Curt's Big Blog

Lineage: One Way To Teach A Stampede of Cats

2004-12-10T15:18:00.000-08:00

Lineage II
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

By Curt Castillow

Trying to motivate my high school students to learn is a lot like herding cats. It can be done but it’s not easy. I spend half my lesson trying to pull “a rabbit out of a hat” just to keep their attention. Yet, those same students will go home and spend hours in front of a computer screen playing their favorite games. What do those computer games have that I don’t? Well, I know one thing they have—my student’s attention. That is why I believe MMO’s have a great potential to educate youth. Educator Frank Lyman quips that “Education should be an itch, not a scratch” Lineage, like other MMO’s, is an intense itch that youth would love to scratch. Unfortunately, learning how to kill Orcs or cast spells on Wizards won’t help chemistry students much with mixing compounds or math students with solving quadratic equations. But an MMO, could, however, motivate students to want to learn how to mix compounds or solve quadratic equations. If MMO environments required gamers to use educational skills to progress and succeed in the game environment, they would not only have the ability to motivate students to learn, but they would actually learn something substantial.

Think of the potential of a Lineage-type game in a geometry class where one has to use Pythagorian’s theorem to calculate the distance from the catapult to the castle. If the player wants to take out the castle wall, he or she would have to learn how to calculate the exact angle requisite for the flaming projectile to meets its mark. Think of the potential for a chemistry class if there was an island where wizards survive by buying, selling, and casting spells with magic potions made from real elements. If they need water to put out a burning village then they need to know how many atoms of hydrogen and oxygen form a water molecule. If they want to attack a neighboring castle they would need to know how to create an explosive mixture with the right amount of Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, and Oxygen. Of course the there is no game that does that at this time, but why can’t someone design one? (I know, no money.)

Then again, a sociology professor wouldn’t have to redesign Lineage if he or she wanted to teach Granovetter’s theory of mob violence. A quick visit to the Knight’s Silver City and one would quickly see how quick the store-front turns into a riot of wizards, elves, and knights. Similarly, psychology teachers could discuss antisocial behavior then let students see virtual-real, anti-social behavior in Lineage. It wouldn’t take long before an antisocial knight would hack them like the one that leveled me for merely saying “hello!”

MMO’s would be an excellent source of learning because they possess an element of Problem Based Learning (PBL) where the learning engages students. In PBL, learners are “thrust into a problem situation immediately, just as readers are thrust into the middle of the story, from which they must learn their way out” (Wiggins & McTighey, 1998). Likewise, if a Lineage gamer is going to succeed and progress to higher levels they must learn their way through each level.

In a Lineage setting, an instructor could also utilize cooperative models of learning. For example, he or she could divide an engineering class into quads where each quad works online as a team. Each team would have to attack a castle with a battering ram they designed. The better the design, the faster they break down the castle’s door and capture the king.

I know my ideas are a little dreamy, but Dave, you want us to think out of the box—especially with social software? You stated the following,

“ I think that games can be a great component of the [learning] experience. If the person is studying urban planning, they could study principles in class and play Sim City. Recreation management majors could play Roller Coaster Tycoon to learn how to manage a theme park - but they would need to attend class and learn the principles that would help them succeed in the game” (Wiley, 2004).

Gulfidan (2004) quoted Dewey as saying “I believe that the only true education comes through the stimulation of the child’s powers by the demands of the social situations in which he finds himself”. MMO’s are very demanding and stimulating to youth and adult alike (Ask RoeHaun). MMO’s are not the pedagogical panacea, but they have some essential components of learning. Practice is required, feedback is given, and zones of proximal development are established >(Wiley, 2004).

So in conclusion, and in keeping with the “herding cats”-barnyard metaphor, you can lead a horse (student) to water (education), but you can’t make him drink (learn). You can, however, feed him salt (desire), or a dash of MMO.

There Are Smart People, But Their Are Smarter Crowds

2004-12-03T15:31:00.000-08:00

Hiv Spread Rate
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

I have to be honest, I didn’t get as much out of playing Netlogo as I thought I would. I did, however, learn from Wiley’s upcoming book on Open Learning Support (OLS). I was fascinated with the concept that the “further up Bloom’s taxonomy a desired learning outcome is, the more important social interaction will be in promoting student achievement of the outcome”. I was also very interested in the information his links provided.

I followed the links in Wiley’s lecture page and spent hours reading and learning about OLS. I went to his OLS website and read comments from students and visited the FAQ section where I learned the mechanics of OLS. I also went to MIT’s OCW website and read assignments and syllabi descriptions of different classes. I was intrigued that anyone could take class from a Professor Frank Wilczek, a Professor of Physics who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his discovery of quarks.

Wiley’s paper and related links engendered excitement in me. I believe OLS is cutting-edge technology in education. The OLS concept reminds me of fairly new book titled, “The Wisdom Of The Crowds: Why The Many Are Smarter Than The Few, And How Collective Wisdom Shapes Businesses, Economies, Societies and Nations.” The author, James Surowieki, states, “under the right circumstances, groups are remarkably intelligent and are often smarter than the smartest people in them”. He supports his theory with real-life examples. Here is an excerpt from John Mark Ministries (2004)that shares some examples with interesting comments. I thought you might think it interesting.

"A classic demonstration of group intelligence is the jelly-beans-in-the-jar experiment, in which invariably the group's estimate is superior to the vast majority of the individual guesses. When finance professor Jack Treynor ran the experiment in his class with a jar that held 850 beans, the group estimate was 871. Only one of the fifty-six people in the class made a better guess." This is only one example of many in the book. No matter how knowledgeable the individual observer, a group estimate, even a group composed on non-experts, routinely trumps the individual in insight. Whether it involves counting jelly beans, estimating the weight of an ox, or assigning blame in the stock market to the correct company responsible for the Challenger accident in 1986, the crowd gets it right faster and more accurately than the individual expert. Note this other fascinating example:

"In May 1968, the U.S. submarine Scorpion disappeared on its way back to Newport News after a tour of duty in the North Atlantic. Although the navy knew the sub's last reported location, it had no idea what had happened to the Scorpion, and only the vaguest sense of how far it might have traveled after it had last made radio contact. As a result, the areas where the navy began searching for the Scorpion was a circle twenty miles wide and many thousands of feet deep. You could not imagine a more hopeless task. The only possible solution, one might have thought, was to track down three or four top experts on submarines and ocean currents, ask them where they thought the Scorpion was, and search there. But...a naval officer named John Craven had a different plan. "First, Craven concocted a series of scenarios -- alternative explanations for what might have happened to the Scorpion. Then he assembled a team of men with a wide range of knowledge, including mathematicians, submarine specialists, and salvage men. Instead of asking them to consult with each other to come up with an answer, he asked each of them to offer his best guess about how likely each of the scenarios was..Craven believed that if he put all the answers together, building a composite picture of how the Scorpion died, he'd end up with a pretty good idea of where it was...He took all the guesses, and used a formula called Bayes's theorem to estimate the Scorpion's final location..When he was done, Craven had what was, roughly speaking, the group's collective estimate of where the submarine was.

