Animoto is a web-based application that enables you to mash-up your photos and music to make short, high quality vidoes that can be downloaded to your desktop, emailed, or embedded into other sites. The basic service is free and allows you to create an unlimited number of 30-second videos, e.g. movie trailer or teaser length. You also have the option of paying $3 to create a single full-length video or you can pay $30 a year to create an unlimited amount of videos. If you're a Mac user think of Animoto as iMovie amped up.
Using the application is easy. You add images either from your desktop or from another web-based application such as Flickr, Facebook, and Picasa, select the music, finalize the production and you're good to go. Short videos, e.g. movie trailer or teaser length, use approximately 12 to 15 images and you can select music from the Animoto library or upload your own.
I can see the short videos being used in conjunction with a presentation as a way to generate interest in a topic. This could ber especially powerful as a promotional tool, e.g "Wouldn't you like to go here/do this?" and as a reflective tool, e.g. images taken along the way to completing a project.
For me, the big takeaway from the NMC conference was the crystilization of this thought: Images, both still and moving, are fast becoming our primary means of communication. You see this phenomenon in higher education where multi media projects are not only commonly accepted as demonstration of learning by instructors but instructors are getting in on the act themselves. Witness some of the incredible work of Michael Wesch and his Digital Ethnography project. Or the work by our own faculty and students. In fact, many universities are rolling out digital media centers to support the work of students and instructors. We see this in popular culture where "conversations" take place via the mashing-up of video clips, music, and images as people build on one another's creations and post them to places like YouTube. At the symposium, Lessig talked about digital media as the preferred means of communications amongst the young digital natives and the pressure this brings to bear on the copyright laws, which were written for another age.
I saw an excellent demonstration of this in a pre-conference workshop by Beth Harris and Steve Zucker from the Fashion Institute of Technology. Using image and video collaboration tools, (this example uses Cozimo but they also used other tools), they built a shared understanding of various works of art with their students by annotating the image in real time (both synchronously and asynchronously).
What struck me was how the image went from being talked about to being worked on. And it wasn't so much the tools they were using but how they were using them to communicate. In many examples throughout the conference an image or a video was the primary vehicle of communication. This was true regardless of whether the conversation was started by the students or the instructor. And regardless of whether the work was an original creation or an existing piece. The next layer of communication could be described as microblogging, short declarative sentences and interrogative questions whether done directly on the piece or using another medium such as Twitter. It was not until the third layer of communication where "traditional" expanded text-based narrative kicked in. At this stage of the conversation text was used for reflection, expanded narration, and for summary. This could be in the format of a term paper but more often as a blog post. And sometimes delivered via audio. In fact it is not uncommon for the entire conversation to take place within the first and second levels with students building on each others work in response to one another.
This of course raises several challenges. If this is the way of communication, how do we build an educational infrastructure that supports it? Questions of tools, their availability, bandwidth, an education all need to be addressed. How do we aggregate content spread out over several mediums. Many of which our in the public realm and could, theoretically, disappear at any moment in time. How can this content be archived in a way that is meaningful and retrievable? How do we evaluate student contribution and measure learning in a collaborative environment?
We've begun addressing these questions but there is still much work to be done.
I saw an excellent demonstration of this in a pre-conference workshop by Beth Harris and Steve Zucker from the Fashion Institute of Technology. Using image and video collaboration tools, (this example uses Cozimo but they also used other tools), they built a shared understanding of various works of art with their students by annotating the image in real time (both synchronously and asynchronously).
(taken from smarthistory.us)
What struck me was how the image went from being talked about to being worked on. And it wasn't so much the tools they were using but how they were using them to communicate. In many examples throughout the conference an image or a video was the primary vehicle of communication. This was true regardless of whether the conversation was started by the students or the instructor. And regardless of whether the work was an original creation or an existing piece. The next layer of communication could be described as microblogging, short declarative sentences and interrogative questions whether done directly on the piece or using another medium such as Twitter. It was not until the third layer of communication where "traditional" expanded text-based narrative kicked in. At this stage of the conversation text was used for reflection, expanded narration, and for summary. This could be in the format of a term paper but more often as a blog post. And sometimes delivered via audio. In fact it is not uncommon for the entire conversation to take place within the first and second levels with students building on each others work in response to one another.
The New Communication Paradigm
Primary:
Images
(Still and Moving)
Secondary:
Microblogging
(Short, declarative statements and interrogative questions)
Tertiary:
Extended text
(Reflection, narrative, and summary. Often delivered via audio rather than the written word)
Primary:
Images
(Still and Moving)
Secondary:
Microblogging
(Short, declarative statements and interrogative questions)
Tertiary:
Extended text
(Reflection, narrative, and summary. Often delivered via audio rather than the written word)
This of course raises several challenges. If this is the way of communication, how do we build an educational infrastructure that supports it? Questions of tools, their availability, bandwidth, an education all need to be addressed. How do we aggregate content spread out over several mediums. Many of which our in the public realm and could, theoretically, disappear at any moment in time. How can this content be archived in a way that is meaningful and retrievable? How do we evaluate student contribution and measure learning in a collaborative environment?
We've begun addressing these questions but there is still much work to be done.
Since arriving at Princeton on Tuesday I've had the opportunity to participate in several different events (a couple of workshops, a reception, a plenary address and a presentation. And I've noticed a common theme bubbling up from all of them. That is, we are all fundamentally story tellers.
I did not expect to see much innovation attending a conference about a
course management system. And the Angel User Conference did not
disappoint. The main thrust of the conference, and I've attended the
last three, is to give an update on the status of the company, show off
the glitzy features in the soon to be released version, and to provide
allied vendors with a chance to press the flesh. It's more kin to a
sales conference than an educational conference. If you ever had a
friend drag you to a pyramid sales pitch then you'll get the vibe of
the ANGEL User's Conference.
