- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-l] online education effectiveness
by R.Mabry-Hubbard (UMC Student) 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Heidi, please define "effectiveness" relative to learning and online learning. Learners are not homogeneous; therefore, effective teaching strategies and learning environments depend on the material and learning outcome desired. Distance education has been around for over 100 years but the delivery medium has changed from postal only to a continuum of technologies including TV, video conferencing, and, of course the Internet. Online learning has many strengths both as stand-along delivery method and in conjunction with traditional face-to-face classes. It also has its weaknesses just as traditional lecture or seminar classes do. From a strictly "cost-benefit" perspective, the Internet increases access to higher education without the capital investment of "brick and mortar" classrooms and additional support staff. Online courses or supplemental online instruction also permits "mandatory" and equal participation by all class members since time is not a constraint. Online teaching, however, from the instructor's point of view requires much more time and effort -- something I can personally attest. I was also involved with two-semester study evaluating online instruction as a supplement to the traditional large lecture course (500+) and we found statistically significant improvement in "face-to-face" mid-terms exams scores for those who were active participants in online discussions and from previous semesters. This is as an older but fairly comprehensive report by the World Bank Organization called: Distance Education: Growth and Diversity (1998) http://www.worldbank.org/fandd/english/0398/articles/0110398.htm Perhaps the most important barometer of "learning outcome" effectiveness and cost is the continued adoption of online learning as a delivery method by businesses. For more resources, try a KEYWORD search: ("online learning" OR "e-learning") AND ("cost effectiveness") I hope this helps. R ------ Robin Y. Mabry Hubbard, MBA, EdS(Educational Technology) Rural Sociology Doctoral Student - Community Informatics Email: ryh352(a)mizzou.edu My Homepage: http://www.rrchubbard.org Murphy's Law: There is never enough time to do it right; but there is always time to do it over ~ Our Future arrived Yesterday! ~ [I am not inviting any postmodernist to my party!]

1 0

job announcements (2) - Dept of Communication, Cornell University
by Tarleton Gillespie 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Cornell University Department of Communication Position: Tenure-eligible assistant professor, Communication, Human- Computer Interaction/Computer-Mediated Communication Starting Date: Fall Semester, 2007 Description: The Department of Communication at Cornell University is seeking a social science scholar to conduct research and to teach in the area of Human-Computer Interaction and/or Computer-Mediated Communication. We welcome scholars who study the human and social dimensions of information technology from psychological, sociological, or organizational vantage points. The successful candidate will have a Ph.D. in Communication or closely aligned field and have (or show promise of developing) a national/international reputation doing theory-based empirical research that will contribute to one or more of the Department’s core strengths in communication and technology, science, risk and environmental communication, media effects, and media and society. The successful candidate must be able to develop a research program connected to college and university priorities in information science, as well as applied social science, life science issues, environmental issues, and/or public outreach, and should have a high potential for attracting external research funding. Communication faculty teach two to three undergraduate and/or graduate courses per academic year, and advise students in the Department’s B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. programs. Salary: Cornell offers a highly competitive salary and benefits package. Support for start-up research costs will be available. Women and minorities are especially encouraged to apply. Application: plm29(a)cornell.eduApplication: Send letter of application addressing position qualifications and goals, vita, official academic transcripts, research article(s), and names and contact information of three references. Please also have each reference submit a letter of recommendation. All materials should be sent to Dr. Poppy L. McLeod, Department of Communication, 325 Kennedy Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853. For additional information, e-mail Dr. McLeod (eduhttp://www.comm.cornell.edu) or telephone 607.254.8896. For more information about the Department of Communication, please visit our website: . Closing Date: Applications will be reviewed beginning October 16, 2006, until candidates are selected. Cornell University is an equal opportunity, affirmative action educator and employer. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Cornell University Department of Communication Position: Tenure-eligible assistant professor, Communication, Media effects/Media studies Starting Date: Fall Semester, 2007 Description: The Department of Communication at Cornell University is seeking a social science scholar to conduct research and to teach in the area of media effects/media studies. We welcome scholars who study media from psychological, sociological, or institutional vantage points. The successful candidate will have a Ph.D. in Communication or closely aligned field and have (or show promise of developing) a national/international reputation doing theory-based empirical research that will contribute to one or more of the Department’s core strengths in science, risk and environmental communication, media effects, media and society, and communication and technology. The successful candidate must be able to develop a research program connected to college and university priorities in applied social science, information science, life science issues, environmental issues, and/or public outreach, and should have a high potential for attracting external research funding. Communication faculty teach two to three undergraduate and/or graduate courses per academic year, and advise students in the Department’s B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. programs. Salary: Cornell offers a highly competitive salary and benefits package. Support for start-up research costs will be available. Women and minorities are especially encouraged to apply. Application: Send letter of application addressing position qualifications and goals, vita, official academic transcripts, a research article, names and contact information of three references. Please also have each reference submit a letter of recommendation. All materials should be sent to Dr. Michael Shapiro, Department of Communication, 319 Kennedy Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853. For additional information, e-mail Dr. Michael Shapiro (mas29(a)cornell.eduApplication: eduhttp://www.comm.cornell.edu) or telephone 607.255.6356. For more information about the Department of Communication, please visit our website: . Closing Date: Applications will be reviewed beginning October 16, 2006, until candidates are selected. Cornell University is an equal opportunity, affirmative action educator and employer.

