Group items tagged

This resource, an article from the Wall Street Journal, is a more current take on the SETI @home project. It can be more easily understood by the average reader and gives a summary of both the history of the SETI @home project, and information on where it stands today. It also discusses further details of "distributed computing". According to this resource, late in the 1990s University of California, Berkeley scientist David P. Anderson thought that the millions of "often-idle computers"(Gomes, 2006) could be better utilised in distributed computing. The idea behind distributed computing is to take a scientific problem, and then share out the computations required to millions of computers. To test this theory, Dr. Anderson chose the SETI project, and set up SETI@home. Although the search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence was basically an "attention-getting gimic" (Gomes, 2006), it worked better then expected with almost a million users signing up and downloading the required client. Although there are now many other distributed computing projects available, almost akin to choosing which charity to donate to, many users are still loyal to the original SETI @home project. With their accumulated point system, earned by the number of computing hours donated to the project, users are unwilling to move to another project and lose the points they have earned. The current popularity of this project is shown by the 10,000+ members of the SETI @home facebook page (Facebook, 2011), which also demonstrates how many forms of online collaboration often cross paths. This resource describes the SETI @home project in easy to understand language making it a good introduction to the theory of distributed computing (or public-resource sharing) however some of the information seems to contradict that written on the SETI @home about page.

Facebook. (2011). SETI@home Community. Retrieved from http://www.facebook.com/search.php?q=seti&init=quick&tas=search_preload&search_first_focus#!/pages/SETIhome/16063264533 Gomes, L. (2006). How Many Computers Does It Take to Make Contact with E.T.s? Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB115145653496392561-3YTEjOQhd0ZilADHfEf8hoK4BhA_20070628.html?mod=blogs

SETI@home has also inspired other collaborative shared computing projects. Most notably the Folding@home project conducted by Stanford University (Sony folding@Home 2008). The aim is to analyze proteins in hope of solving various diseases including Cancer. An interesting aspect of the project is its imbedding as a networked technology in the millions of PlayStations 3's around the world. As a user-setting, PlayStations left idle can shift processing resources to working through the protein work packets sent out by Stanford. Like the SETI Project, various teams compete for most work units analyzed. As an addition, Stanford are in the process of publishing peer reviewed results that stem from the completed work (Stanford 2009). Both this and the SETI Project hold technology as the central core of collaboration, but there is a human social factor playing an important role. Highlighted by the the team-play that gathers around the competition to see who is putting the most resources into completing work units. Sony folding@home (2008). The Folding@home™ Distributed Computing Project at Stanford University. Retrieved from http://www.scei.co.jp/folding/en/ Stanford (2009) Recent Research Papers from Folding@home. Retrieved from http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Papers

This wiki is about Social Constructivism. The idea that learners are influenced by their environment is the bases of this theory.  The empathy on the importance of culture and understanding what occurs in society and constructing knowledge based on it understanding.(Derry, 1999; McMahon, 1997) There is three elements to the assumption of social constructivism.  Reality: Social constructivists believe that reality is constructed through human activity Knowledge: To social constructivists,. Individuals create meaning through their interactions with each other and with the environment they live in. Learning: Social constructivists view learning as a social process.. Meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities Topics covered include 1 Social Constructivism Vignette2 What is Social Constructivism?3 Assumptions of Social Constructivism4 Intersubjectivity of Social Meanings5 Social Context for Learning6 General Perspectives of Social Constructivism on Learning7 Social Constructivism and Instructional Models8 Sorting Out Variations on the Terms "Constructionism" and Constructivism" Derry, S. J. (1999). A Fish called peer learning: Searching for common themes. In A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.),  Kim, B. (2001). Social Constructivism.. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 15th April 2011, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Computer-mediated Communication in Education: A review of recent research. This research paper available online addresses the recent research into Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) in education (Keller, 2007). The author looks at each research methods and compares it to a counter research method like Quantitative verses Qualitative and Empirical verses Non-empirical research. This gives you a clear picture in many areas that are lacking in research and would help anyone who is looking to further research this area. It is important to note at this study of articles during the period 2000 to 2004 indicates some recent changes of interest but also shows interests that have remained steady in the research community(Keller, 2007). Also, it should be remembered that these results are based on 117 selected articles in Computers & Education, Educational Media International, Journal of Educational Computing Research and Journal of Educational Media between 2000 and 2004 out of many journals on educational technology. The article concludes a number of outcomes. That more work is needed that builds theories concluding that the research field has relied heavily on empirical studies (Keller, 2007). More research is needed in new and emerging communication media stating that current research is very much focused on text-based communication, not using graphics, audio and video(Keller, 2007). Research is needed on synchronous media because that most of the research has been on asynchronous studies. And finally Keller concludes that research is needed on the combination of different media in blended education. Keller, S. H. C. (2007). Computer-mediated Communication in Education: A review of recent research - Educational Media International. Educational Media International, 44(1), 61-77.

This article was published in the Fibreculture Journal[1], a peer reviewed Australian Journal. Nicholson (2005) in this article is primarily focused on mobile communications role in FlashMobs. According to Nicholson (2005) the popularity of FlashMobs and its cultural significance was based upon three practices. It was the conjuncture of individuals communicating via mobile phone, sending text via mobiles and the public performance aspects that were significant. The article discusses various historical events associated with FlashMobs and there are links being formed between FlashMobs and the anti-globalization movement. The more organised FlashMob events were highlighted when journalists capturing a FlashMob outnumbered participants. Nicholson (2005) focused on the concept of "one to many" which has similarities and overlaps with the anti-globalisation movement. The examples used by Nicholson (2005) support this theory that FlashMobs and anti-globalisation, especially in their communication styles are similar. Nicholson (2005) cites Tom (2003) who states that FlashMobbing is, "the power of many, in the pursuit of nothing". Politically motivated FlashMob events ultimately have a pursuit of an outcome and thus questions if the examples given are FlashMob events. Nicholson's (2005) examples certainly allow for exploration of the mobile communication but it isn't entirely focused on the FlashMob phenonomen. The variety of examples on the other hand does allow for the argument that a FlashMob is bounded within the spectacle of the event, activism, being experimental with a prank all rolled into one. This article demonstrates that mobile telephone technology has had a direct influence on the FlashMob culture. The article also implies that the culture of FlashMob events is a past activity which has past it's used by date. Nicholson (2005) doesn't explain how or why this is a past activity and leaves this aspect of FlashMob culture unanswered in her article. Footnote