And I get that. They have a product to sell and partners to satisfy. But one aspect of this conference that's always left me wanting is the lack of focus on the people actually using the CMS. No, that's not correct. ANGEL Learning does focus on the customer. They actively solicit feedback, do focus groups, and partner with customers on pilot projects. No, what disturbs me about these conferences is how it always comes back to being about them. It's the "we heard you and look at what we did to make it better!" tone of the event that wears on me. Because the we is used in the royal sense not in the collaborative. When they say "we" they really mean "us". It's "look at what a great thing ANGEL Learning did for you" and not "look what we all did together." Or even better yet, "look at what you did!" with no mention of the tool.
Because at this point the tool should be implied. This isn't a sales convention. For the most part these are the people and institutions who've invested, quite heavily, into the CMS. They're preaching to the converted. And what better way to sell your product to a potential customer than though the individuals who work with it most intimately on a daily basis? At this point in the game, if I'm a university thinking about a new CMS and I'm at the conference, chances are I already heard the sales pitch. No, I'm there to hear what other schools think.
So for me, the real story of the conference lies in the undercurrent. In what we're all saying to each other in the halls and in the elevator outside the formal events and away probing ears. And since the conference had limited internet access (the hot spot was set up next to the vendors) and there was no inclusion of social computing tools, like Twitter and Flickr, that back story was lost. For the attendees this meant you could only take part in what you could physically be present for. And for everyone, especially ANGEL Learning, they lost a valuable archive of the event.
I understand that ANGEL Learning would be a little uncomfortable using technologies that are not theirs for fear of exposing a perceived limitation. But I think this fear is unfounded. Their product is a course management system. It was designed for the pre-Web 2.0 world with a goal of helping instructors better manage a course, or multiple courses, by making it a convenient place to store, collect, and distribute information. It wasn't made for creating or capturing things like the collaborative tools of today's world. And, in my opinion, that's okay. If it tries to be all things to everybody it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, it's a "small pieces loosely joined" world where innovation comes fast and stripped down. But it's also an imperfect world where we're willing to put up with a lot because of the perceived value we're getting in return (and mostly for free). But we're not willing to put up with that in an enterprise system like a CMS. A product we invest heavily in with money, time, and reputation. Above all, a CMS must be two things stable and available, not most of the time like Web 2.0 technologies but always.
Where I see a competitive edge for ANGEL, or any CMS, would be in it's ability to adapt to and partner with these emerging social technologies. A colleague of mine whom I really respect, Joe Fahs of Elmira College, did a presentation where he demonstrated how using Pageflakes he could aggregate all sorts of content and then drop the Pageflakes link into an ANGEL course. Now, if I'm ANGEL Learning I'm thinking what can we do to make that easier? Is there a way archive any of this content, like student blog posts or videos? Is there an easy way to link it with the gradebook? And how can I do it quicker than my real competitors (Blackboard) can?
To their credit ANGEL Learning is taking some steps in this direction. In version 7.4 there will be a You Tube option in the HTML editor that enables faculty and students to drop videos into the course. And there is talk that a rubric tool could be piloted. I'd like to see more of this.
And I get that. They have a product to sell and partners to satisfy. But one aspect of this conference that's always left me wanting is the lack of focus on the people actually using the CMS. No, that's not correct. ANGEL Learning does focus on the customer. They actively solicit feedback, do focus groups, and partner with customers on pilot projects. No, what disturbs me about these conferences is how it always comes back to being about them. It's the "we heard you and look at what we did to make it better!" tone of the event that wears on me. Because the we is used in the royal sense not in the collaborative. When they say "we" they really mean "us". It's "look at what a great thing ANGEL Learning did for you" and not "look what we all did together." Or even better yet, "look at what you did!" with no mention of the tool.
Because at this point the tool should be implied. This isn't a sales convention. For the most part these are the people and institutions who've invested, quite heavily, into the CMS. They're preaching to the converted. And what better way to sell your product to a potential customer than though the individuals who work with it most intimately on a daily basis? At this point in the game, if I'm a university thinking about a new CMS and I'm at the conference, chances are I already heard the sales pitch. No, I'm there to hear what other schools think.
So for me, the real story of the conference lies in the undercurrent. In what we're all saying to each other in the halls and in the elevator outside the formal events and away probing ears. And since the conference had limited internet access (the hot spot was set up next to the vendors) and there was no inclusion of social computing tools, like Twitter and Flickr, that back story was lost. For the attendees this meant you could only take part in what you could physically be present for. And for everyone, especially ANGEL Learning, they lost a valuable archive of the event.
I understand that ANGEL Learning would be a little uncomfortable using technologies that are not theirs for fear of exposing a perceived limitation. But I think this fear is unfounded. Their product is a course management system. It was designed for the pre-Web 2.0 world with a goal of helping instructors better manage a course, or multiple courses, by making it a convenient place to store, collect, and distribute information. It wasn't made for creating or capturing things like the collaborative tools of today's world. And, in my opinion, that's okay. If it tries to be all things to everybody it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, it's a "small pieces loosely joined" world where innovation comes fast and stripped down. But it's also an imperfect world where we're willing to put up with a lot because of the perceived value we're getting in return (and mostly for free). But we're not willing to put up with that in an enterprise system like a CMS. A product we invest heavily in with money, time, and reputation. Above all, a CMS must be two things stable and available, not most of the time like Web 2.0 technologies but always.
