Differentiating Medium from Mission
A statement was made in the Google Group for my Faciltating Online Communities course which I think is worth discussing here. In the context of “what is an online community”, Olubodun Olufemi writes:
“I am not comfortable with describing [online communities] as virtual like some do, I rather think they are real but different in the medium that connects them.”
This statement is significant for several reasons, and relates to how online communities are viewed, their assumed function and role, the value (or lack thereof) they are afforded, and the degree of consideration given to them.
First and foremost there is the notion of the place and role of the technology relative to the community. Whether consciously or not, many people view online interaction and discussion as somehow different - or worse still, superior or inferior - to that which occurs offline. In reality, as Olufemi points out, it is just the medium that’s different.
Significantly this misperception leads to a false distinction in which online activities are treated differently from offline ones, and the two are seen to have different core objectives. Emphasis becomes placed on “eLearning” or “Blended Learning” as opposed to just learning. This serves only to distract from the core learning processes by placing the medium ahead of the mission, and in some ways assigning it more significance than it actually has. In the context of education, the ultimate focal point should be on the learning process itself; not where or how the learning takes place.
In the same way that a classroom, library lawn or coffee shop provides a physical space within which student interaction can take place, so too does an online application do the same. Both carry with them their own opportunities and challenges and must ultimately be selected based on their ability to facilitate the core objectives and activities of the community.
While the demographics of a community - including geographic, social-political, or policy constraints or those of technical expertise - will dictate the approach taken in facilitating interaction, it is critical to realise the distinction between a logistical consideration, and a core community objectives. The objectives and mission should be adhered to regardless of location, be it online or offline.
It’s the shared values, goals and/or mission that makes a community, not the space within which they congregate.
August 7th, 2008 at 1:04 am
I agree wholeheartedly. As you said very eloquently, it’s shared intent that makes a community - whatever the environment in which it occurs.
I notice a popular perception that there’s a fundamental split between “real life” and cyberspace, as if somehow people cease to be human when they interact online. This can be a self-fulfilling projection, of course, but there’s no reason for it to be.
Similarly, many people express a difficulty in conceiving of “real” community existing online, but it’s certainly my own experience that it can and does. When there is common cause, and an intent to find and act on collective meaning, community tend to grow among us, wherever we are.
[Reply]
Mike Bogle reply on August 8th, 2008 11:09 am:
Hi Amy,
Along the lines of the split you mentioned, I think this presents a huge detriment to the community itself because it causes an artificial or arbitrary division in focus to develop in the minds of the learners. In most cases one realm (online versus offline) wins out in priority over the other; and I’d say more often than not it’s the offline activities that end up ahead.
Online interaction and communication then gets relegated to the back seat where it’s given less attention and consideration. As a result it becomes perceived as an add-on that offers learners less depth and interactivity, and which translates to less engagement and therefore reduced learning opportunities.
It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy really - in considering online learning as somehow different from or inferior to “regular” learning, you actually ensure it.
I think this relates quite closely to the final point you mentioned about people expressing “a difficulty in conceiving of “real” community existing online”. As a uni instructor of mine was fond of saying “once you know what to think, you’ll know how to act.”
If you’re convinced ‘real’ communities only exist offline, you stand little hope of ever realising otherwise.
Cheers,
Mike
[Reply]
August 8th, 2008 at 4:50 am
It seems obvious now that you’ve pointed it out!
[Reply]
Mike Bogle reply on August 8th, 2008 11:15 am:
I had the same reaction when I first read Olubodun’s statement. Then I got to thinking and realised how huge the implications of it were.
[Reply]
August 10th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Hi Mike
I totally agree with you. In fact, I’ve had discussions about this topic and resent having the friendships in the communities that I’m in called ‘virtual’. These are real people and the effort I invest in the communities is certainly real as well. I would do the same thing- reflecting, discussing, giving kind remarks and sharing if we were f2f. And I’ve learned more through online communities than in any other f2f courses within the same timeframe.
In the chaos ensuing at the beginning of the course, I realized that we were building places for us to meet, on a campus much like you describe in your post. However, if one thinks linearly, I’m sure the idea behind online communities is difficult to grasp. It involves a change of mindset on how to communicate per text, and I find it circular. This comes back to your instructor’s quote: Once you know how to think, you’ll know how to act.”
[Reply]
August 12th, 2008 at 10:17 am
You mention online activities are treated to offline ones as a misperception. However I feel that online communities operate under different rules and expectations than those that occur face to face. The concept of virtual, although misliked by some, has some truth as participation is not required to be part of an online community. It is perhaps their inclusion within the community that can be considered virtual.
[Reply]