conferencecalls are not recorded. Options are Skype Chat and Blackboard Chat.Reserve a Blackboard Chat Room for each group as the last resort. One of the drawbacksof using such freeware is that the service makes no guarantee that theprogram will be there when needed. An effective way to cope with this is to reservethe Blackboard Chat Room as a backup device.Encourage necessary accessories. A headset and a wired broadband connection arepreferred accessories for use with Skype and other similar communication tools. Pan, C.-C., & Sullian, M. (2005). Promoting Synchronous Interaction in an eLearning EnvironmentThe Journal  Retrieved 11th April 2011, from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2005/09/01/Promoting-Synchronous-Interaction-in-an--eLearning-Environment.aspx?Page=1

This is a comprehensive blog entry introduction to the potential of Google Docs as a collaborative tool for students. These potential uses are also valuable in work places or other group work. The value of this resource is the well-written way Wetzel articulates the advantages of Google Docs for collaborative practice. His argument is that such a system, aside from being free, is valuable to go beyond the e-mail sharing culture to a full real-time collaborative environment. Wetzel then proceeds to give examples of the potential for the application of Google Docs in education contexts and classrooms. To summarise, he argues three main points in using Google Docs for collaboration:  The ability for Google Docs to provide instant feedback to students on their work  To conserve expenses on school projects such as printing costs  Encouraging the working together of students on a projects in a systematic and orderly manner The tone of the article is clearly very much in favour of using Google Docs for collaborative practice in educational settings. However, though this may not be an issue in educational contexts, there are disadvantages using Google Docs that are not reported. Two bloggers highlight those weaknesses which may be of concern when trying to use more features in Google Docs that are not there but are part of the Microsoft Office Suite:  The speed of internet connection is vital; if it is slow the collaborator may not be able to keep up with others' postings (Bukisa, 2011)  Most of the time you cannot work offline with Google Docs, you must be online to create and update documents (Creative Marketing Solutions, n.d.) However, the article does put a compelling list of features that make Google Docs a good system to use for educational collaboration.

References Bukisa. (2011). Google Docs review. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://www.bukisa.com/articles/480255_google-docs-review Creative Marketing Solutions. (n.d.). How to use Google Docs. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://knolt.com/creative-marketing-solutions/2010/10/20/heading-2/ Wetzel, D. R. (2009). Google Docs are a free online educational tool: Web-based productivity software for teacher or student collaboration. Suite101.com. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from http://www.suite101.com/content/google-docs-are-a-free-online-educational-tool-a105900

This study by Blau and Caspi is valuable for seeing how using Google Docs in a sharing and collaborating environment has on perceived student learning. The credibility of this study is enhanced by a wide survey of 118 students at an Open University in Israel. Ownership meant the degree to which the student using Google Docs felt responsible to work on and update project documents. This quantitative study also sought to measure the perceived learning and quality of project outcomes students felt were a result of using Google Docs. The implications from the study suggested the importance of owning the document, but also to make sure others knew of changes to the document. A document creator felt they lost ownership of the document when editing was done on it. They became the reader of the document. Such a change in hierarchy shows the importance of communicating changes done on Google Docs to every team member. A second implication was that the value of the document seemed to increase when more revisions was done. This suggested that more work on the document resulted in a more credible and trustworthy document as the project document was improved towards its final presentation. In fact most survey respondents seemed to not think the document got worse as more things were added to it. Overall, there was a correlation between document quality and revision, with Google Docs being perceived as quite effective in producing trustworthy documents which add to the learning process. The researchers' main advice from the study is that revising documents and suggesting improvements is far more effective than editing another's documents. Whilst this is not always possible it does suggest the importance of communication in the collaboration process. Google Docs is not a passive collaboration media; therefore, care in making sure all team members communicate changes is vital to a much better collaboration process.

