[Work] CSCW course

in
Today, I worked on the slides for the course about Computer Supported Cooperative Work I am going to give with Pierre. I came up with this simple logo and did some research about the projects we want the students to carry out. I now need to set up the web portal/platform to support the course. we are going to use teamframes, the paltform developed here at CRAFT

The goal of this course is that students become able: • To analyze the impact of a groupware system on the cooperative processes. This requires constructing an experiment and analyzing team interactions with both qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques ( project 1) • To specify a groupware system that supports specific teamwork processes. This requires analyzing the process to be supported and understanding the relationship between groupware features (architecture and functionalities) and cooperative processes. ( project 2). To meet this end, we will take roomware design as the example. It's pretty innovative and I think it could be more appealing/motivating than ugly shared whiteboard. Moreover, fast prototyping and participatory design techniques could be nice to use in this context.

Project 1: Comparative analysis of using a collaborative simulation software in two experimental conditions. Each students group has to run experiments with four pairs, one in each conditions. The experiments will be run in CRAFT's laboratory. Students are invited to do themselves she task. The project includes 5 data analyses that have to be delivered on the dates specified in the agenda.

Project 2: Design of a roomware that is a piece of software to be integrated into a table. The project aims first to design and build the table (designing the plane shape and adding standard legs), to run experiments with teams using a plastic whiteboard pasted on the table as well as using their laptops, analysing the video recordings of these experiments an designing the software that could be provide dif the plastic whiteboard was replaced by a computer screen.

[Research] Few notes about Activity Theory

in

According to Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research, there seems to be three theoretical generations in the evolution of activity theory. The first generation, centered around Vygotsky, created the idea of mediation.

The second generation of activity theory derived its inspiration largely from Leont'ev's work. In his famous example of "primeval collective hunt" Leont'ev (1981, p. 210-213) explicated the crucial difference between an individual action and a collective activity. The distinction between activity, action and operation became the basis of Leont'ev's three-level model of activity. The uppermost level of collective activity is driven by an object-related motive; the middle level of individual (or group) action is driven by a conscious goal; and the bottom level of automatic operations is driven by the conditions and tools of the action at hand. However, Leont'ev never graphically expanded Vygotsky's original model into a model of a collective activity system

John Halloran in his phd summarizes this hunt:

In his important example of the ‘primeval collective hunt’ Leont’ev (1978) discusses an activity in which a tribe needs to catch animals for food. He points out that the object (or motive) of this activity is to get food through catching animals. The same object is shared across all the participants; but the participants do not all share the same goal. The goal of a beater is to scare quarry. This forces animals out of hiding. On the face of it, this appears irrational in terms of the object, as the animals scatter. However, others involved in the activity are then able to catch the animals; and this is their goal.

[Weird] Accidental Re-examination of a system

in

I really like this kind of story, as told by MK:

Some cowboys left some guitars behind in Hawaii in about 1792, and the result was Hawaiian Slack Key guitar playing. The cowboys didn't leave behind any instructions on how to tune the guitars, so each person who picked up a guitar and taught themselves to play also learned their own individual way of tuning the guitar. These methods of tuning became highly prized, and musicians would loosen their strings when they put their guitars down, so no one could steal their tuning. Tuning styles were only shared within families, and this created a wonderful kind of family history, with some musicians able to re-tune their guitars and play in the style of their father, and re-tune again and play in the style of their aunt, et cetera.

It is a slightly different but it reminds me this other story I already told here (writtent by Miroslav Holub):

"The young lieutenant of a small Hungarian detachment in the Alps sent a reconnaissance unit out onto the icy wasteland. It began to snow immediately, snowed for two days and the unit did not return. The lieutenant suffered: he had dispatched his own people to death. But the third day the unit came back. Where had they been? How had they made their way? Yes, they said, we considered ourselves lost and waited for the end. And then one of us found a map in his pocket. That calmed us down. We pitched camp, lasted out the snowstorm and then with the map we discovered our bearings. And here we are. The lieutenant borrowed this remarkable map and had a good look at it. It was not a map of the Alps but of the Pyrenees."

The common point here is the way we use artefacts and the inferences we draw from them :) Human beings are a really powerfull 'machine' that interprete meanings!

[MyResearch] Mixed Evaluation Method of Collaboration

in

Last week, at the CSCL symposium, I attended an interesting presentation by Alejandra Martinez about evaluating collaboration. She showed this table

Method requirements: - integrate context................ethnographical data (questionnaire, observation, focus groups...) - study of real situation................ qualitative analysis - participants' point of view................ qualitative analysis - new forms of interaction (technology)................ log recorded data - scalable and efficient processes................ qualitative analysis - visualization processes................ social network analysis or log parsing

[Research] Mobile Research/Design Methods

in

Well, thank you Jeff for this very informative summary of mobile research/design methods! It is actually a comparison of methods for understanding mobile behavior to inform technology design: Case Studies, Diary Studies, Cultural Probes, Ethnography, Field Study (natural or artificial settings), Interviewing, Lab experiment, Normative writings, Survey research, Techology Probes. Trying to find mysefl in the picture, I am actually doing a kind of 'lab experiment/light field study in artifical settings'.

