Learn with games!

I am really fascinated by they weeks topic. Ever since my family got a PC in 1986 and I got my first taste of video games, I have been hooked. I think that I have developed a number of skill sets over the years from playing (way too many) video games. There are the basic cognitive skills like spacial-orientation, visual acuity, hand-eye coordination, etc., but I think that I have also become much more adaptable to new situations and become a very quick learner because of video gaming. After all, in a video game, the player must become acquainted with a new world and a new set of rules very quickly in order to succeed.

I enjoyed the insights in many of this weeks readings. The idea of cognitive disequilibrium that Van Eck describes is an interesting one. It also seems to make a lot of sense in regards to how we learn. Given a situation that poses a familiar problem, we assume a certain cause and solution, but are forced to learn new possibilities when our expectations are foiled. It is the gradual building on existing mental frameworks that seems to be particularly effective in learning. Games do this quite well, by gradually increasing the complexity and difficulty of levels.

I think that games are great learning tools (or have the potential to be, at least) in large part because they have something that will be accessible to all different learning styles. There are visual, aural, written, and experiential aspects of video games. Regardless of a students strength, there is a communication/learning method present in video games that will be accessible.

With regards to implementing game assisted learning in the classroom (or the library), Squire and Steinkuehler have some important ideas about skills that gamers have that can be tapped to aid learning. For instance, they point out that for gamers, "knowing where and how to find the right information isn't just entertainment, it's also a source of prestige." Many games require research and knowledge acquisition that, in online fora brings individuals prestige. Many gamers have a genuine love of research and this love can be leveraged to benefit them academically, if games are incorporated into lesson plans.

I would love to see a games night in the library where students could play various games so long as they signed out at least one book--preferably related to some topic explored within one of the games. That would be really cool, even at a university level. There are many games based on world mythologies, or literature that could lead students to rich learning experiences.

The most popular book in the library: facebook

I can certainly attest to the fact that Facebook is extraordinarily popular amongst today's university students. Wandering through the Queen's University Learning Commons on a daily basis, I would suggest that 1 in 3 students using computers are perusing Facebook, rather than article indexes, the catalogue, or even using MS Word. It makes me wonder whether or not the library should simply migrate its web services to Facebook. It certainly seems like a great avenue through which to reach students. Given that third parties can now develop applications for Facebook, it can't be long before an industrious librarian develops a catalogue search interface.

I really like the idea of using Facebook as a suggestion box for new acquisitions. I also think it would be a fantastic virtual reference tool--while it would probably be best to avoid posting questions on the Facebook wall, it is easy to send private messages. The library could easily post instructional materials on Facebook as well, via the notes application. There are now video applications as well, through which the library could post video tutorials. There is really a great deal of potential here.

What about the wisdom of the minority?

There are many benefits to folksonomies and tagging that have been relayed in this weeks articles, many centering on the fact that tagging systems are bottom-up classification schemes. Thus users tag items with language that they see as appropriate. This seems great because one can leverage the "long tail," as mentioned by Kroski. But when it seems important to remember that there are a lot of people who are not online tagging items. As we endeavour to bring order to all of this knowledge, is the wisdom of the crowds really better than the wisdom of a minority? There are of course examples of outdated and potentially offensive classification of subjects in both LCSH and in the DDC, but even with the greater representation of minorities in tagging, there are still large numbers of people out there who are not tagging and may be misrepresented by tags used by the majority of taggers. Just look at the way the word "gay" is callously thrown about on the internet as a pejorative descriptor--damage can be done by this careless use of language. The meaning of words can change through popular usage and there is real is little that can be done to prevent this, but relying on folksonomies can easily encourage this semantic evolution in ways that may be damaging to groups who are underrepresented online. When there is an authoritative body in control of classification, at least there can be some debate and some control over what will be tolerated and what will not.

After all of that ranting, I would like to point out that I am in no way trying to suggest that folksonomies be discarded, or even scaled back, because that would simply be impractical (and probably impossible, given the popularity of tagging). However, there are serious issues to consider when relying on the wisdom of the crowds beyond just misclassification or lack of precision searching. Looking back to last weeks reading authored by Rainie for the PEW Internet and American Life Project, we can see that there are at least racial minority groups (minorities in America, at least) who are well represented within tagging communities, but when we look for distinctions beyond race and gender, and begin to examine classes and people of varying sexuality, there are bound to be underrepresented communities that are excluded from this grand classification process. I think it is important to keep this in mind. The wisdom of the crowds may not be universally wise--it may just suit the views of a predominant class.