References Blau, I., & Caspi, A. (2009). What type of collaboration helps? Psychological ownership, perceived learning and outcome quality of collaboration using Google Docs. Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research 2009: Learning in the technological era. Y. Eshet-Alkalai, A. Caspi, S. Eden, N. Geri, Y. Yair (Eds.), Raanana: The Open University of Israel. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:bBVQbNfm4-MJ:scholar.google.com/+google+docs&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

This article highlights the potential that blogs have in allowing student nurses to collaborate and enhance their studies. The article describes how healthcare professionals can use online collaboration to "communicate, manage knowledge, mitigate error, and support decision" (Maag, 2005). The author believes that strong written skills are essential in nursing to "disseminate information on evidence-based practice and ultimately provide safer client care" (Maag, 2005). These skills can be enhanced by the online collaboration found with blogs as they provide "an opportunity for the nursing student to converse and state opinions about their knowledge acquisition" (Maag, 2005). Further to this, online collaboration in the form of blogs can provide the setting for "public debate regarding simulations and scenarios that might occur in the clinical setting" (Maag, 2005). This article is a valuable and highly credible resource. The author, Margaret Maag EdD, RN is a Doctor of Education as well as a Registered Nurse. Also the article was accepted by and published by an Industry Journal, Medscape. Although this article may be too detailed at times and provides a lot information on the types and working of blogs, this is probably due to the article's age (published in 2005) when background information was probably required on blogs. The main value of this article is it ability show how blogs, even back in 2005, were "providing the means to make a collaborative effort in enhancing knowledge acquisition". This would not only benefit nursing education but also the healthcare industry at large. References: Maag, M. (2005). The Potential Use of Blogs in Nursing Education. Retrieved April 16, 2011, from http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/498947

This is an unpublished paper that has been linked to Maxter[1] an online community with links to the Media, Art & Text PhD program known as MATX. The MATX program is linked to the Virgina Commonwealth University (VCU) [2]. It would not be generally considered a reliable resource as a key article in an academic piece it is a well written piece including clear historical information into FlashMobs. Garland (2010) is able to use a recent event of students rioting to distinguish rioting organised via technology contrasted against the original FlashMob at Macy's in 2003. Garland (2010) has a focus on the original Macy's event as organised by Wasnik throughout the article. The question of why people are participating in FlashMob events is also considered. This paper also considers how cooperation and participation by individuals is implied when they participate in a FlashMob. The participation of a FlashMob allows individuals to remain anonymous through the free exchange of information, even the creator of the original FlashMob, Wasnik was able to remain anonymous. It was after FlashMob phenonomen became commericalized Wasnik felt comfortable revealing his identity and role in the original Macy's FlashMob. Throughout the article Garland (2010) draws connections between FlashMob and SmartMob, supporting and citing Rhinegold, agreeing that FlashMobs were part of SmartMobs. There is also an interesting connection drawn between FlashMobs and Flux Art [3]. Despite the article being unpublished key areas of FlashMob are clearly explored. Garland (2010) takes a wide approach to FlashMob and widely explores various aspects. There is a strong reliance on the experience of Wasnik in proving the differences between FlashMob, SmartMob and rioting organised through social media which is the main weakness of this article, which otherwise addressed the topic soundly. Footnotes [1] http://matxer.org [2] http://www.vcu.edu/ [3] http://www.fluxus.org/12345678910.html

"Sukey apps help protesters avoid police kettles" Sukey is a recently developed online tool for protesters. It is made up of a suite of applications that allow protesters to either submit or access information about police presence on roads or junctions during protests. Sukey can be accessed and updated online from any connected computer and also via mobile phones, meaning that protesters potentially have access to relevant information no matter where they are. There are two flavours of Sukey for mobiles, smart phones with GPS and Internet browsers can use the "Roar" version of Sukey which includes helpful graphics like a compass and an interactive google map (Doctrow 2011). The "Growl" version of the application is suitable for older mobile phones and is basically an SMS update service. Information is gathered by people on site at protests, from specially tagged Twitter comments, from news broadcast footage and geotagged photos from Flickr. Location information can also be submitted via Google Latitude or by SMS. This crowd-sourced information is intended to allow protesters to make informed decisions and hopefully avoid kettling. Kettling is a practice used by police whereby protesters are surrounded and confined, sometimes for hours on end without access to food, shelter or toilet facilities. At present the platform is only available in London, but the developers have plans to release national and international versions. References: Doctrow, C. (2011). Sukey: an anti-kettling app for student demonstrators in London. Retrieved from: http://boingboing.net/2011/01/28/sukey-an-anti-kettli.html Geere, D. (2011). Sukey apps help protesters avoid police kettles. Retrieved from: http