"The location that Craven came up with was not a spot that any individual member of the group had picked. In other words, not one of the members of the group had a picture in his head that matched the one Craven had constructed using the information gathered from all of them. The final estimate was a genuinely collective judgment that the group as a whole had made, as opposed to representing the individual judgment of the smartest people in it. It was also a genuinely brilliant judgment. Five months after the Scorpion disappeared, a navy ship found it. It was 220 yards from where Craven's group said it would be."

Remarkable, right? Is it just in humans that we see this sort of behavior? No. Consider how bees find good sources of nectar:

"They don't sit around and have a collective discussion about where foragers should go. Instead, the hives sends out a host of scout bees to search the surrounding area. When a scout bee has found a nectar source that seems strong, he comes back and does a waggle dance, the intensity of which is shaped, in some way, by the excellence of the nectar supply at the site. The waggle dance attracts other forager bees, which follow the first forager, while foragers who have found less-good sites attract fewer followers and, in some cases, eventually abandon their sites entirely. The result is that bee foragers end up distributing themselves across different nectar sources in an almost perfect fashion, meaning that they get as much food as possible relative to the time and energy they put into searching. It is a collectively brilliant solution to the colony's food problem. "What's important, though, is the way the colony gets to that collectively intelligent solution. It does not get there by first rationally considering all the alternatives, and then determining an ideal foraging pattern. It can't do this, because it doesn't have any idea what the possible alternatives -- that is, where the different flower patches -- are. So instead, it sends out scouts in many different directions and trusts that at least one of them will find the best patch, return, and do a good dance so that the hive will know where the food source is."

Now we begin to see the secret to this group wisdom effect. The more people involved (or the more bees), the greater the input from the group as a whole and the more likely it is that the correct solution is reached. That makes intuitive sense, for we all know that "two heads are better than one." So that means instead of relying on one expert, get a group of experts together, right? Wrong:

". . . [A] group made up of some smart agents and some not-so-smart agents almost always did better than a group made up just of smart agents. Diversity is, on its own, valuable, so that the simple fact of making a group diverse make it better at problem solving. That doesn't mean intelligence is irrelevant.. but it does mean that, on the group level, intelligence alone is not enough, because intelligence alone cannot guarantee you different perspectives on a problem.. Adding in a few people who know less, but have different skills, actually improves the group's performance." OK, now we're getting radical. A group of experts and non-experts is better than just a group of experts, even if the group size is the same? Surowiecki knows what you are thinking at this point and addresses it:

"Again, this doesn't mean that well-informed, sophisticated analysts are of no use in making good decisions. (And it certainly doesn't mean you want crowds of amateurs trying to collectively perform surgery or fly planes.) It does mean that however well-informed and sophisticated an expert is, his advice and predictions should be pooled with those of others to get the most out of him. (The larger the group, the more reliable its judgment will be.) And it means that attempting to 'chase the expert,' looking for the one man who will have the answers to an organization's problem, is a waste of time." So don't worry, he's not deprecating intelligence or expertise, and he acknowledges there are obvious times when you do want the lone expert working on your problem, especially if "your problem" is you need brain surgery. And Surowiecki absolutely acknowledges the problems that can come from relying on the crowd to achieve wisdom. But the principle upon which this book rests is expressed simply thus:

"The idea of the wisdom of crowds is not that a group will always give you the right answer but that on average it will consistently come up with a better answer than any individual could provide." It's that group experience that makes the difference. Expertise is needed, but relying on expertise alone will leave you worse off than if you couple expertise with diversity. Does that sound familiar? It should. It's the Linux model for developing software, and it's the Groklaw model for gathering legal news and insight. The more diverse the crowd, the greater the chance that one of those waggling bees will stumble upon the right answer, or the best answer. It works when looking for nectar, and it works when submitting bug fixes and new features for Linux. Notice what Surowiecki says about Linux:

"In the way it operates, in fact, Linux is not all that different from a market. Like a bee colony, it sends out lots of foragers and assumes that one of them will find the best route to the flower fields. This is, without a doubt, less efficient than simply trying to define the best route to the field or even picking the smartest forager and letting him go. After all, if hundreds or thousands of programmers are spending their time trying to come up with a solution that only a few of them are going to find, that's many hours wasted that could be spent doing something else. And yet, just as the free market's ability to generate lots of alternatives and then winnow them down is central to its continued growth, Linux's seeming wastefulness is a kind of strength (a kind of strength that for-profit companies cannot, fortunately or unfortunately, rely on). You can let a thousand flowers bloom and then pick the one that smells the sweetest. "So who picks the sweetest-smelling one? Ideally the crowd would. But here's where striking a balance between the local and the global is essential: a decentralized system can only produce genuinely intelligent results if there's a means of aggregating the information of everyone in the system. Without such a means, there's no reason to think that decentralization will produce a smart result. In the case of Linux, it is the small number of coders, including Torvalds himself, who vet every potential change to the operating-system source code. There are would-be Linux programmers all over the world, but eventually all roads lead to Linus."

So we see that wisdom from crowds comes as a result of certain conditions. There are principles by which wisdom can come from the crowd (as opposed to madness):

". . . the four conditions that characterize wise crowds: diversity of opinion (each person should have some private information, even if it's just an eccentric interpretation of the known fact), independence (people's opinions are not determined by the opinions of those around them), decentralization (people are able to specialize and draw on local knowledge), and aggregation (some mechanism exists for turning private judgments into a collective decision). If a group satisfies those conditions, its judgment is likely to be accurate." What about the opposite result, the one where crowds are not wise and even dumb? Under what circumstances do crowds go wrong and start to riot (or in the case of online communities, start to turn on the community)?”

So having quoted that (I’m impressed if you read all of it), it seems to me, Dave, you are saying too, that the online groups will naturally organize into highly intelligent groups that are smarter than the smartest person in them. I would love to be a part of a learning environment like that. As the online environment grows smarter, I grow smarter too. The group never grows too big because the bigger it gets, the smarter it gets. Your OSLO group is heading in the right direction. Kudos.

Pedagogical Principles: Pure, Powerful, And Universal

2004-11-27T13:36:00.000-08:00

Karate_Kid
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

Are teaching and learning really done differently in Lineage than in the classroom? I believe they may be “done” differently but the underlying principles that provide true teaching and learning are the same whether in the classroom or in cyberspace. Mr. Meeogi would agree. Remember in Karate Kid when Danielson is frustrated because his first self-defense lesson seemed to him no more than a home-improvement project for Mr. Meeogi. What Danielson thought was no more than a lesson on washing cars and painting fences, however, was a lesson on self-defense. Washing and waxing cars, and painting fences had nothing to do with karate, but the circular and vertical movement of his arms performing these tasks were principles of karate that had everything to do with it. The application of the movement was different, but the technique and tactics in arm movements were the same. The principles Danielson learned could be applied to a wide variety of circumstances whether one washes cars, defends him or herself, or karate-chops high school bullies.