Where I see a competitive edge for ANGEL, or any CMS, would be in it's ability to adapt to and partner with these emerging social technologies. A colleague of mine whom I really respect, Joe Fahs of Elmira College, did a presentation where he demonstrated how using Pageflakes he could aggregate all sorts of content and then drop the Pageflakes link into an ANGEL course. Now, if I'm ANGEL Learning I'm thinking what can we do to make that easier? Is there a way archive any of this content, like student blog posts or videos? Is there an easy way to link it with the gradebook? And how can I do it quicker than my real competitors (Blackboard) can?
To their credit ANGEL Learning is taking some steps in this direction. In version 7.4 there will be a You Tube option in the HTML editor that enables faculty and students to drop videos into the course. And there is talk that a rubric tool could be piloted. I'd like to see more of this.
I was all set to write my latest essay, Small Pieces Loosely Swained, when I cam across Michael Wesch's posts discussing something he refers to as the "Digital Database of the Mundane." Loosely defined this database is the aggregation of our movements on the web. (I highly recommend reading his posts on this here and here.) In his posts Wesch talks about the unintentional trail of information we leave behind as we maneuver around the web. And how easy some technologies make it to aggregate this information. Specifically, he mentions radio frequency identification (RFID) tags and two-dimensional (2D) barcodes.
RFIDs are data chips that can be implanted in most anything. Some are active meaning they transmit data, such as the ones shipping companies use to track packages. While others are passive. They do not transmit data but rather are read by something like a scanner. For example, my neighbors had one implanted into their pet boxer, Roxy. If she ever gets lost any vet with a scanner can pull up her contact information. 2D barcodes are barcodes that store information both horizontally and vertically. Thus they are able to contain a lot more detail than uni-dimensional
barcodes. For example, I could have a digital identification card attached to all or selected movements on the web that contains demographic information about me that can easily be transferred and read by other parties. It is technologies like these that make possible the idea of having a 'digital wallet' where all our pertinent information is stored and encrypted to be used for things as mundane as renewing you library books online to purchasing expensive gifts. But that's a topic for another post to come.
Getting back to Wesch, he's an anthropologist at Kansas who along with his students are exploring the digital trails we leave behind in a new and exciting field called digital ethnography. The genesis of this field of study comes from Sandy Pentland and the MIT Media Laboratory. In 2005 Nathan Eagle and Pentland published a study in Reality Mining. Reality Mining is the ability to identify social patterns of individuals and groups by tracking the ways in which they access and use information. Including the context in which they are doing it. Pentland and Eagle used Blue Tooth enabled mobile phones to monitor the activity of about 100 MIT students and professors. From this data they were able to create a model of the research subjects social networks and use the model to predict where the subjects would meet with other members of their network on any given day of the week. Read their paper here.
This has powerful implications for those of us interested in studying the digital neighborhoods of our students to understand how to better connect with them. Digital Neighborhoods, as defined by me, are the personal spaces we create on the web through the aggregation of hyperlinks. Where proximity is determined by each individuals unique and ever-changing interests. The more I am interested in something the 'closer' is will be in relation to me digitally. In other words, if I like something I make it easy for me to access either through bookmarks or links from my own pages. With reality mining I can not only study where we go and how we present ourselves on the web we I can also now see physically where we're doing this and anticipate the outcomes of the interaction. Reality mining adds another layer that we can study further blurring the line between our web selves and our terrestrial selves. In fact it may obliterate it.
RFIDs are data chips that can be implanted in most anything. Some are active meaning they transmit data, such as the ones shipping companies use to track packages. While others are passive. They do not transmit data but rather are read by something like a scanner. For example, my neighbors had one implanted into their pet boxer, Roxy. If she ever gets lost any vet with a scanner can pull up her contact information. 2D barcodes are barcodes that store information both horizontally and vertically. Thus they are able to contain a lot more detail than uni-dimensional
barcodes. For example, I could have a digital identification card attached to all or selected movements on the web that contains demographic information about me that can easily be transferred and read by other parties. It is technologies like these that make possible the idea of having a 'digital wallet' where all our pertinent information is stored and encrypted to be used for things as mundane as renewing you library books online to purchasing expensive gifts. But that's a topic for another post to come.Getting back to Wesch, he's an anthropologist at Kansas who along with his students are exploring the digital trails we leave behind in a new and exciting field called digital ethnography. The genesis of this field of study comes from Sandy Pentland and the MIT Media Laboratory. In 2005 Nathan Eagle and Pentland published a study in Reality Mining. Reality Mining is the ability to identify social patterns of individuals and groups by tracking the ways in which they access and use information. Including the context in which they are doing it. Pentland and Eagle used Blue Tooth enabled mobile phones to monitor the activity of about 100 MIT students and professors. From this data they were able to create a model of the research subjects social networks and use the model to predict where the subjects would meet with other members of their network on any given day of the week. Read their paper here.
This has powerful implications for those of us interested in studying the digital neighborhoods of our students to understand how to better connect with them. Digital Neighborhoods, as defined by me, are the personal spaces we create on the web through the aggregation of hyperlinks. Where proximity is determined by each individuals unique and ever-changing interests. The more I am interested in something the 'closer' is will be in relation to me digitally. In other words, if I like something I make it easy for me to access either through bookmarks or links from my own pages. With reality mining I can not only study where we go and how we present ourselves on the web we I can also now see physically where we're doing this and anticipate the outcomes of the interaction. Reality mining adds another layer that we can study further blurring the line between our web selves and our terrestrial selves. In fact it may obliterate it.