Thank you for sharing Alio. This is the first I have heard of Sukey and after reading Geere's blog post, I can really appreciate its usefulness throughout political demonstrations, in particularly the recent protests in Egypt. After some further research it appears Sukey emerged on January 27, 2011, two days after the initial January 25th 2011, Egypt demonstrations; however, there appears to be no connection between the two. The purpose of Sukey is to improve communications during protests and to counter the act of kettling, a crowd management tactic used by police that involves cornering protestors in a confined space with only one possible - normally guarded - exit (Kingsley, 2011). Sukey facilitates this through the amalgamation of information sources such as; Google Latitude, Geo tagged Flickr photos, Twitter and television news, feeding the content to web enabled phones or for a small fee traditional SMS. Throughout the Egypt uprising, there were many instances of kettling captured on video and submitted to YouTube - as per the below links. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXbRdumboZ0&feature=related. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xWiBCIxjIk&feature=related If available at the time Sukey may have been an advantageous asset to Egyptian activists. It can be argued that the police clashes - which resulted in numerous injuries and 125 deaths - could have been minimized if protestors had access to real-time information indicating police strategies. It is worth mentioning that Sukey would have been effective up to the point the Internet and mobile networks were shut down by Egyptian authorities. Provided there is robust communication infrastructure is in place, Sukey proves to be a powerful participatory tool that has the potential to reduce injuries and fatalities throughout demonstrations. Geere, D. (January 31, 2011). Sukey apps help protesters avoid police kettles: Wired [Blog Post]. Retrieved April 11, 2011, from, http://www.wired.co.uk/

[Part 1] Lemos' paper depicts map-making as a socio-political act, an expression of power. Maps themselves are a visual way of presenting geographic information, and have been traditionally controlled by technicians, governments and private companies, but since the advent of interactive online tools, some of the power inherent in map-making has shifted to ordinary people. Interactive tools such as Google Maps, allow the everyday person to experience a new practice of place, as Lemos writes "mapping our moves on the streets allows us to control the space; it is territorialization. […] The use of GPS and other devices for location and location-based services puts the emphasis on control and domination over a territory" (Lemos 2008, p.15). From the perspective of student protesters in London at the end of 2010, the use of an interactive Google map (see and example at: http://www.movements.org/blog/entry/maptivism-in-london), allowed protest organisers to control the flow of digital information between cyberspace and the urban environment. Protesters themselves, those armed with locative media such as smart phones, had access to near real time data superimposed upon street maps relevant to their own position. This allowed protesters to collaborate by providing feedback to organisers or by reacting geographically to reported police location and action.

[Part 2] The act of real time digital mapping and urban annotation by protest movements potentially creates a new dynamic where the distribution of power relative to a location is altered. The ways in which citizens perceive the city and interact with its structure is changed when citizens have access to information about proximity and distance, when they are kept informed of lines of escape from controlled spaces. The act of protesting creates a temporary urban space, changing a location's social meaning. With the use of digital mapping tools a mobile social network is created, one that has the potential to communicate more effectively than the police forces arrayed against them. References: Cullum, B. (2010). Maptivism in London. Retrieved from: http://www.movements.org/blog/entry/maptivism-in-london Lemos, A.(2008). Mobile communication and new sense of places: a critique of spatialization in cyberculture.  Retrieved from:  http://www.andrelemos.info/artigos/spatialization.pdf Live Protest Map (2010). Retrieved from: UCL Live Protest Map