1 0

Re: [Air-l] FW: list etiquette
by Charles Ess 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Dr. Cornwall's response is in error in at least three ways: > I assert that Terri Senft has been allowed, without rapprochement, to use > vulgar epithets and she has done so on three different occasions. 1) To my knowledge, none of Terri Senft's comments have appeared on the aoir listerv. > > > I assert that Charles Ess as the result of a private communication, by > someone else, has labeled me unprofessional and unethical in the public > forum. 2) This is false. My communication was posted to the public forum only by you. My communication was to the pseudonmymous Rasputin, copied to the AoIR executive committee (a closed list) and Jeremy Hunsinger. 3) The AoIR guidelines for list etiquette state: > You should reply privately to private > email and not forward personal email to air-l without the author's > permission. My email to pseudonym R was private - you have now forwarded it to air-l without my permission. > > I don't have to prove any points I have made. They are a matter of the > archival record. These errors of fact and violation of etiquette guidelines are a matter of the archival record. They serve rather to undermine than to support at least these points - which in turn suggests that, in fact, assertions do require support. While intended privately to pseudonym R, I stand by my comments as now made public by you. Unfortunately, these errors of fact and violation of etiquette guidelines are consistent with my comments. - charles ess Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php> Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23

3 2

From Social Isolation in America to Facebook
by Barry Wellman 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

SPOILER WARNING: This posting will wind up with Networked Individualism. The meaning of friendship has been preoccupying me -- and others -- more than I would have expected. It started with the publication of McPherson, Smith-Lovin, and Brashears' "Social Isolation in America" in Amer Soc Rev, June 2006. This evoked a media panic that friendship was dying, based on a shrinkage in the number of people "who discuss important matters" from nearly 3 in 1984 to slightly more than 2 in 2005. (And nearly a quarter of the American adult pop said they had no one.) I spent a lot of time with the media for the next month pointing out that research suggests that most very close ties are specialized, and that "discussing important matters" wasn't the only way that people are close. I noted that other surveys -- such as our Connected Lives study in Toronto and the Pew Internet "Strength of Internet Ties" study have found a mean of 10+ Very Close friends and relatives. (These numbers probably seem high to non-North Americans. German and French folk frequently tell me that they are astonished at how easily Americans call someone "friend" when they, by contrast, take 5 or so years to admit someone to their charmed cognitive friendship circle.) I also pointed folks to Peter Bearman (& coauthor's) 2005 Social Forces' article showing the variety of matters that people think are important to discuss. While most people have their own construct of what are important matters, they'd be mistaken to think that others share their zeitgeist. To me, it is "world peace" (just like Miss Congeniality), the state of the internet, and various family issues, but Bearman shows that to others it might be what kind of haircut or tatoo to get, plus the usual boy/girl friend issues. This leads me to the Facebook fiasco. First, as danah boyd says on her blog, a Facebook, MySpace, etc. "friend" often is different from what most of us otherwise would consider a "friend". Folks on the AOIR list reported mean numbers of greater than 100 Facebook "friends" in major American universities. By contrast, no survey has shown such high numbers, even though they have shown larger numbers than the 2 that McPherson found in analyzing the 2005 US General Social Survey. One problem with almost all social software is that it makes two false assumptions: (a) It assumes that relationships are dichotomous: Friend/Non-Friend. (b) It assumes that friends all belong to the same group. In reality, friendships not only are specialized in content, but vary in intensity. It's rare that someone would want to share everything with almost any "friend". Our data also show the obvious: it's rare that all Very Close friends (and relatives) live in the same densely-knit group. The news that we want to share with friends in one cluster of relationships may not be something we would want to share with those in other clusters. In short, we live in a world of "networked individualism" in which we're forever navigating through complex social networks -- assessing who and when to tell what. Facebook got both of these wrong (in addition to foolishly not consulting): It propogated all changes to all Facebook Friends. Gosh, we could have saved them a bunch of money and reputation. Barry _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 You're invited to visit & contribute to the new version of "Updating Cybertimes: It's Time to Bring Our Culture into Cyberspace" http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________