A couple of weeks ago I wrote about my digital neighborhood. The premise behind the post was that the line between my digital self and my terrestrial self had become blurred to the point of non-existence. They are all pieces of the same 'me' that I put forth. As a result of this self-revelation I became more cognizant of the multiple pieces of myself that I put forward in whatever realm (see My Multiple Selves). Jim Phelps wrote an excellent response to my digital neighborhood post asking how we as educators can leverage this concept to reach our students (see Digital Neighborhoods - Guiding Design). Jim suggests that, "we need to think about our users’ current digital neighborhoods and how we
can integrate our new applications and services into those
neighborhoods." I agree with Jim. Distance on the web is determined by links and the closer you are to your clientèle the better. For us that means being where our students are.
This also got me thinking about what it looks like on the other side. I manage the Technology Learning Assistant program (TLA) at University Park. This is a program designed to match up kids (both undergrad and graduate students) who want real world consulting experience with faculty who desire to integrate technology into their teaching repertoire. These kids are in a unique position of still being, well, kids while also trying to strategically prepare themselves for entering the workforce. So how do they manage their digital identity? How do they manage their multiple selves so they can be kids with their friends but young adults to prospective employers? After all, most employers "Google" people they're thinking of hiring.
To help them along I'm thinking of incorporating a digital identity management component into the TLA program. My hope is to help these kids discover a sense of purpose in at least part of their web presence. To give them an idea of when and how to be kids and when it is a good idea to put forth a more, for lack of a better word, "serious" presence. For example, Facebook is a powerful social networking service where the vibe is casual and friendly. There all all sorts of fun and quirky apps you can drop into your profile and share with your friends. But there are also professional social applications out there, such as Linkedin, where the goal is to build a professional network of contacts. And through these contacts you can land a job, make deals, share advice, etc. I'm thinking of encouraging the students establish a presence on Linkedin as part of their e-portfolio.
But there is also the need to educate these kids on managing their "kid" presence. To help them understand that space and distance on the web are entirely different animals than they are in the terrestrial world. I think most of us get this in theory but practicing it is another thing. For example, the part of the 'self' a TLA displays while working with a client is a distinctly different than the self she will display hanging out with friends. And that's how it should be. We understand how to act appropriately in each scenario and since these situations are naturally distinct, separated by both time and distance, the world runs smooth. However, the laws of time and space on the web don't operate like that.
Once an individual is 'found' on the web then practically everything about them that exists there is only a click or two away. Sure I may put a link to my Linkedin profile on my CV and strategically decide to leave my Facebook address off but, unless I lock it down, will that stop a potential employer from finding me there? Hardly. Plus who wants to lock down any social application? The inherent beauty built into them is the ability to find and be found. That's where the fun (and the power of it all) is.
So rather than teaching my TLAs the mechanics of hiding or limiting information I'm seriously thinking about having discussions around etiquette. I want to help them understand that there really is no difference between the terrestrial and the web. That they don't exist as separate planes but have now combined to create a single expanded space. Where we generally move so freely about and between without so much as a second thought. And that's great; it's liberating. But we need to be aware of the ramifications of this freedom of movement. Gone are the days of hiding in plain site on the web. If somebody, such as a prospective employer wants to find you, they will.
I'm not preaching doom-and-gloom or prescribing self-censorship. Personally, when I self-censor I grind to a halt and all creativity dies on the vine. But I do find that by exercising a little self-discipline my creativity flourishes. Instead I'm thinking more along the lines of having a sense of decorum. There are ways to express all facets of your personality and them there are ways. And I am suggesting that one may be better than the other relative to your aspirations.
This also got me thinking about what it looks like on the other side. I manage the Technology Learning Assistant program (TLA) at University Park. This is a program designed to match up kids (both undergrad and graduate students) who want real world consulting experience with faculty who desire to integrate technology into their teaching repertoire. These kids are in a unique position of still being, well, kids while also trying to strategically prepare themselves for entering the workforce. So how do they manage their digital identity? How do they manage their multiple selves so they can be kids with their friends but young adults to prospective employers? After all, most employers "Google" people they're thinking of hiring.
To help them along I'm thinking of incorporating a digital identity management component into the TLA program. My hope is to help these kids discover a sense of purpose in at least part of their web presence. To give them an idea of when and how to be kids and when it is a good idea to put forth a more, for lack of a better word, "serious" presence. For example, Facebook is a powerful social networking service where the vibe is casual and friendly. There all all sorts of fun and quirky apps you can drop into your profile and share with your friends. But there are also professional social applications out there, such as Linkedin, where the goal is to build a professional network of contacts. And through these contacts you can land a job, make deals, share advice, etc. I'm thinking of encouraging the students establish a presence on Linkedin as part of their e-portfolio.
But there is also the need to educate these kids on managing their "kid" presence. To help them understand that space and distance on the web are entirely different animals than they are in the terrestrial world. I think most of us get this in theory but practicing it is another thing. For example, the part of the 'self' a TLA displays while working with a client is a distinctly different than the self she will display hanging out with friends. And that's how it should be. We understand how to act appropriately in each scenario and since these situations are naturally distinct, separated by both time and distance, the world runs smooth. However, the laws of time and space on the web don't operate like that.
Once an individual is 'found' on the web then practically everything about them that exists there is only a click or two away. Sure I may put a link to my Linkedin profile on my CV and strategically decide to leave my Facebook address off but, unless I lock it down, will that stop a potential employer from finding me there? Hardly. Plus who wants to lock down any social application? The inherent beauty built into them is the ability to find and be found. That's where the fun (and the power of it all) is.
