Now that I have established myself as the ‘lurker’ ethnographer in my particular MOOC, I decided to focus my attentions this week on the building of the online community within this space. Hines (2000) Â suggests that at this certain position digital ethnographers are able to hone in on the cultural processes such as community building by actually despatializing notions of traditional communities.
This particular MOOC on Web 2.0 Tools, has drawn the attentions of educators from all walks of life. All them have arrived at this space to learn from the tutors, and as well, learn from each other. My quest was to determine and analyze the emergence of an online community. In Megan Reile’s (2014) article she suggests that online communities offer a space of connection for the participants particularly within MOOCs. Indeed the common interest here is educational technology and more specifically professional development.
The course is only three weeks old and has only recently shown signs of community building and collaboration. In the first week there was a fair amount of candor amongst the participants with everybody introducing themselves on the first forum thread. Discussions started to build from this point on and private study groups were formed, with a few participants taking on more facilitator roles. These facilitators were usually thread creators and offered majority of the comments within the discussion thread.
The TED talk by Mark Wills (2012) was interesting and also brought up many valid points about community which translated to what I was witnessing on the discussion forums. He suggests that in terms of community management, tutors and moderators should allow the participants within the community to run the community. This way the community can be driven by shared values or common interests amongst the group participants. I noticed this first hand in the discussion forums. Firstly it is important to note that the tutors and moderators do not have a presence within the forum space. Interactions between participants increased when the discussion revolved around commonalities as well as familiar experiences. Actually most of the interactions were empathetic in nature. Participants shared their experiences with each other and offered support as best they could.
Wills also brought up an interesting topic of longevity. He stated that in order for the community to develop and grow the people who established the community need to stay within the community. I find that this will be a challenge for this particular MOOC as the time frame for the course is only 5 weeks and offers no other social media space (either Facebook or Twitter) for participants to engage with each other.
Perhaps a social media space where these discussions could be carried on is something that could be suggested within in the group. The topic of Web 2.0 tools in itself has longevity. So there is potential for great community building.
References:
Hine, C (2000) The virtual objects of ethnography, chapter 3 of Virtual ethnography. London: Sage. pp41-66
Reile, M. ‘Online Communities Can Get Moocs Back On Course’. 360 Alumni 2014. Web. 16 Feb. 2015.
Will, M. “The Online Community: A New Paradigm.” YouTube. YouTube, LLC, 21 December 2012. Web. 15 February 2015 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhOUNsATofU>.