8 7

Re: [Air-l] american internet penetration stats?
by Chadwick Andrew 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hi Nancy, It's probably better to use the ITU data as the definitive source; they are the only official global repository. They rely on the national sources, but try to be consistent and rigorous in the way they clean the data. They have a complete set for the US for every year back to 1995. Look for the latest Statistics Yearbook on their website - a goldmine! Yours, Andy --------------------------------- Dr Andrew Chadwick, Senior Lecturer in Political Science, Head of Department, Department of Politics & International Relations, Royal Holloway College, University of London, http://www.rhul.ac.uk/politics-and-IR http://www.andrewchadwick.com > -----Original Message----- > From: air-l-bounces(a)listserv.aoir.org > [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nancy Baym > Sent: 08 September 2006 16:19 > To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-l] american internet penetration stats? > > Also I do want to mention the Pew chart on American internet > adoption at this page: > > http://www.pewinternet.org/trends.asp > > Nancy > _______________________________________________ > The air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ >

4 4

Ready for registration to DOCAM 06, Oct. 13-15
by Niels Windfeld Lund 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hello everybody It is now time for register for the 4th. Document Research conference at UC Berkeley Information School, next month, October 13-15 organized by The Document Academy, an international collaborative initiative for document research. The conference is growing slowly at a calm pace, keeping it a relatively small conference with only plenary sessions and time for discussion and meeting people. In the program you will find DOCAM regulars as well as new contributors from many different disciplines and parts of the world, hopefully ensuring an open-ended discussion with benefits for all participants. You will find program, online registration form and recommendations for accommodation on this link: http://thedocumentacademy.hum.uit.no/events/docam/index.html Abstracts will be uploaded soon. Online proceedings are planned to be published after the conference. Finally we are delighted to announce that the key-note speaker this year will be Professor Geoffrey C. Bowker, Executive Director for the Center for Science, Technology and Society, Santa Clara University. Professor Bowker will give his Keynote Address at the end of the conference and comment on the core questions and challenges for document research in the future. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to send me an email. Please feel free to forward it to people, you think would be interested. Welcome at DOCAM 06 Niels Windfeld Lund chair of The Document Academy

1 0

Open access publishing (was a modest proposal)
by William Bain 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

On open access I wonder if someone could give me further information (on or offlist) about the humanities participating less than the sciences. As one who works in the humanities outside the United States, I've been interested in what's been said aabout OA so far on the list. And specificaslly that point. There are of course indications that sciences/humanities merge more and more, and I've had a hard time accepting the distinction anyway. Though I mentioned the book by Michael Whitworth, _Einstein's Wake_, before I'll do so again FWIW. The main basic argument there is that language/metaphor is the great equalizer. Again FWIW and hoping it's not too dejà vu, I note that online information giving other institutions supporting OA is online by "Alliance for Taxpayer Access" found at http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/frpaa/ Thanks for any further info! Best regards, William ñ William Bain PhD Student Comparative Literature Department of Spanish Philology Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.

2 1

Re: [Air-l] Open access publishing
by Katja Mruck 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Dear All, i did not follow the complete discussion on open access publishing, so hopefully my comments will not only repeat was already had been mentioned ... Besides NIH in USA, you might be interested in the RCUK position on issue of improved access to research outputs (http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/access/index.asp) also funding organizations in other countries support OA, f.e. in Germany the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (http://www.dfg.de/en/news/information_science_research/other_news/info_wiss…, http://www.dfg.de/lis/openaccess/) DFG and many others signed the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (see http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html for the declaration and http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/signatories.html for a list of signatories). Some other URLs besides Peter Suber´s SPARC Open Access Newsletter already mentioned for those interested in the topic: - Budapest Open Access Initiative: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/ - Directory of Open Access Journals: http://www.doaj.org/ - Registry of Open Access Repositories: http://archives.eprints.org/ - Publisher Copyright Policies & Self-archiving: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php And various mailing lists (BOAI-Forum, American Scientist etc.) exist; more links to resources and texts are available at Stevan Harnad´s website (http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/) Our own journal, FQS, is open access since 2000. The newsletter we distribute once a month (English and German) contains information about the latest OA developments (just send a short PM if you like to receive it). All the best, Katja -- FQS - Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research (ISSN 1438-5627) English -> http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm German -> http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs.htm Spanish -> http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-s.htm Dr. Katja Mruck Freie Universitaet Berlin Center fuer Digitale Systeme (CeDiS) Ihnestr. 24 D - 14195 Berlin E-mail: kmruck(a)cedis.fu-berlin.de Phone: ++49 (0)30 838 - 55 725 / - 52 779 (off.) ++49 (0)30 791 54 31 (priv.) Fax: ++49 (0)30 838 - 52 843