So it goes in the classroom and MMU’s. As long as true principles guide the pedagogical process, true learning takes place whether it takes place face-to-face or online. Though I believe more learning generally takes place in a Lineage environment than many classrooms, it’s not because the MMU is a better medium than the classroom, but because it adheres to some sound principles of pedagogy. I’ve seen, however, classroom instruction every bit as effective and efficient at engaging learners as Lineage, but it was only because the instructor employed sound teaching principles. In Gulfidan’s “Problem-centered coaching and communities of practice,” (which incidentally I enjoyed the most of the three I read) Gulfidan believes that principles found in Social Theories of learning are exclusive to social communities like Lineage, but I believe that the principles she teaches are universal and can be applied to a wide variety of circumstances whether it be in the classroom or online.

Gulfidan believes classroom instructors present problems as abstract or “decontextual” knowledge that is “outside the learner”, and abstract “representations are meaningless unless they can be made specific to the situation at hand”. She goes on to state that, conversely, in an online environment like Lineage, learners are immersed in a problem that is what Merril might call “authentic” and “real world” (p.5). I concur with Gulfidan that abstract knowledge undermines learning, but it will undermine learning online as well as in the classroom. For example, parts of the tutorial in Lineage’s Hidden Valley were very abstract and general. Their explanation of teleporting was extremely ambiguous. I learned more from a Lineage participant’s one-line explanation than I did from a verbose, nebulous explanation given in the tutorial. Conversely, I learned more about calculating the length of the hypotenuse of a triangle on the roof of house from a leathered face, old carpenter that called me “boogerhead,” than I did from Mr. Rodriguez’ high school geometry class. Thus, it’s not where the instruction takes place but how it’s presented. If it’s presented with true principles, it will educate wherever it is presented and through whatever medium.

Gulfidan stated that the role of a teacher is to coach, support and “help children in authentic learning activities,” to which I agree, but is that role limited to online communities? She claims schooling environments are devoid of coaching mentors to which I agree. But if a teacher will implement the coaching principles she speaks of, they will be as effective as coaching mentors are in Lineage. I recall in my high school agriculture class my teacher, Mr. Brown taught us the beef-production process by coaching us through a step-by-step process. We raised and fattened a beef cow, butchered it, packaged it, cooked it in a pit barbecue, then sold the beef at a community dinner held at our high school. I learned as much about beef production from Mr. Brown’s coaching as I did about purchasing healing potion from wizard in Lineage. I learned in Mr. Brown’s class as much as I did in Lineage. The only difference is I was coached face-to-face in one setting and online in another. They both used what Gulfidan calls problem centered coaching they just implemented the principle through a different medium.

I believe that one of the occupational hazards in social sciences and education is to believe that one theory is the panacea of the people. There isn’t a panacea just principles. I am of the same opinion of Merrill that there are certain principles that are so pure, pristine, and packed with pedagogical power that they can be applied to a wide variety of circumstances. It is those principles we must seek. For example, one of them Merrill purports is what he calls Demonstration. He says, “Learning is facilitated when the instruction demonstrates what is to be learned rather than merely telling information about what is to be learned” (p.6). This is a true principle that is not exclusive to the classroom or online communities. For example, A 13 year-old boy demonstrating to me how to clobber a Mine Dwarf was every bit as instructional as Mr. Brown demonstrating to me how to weld a horse feeder.

Gulfidan states that coaching is an integral part of online communities like those found in Massively Mutliplayer Games. I believe the coaching she speaks of is a sound pedagogical principle and when it’s applied in other settings it will help maximize learning. Merril speaks of coaching as a principle that can be applied in any learning program or practice. Merrill states that “Learning is facilitated when learners are guided in their problem solving by appropriate feedback and coaching” (p.7). Just as a Lineage user coached walked me to the dungeon, likewise, Mr. Merrill, my college physics professor, personally walked me through many difficult physics problems.

Whether learning to defend one’s self through karate in Danielson’s world, or defend one’s self through magic potions in Lineage’s world, the learning is the same. It’s similar so long as the principles of pedagogy are applied in the same way.

My MMO Experience

2004-11-20T13:33:00.000-08:00

Knight
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

I played Lineage several days and thoroughly enjoyed it. I can’t believe how fast time went by as I played. The game is very addicting. No wonder MMO games bring in billions of dollars.

I chose the character of a Knight and his name was Gazelem. He carried a dagger. He collected lots of loot and prizes in the Hidden Valley. At first I didn’t know what the prizes were for but over time I learned to use them. For example, in the Dungeon I learned to use my lamp to light my path. The healing potion came in handy when I had to fight the snake lady. I had a difficult time destroying her. I remember a tip on how to destroy her appeared on the screen the first day I played, but I couldn’t remember what it was. So, they/she/it wasted me several times.

My favorite creatures were the Black Knights on Level 6. There was something scary and mysterious about them. They reminded me a little of the horse-mounted creatures in Lord of the Rings.

I died so many times I can’t count them. None of the deaths stood out as overly embarrassing, but I was, however, embarrassed when was responsible for another knights demise by the scary Black Knights. I attacked one and the knight tried to protect me and he was killed. He was a Knight who was tutoring me for quite some time. He warned me not to attack anyone on that level, but I couldn’t resist. I apologized and obeyed him after that. It turned the tutoring knight was a 13-year old kid from Argentina. Go figure.

The Dynamics Of A Group That Gave Back To The World What One Took Out

2004-11-14T01:15:00.000-08:00

tiffany
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

By Curt Castillow

Louis Comfort Tiffany (1848-1933) an artist at the turn of the century perfected the art of creating stain glass lamps, vases, and windows. His trademark was the favriel style of iridescent colors and natural forms in art nouveau. His lamps become extremely popular in the 1960’s and today sell in the price range anywhere from $80,000 to $350,000. Unfortunately, when he died his technique died with him. There was no book or instruction manual left behind to show ensuing artists how to do what he did. No one really knows exactly how he did it, but there is a small group of individuals who have resurrected his technique through trial and error and have created works of art that rival even his $100,000 Tiffanies. This small, international society of artists is no “DaVinci code” secret society but it is an online LISTSERV. Through cooperation and incentive, this listserve thrives today and shares Tiffany secrets of stained glass art that gives back to the world what Tiffany took out.

In the early years of our marriage, as a stained glass artist, my wife was still learning skills necessary to creating a Tiffany reproduction lamp. She found a website created by Walt Beopple that displayed his beautiful Tiffany reproduction lamps. She emailed him requesting how she might learn to design and create quality lamps like his. He told her there was only one way—the ASLGA LISTSERV. ASLGA stood for Association of Stained Glass Lamp Artists. It was a group of a 1000 plus stained glass artists from around the world that communicated via the list-serve to share Tiffany reproduction lamp techniques, methods, and art form. My wife learned from the LISTSERV that there was no book that taught Tiffany’s technique and method; There was only a relatively small handful of artists around the world that knew the technique. She joined the group and the other artists began to tutor her online how to create her own Tiffany reproduction lamps. The knowledge was invaluable.