So rather than teaching my TLAs the mechanics of hiding or limiting information I'm seriously thinking about having discussions around etiquette. I want to help them understand that there really is no difference between the terrestrial and the web. That they don't exist as separate planes but have now combined to create a single expanded space. Where we generally move so freely about and between without so much as a second thought. And that's great; it's liberating. But we need to be aware of the ramifications of this freedom of movement. Gone are the days of hiding in plain site on the web. If somebody, such as a prospective employer wants to find you, they will.
I'm not preaching doom-and-gloom or prescribing self-censorship. Personally, when I self-censor I grind to a halt and all creativity dies on the vine. But I do find that by exercising a little self-discipline my creativity flourishes. Instead I'm thinking more along the lines of having a sense of decorum. There are ways to express all facets of your personality and them there are ways. And I am suggesting that one may be better than the other relative to your aspirations.
I first encountered the idea of working in a paperless office environment over ten years ago while working in the health care industry. I was part of a contract that offered Medicare supplement insurance and when the contract came up for bid in 1995 a new company took over. Part of this new company's vision for reducing operating costs was the implementation of a company Intranet where all our reference and training materials would be stored. I was part of the T&D department who was charged with implementing this. And, quite honestly, it sounded like a great and timely idea. This was the time of boom in personal computing and the growth of the world wide web. Delivering and consuming information electronically seemed logical, economical, and practical. But a funny thing happened along the way to office of the future. The human element kicked in.
People began to look at paper in much the same way their grandparents viewed land during the great depression. Currency and capital were abstract concepts who derived their solve value from the trust or belief of the marketplace but land was permanent. It couldn't disappear because someone decided they didn't believe in it anymore. Flash forward fifty-odd years and workers had the similar reaction to paper. Paper was tactile. And documents on paper were official. You could wield a document. Use it as proof. Waive it in the air to make a point. And it wouldn't disappear if someone pulled the plug on the network. There was even some research that indicated the use of paper had increased as a result of the office of the future.
At some point in time, I don't recall a specific moment, I resigned myself to the fact that I would always need paper and that I would work in a dual-medium environment. Until two weeks ago.
It was the week after the symposium and I was spent. For those charged with putting it on the symposium is really a nine to ten month event and those last six weeks leading up to it are frantic with activity. For me, I was pretty useless afterwards. Incapable of sustained periods of intellectual activity I decided I would clean my office. If you haven't seen my office it can best be described as intimate. It is literally a converted storage closet. So economy of space is essential (Good thing I'm a minimalist at heart). And that's when it hit me. I was paperless.
Going through my filing cabinets I discovered I had not 'filed' anything in over a year. My weekly reports, vacation requests, projects, etc., were all online. Stored on one machine or another. On one of two external hard drives. And more and more in someone else's database (can you say Google docs?). I was able to recycle 95% of what remained. After all, do I still need that ANGEL 6.3 User Manual? (A 500+ page behemoth). We hadn't been on 6.3 for 2 years!
So I got to thinking, as I packed the Mixed Office Paper recycling bin, how I got to this point. What happened that made saving paper so superfluous? Once the Jell-O that was my mind began to firm back up it dawned on me that it wasn't so much one thin or event that brought me to this point. Rather it was several.
As electronic document creation and storage improved I was able to do more without the need of paper. We all become more comfortable working this way and 'trusting' that bits of data were just as tangible as sheets of paper. The initial promise of the company Intranet had come to fruition in it's promise of how information could be consumed. But it was more than that. I realized my need for paper had decreased because my use of it had become more specialized. Most of what I do now I do electronically. Whether it be on my laptop or even my cellphone. I've come to rely on the text feature of my phone so much I recently bought an env for the flip top keypad. I use paper mostly for very brief notes or scribbles that will grow into something more when I take them online. Because of that, the size of the paper I use has shrunk. My binder sized day planner has been replaced by a reporter's notebook. And it's not just my need for paper to capture the written word. Now the majority of my picture taking is done wit my camera phone on digital camera and again deposited online. And it's not just visual media. Not only have I moved all my music to non-tangible electronic formats. It's also how I buy it. A quick mental check leads me to think it's been two years since I bought a cd at a brick and mortar store and that was because someone had given me a gift card. My movie collection can't be far behind. This 'virtual mentality' has crept into other facets of my life where going digital isn't all that practical. I love books but I don't buy them like I used to. I rediscovered the public library when borrowing a book is much like downloading a file and when I'm finished with it I can return (read delete it). Now I buy only the books that I absolutely covet.
Yes, a funny thing happened on my way to becoming paperless. I became 'possession-less' or 'thing-less'. At least lesser. I became digital.
People began to look at paper in much the same way their grandparents viewed land during the great depression. Currency and capital were abstract concepts who derived their solve value from the trust or belief of the marketplace but land was permanent. It couldn't disappear because someone decided they didn't believe in it anymore. Flash forward fifty-odd years and workers had the similar reaction to paper. Paper was tactile. And documents on paper were official. You could wield a document. Use it as proof. Waive it in the air to make a point. And it wouldn't disappear if someone pulled the plug on the network. There was even some research that indicated the use of paper had increased as a result of the office of the future.
At some point in time, I don't recall a specific moment, I resigned myself to the fact that I would always need paper and that I would work in a dual-medium environment. Until two weeks ago.
It was the week after the symposium and I was spent. For those charged with putting it on the symposium is really a nine to ten month event and those last six weeks leading up to it are frantic with activity. For me, I was pretty useless afterwards. Incapable of sustained periods of intellectual activity I decided I would clean my office. If you haven't seen my office it can best be described as intimate. It is literally a converted storage closet. So economy of space is essential (Good thing I'm a minimalist at heart). And that's when it hit me. I was paperless.