[Research] Reference about context awareness

in

Relevant research paper: >Exploiting Space and Location as a Design Framework for Interactive Mobile Systems by ALAN DIX and TOM RODDEN, NIGEL DAVIES, JONATHAN TREVOR, ADRIAN FRIDAY, and KEVIN PALFREYMAN.

This article considers the importance of context in mobile systems. It considers a range of context-related issues and focus on location as a key issue for mobile systems. A design framework is described consisting of taxonomies of location, mobility, population, and device awareness. The design framework informs the construction of a semantic model of space for mobile systems. The semantic model is reflected in a computational model built on a distributed platform that allows contextual information to be shared across a number of mobile devices. The framework supports the design of interactive mobile systems while the platform supports their rapid development.

[Space and Place] Destroyed Buildings in Dresden

in

Yesterday I went to a photo museum and there were nice pictures of cities destroyed by the war. I am always impressed by this. I tried to find pictures in the same line and it reminded me the one of Dresden after the war. It is amazing. The last one is definitely my favorite, I cannot find the author of those picture, it is a shame.

[Life HAcks] How to do a mindmap

in

These days, I am trying to figure out the global picture of my phd, that's why I am into napkin sketches and mind maps. I found this short tutorial on the web. Here are the rules:

Mind mapping (or concept mapping) involves writing down a central idea and thinking up new and related ideas which radiate out from the centre. By focussing on key ideas written down in your own words, and then looking for branches out and connections between the ideas, you are mapping knowledge in a manner which will help you understand and remember new information.

- Use lines, colours, arrows, branches or some other way of showing connections between the ideas generated on your mind map. These relationships may be important in you understanding new information or in constructing a structured essay plan. - Draw quickly on unlined paper without pausing, judging or editing - Use capitals to encourage you to get down only the key points. Capitals are also easier to read in a diagram. - Put main idea in the centre, landscape style - Leave lots of space: some of the most useful mind maps are those which are added to over a period of time

[Research] News from our workshop

in

We had a nice workshop, here are few pictures of what people designed. I am really happy that the fast prototyping activity fostered interesting discussions between participants. The main lesson of this workshop is that finding a collaborative context-dependent task is obviously hard. People always comes up with old-season ideas like space annotation (it's not old season actually, it is rather cliché). Another interesting point that emerged is emotion: we should take more into acocunt the link between context-awarenes and emotion. Finally, it seems also hard to fit all of this into a 'learning' framework.

[Life Hacks] Napkin Sketch Tips

in

I often use napkin to draw sketches but I am an awfull drawer. That's why I turned myself to this summary of “Napkin Sketches 101” written by Don Moyer in 360

1. Realize ugly is beautiful. – Crude, ugly and wobbly are okay. If the idea captured is valid, you’ll have time later to make it beautiful. 2. Master the basics. – If you can draw a half-dozen simple shapes you’re ready to take on almost any topic. 3. Use labels. – Include lots of labels and notes so things will make sense to you when reviewed at a later date. 4. Keep it simple. – In general, leave out any detail that will not be missed. 5. Be consistent. – Avoid variations that don’t mean anything. 6. Break some rules. – Don’t worry about keeping things in the “right” scale. 7. Let your arrows speak. – Pointing arrows are the verbs in a napkin sketch. 8. Use the right tools. – Use whatever surface is available – paper, whiteboard, small note-paper etc. 9. Don’t keep the napkin on your lap. – Don’t hide your sketches in a file folder. Make them visible and share them with teammates.

[Research] Notes about Mutual intelligibility

in

In the context of collaborative interaction analysis, we have to deal with our team-mates share the context in which they carry out their joint activity. Collaboration indeed requires “intersubjectivity”: the understanding of another person depends on the assumptions the observer can make about what he’s understanding and planning. Carrying out a joint activity depends on this intersubjectivity: a mutual and shared understanding based on the immediate experience of two persons who have only access to their own thoughts and the actions performed by each of the participants This notion of mutual intelligibility has been extensively studied by scholars, it is called: - 'mutual knowledge' by philosophers specialised in language studies: Smith 1982 or Grice, 1975 - 'common ground' by psycholinguists: Clark, 1991 or 'mutual knowledge' by Krauss and Fussel, 1990: they claim that communication needs a common ground, a common body of knowledge between interactants. - 'shared cognitive environment' by Sperber and Wilson, 1986: unlike Clark, they states that communication is just the intersection between different individual cognitive environment/context.