A small issue with Mercado

Andrea Mercado writes in her blog post "Tagging on Flickr & del.icio.us" that one of the ways in which to find other users bookmarks on del.icio.us is via "Browsing, [kinda like the bookstore browse vs. trying to find something on a library shelf using the call number system, serendipity vs. structure]." I take issue with her suggestion here that serendipity and structure are opposites. Yes, library materials are arranged according to a highly codified system, but I see no way in which this somehow hinders serendipity. While a user may use different information seeking methods when they start searching in a library vs. a bookstore, I would suggest that many end up browsing just the same in the end. Collocation allows for highly successful browsing within the library and serendipity is just as likely to strike in the stacks as it is in the aisles of a bookstore.

Wiki Difficulties

The thing that really caught my eye in this weeks readings were the concepts of community support and community building that are part of the creation of a wiki. The idea that a wiki needs a dedicated community seems in some ways counter to the idea that a wiki can build a community. Which came first, the community or the wiki? I suppose, ultimately, it all comes down to need. Is there a need that can be filled by a wiki? If there is, then there theoretically ought to be a community waiting to embrace it. That community need not be cohesive and recognized prior to the implementation of the wiki, and thus it can develop via the wiki.

The fact that there must be a need for the wiki in the first place is vitally important. I have had the opportunity to develop a course wiki for an engineering course at Queen's University and I am sad to say that it bombed. It was a well-crafted wiki and a lot of work went into it, but in the end, it turned out that there was no need for it. The idea was that the class could use it as a virtual discussion space and as a space to write the draft of their final papers, which were to be done in groups of three or four students. Ultimately, the wiki failed because the students did not find it difficult to meet in person to discuss their projects, and thus there was no need for a virtual discussion space.

There was some activity on the wiki initially, and that was exciting, but as the term got busier, the students made it known that the wiki was just another thing that they had to keep in mind. It was more of a burden for them to use it than it was a convenience. So, in the end, there was no community support, because although there was a perceived need, there was no actual need. The lesson that I learned from this is that if you can consult a community before implementing such a project, do it.

Rojo vs. Netvibes

It is difficult to actually compare these two web services. Rojo and Netvibes, while both providing RSS aggregating services, are actually quite different. While I would suggest that both companies would love to have you make their page your homepage, they offer very different reasons for doing so.

Rojo, in offering social networking features such as contacts (making friends with other Rojo users) and tagging, voting, etc. is forced to try and bring users into a new system. They are in a sense attempting to compete with services such as Facebook, in the sense that they want you to communicate news about the world (and presumably yourself) through Rojo. Given the vast array of choices in social networking software these days, I think that Rojo is facing an uphill battle. This idea of have RSS friends is really the only feature available in Rojo that I haven't seen in any other RSS-focused software. The tagging and voting, etc. has been covered by applications such as Digg, Redit, etc.

Netvibes has a very different strategy. They are providing a platform for clustering all of the social networking and news related services you already use onto one homepage. This is similar to other services such as Google's customizable homepages. This seems like a much more appealing option to me, because I already feel bogged down by the number of online services I subscribe to. If I can have them all in one place, that works well for me.

Blogging ethics and guidelines

While much of the guidelines for blogging that were given in this weeks readings seemed to fall within the realm of common sense, there were several in the first article, "Blogging Strategy 101: A Primer", that I found quite interesting. One such guideline that seems quite obvious in retrospect, is the idea of laying out a plan for the blog. I'd not really thought about the need to plan out the publishing schedule, the topics that will be covered and those that won't, etc. I just sort of thought of blogs as something that one starts up and populates with whatever content seems relevant at the moment.
Another guideline that would not have occurred to me, but is unarguably important is the strategic deployment of keywords. New readers are most likely going to be won via search engine results, so it only makes sense to have useful keywords appear in headlines and the body of posts so that they will be appropriately indexed by search engines.
Aside from these points, most of the others were not new to me. Ideas such as transparency and honesty should be at the forefront of the thoughts of all writers, regardless of their medium. Citation is easier than ever in a blog (simply provide a link to the source document, assuming that it is online) so there is no reason to skirk this duty.

In regards to the case studies, there were some very good blogs and some that I found lacking in several areas. The blog that seems most in need of improvement is the St. Joseph County Public Library GameBlog. The first thing I noticed about this blog was a posting headline that reads: "Say wha?," which completely obliterates the concept of keyword placement, given that the post has nothing to do with saying anything nor anything to do with "wha." Now, I realize that this is a blog aimed at a young audience, and that this particular post is simply a funny picture of a cat posed with a Nintendo DS lite, so I ought not to be too critical of it. However, there are other poorly titled posts, such as "The Results are In..." that do not in any way describe to the reader what results are in and would not be of any use in appropriately indexing this post in a search engine.
Another complaint I have about this blog is that there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the publishing schedule. There are some days that have multiple posts and then there are several weeks that go by between posts. One final complaint is that the author pages are scant in detail. The author photos are highly edited with effects that largely obscure the images (for reasons why this might be bad, consult Jakob Neilsen's "Weblog Usability") and there is little information that would help the reader feel any connection with the author.