1 0

FW: list etiquette
by Dr. W. Reid Cornwell 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

For those of you that have been speculating that I am Rasputin I hate to disappoint you but I am not him. Charles is correct that they are associated with me but I did not put them up to those communications. I did allow them to change the login to the listserv but what transpired is not of my doing. Having said that, I have several things to bring to your attention. I agree with everything that Rasputin said. (I have read them) I have also read my own communications to the listserv. (over 150 pages) While they arguably could be considered aggressive, they have not labeled anyone and have been directed towards specific points that should be considered. I argue that the most strident posts that I have made have been a reaction to attacks by others and that even then what could be considered and attack by me was framed as a question. I assert that others have been allowed to label and to nuance criticism without rapprochement. I assert that under the color of an alias (KQ-Amazon) has been allowed to level disrespectful communications and no one has risen to my defense. No one has challenged the alias. I assert that Terri Senft has been allowed, without rapprochement, to use vulgar epithets and she has done so on three different occasions. The arguably unethical or professional attack on my part was the poking of fun at Jeremy for his use of dense language. I assert that Charles Ess agreed with my assessment of the lack of clear definitions and then reprimanded me for having said it not to his liking. I assert that Charles Ess as the result of a private communication, by someone else, has labeled me unprofessional and unethical in the public forum. I don't have to prove any points I have made. They are a matter of the archival record. I stand by the comments below. Reid -----Original Message----- From: Rasputin [mailto:rasputin@sukinsyn.com] Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 8:04 PM To: wrc(a)tcfir.org Subject: FW: list etiquette -----Original Message----- From: Rasputin [mailto:rasputin@sukinsyn.com] Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 12:25 PM To: 'Charles Ess' Subject: RE: list etiquette Rules or customs have no meaning when they are differently applied. Words like unprofessional, unethical, trolling, fan boy are only applied by the inner circle of a group identity that seeks to exclude. Hiding behind an alias is a well entrenched Internet behavior and practiced by more than one AOIR member. Why has the collective voice been silent till now? These dialogues bare the ugly truths of a private club. He/she is not our kind of people. He /She is unprofessional. It's permissible for Joe BagofDonuts to use the bandwidth to appeal for the rescue from poor planning. (rooms in Brisbane) (not of general interest). I resent having this in my mailbox. Who has flamed them. It's hard to look at the dark underbelly of these pretensions. All the academic language in the dictionary can't hide the snobbery. This dialogue says more about AOIR than me. "When pricked do I not bleed" Rasputin -----Original Message----- From: Charles Ess [mailto:cmess@drury.edu] Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 5:30 AM To: Rasputin Cc: air-exec(a)listserv.aoir.org; jeremy hunsinger Subject: list etiquette "Rasputin," cc to AoIR Executive Committee, Jeremy Hunsinger. "Rasputin" wrote > Perhaps, aside from "we've always done this way", you could give an answer. I am happy to engage in online discussion - but not with interlocutors who are hiding behind a pseudonym; whose primary mode of discourse is attack - indeed, whose primary mode of discourse seems mostly to head in the direction of trolling; and whose pseudonym almost certainly masks an interlocutor and/or consociate who has already established a pattern of attack / trolling - including personal attacks, both by innuendo onlist and directly offlist. At best, such behavior is unprofessional - especially for someone hoping to make constructive use of internet technologies for communication. At best, such behavior is unconstructive and a waste of everyone's time and resources. At worst, such behavior is unethical, because it fails to begin with a minimum of respect for others. Come out from behind the pseudonym, take clear and personal responsibility for your words, engage with us constructively and professionally, and I'll be happy to continue the conversation. - charles ess Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php> Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23

2 1

Virtual Community and Trust
by Sarah Brooke Robbins 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

I've written a piece about the recent FaceBook, Craigslist, and SecondLife events on my website. It's a bit long so I don't want to paste it here but I'd appreciate any and all feedback. http://www.secondlife.intellagirl.com/ -- Sarah "Intellagirl" Robbins http://www.intellagirl.com http://secondlife.intellagirl.com Yahoo: Intellagirl Skype: Intellagirl SecondLife: Intellagirl Tully

1 0