Lemos' journal examines the notion that recent mobile innovations have facilitated new and socially focussed communication systems. Locative media is the primary focus of the article and Lemos argues that technology and its relationship with mobility, community and place are creating new forms of 'territorization' - a socio-political act that involves control, surveillance and tracking. The distinction is made that locative media creates new uses for non-virtual space and bridges the gap between the physical and the virtual. This is achieved through augmented reality, mobile information consumption, events and geo-mapping; all which reinforce collaboration and participation among real world communities. Examples of locative media and territorization include CitizenMap, a community focussed web service which utilises Google Maps, Twitter and news sources to identify and detail environmental incidents throughout Hong Kong and the South China region. Sukey, an anti-police kettling application is another example of locative media, this service aims to improve communications throughout demonstrations by feeding police tactics and information from an assortment of data sources such as Twitter, Google Maps, Flickr and directly aggregating it to mobile / SMS enabled devices (Sukey, 2011). What Lemos fails to expand on in the journal is the technical and participatory expectations required for the services to be successful. Without regular and active participation these services add little or no value to the community or the cause.

CitizenMap - a South China Morning Post initiative is a web-based reporting tool which geo-maps news, community generated media and other local citizen reports throughout Hong Kong and the South China region. Its primary focus is environmental incidents including; the illegal dumping of waste, unauthorised construction and the removal of native plantation. Moving forward, CitizenMap will eventually branch out to include other topics in the future. CitizenMap utilises an array of online services such as; Google Maps, Twitter, Flickr and other Web 2.0 features like tagging, verifications and geo-mapping to encourage local participation and information sharing among the community. Although CitizenMap is not directly linked to the coordination of political demonstrations, it can still be a useful tool for environmental activists. The documented evidence contained within this web service can act as ammunition for protestors and further fuel their campaigns - especially once the report is official verified by the South China Morning Post. Example includes green groups challenging the HK Environment Bureau over a flawed policy which will allow a 5 hectare clearing to be used as landfill. Another incident involves journalism students providing photographic evidence that details the illegal dumping of waste in a Mong Tseng Wai pond (Reports, 2011). Encouraging the community to engage in citizen journalism surrounding environmental issues is an effective way to promote accountability, responsibility and the notion to 'think green' among the community. CitizenMap. (2011). Retrieved from: http://citizenmap.scmp.com/main Reports. (2011). CitizenMap. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from: http://citizenmap.scmp.com/reports/view/238

[Part 1] The CitizenMap, created by Hong Kong's South China Morning Post (SCMP), is a good example of a combination of crowd sourcing and crisis mapping. According to Blogger Jennifer Jett, the project's aim is to make up for the shortfall in staffing at Honk Kong's planning and lands departments. Jett wrote on her blog that "Almost 60 percent of government investigations into improper land use stem from citizen complaints, and the percentage rises to 90 percent for dumping". The SCMP mapping project's use of crowd sourcing to report illegal and polluting acts, therefore meets an identified need within the Hong Kong community. The South China Citizen's map uses an open source crowd-sourcing tool called Ushahidi to map environmental issues in Hong Kong. The Citizen Map site's tag line "For Hong Kong by Hong Kong" suggests ownership of both the project and the land itself by the people, it invites citizens to report instances of environmental destruction and disputed land use. As such it is a form of citizen surveillance. The map is interactive; sites of improper land use are pinpointed on a map by the placement of circles, the larger the circle, the larger the number of reports there are for a particular incident. Clicking a within a circle opens a dialogue box with brief details, clicking within that box opens an incident report page containing more comprehensive details including photographs and the option to append further details to the report. The act of digitally mapping and tagging environmental events provides the citizenry with a widely accessible forum for complaint, and the prospect of exerting some form of power over their environment.

[Part 2] References: Citizen Map (2010). Retrieved from: http://citizenmap.scmp.com/main Jett, J. (2010) SCMP uses citizen reporting to map environmental destruction. Retrieved from: http://jennjettkw.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/scmp-uses-citizen-reporting-to-map-environmental-destruction/ Ushahidi (2010). Retrieved from: http://www.ushahidi.com/

Brainstorming is a method students can use to generate ideas for writing a paper. In the process of brainstorming you should suspend any concerns about staying organized. The goal is to pour your thoughts onto paper without worrying about whether they make sense or how they fit together.