Artists emailed my wife and others, step-by-step instructions, tips, shortcuts, pointers, and other valuable information. What was so fascinating was that this information couldn’t be obtained in any other way or place than with this group. The information disseminated in the group via email, was so valuable that the head of the group eventually put together all the instructive postings and bound them. One could purchase the postings for $20.00 which was the cost of the binding fee. What I found even more fascinating than the priceless secrets held by this group was their trust in each other.

They trusted each other enough to lend each other tools and equiptment worth hundreds of dollars. For example, my wife needed a large fiberglass dome to build her Tiffany lamp upon, so she emailed the group requesting where she might find one. A woman named Carol offered to lend my wife her dome worth over $150.00. She had never met my wife but trusted her. My wife didn’t have an account name, signature, or website to give her credibility. She did, however, have Carol’s trust.

I asked Heather (my wife) if there were technical cues that gave a person credibility so that you could trust them. She said it helped if they had a website that presented their artwork. For example, Peter Grotpass, an artist, shared his website address so that one could see for him or herself Peter’s beautiful stained glass lamps. Another technical clue that helped others trust in another’s expertise was finding a business name in their email address. For the most part, however, everyone trusted each other.

My wife claims their trust in each other came because they were a close group. I couldn’t help but wonder if the trust came because they were close or the closeness brought the trust. For whatever reason, they were a tight-knit group considering most of them had never met each other. Here is an illustration of how close they were. There was one artist named Walt, that was admired by the group for his knowledge and skills, but most importantly, for his willingness to reach out to anybody in the group that needed help. He helped my wife countless time and was the responsible for leading her to the LISTSERV. One day, an email was received that Walt had passed away. The group was very saddened by his tragic loss even though most of them never had met Walt. My wife related how strange it was that she was so saddened by the death of a man she never met. She said there was a void in the group after Walt left. It took sometime for the group to get over the loss of one they had grown to admire and cherish.

You could see the group’s closeness in the content of their email messages too. At least half of the messages were personal. If anyone became sad or discouraged users would rally to their side with emails of encouragement. There was a phrase they would often say to cheer each other up: “I’m sending some ‘white light’ your way.” I’m not sure what white light was but I assume it had something to do with the light that radiates from the stain glass lamps.

My wife doesn’t participate in the group anymore but she will always remember with fondness their willingness to give what no one else or book could give. It was not only the knowledge of a lost art form she appreciated, but the friendship and all that comes in its wake—trust, appreciation, respect, and validation. She will always remember with fondness the willingness of this group to give back to the world what Tiffany took out of it.

The IRC World: An Unconscious Pretending In A Real-Time World

2004-11-05T16:49:00.000-08:00

brain
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

by Curt Castillow

When I was a kid, my friend Mark Saxon was given a “CB” radio for Christmas. It was one of the nicer quality CB’s that received long-range signals. Excited with the prospect of communicating to the world, we began at once talking to strangers. Most individuals we spoke with were within our state, but occasionally on a cloudy day, our receiver picked up far away places. One such place was Australia. Mark and I would spend hours—no—days talking with a world of people we hadn’t previously met. I don’t have a CB anymore but I do have a computer. Instead of a handheld receiver, I have a keyboard, and, instead of communicating by airwaves, I communicate by bytes and bits. I find it just as fascinating to communicate today with a complete stranger in the UK as I did back then with one in Australia. It is that real-time communication that appeals to the IRC and MOO users. Though both IRC and MOO group users apply real-time technology to communicate, there is a subtle difference in the way in which they interact online. The difference is in the their conscious or unconscious effort to pretend to be something they are not.

In the MOO world, users interact in a pretend world of textual sights, sounds, and places. A user may find himself in a conversation with a stranger in a tree house or a jet tub. They consciously make an effort to imagine they are in the tub and make comments like “The water feels great!” Conversely, in the IRC space, there is no pretend world of make-believe. Users interact with each other without pretending to be anyone but themselves or anywhere but at home behind their computer. They don’t try to imagine they are in a closet or a gypsy wagon, just as I don’t try to imagine I am grain silo when I speak with my sister by telephone. As she and I talk, I acknowledge she’s in a car on a cell phone, and she recognizes I’m behind my desk at home. We don’t try to pretend we’re anywhere else nor anyone different then what we are—brother and sister. In the IRC world, people don’t try to consciously pretend, but in a sense they still do only they do it unconsciously. Let me explain.

The “anonymity of interaction in IRC allows users to play games with their identities” and be something unlike their real selves. Their “boundaries delineated by cultural constructs of beauty, ugliness, fashionableness or unfashionableness, can be by-passed on IRC. It is possible to appear to be, quite literally, whoever you wish” (Reid, 1991). I don’t believe most users deliberately try to be someone their not, but it’s a phenomenon that just happens. I noticed as I spoke with a user in an IRC environment, I was a little more upbeat and friendlier than I am in person. I wanted to make a good impression with him. This phenomena found in IRC users is not exclusive to cyberspace interaction. It can be witnessed in person as well. For example, we might find ourselves on edge with a family member then answer the front door and greet our neighbor with a friendly smile. On a first date, a man says all the right things and acts the right way but it may not be his real self. The blind dater doesn’t consciously deceive his date into believing he is something different than he really is, but he does it anyways.

Why are we not genuine with others online or in person at the front door? I don’t know all the reasons, but I think I know one: I suspect one reason is because we fear if others knew our “real selves”, they would dislike us. So we put on our best behavior and appear to be better than we actually are.

So whether I was trying to convince a trucker on my CB that I was older than I actually was, or convince a musician on the IRC channel that I’m a better guitarist than I really am, I want to look the part I think they believe I should be. In essence, I want to be to be more than I really am—I want to liked—whether it’s really me or not.

(I participated in three different channels on the EFNet: #apple, #horses, and #(I can’t remember the title but the people were foul)

Comparing A MOO World To A Blog or Fan Fiction World: It's A Good Place But Is It An Essential Place?

2004-10-30T13:51:00.000-07:00

Cow
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

The MOO world is different than any other social software environment I’ve experienced in this class. The emotional ambiance created by artifacts and descriptions of people, places, and things made the MOO world unique, but it was the real-time interaction that made it so different—even enticing. Is the MOO world the best world though for an instructional technologist?