Going through my filing cabinets I discovered I had not 'filed' anything in over a year. My weekly reports, vacation requests, projects, etc., were all online. Stored on one machine or another. On one of two external hard drives. And more and more in someone else's database (can you say Google docs?). I was able to recycle 95% of what remained. After all, do I still need that ANGEL 6.3 User Manual? (A 500+ page behemoth). We hadn't been on 6.3 for 2 years!
So I got to thinking, as I packed the Mixed Office Paper recycling bin, how I got to this point. What happened that made saving paper so superfluous? Once the Jell-O that was my mind began to firm back up it dawned on me that it wasn't so much one thin or event that brought me to this point. Rather it was several.
As electronic document creation and storage improved I was able to do more without the need of paper. We all become more comfortable working this way and 'trusting' that bits of data were just as tangible as sheets of paper. The initial promise of the company Intranet had come to fruition in it's promise of how information could be consumed. But it was more than that. I realized my need for paper had decreased because my use of it had become more specialized. Most of what I do now I do electronically. Whether it be on my laptop or even my cellphone. I've come to rely on the text feature of my phone so much I recently bought an env for the flip top keypad. I use paper mostly for very brief notes or scribbles that will grow into something more when I take them online. Because of that, the size of the paper I use has shrunk. My binder sized day planner has been replaced by a reporter's notebook. And it's not just my need for paper to capture the written word. Now the majority of my picture taking is done wit my camera phone on digital camera and again deposited online. And it's not just visual media. Not only have I moved all my music to non-tangible electronic formats. It's also how I buy it. A quick mental check leads me to think it's been two years since I bought a cd at a brick and mortar store and that was because someone had given me a gift card. My movie collection can't be far behind. This 'virtual mentality' has crept into other facets of my life where going digital isn't all that practical. I love books but I don't buy them like I used to. I rediscovered the public library when borrowing a book is much like downloading a file and when I'm finished with it I can return (read delete it). Now I buy only the books that I absolutely covet.
Yes, a funny thing happened on my way to becoming paperless. I became 'possession-less' or 'thing-less'. At least lesser. I became digital.
I've been reading David Weinberger's Small Pieces Loosely Joined and I can't stop thinking about the concept of space and how it applies to the web. Generally, when Weinberger speaks of space he's referring to the relative distance between two sites. In the terrestrial world the distance is determined by geography; the physical proximity of one thing in relation to another. For example, here in State College there are primarily two places to do your shopping, College Ave. and the Nittany Valley Mall. Each is comprised of a mixed bag of stores. On College Ave. there is a frame shop located next to a Chinese restaurant, located next to a bar, located next to a card shop, located next to a sandwich place, located next to a jewelry store. What binds these individual stores together is not what they have in common, rather it's their the locale. They are located in desirable space.
As Weinberger points out space on the web doesn't work that way. Distance is measured in hyperlinks and proximity is created by interest. In other words, each of us gets to create own own space on the web. Your own neighborhood, if you will, filled with the places you find interesting. And unlike your physical neighborhood where you can't just make your loud neighbors disappear, that's exactly what you can do on the web. Get tired of a blog? Delete the link. If it gets interesting six months from now? Add it back. As Weinberger says, links are the geography of the web (italics mine).
So this got me to thinking, What does my digital neighborhood look like? What seemingly disparate places are loosely joined (pun intended) just because I happen to be interested in them? Let's see, if I start with my personal blog, Running on the Learn, I immediately jump to my running partner's blog, Parked Thoughts, where we do our weekly endorphin high podcast, Running with the Pack. The podcast has drawn interest from all over and we've now connected with an opera singer from New York who is training to run his first marathon (and blogging about it). And then there's Kris, the self-described "Hoosier chick now living in Australia". If you jump over to her blog you also see she's recently married and really into knitting. And Mike, an ultra-marathoner whose goal is to run a marathon in all fifty states.
Tweeting about my running experiences introduced me to IrafromSoyasset. Now IrafromSoyasset is a friend on Facebook and a professional contact on Linkedin. Ira introduced me to SteveRunner whose training for the Boston Marathon ad has a blog site called Phedippidations as well as a group on Facebook that joined. Phedippidations is also linked from Parked Thoughts completing a loop there.
If we walk up the street of my neighborhood we come to another interest of mine, gentlemanly pursuits. There I have a link to a man-on-the-street fashion blog, The Sartorialist. From there I bounce to LagunaBeachTrad's site, amongst other claims LagunaBeachTrad claims to be a failed mercenary. From Trad's site I came across WASP 101 a primer on the old Brooks Brothers Boston Brahmin lifestyle. From the GQ podcast I discovered Ask Andy a Q&A type discussion forum where you can get all your fashion questions answered as well as a blog site hosted by a custom bespoke tailor from Saville Row. Not to mention the email updates I get from places such as The Gap and Neiman-Marcus.
Sometimes an old neighbor will look you up. Today I got an email from a message board dedicated to the Philadelphia Phillies that I hadn't contributed to since last September. Apparently someone was comparing the Phils start this season to their start last season and rehashed an old comment of mine. Now, my interest rekindled I moved the Philaphans message board back into my neighborhood.
If I go 'round the corner I meet my book friends redjen, nfh, and MaryMary. We post what we're reading and make recommendations and write reviews for each other from a nugget in Facebook, complete with links to retailers like Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
When I go out to my garden I find my friends Jamie and Brett. Jamie put Brett and me on to a gardening writer for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette who'll mail you potato top tomato seeds if you send him a self-addressed envelope. If I want to discover the latest and greatest social networking applications out there I'll drop by Cole Camplese's blog or his neighbor The Blog of Brad.
