I just read an article by Blanchard and Markus for my Community Informatics class. Here is the article
itself:blanchard-2002.pdf

This article, and many other community and internet resources, can be also found at our class website.

The introduction lists some existing definitions for “communities” in current literature (great list of references!) and examines how these definitions might apply to virtual communities. One framework, by McMillian and Chavis (1986), is:

• Feelings of membership
• Feelings of influence
• Integration and fulfillment of needs
• Shared emotional connection

McMillian and Chavis also proposed a theoretical model that specifies the origin of each of the above dimensions and also how they interrelate to produce sense of community.

The article also describes the difference between a settlement, or neighborhood, and a community — in both the ‘real’ and ‘virtual’ worlds. Finally, the article shares the results of the authors’ analysis of a virtual settlement, MSN, and in doing so identify some key characteristics provided by the members as reasons for why MSN is a community. The authors also share some interesting thoughts on identity. Below is a quick overview of the reasons most commonly provided by members. The authors elaborate and define each reason:

• Recognition
• Identification
• Support
• Relationship
• Emotional Attachment
• Obligation

Again, the article is uploaded at the beginning of this entry or available on the class website. Happy reading!

-Blanchard, A.L., & Markus, M.L. (2002). Sense of virtual community- Maintaining the experience of belonging. Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
-McMillian, D.W., & Chavis, D.M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition of theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6-23.

You can honestly respond with “Ok, but it depends on who is asking.”

Some thoughts on identity…first, I’ll start with my title and lead-in.

Before I go any further, it is important to know that my primary
interest is non-formal education, specifically the camp industry, and I
have worked at a summer camp for the past 13 years of my life, as a
counselor and now Program Director. With that in mind, I recently (and
successfully) defended my comps exam. Many of my questions centered
around applying youth development concepts and theories to the world of
summer camps. Afterwards, my committee complimented me by sharing, to
paraphrase, that I am somewhat of an expert on camping. That made me
feel good.

Since I just built myself up, it is only fair that I knock myself
down. If I told my colleagues at the summer camp that, they would
laugh at me and probably ridicule PSU’s credibility for making such a
statement. Part of their warm response is because we are all sarcastic
jerks to each other and this is how we keep our egos in check. But I
think the main reason this response is that none of us see any one of
us as any more of an expert on camping than the rest of us (wow, that’s
quite the usage of “us” in one sentence). My camp colleagues see me
merely as one of them.

At the same time, the camp colleagues have declared me an expert on
youth development and literature, and often ask me for advice and to
recommend sources when they are in need of help. Please note, this is
in direct contradiction to the aforementioned sarcastic jerkiness
theory. Ahh, I feel good about myself again.

But here comes the kick in the knee: I will be the first to admit that
my research and academia skills are quite inferior, particularly
compared to the great minds that I theoretically encounter on a daily
basis in State College. Some of my PSU colleagues would likely laugh
at the thought of me being a youth development or literature expert
and, unlike the camp colleagues, they are generally nice, encouraging
people.

My point is this: I am a member of two different communities, the
summer camp community and the PSU research community. I don’t conduct
myself any differently in either community; in fact, I often try to do
things and complete projects that satisfy the demands and
responsibilities of both communities at the same time. Yet the
perception of my identity is different despite my uniform actions in
both communities. The camp community sees me as an expert in youth
development because I read more literature and am more familiar with
the academic community than the rest of the community, though my
research skills are quite ordinary in the academic community. On the
other hand, the academic community sees me as an expert on camping
because of my vast experience, understanding, and philosophical
abilities of the camp community, though my camp knowledge is quite
ordinary in the camp community.

Interesting how two different communities see me as an expert in the
opposite world, yet not in their own. My actions are important, but my
identity is dependent upon the context of the observer. Perhaps my
identity is not that I am an expert in camping or an expert in youth
development and literature, but that I am an expert in bridging these
two communities?

What do you think? Do you have any similar experiences, where two
worlds observe you as two different people based on the rest of the
community?

Here is something I have been thinking about with regard to ‘peripheral’ members of our community.

With Carla, or even internet lurkers (hello out there to all of our fans; we do this for you, and thank you for your support!), there is some quantifiable and observable way for us to know that they are part of our community. Carla directly interacts with many of us, and the lurkers (hello again) directly interact with our content, even if in a passive way.

But what about this:

Every Thursday, after I leave Chambers, I spend the next hour telling my fiancee all about our class. She knows all about the technologies we discuss (and I have even hooked her on using some of them, like Google Reader), and all about the discussions we have. In fact, sometimes she even engages me by trying to form and articulate the difference between knowledge and learning, or community and identity — an extension of our discussions.

Despite this, she has never been to any of the class sites — Pligg, the class blog, your blogs, or my blog — and I have yet to bring up any of her points in class.

So is she a member of our community? Unlike Carla, who we can interact with in class, and lurkers (one more shout out to my homies in cyberspace) who leave a statistic that Cole can identify through Google Analytics, my fiancee leaves no trace (until this comment, anyway). If you think she is a member of our community, why do you think that?

Having just finished Roger’s “Elements of Diffusion,” I decided to revisit The Cluetrain Manifesto (Punching Care Bears and Cluetrain Eats Soggy Cheerios). Rogers points out that innovations typically don’t happen quickly, regardless of how great the innovation is. Cluetrain’s authors, however, passionately make the argument that there is a revolution in the air and the market is changing due to innovations in the internet and its affect on hierarchies between and within markets and audiences.

I guess I am wondering why Cluetrain’s authors felt the change would happen so powerfully, and how quick was the diffusion of the innovative use of the internet in the market — be it business, classrooms, or other educational environments.

Today’s world and communities are designed around instant gratification. Food can be prepared and consumed in seconds through fast food and microwaves.Trivial information is immediately accessible, thanks to Google, Wikipedia, and smart phones like the iPhone. TV shows, music, and movies are seconds away thanks to iTunes and Zune, for the two people in the world who use it. Communication with a friend has progressed from a handwritten letter delivered by pony to delivery by truck to telegraph to telephone to answering machines to cell phones and email to text messages and twitter (still not buying into it). What took as long as weeks to deliver via pony express now takes seconds thanks to texting and twitter. Your network is always instantly accessible; you don’t even have to wait for them to return home to hear your message! Even coaches in sports are expected to win NOW!

If instant gratification is so much a part of our culture’s design, it is easy to understand the immediacy and passion behind The Cluetrain Manifesto. But is accurate or reflective of the way innovation works? Is there a way to change this design, or is it even necessary?

I intend to post this now. It frustrates me when my internet connection takes 4 seconds to do so!