Even though I knew I wasn’t really standing in a dark closet with strangers, the very idea that I was pretending so, made me a little uncomfortable at first. In my real world, it would be inappropriate for me to stand, lie, or sit in a dark closet with anyone but my wife. I found it odd that a surreal world of make believe could evoke my conscience and make me feel I might have to defend my moral standards. I have to admit though, I was fascinated that so many people were in the closet, and I couldn’t help but wonder why, so I began to ask. I asked one girl (I think it was a girl) why she would stand in the closet. She replied, “To feel warm and cozy.” Now I thought that to be a little strange yet interesting—she felt warm and cozy in a pretend closet? But then again, in the pretend closet I felt real feelings that my personal space was violated. A pretend, textual world, created an emotional ambiance that could evoke feelings in me—uncomfortable feelings. So that shouldn’t seem so strange they would evoke “cozy” feelings in her.

Blogs and fan fiction writings evoked emotion too, but not in the same way that standing in a dark closet with a stranger did. Also, reading a description of a make-believe world in a fan fiction story was one thing but exploring it, touching it, and feeling it in a MOO world was another. For example, I visited a street that had an open manhole with a rope dropped in it. I was so fascinated as to who would be in that manhole and why. In a fan fiction piece, as a reader, I would merely observe the manhole from afar, but in a MOO world I’m there. I can see it, touch, and smell the stale, pungent odor rising from it cavity. Furthermore, I can look inside and talk about it with real people who see it too.

The fascination, however, was not so much a mysterious, dark, manhole, but who was in it, and why they were in it. I was interested in the people. Often I would explore strange places like a gypsy wagon, wondering what kind of personality would be in gypsy wagon, but was very disappointed to find no was there but me. I wanted people to be there; I wanted to interact with them. They made the world real, and were that attraction that made the make believe world so charming and alluring. So it wasn’t so much the artifacts and surroundings that make the MOO world so appealing, but the people that are in them.

Which brings me to what I believe makes the MOO world so different from the fan fiction and blog world. I can write a blog and eventually someone will respond and I feel a connection with him or her. In a MOO environment, I just enter a room and feel connected immediately as people greet me in real-time with a warm smile. I ask them questions and they respond. The world is pretend but their immediate response is real—very real and immediate. In fact even their body language seemed real. When I first entered the Living Room, everyone kept smiling at each other. They drove me crazy. Feeling self-conscience, I finally asked why they were all smiling. I felt they were all looking at me, and knew something I didn’t know as if perhaps a cyber, poppy seed was stuck between my teeth. They seemed to sense I was new and naïve to their world. They had fun with my inexperience, but were sensitive and helpful.

I can’t help but wonder though if the MOO world is the best world—at least from an instructional technology perspective. I know MOO and MUD world’s are “constructionist environments in which people build personally meaningful artifacts” (Bruckman, 1994) and collaborate in social settings. I know they have pedagogical underpinnings. And I know, they build by experiencing, and Dewey would say experience is the best teacher. I believe, however, experiencing the right things is the best teacher. I don’t have to experience Crack to know its bad. I’m not saying the MOO world is comparable to a drug world, but I’m not sure its an essential world to learning. Granted, it is a place where people experience and make understanding, but even Dewey said, “It is not enough to insist upon the necessity of experience, nor even of activity in experience. Everything depends upon the quality of the experience which is had” (Dewey, 1938). Is the MOO world a quality-learning environment? For the time you spend there is it worth it? If I am to look at from an instructional technologist point of view then I have to say no. At least, no, it’s not the best of quality time spent in pedagogy. There are better quality constructionist environments where I can build personal meaning to my world. I suspect though they might not be as enjoyable as a MOO world.

If I look at the MOO world from a psychological perspective, however, then perhaps I might say it is a quality world worth its weight in gold and my precious time. “Technicolor” thought so. When I asked her why she participated in the MOO realm she replied, “I’m a shut-in and I have to interact socially somehow with people.” In light of that statement, I can see where it might be a place to be.

Having said all that, on the bright side, I enjoyed the experience and was fascinated with the people and the emotions their cyber world evoked in me. But I have very little time and I’m not sure if the MOO world is where I want to spend what precious time I have left. Besides, I get all the MOO I need every morning from my neighbor's hungry cow.

The Santa Claus Principle

2004-10-25T09:36:00.000-07:00

Santa
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

by Curtis Castillow

It was interesting to discover in Resnick and Zeckhuaser’s article on eBay’s reputation system, that though the system was unreliable and unsound, it still worked. The authors concluded that it worked because people believed it worked. The phenomena that drives the success of eBay’s reputation is the Santa Claus Principle. Let me illustrate.

Logistically, Santa can’t reach every little boy and girl in the world in 24 hours—even if he could travel at the speed of light. Yet, the Santa Claus story works because children perceive it works. Just as children fear that negative behavior will reap large chunks of coal, so likewise, eBay sellers fear that negative feedback will reap lower sells.

Perception is the impetus behind any societal system, whether it’s politics, economics, diplomacy, or children’s dreams of sugar plums and ferries. It was perception that inflated the stock market in 1999 to an all time high, and its perception that will elect our next president. But it must be remembered, however, that perception is a two edged sword that cuts both ways—good and bad. Just as perception raised the market, it could also crash it, or at least, suppress it even though the GNP is up and unemployment is down.

If perception-driven, societal systems are vulnerable to opinion and perception, then it seems eBay is vulnerable too. But to what extent is it vulnerable? It seems it is as vulnerable in proportion to the perception that upholds it. So, how much of it is really driven by perception?

Understaning the Impetus Behind the Fan-Fiction Phenomenon

2004-10-16T17:04:00.000-07:00

Qualifying Statement:
I could not completely fulfill this assignment and write my own fan fiction because my computer’s logic board fried the day this assignment was given. I tried to access the fan fiction site with my work computer, but the internet filter wouldn’t allow me to access fanfiction.net. I believe, however, I have augmented the assignment, by researching and reading many articles and writing a paper that might help us understand why fan fiction writers compose voluminous prose. I’ve spent at least 15 hours researching and writing this.)

In her article, “Muse of the Hemispheres,”Dupree(2004) writes “William Faulkner didn't so much write "The Sound and the Fury" as erupt with it, pouring out the masterpiece in a matter of weeks, his words and ideas as unstoppable as a flood. ‘That emotion definite and physical yet nebulous to describe,’ he wrote of this creative explosion, ‘that ecstasy, that eager and joyous faith and anticipation of surprise.’ Like Faulkner, many writers have periods of frenzied inspiration. Where does that frenzy originate? It is an interesting question because others like Vincent Van Gogh and Dostoevsky were caught up in a creative frenzy of passion to create. As Flaherty (2003) points out, the same “frenetic” drive that pushed Van Gogh to produce a painting every 36 hours also pushed him to write two long letters a day to his brother, and Dostevsky to produce volumes of books, diary entries, and articles. What is it that makes creative writers like John Updike “see a blank sheet of paper as radiant, as the sun rising in the morning?” If we could answer that question, then perhaps we could better understand what motivates fan fiction writers on the internet.