There's my news aggregator, NetNewswire. It's like getting a global newspaper dropped on my doorstep. I get headlines from the BBC, Wired, the Philadelphia news stations, the blogs I follow, etc. And I get to clip and save articles fir future reference. Because of NetNewswire I actually spend less time cruising the large 'corporate' sites. Does anyone actually still go to CNN to see what's new?
Then there's all the connections I've made through Twitter and Flickr. How would I get through the day without Robin2go, stevier, or kevinoshea not dropping by for avisit? I could go on but I think you get the picture of what my digital neighborhood looks like (for the moment). Chances you'll find a lot of turnover if you come back for a visit a year from now. Maybe 25%?
And that's the beauty of it. My neighborhood exists in this form because I created it to be that way. The connection between these disparate places is that there are all one click away for me. I am the geography of my Web. As you are yours. I'd love to see what your neighborhood looks like. Please share.
As Weinberger points out space on the web doesn't work that way. Distance is measured in hyperlinks and proximity is created by interest. In other words, each of us gets to create own own space on the web. Your own neighborhood, if you will, filled with the places you find interesting. And unlike your physical neighborhood where you can't just make your loud neighbors disappear, that's exactly what you can do on the web. Get tired of a blog? Delete the link. If it gets interesting six months from now? Add it back. As Weinberger says, links are the geography of the web (italics mine).
So this got me to thinking, What does my digital neighborhood look like? What seemingly disparate places are loosely joined (pun intended) just because I happen to be interested in them? Let's see, if I start with my personal blog, Running on the Learn, I immediately jump to my running partner's blog, Parked Thoughts, where we do our weekly endorphin high podcast, Running with the Pack. The podcast has drawn interest from all over and we've now connected with an opera singer from New York who is training to run his first marathon (and blogging about it). And then there's Kris, the self-described "Hoosier chick now living in Australia". If you jump over to her blog you also see she's recently married and really into knitting. And Mike, an ultra-marathoner whose goal is to run a marathon in all fifty states.
Tweeting about my running experiences introduced me to IrafromSoyasset. Now IrafromSoyasset is a friend on Facebook and a professional contact on Linkedin. Ira introduced me to SteveRunner whose training for the Boston Marathon ad has a blog site called Phedippidations as well as a group on Facebook that joined. Phedippidations is also linked from Parked Thoughts completing a loop there.
If we walk up the street of my neighborhood we come to another interest of mine, gentlemanly pursuits. There I have a link to a man-on-the-street fashion blog, The Sartorialist. From there I bounce to LagunaBeachTrad's site, amongst other claims LagunaBeachTrad claims to be a failed mercenary. From Trad's site I came across WASP 101 a primer on the old Brooks Brothers Boston Brahmin lifestyle. From the GQ podcast I discovered Ask Andy a Q&A type discussion forum where you can get all your fashion questions answered as well as a blog site hosted by a custom bespoke tailor from Saville Row. Not to mention the email updates I get from places such as The Gap and Neiman-Marcus.
Sometimes an old neighbor will look you up. Today I got an email from a message board dedicated to the Philadelphia Phillies that I hadn't contributed to since last September. Apparently someone was comparing the Phils start this season to their start last season and rehashed an old comment of mine. Now, my interest rekindled I moved the Philaphans message board back into my neighborhood.
If I go 'round the corner I meet my book friends redjen, nfh, and MaryMary. We post what we're reading and make recommendations and write reviews for each other from a nugget in Facebook, complete with links to retailers like Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
When I go out to my garden I find my friends Jamie and Brett. Jamie put Brett and me on to a gardening writer for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette who'll mail you potato top tomato seeds if you send him a self-addressed envelope. If I want to discover the latest and greatest social networking applications out there I'll drop by Cole Camplese's blog or his neighbor The Blog of Brad.
There's my news aggregator, NetNewswire. It's like getting a global newspaper dropped on my doorstep. I get headlines from the BBC, Wired, the Philadelphia news stations, the blogs I follow, etc. And I get to clip and save articles fir future reference. Because of NetNewswire I actually spend less time cruising the large 'corporate' sites. Does anyone actually still go to CNN to see what's new?
Then there's all the connections I've made through Twitter and Flickr. How would I get through the day without Robin2go, stevier, or kevinoshea not dropping by for avisit? I could go on but I think you get the picture of what my digital neighborhood looks like (for the moment). Chances you'll find a lot of turnover if you come back for a visit a year from now. Maybe 25%?
And that's the beauty of it. My neighborhood exists in this form because I created it to be that way. The connection between these disparate places is that there are all one click away for me. I am the geography of my Web. As you are yours. I'd love to see what your neighborhood looks like. Please share.
Lately I've noticed a convergence between parts of myself that I used to consider as separate entities. I'm talking about my physical self, the me that exists in the tactile world who likes to run, write, and garden and the me who exists online out in the ether. The me who enjoys surfing the web consuming information like a junkie and distributing it like a dealer. Recently I've had trouble determining where which me ends and the other begins.
Take last weekend for example. Saturday morning was my last long run in preparation for the Flying Pig marathon in three weeks. I also planned to run a 5k to benefit autism research that afternoon. The challenge of doing both was appealing because they are entirely different runs (one is about endurance and the other about speed). But what became fascinating to me in retrospect was the fact that I found myself documenting it all as it was happening. I Twittered about it (first at home on my MackBook Pro and then from my phone during the events) and received Tweets of encouragement from friends throughout the day. I captured the event with photos and sent them directly to Flickr as well as other family and friends, again from my phone. Not only was I experiencing something for the first time but, I was capturing my experience in order to share it with others.
