1 / 17

Human and Technology Factors in the Design and Sustainability of DCoPs

Human and Technology Factors in the Design and Sustainability of DCoPs. Ben Daniel Laboratory for Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems [ARIES Lab] University of Saskatchewan. Outline of Talk. Introduction (DCoP) DCoP: Motivation Types of Technologies Supporting DCoP

nasnan
Download Presentation

Human and Technology Factors in the Design and Sustainability of DCoPs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Human and Technology Factors in the Design and Sustainability of DCoPs Ben Daniel Laboratory for Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems [ARIES Lab] University of Saskatchewan

  2. Outline of Talk • Introduction (DCoP) • DCoP: Motivation • Types of Technologies Supporting DCoP • Common problems • Design Challenges • Human • Technology • Others • Questions

  3. SOC. CMPT. GOV. DEV. DCOP ENG. COMM. IS ED. ECON. [D]CoP Chemistry

  4. Semantics,Pragmatics, or Syntax of DCoP? • [D/- \De-\ ] for: • Do or make the opposite of • Reverse • Decriminalise • Remove or remove from • Delouse; deoxygenate • Deplane; defenestration • Derived from • Deverbative [CoP/k[o^]p ]for: • No, not police but communities of practice

  5. Introduction • A geographically dispersed professionals who share common practices, and interests in a particular area of concern • Members’ activities are mainly enriched, and mediated by information, and communication technologies (I & CT) • They are more than communities of practice (CoP). • They are not limited to community of interests (CI). • They represent one type of a virtual learning community(VLC)

  6. Features of DCoP • Shared interests—Membership is organized around topics, interests, or domain issues that are important to members • Common grounding—Members develop shared understanding • Autonomy in goals setting—members set group agenda based on the needs of members at a particular period of time • Shared information and knowledge—Members share information and knowledge

  7. Features of DCoP Cont… • Voluntary participation—Members normally voluntarily participate in the activities of the community • Awareness—Social protocols and goals, expertise, location, task, social, cultural, etc.. • Communications—one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-many • Interaction—is mediated by face-to-face and enriched by ICT

  8. Key Motivation • Informal and casual learning • Minimise the learning required to operate within them • Maximise information and knowledge yield • Hub for information and knowledge sharing • Easy, cheaper , and faster • Minimise cognitive load caused by information and knowledge explosion • Ability to network with colleagues

  9. Community Technologies [Push] • Automated processes: searching, locating, retrieving, and delivery of content to a user's end • Enabling people, computers [applications] to share data • Data and information sent on a periodic basis • Personalised stream of data and information

  10. Community Technologies [pull] • A process where a user(s) request data from another program[application] or computer • Enable people to seek relevant information they need • High level of personalisation • Download information to your computer • Seek support from colleagues • Knowledge repositories, members’ profiles etc

  11. Common Issues with Push Technologies • User/Community privacy • Relevancy • Cognitive over-clocking • Security • Privacy • Performance • User/system vulnerability

  12. Common Issues with Pull Technologies • Require user/community, ability, time to search, locate, and retrieve information • Limit user/community to what they know or want to know at a time • Keep individuals in a community together but isolate communities from other communities • Requires high interactivity

  13. Design Challenges • Human-Oriented • Awareness • Contextual issues • Sociability • Relevance • Trust • Culture • Personalisation • Sustainability

  14. Design Challenges cont.. • Technology-Oriented • Scalability • Privacy and security • Usability • Transferancy • Imaginability • Trust • Reduced learnability

  15. Other Challenges • Difficult to emerge organically • Difficult to build and support due to diversity in membership • Difficult to establish shared understanding and trust among members • Hard to merge individual interests to community interests • Providing individualisation • The issue of relevance is implied not defined • Requires strong leadership to motivate, energise participation

  16. Merging Technology and Human Factors • Creating and interface • In building DCoP, you generally push and let the members pull. • When, how, what, where, do you push? • When, how, what, where, do you pull?

  17. Workshop “wikisDom” “Societies [human or artificial] have always reminded individuals about the value of communities, the importance of building communities, and the benefits of ascribing, subscribing to, and achieving at least a particular community’s status. But over the years most societies seem to have progressively achieved successful high rates of failures because of their inability to link one community to another, to create shared understanding not among individuals in a community, but between communities. If people in a society, who are often members of different communities are to work together, to solve common confounded global or regional issues, then I think this is a way to go!” [Uncle Ben, May, 30th 2004]

More Related