I propose that the motivation that drives creative writers in the fan fiction realm is, to a lesser extent, the same motivation that drove great writers like Earnest Hemmingway and Alexander Dumas. It is in the physiological and cognitive structures of their brains where one might find the matrix of this motivation. Only by identifying and understanding the locus of this motivation can we better design instruction that will foster creative writing in the classroom.

What drives individuals with an obsession to write? Whether they write Tom Clancy novels or volumes of fan fiction blogs, what is the source of their drive? This obsessive drive to write is called hypergraphia. Hypergraphia is defined as the “overwhelming urge to write”.The desire to write is so powerful that it can drive one to write on toilet paper or write with one’s own blood. There is no evidence that all creative writers suffer with hypergraphia, but their symptoms are similar to hypergraphia.. For example, Melissa Wilson , a fan fiction writer states the following about her experience when she writes: “the story lines get stuck in my head until I can't concentrate on anything other than a particular plot or scene. In this case, writing is a means of self-defense. It either gets written, or I get carted away by nice folks wearing white.” Could it be that all creative writers suffer from some form of hypergraphia? It seems they at least suffer from some of the symptoms.

Assuming that creative writers suffer from hypergraphia—at least somewhat—what causes it? Alice Weaver Flaherty (2004), a Harvard professor and neurologist purports that one way it is caused is by temporal and frontal lobe damage. She states the following:

“The temporal lobes are important for producing literature, in part because they are necessary for understanding semantic meaning and also Meaning in its philosophical senses, as in the Meaning of Life. And changes in the temporal lobes can produce hypergraphia. One example of these changes is temporal-lobe epilepsy. Some people with epilepsy stemming from temporal-lobe damage have hypergraphia so strong that they will write on toilet paper or use their own blood for ink if nothing else is at hand.”

Imacura (1992) has also discovered that “Two different neurobehavioural abnormalities have been reported under the term hypergraphia. One has been described in temporal lobe epilepsies and the other in the acute stage of strokes of the right cerebral hemisphere”. Perhaps this is what invoked Dostevsky to go through his bouts of passion to write. Flaherty goes on to say, “Dostoevsky had temporal lobe epilepsy. Some, but not all, people with temporal lobe epilepsy have a group of five personality traits called the Geschwind syndrome, which includes hypergraphia, strong religious or philosophical interests, and wide mood swings. Just before a seizure, Dostoevsky would experience an ecstatic or religious aura in which the world was flooded with meaning.” During his hypergraphic episodes he would write incessantly.

It hardly seems likely that all fan fiction writers, or even a majority, suffer from lobe damage, but at least we know its in the temporal lobe where creativity and drive is contained. Is it possible that the temporal lobe of a fan fiction writer is different from others? If so, how is it different? Furthermore, as fan fictionists write, would brain scans detect wave activity in their frontal and temporal lobes? It seems brain waves in the lobe area of the brain would crackle with different patterns of activity.

Another observation by Flauherty states the following:

“A second region critical for creative writing is the limbic system, the seat of emotion and drive. It gets its name from the fact that it forms a limbus or ring deep under the cortex. It drives many functions we wish we had conscious control over, but don't: for instance, hunger and sexual desire, and the experience of inspiration. The limbic system connects more strongly to the temporal lobes than to any other region of the cortex. This strong connection underlies the importance of emotion and drive to creativity -- factors that are anatomically as well as conceptually distinct from the cognitive contributions of the rest of the cerebral cortex. The limbic system also reflects the importance of mood swings in driving creativity.”

The reason her observation is important to understand the fan fiction phenomena is because the drive to write is largely controlled by the limbic system. Therefore, the drive is “more important than talent in producing creative work. Researchers find that above an IQ of 115, there is essentially no correlation between creativity and intelligence. Rather, in Thomas A. Edison's words, "Genius is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration” (Flauherty, 2003).

There are other avenues of neurology that might account for drive and creativity in fan fiction writers. In Kaufman’s (2002), "Dissecting the Golden Goose: Components of Studying Creative Writers," he states that there is a strong relationship between creativity and increased cortical arousal, basal skin conductance, and EEGs. He says, “Results have been promising, with positive correlation found between higher skin conductance and higher arousal and higher measured amounts of creativity”. If a researcher would measure skin conductance and EEG’s of fan fiction writers to that of a control group, would their be a substantial difference?

Perhaps not all fan fiction writers possess certain limbic or lobe anomalies, but do alter their temporal limbic regions through drug use? According to Flauherty, “For a few creative people, drugs have opened the door to inspired hypergraphia. Robert Louis Stevenson reportedly penned ‘The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,’ a 6,000-word book in six days, with the help of cocaine”. Stevenson’s account brings to mind this question: If drugs invoke inspiration, then what percentage of fan fiction writers use drugs? If the drugs really work, which one’s work better and why? Furthermore, if the drug is pinpointed, is there a safe non-addictive drug or herb that would elicit the same creativity? It is hardly unlikely, nevertheless, an interesting thing to ponder.

As mentioned before, what drives fan fiction writers is not entirely neurological, there are cognitive underpinnings as well. Research shows that creativity and ambition to write could be induced by different cognitive needs. These different needs manifest themselves as emotional, intellectual, and social.. When people have unmet needs, they seek for an outlet to fill those needs. When a charged lighting bolt strikes a weather vane, the energy is channeled down a conductive path (copper wire) that provides an outlet for the focused energy. Likewise, unmet needs in a person with a creative writing disposition, is like pent up energy that needs a channel to remove it. Cognitive constructs in the writer’s mind, channel energy through writing. This energy seeking for a path might be a need for praise, positive feelings, understanding, resolution, and identification.
Some creative writers are driven by a voracious appetite for validation and praise. In one such case of Melissa Wilson (2004), a prolific fan fiction writer, she claims that praise is the central dynamic of her motivation. She states:

Really, though, there is one single overriding reason that I and most everyone I know writes fan fiction for the Internet: FAN MAIL! Yes, I will admit to being a...[sleaze] for fan mail. One letter will put me on Cloud 9 for the entire day, and I've seen the same effect on my associates. Of course we write for the series, and for our own piece of mind, but nothing beats getting a letter in your INBOX stating "This is the best story I've read in ages!" Well, maybe getting a story dedicated to you from a new author who was inspired by your work can qualify, too.

Her motivation flies in the face, however, of Giovonni Moneta that states in his research that “money and praise, in interesting tasks has been systematically found to reduce intrinsic motivation”.

Flauherty also believes also that writing has the efficacy to elicit positive feelings in some people. In quoting another study, she states that there is evidence “that writing, at least on personally chosen subjects, has measurable mood effects. In both students and professional writers, the act of writing both intensified positive emotions and blunted negative ones.

There are also needs that could drive fan fiction writers to seek intellectual understanding. Lynn Chrenka (2004) makes this observation: “Writers can read what they have already written and use it as a springboard to further thinking and writing. Writing, then, may be considered a creative process that can generate thought…It is in writing something down that we may actually discover what we think. ‘How do I know what I think until I see what I say?" E. M. Forster wondered.”