This in itself is not a big deal. Documentary film makers have been doing this for years. Now the ability to do this has become more democratized due to advances in technology and market forces. The real kicker for me was that I was doing this in real-time and the communication loop was reciprocal. Not only could my family and friends read my Tweets and see my pictures but the could comment on them. And not just back to me but to each other without me. So my sister in Allentown could text a reply of, "Way to go" to me in State College while also telling my mother in Philadelphia who happens to be looking at a picture of my sweaty sneakers (yes, I did take a picture of that) that she's got 911 on speed dial.
I guess what's so mind blowing to me is that I did all this without a second thought. Not to long ago the idea writing text messages during a run would have seemed idiotic. Now I capture it all via multi-media. My running partner and I have started doing podcasts immediately after we run so we can capture and share our endorphin high. Meanwhile I was keeping up with a friend's progress as he fixed the eaves of his house and another friend who was teaching her son to drive.
It's been said that all politics is local. I believe the same can be said for social computing. More than Web 1.0 where we could post and read content from our computers Web 2.0 technologies enable us to read and write from numerous and portable devices using quirky applications. As a result I've gotten to know the people in my own backyard better. Seriously, because of text messaging, Twitter, and Flickr my co-workers and I share in a greater part of each other's lives than we ever would otherwise. We've totally demolished the axiom of the separation of personal and professional lives. Conversations bleed into each other regardless of time of day or night. Boundaries are no longer set by societal norms or professional mores they are set by us and how and when we choose to interact.
For me this convergence of my multiple selves has had a profound impact on how I see myself and how I choose to interact with the world. Because the lines between terrestrial-Jeff and online-Jeff and professional-Jeff and private citizen-Jeff have become smeared I think a lot more about the "me" I put forth on any plane. The web for me has become as much a public space as the library, the local pub, the grocery store, or the street where I live. And that's a good thing. For while I behave differently in each place, each persona springs from the same place within me. I now think of my web persona(s) in the same way. I've actually updated my Linkedin profile so it's relevant to my professional goals. I cleaned up my Facebook profile raking up useless widgets like fall leaves. I even cleaned up my iTunes (granted that's because I ran out of disc space but I do now pick and choose what music selections I make available to our network so I'm counting it).
So, as the multiple instances that make up the single entity of me become more fluid I'm more cognizant about the side of me I choose to show. I think of the web as another physical space I occupy, like my office or my home. So I want it to look good when you come over (and you can drop by any time). Just don't look in my Personal Storage Space. That's the electronic version of the storage area in the basement. The one behind the door I close whenever I have company.
Take last weekend for example. Saturday morning was my last long run in preparation for the Flying Pig marathon in three weeks. I also planned to run a 5k to benefit autism research that afternoon. The challenge of doing both was appealing because they are entirely different runs (one is about endurance and the other about speed). But what became fascinating to me in retrospect was the fact that I found myself documenting it all as it was happening. I Twittered about it (first at home on my MackBook Pro and then from my phone during the events) and received Tweets of encouragement from friends throughout the day. I captured the event with photos and sent them directly to Flickr as well as other family and friends, again from my phone. Not only was I experiencing something for the first time but, I was capturing my experience in order to share it with others.
This in itself is not a big deal. Documentary film makers have been doing this for years. Now the ability to do this has become more democratized due to advances in technology and market forces. The real kicker for me was that I was doing this in real-time and the communication loop was reciprocal. Not only could my family and friends read my Tweets and see my pictures but the could comment on them. And not just back to me but to each other without me. So my sister in Allentown could text a reply of, "Way to go" to me in State College while also telling my mother in Philadelphia who happens to be looking at a picture of my sweaty sneakers (yes, I did take a picture of that) that she's got 911 on speed dial.
I guess what's so mind blowing to me is that I did all this without a second thought. Not to long ago the idea writing text messages during a run would have seemed idiotic. Now I capture it all via multi-media. My running partner and I have started doing podcasts immediately after we run so we can capture and share our endorphin high. Meanwhile I was keeping up with a friend's progress as he fixed the eaves of his house and another friend who was teaching her son to drive.
It's been said that all politics is local. I believe the same can be said for social computing. More than Web 1.0 where we could post and read content from our computers Web 2.0 technologies enable us to read and write from numerous and portable devices using quirky applications. As a result I've gotten to know the people in my own backyard better. Seriously, because of text messaging, Twitter, and Flickr my co-workers and I share in a greater part of each other's lives than we ever would otherwise. We've totally demolished the axiom of the separation of personal and professional lives. Conversations bleed into each other regardless of time of day or night. Boundaries are no longer set by societal norms or professional mores they are set by us and how and when we choose to interact.
For me this convergence of my multiple selves has had a profound impact on how I see myself and how I choose to interact with the world. Because the lines between terrestrial-Jeff and online-Jeff and professional-Jeff and private citizen-Jeff have become smeared I think a lot more about the "me" I put forth on any plane. The web for me has become as much a public space as the library, the local pub, the grocery store, or the street where I live. And that's a good thing. For while I behave differently in each place, each persona springs from the same place within me. I now think of my web persona(s) in the same way. I've actually updated my Linkedin profile so it's relevant to my professional goals. I cleaned up my Facebook profile raking up useless widgets like fall leaves. I even cleaned up my iTunes (granted that's because I ran out of disc space but I do now pick and choose what music selections I make available to our network so I'm counting it).
So, as the multiple instances that make up the single entity of me become more fluid I'm more cognizant about the side of me I choose to show. I think of the web as another physical space I occupy, like my office or my home. So I want it to look good when you come over (and you can drop by any time). Just don't look in my Personal Storage Space. That's the electronic version of the storage area in the basement. The one behind the door I close whenever I have company.