Sometimes, writers will use writing to bring resolution, at least Flauherty did. She suffered from the same compulsion to write as did Dostevsky. Her impulse to write wasn’t invoked, however, by frontal lobe damage but rather, from the trauma associated from giving birth to a set of twins after which they both passed away. In her book, Midnight Disease she shares her experience (The title is another name for hypergraphia.), after losing a set of twins, she said "the sight of a computer keyboard or a blank page gave me the same rush that drug addicts get from seeing their freebasing paraphernalia". In an interview with Houghton Mifflin (2004), she describes her experience:

“Well, it started after I gave birth prematurely to twin boys who died. For ten days I was filled with sorrow. Then suddenly, as if someone had thrown a switch, I was wildly agitated, full of ideas, all of them pressing to be written down. Because I was holed up in my office all the time, my friends worried that I was depressed, but I felt quite the opposite. As a neurologist, I had heard of the phenomenon of hypergraphia and was pretty sure that was what I had. That phase lasted about four months.”
Another reason why creative writers might be motivated to write fan fiction is because they identify with their creative counterparts. Birds of a feather, flock together, is not only true of fowl but perhaps fan fiction writers as well. They, like all people, possess an innate desire to have a sense of belonging whether to a family, friendship, marriage, culture, or country. They want to associate with others of similar values, interests, desires, and needs. In Kaufman’s seminal study on creative writers, he found that writers are a very homogenous group with many similar personality characteristics and backgrounds. In his research, Kaufman supports the idea that creative writers have many similar characteristics. Creative writers tend to be the following:

• Open, impulsive, anxious, driven, hostile, affective, emotionally unstable, less socialized, unconforming (Feist, 1999)
• Tend to suffer from bipolar disorders (Andreason, 1999)
• Are either Extraverted-Intuitive-Feeling-Perceptive or Introverted-Intuitive-thinking-Judging (Hall & MacKinnon, 1969)
• Firstborn children (Roe, 1952; Simonton, 1987)
• Come from non-abusive homes that “does not appreciate or encourage literary interests”
• Experienced an early death of a parent (One study showed a figure of 55% for poets and writers; F. Brown, 1968)
• Had mothers who were not as emotionally involved, self-confident, had higher occupational levels and higher levels of divergent thinking (Runco, 1986)

Perhaps fan fictions writers are motivated to write because they want the association with those they can identify with.

There are many unanswered questions about creative writers, but perhaps neurological and cognitive science might help us find answers to these questions. These answers might not only help us understand great writers of the past like Victor Hugo and Jane Austen, but these answers might help us create great writers for the future—our children.

An Epiphany Online

2004-10-09T13:49:00.000-07:00

Epiphany
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

by Curt Castillow

As I visited Dave Wiley’s link to learning and technology blogs, I believe I experienced an epiphany. The information revealed to me my present naivety and ignorance of cutting edge pedagogy. As read about current technology in the field of education, I was enlightened. In just the few short hours of research—visiting linked websites and reading blogger comments—I learned more about the direction and future of instructional technology than all the classes combined in my doctoral degree.

For example, the EdTechPost had an article on learning object repositories. I clicked on the list of repositories, and with another click saw a virtual classroom. The classroom was biotechnology class divided into cooperative groups. If you clicked on any cooperative group in the room a QuickTime video pop-up window would display a short clip of the interaction between the students in each group. There were other learning objects you could visit as well that would teach anything from understanding weather patterns to comprehending the physics of a pulley system.

On the Handheld Instructional Technology website, I learned that the future of traditional film cameras is coming to an end. According to a blog, it quoted Reuter’s as saying: “Eastman Kodak Co. on Tuesday said it will stop selling traditional film cameras in the United States, Canada and Western Europe, another move by the photography company to cut lines with declining appeal in favor of fast-growing digital products”. Information doesn’t get much more practical than that—especially considering that my wife wants to buy a newer, traditional camera because she dislikes my digital. She will be interested in my find.

I also learned the definition of some educational terms, for example, metadata and e-learning. I did find, however, some uninteresting and unhelpful political rhetoric. For example, on Karionews site they discussed the “atrocities” of the arrest of Ralph Nader’s constituents at the recent presidential debates. I couldn’t see the pedagogical connection, so I was unimpressed with that particular site.

Most everything I saw and read, however was an epiphany for my sense of the future of instructional technology. I highly recommend this exercise for all graduate students in instructional technology.

Mormon Bloggers And Patterns of Participation

2004-10-04T06:17:00.000-07:00

With a close examination of religious blogs, it doesn’t take long to see distinct patterns in participant’s age, emotional maturity, and personality type. Because a religious group tends to be homogenous, it possesses characteristics that are unique to that group.

The first pattern that emerged in the blogs was the age of the bloggers. It became apparent that most bloggers in the Mormon group were young. Their style of writing, slang, topics, and maturity level put them somewhere in age between high-school-sophomore and a college student. Their writing style seemed as though it was still in developmental stage—it lacked depth and clarity. It did, however, possess the feeling and passion of youth. Their slang gave away their age too. They used words and phrases like: “no way,” “totally awesome,” “rad,” “too cool,” “Like, how do you do that?”

Some of the subjects revealed their age by the content of their messages. One girl was worried what her “dad” might think about her decision and how he might punish her. Other readers revealed their age like one college student who stated she was 21 years old.

Another pattern among some bloggers was their emotional immaturity. Some seemed very needy and lonely. One writer was struggling with cutting her skin and asked readers for help. It was obvious she had a serious behavioral problem that required professional counsel from a qualified therapist, yet, she turned to total strangers for help. It seemed odd she would implore help from complete strangers. The question that came to mind was “Why do they turn to complete strangers?” Do they not possess a support group in their own community? Perhaps they’ve already exhausted their resources and their only hope left is the online community. These are questions worth searching in the future.

Not all participants in the blogs had emotional issues, but many did seem lonely. One person wrote:

“So tonight was our second meeting and we had an excellant discussion. So the topic for next week is prayer: What prayer like for you? Is there a 'right' way to pray? How do you pray? What does it feel like for you. How do you get answeres, etc...
So, I would love to hear from anyone who would like to comment.
Much love!
LeA”

This individual seemed genuinely inquisitive but at the same time lonely. They could have easily found answers to those questions from Mormon missionaries, church members, or friends, yet they chose online strangers.

One girl didn’t seem lonely but her solicitations one might wonder if she has enough social interaction in her real life. She wrote:

“What is everybody doing for General Conference? Do you have family traditions? Do you make breakfast before hand? Do you go to another state and watch it with family there? Guys, do you have any traditions for priesthood?”

After reading this, my first impression was that she is merely a very social girl that wants to interact online with others. Like other subjects, her question doesn’t request emotional support or counsel in grave matters, but rather her question is very superficial. It does seem, however, sincere and merely a petition to “chat”. Is that the case though? Is she a gregarious person merely seeking for someone to chat with? Is she an extrovert seeking for more social interaction? Or, could she be a girl that doesn’t have her emotional needs met at home, so she seeks to meet them in cyberspace? These are questions that would be interesting to research: What kind of personality types participate in social software? Are they emotional healthy or unstable? What percentage are extroverts and introverts? Are they “takers” or “givers”?; Do they take what they can get from others online or are they merely there to give?

Overall, it seems the Mormon blog community is place for Mormons to seek help, counsel, comfort, validation, and surreal socialization. Unlike the Mormon newsgroup, they weren’t interested in playing doctrinal ping-pong. On the contrary, they were more interested interacting online with individuals that understands their values, traditions, and needs.

Patterns of Online Motivation: Why LDS Google Group Users Participate

2004-09-25T14:13:00.000-07:00

motivate
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

By Curtis Castillow

I chose to analyze a thread from the group soc.religion.mormon, because as a LDS member and seminary instructor I understand the people, their culture, and the issues they discuss. I believe my background gives me a clearer understanding of the groups motive.

The discussion I analyzed was centered on a very controversial issue, one that has been disputed by anti-abortionist, stem-cell researchers, and theologians. The issue was mainly concerned with the question: When does the spirit enter the body of an unborn child? The individual that posted the question stated the following:

In another thread hlillywh@juno.com posted in part <> That really surprises me especially with the LDS doctrine of the pre-existense of spirits. So then it's possible that the soul / spirit is infused at some point in time following the actually conception? Carrying that forward is it possible that a human person could exist even after birth without a soul/spirit?

By analyzing all 29 comments in light of LDS culture and doctrine some patterns began to emerge. There were five camps of people that contributed to the thread:
The Speculators24 total
The Helpers1 total
The Doctrinally Correct Clarifiers2 total
The Evaluators2 total

The speculators, by far, contributed the most to the group. They are bequeathed with this title because they love to speculate about the unknown. Many of them will preface their comment that they know there is no definitive answer by LDS authorities, yet they still state their opinion. For example, one person said, It has not been revealed through the prophets and established as a doctrine. But it has been revealed to my wife and me: The spirit of the child is involved in the conception process. The speculators seemed more motivated to conjecture on the unknown, than to answer with facts. They want to state their opinions, but they dont support with truth.

The helpers, on the other hand, seem to possess the purest motives. The one helperthe only helper in the threadseemed to have a genuine concern for the person asking the question. The helpers comments were centered more on helping than convincing; the helper offered links to websites and specific talks that might contain insights and answers.

The doctrinally correct clarifiers were good at shooting holes in the speculators theories. Though they may have had their own opinions, they steered clear from stating them. They did, however, state doctrine from scriptures or LDS Church authorities that undermined the theories made by the speculators. It seemed by their comments that the clarifiers werent there to conjecture but rather to make appropriate course corrections when speculators veered from the truth. For example, one clarifier stated the following:
FWIW (For whatever its worth), I believe Brigham Young speculated that it was when the mother can first feel the child kick in the womb. But it was just speculation. Anyway, this has been discussed a bit back a few years. You might want to check out this thread for some stuff regarding stemcell research.
It seemed their motives were fueled by a desire to defend their faith and what is taughtnot what is speculated.

The last group, the evaluators, made value statements on the merit or shortcomings of the speculators comments. One stated, How important is this question on a scale of 1-1000 for our lives today? Another said All that has been said so far.is nothing but speculation. They seemed motivated with a desire to keep an appropriate perspective on the subject discussed.

The URL for the thread is http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=10fmncqm27viu41%40news.supernews.com&prev=/groups%3Fnum%3D25%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dsoc.religion.mormon%26start%3D200

My impression of Google's groups

2004-09-18T13:28:00.000-07:00

My overall impression of Google newsgroups was somewhat mixed. At first I was confused. The newsgroup world with all its .soc, .biz, .misc, was Greek to me. After a few hours of searching through the different groups and threads, however, the confusion turned consternation.

The consternation was a result of my being uncomfortable with some of the user groups. A few of the interest groups focused on subjects and issues that were very lude, rude, or lascivious. I was surprised that Google allowed certain interest groups on their website.

I must say though, beyond that, my impression was one of fascination. I couldn’t help but wonder who started all the groups on Google and how others discovered them. I showed the groups to my secretary at work and she was astounded that they existed. She kept saying, “I didn’t even know that was available on the website; How did you find this anyways?” I was also fascinated that there were so many different groups representing every passion, obsession, interest, hobby, and need of mankind. Whether you are interested in hamsters or humanities, snowboarding or sexuality, Google groups has them all.

I participated in a Christian news group, but they wouldn’t participate with me. I posted a message in a thread, but no one responded. I then attempted to post my message as a “new post” but the moderator blocked it. I assume because of my religious affiliation. At first, I went to my own religious newsgroup (LDS) but they posted uninteresting unimportant messages, so I opted to try the Christian group.

My overall impression of the groups can be summed up in one word—interesting. I have a fascination with these groups, but I can’t help but wonder where those people find the time to play so much.

I spent at least 6-8 hours total online. My thread can be read at the following URL: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=uRt2d.4274%24bj2.3608%40trnddc08&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dsoc.religion.christian

(Dave, are you really reading these?)

Curt's Internet History

2004-09-11T06:46:00.000-07:00

CurtCastillow
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

I was introduced to social software at the tender age of 30. My introduction was abrupt. My master's degree in instructional technology thrust me into the online arena in one semester. It was very difficult at first, because I had to learn to operate many applications at once including the internet. I had a little help from friends, but most of my learning came from trial and error and reading software helps. Back then, software help--whether online or printed--had lousy interface. The "helps" were ambiguous and difficult to understand--an instructional technologists nightmare. Ten years later it is still an integral part of my life academically and personally.

Academically, social software is a quintessential element to earning my doctoral degree. I live in Utah Valley--a far cry from cheese valley, USA--so I need to email to keep in touch with my professors. They are often difficult to reach in their offices, and some are slow to return calls, but most of them will communicate back with email in a timely manner. Sometimes, I urgently need a document the professors possess so they send them as attachments. This past summer I did some research that required a specific article from an Israeli professor located on the east coast. Her article was neither online nor available at Brigham Young University. I called her office at 7:30 AM mountain time and she emailed me the article by 8:AM. That's quick considering she lived in Washington, D.C., and I in the small town of Pleasant Grove, Utah.

Personally, social software keeps me in touch with my sisters in Arizona, and my closest friend in Texas. We still call each other on the phone, but email narrows the distance between us by allowing us to exchange pictures and video clips.

I am still at a tender age in my forty-first year, but I suspect when I really get old, I will still use social software in my academic and personal pursuits.

Hello Dave

2004-09-03T18:29:00.000-07:00

What do you think?

Curt Castillow

Family 2004

2004-09-03T18:16:00.000-07:00

Family 2004
Originally uploaded by Curtis Castillow.

My Family