Note at the beginning: This
article will be divided into two parts. The first part I will talk about the
Communication Networks which is proposed by Porf. Chan in the lecture 5. And
the second part I would like to share something around the assignment in the
lecture 6, including the answer of the two class activities.
Let’s talk about Communication Networks first. We
have learnt many concepts around social networking and we studied Social
Psychology Theories of Groups and Group Behaviors, Social Experience as well as
Cloud Collaboration in the fifth lecture. What interests me most in this
lecture is Communication Networks and I am going to illustrate some
understanding of mine about it in this blog.
We shall begin with the concept of group. A group
indicates that its members should be aware of and somehow interact with each
other, specifically, they consider themselves as a group. Like Prof. Chan said
that a group is a structure consists of members with different roles, status,
relations and communication networks, as well as subgroups. Group members
usually share the same interests, topics or target. So we may think about the
question, that is, how can those members share the information with others. In
other words, what does the communication between them look like? Now we focus
on communication networks, which can be regarded as communication structure
that restrict its member can communicate with whom at one time.
There are five organizations of communication
networks if we consider the number of members in group is five, which was proposed
by Bavelas in 1950. The communication structures are as follows: Circle, Chain,
Y, Wheel and Concom. According to the picture of communication patterns in
problem solving involving five peoples, we can clearly see the relationship and
state of members in group.
Figure of Five Different Communication Structures
Take Circle pattern as example, a person
can only communicate to his/her neighbor on both left-hand and right-hand side,
so does everyone else. In such pattern, information or messages can only be
delivered by person to person like cascade form but in two directions from the
start. You may notice the situation that if one of them receives the message
but do nothing about it, such as not telling the other neighbor, that neighbor
still have chance to get the message if others are responsible to deliver the
message to their neighbors. Imagine that a group of students deliver paper note
in class, one pass the note to another and the note can be delivered back from
different student, which forms the circle pattern.
We can easily cut off one of those
communications to form Chain pattern, just like the situation we mentioned that
one do nothing about the communication to the next one. Unlike the Circle
pattern, its disadvantage is obvious that the information may not go further if
one in the middle of chain is unwilling to pass on the message. So in this
Chain pattern, a requirement that members must be active in the group is
needed. The Chain pattern is just like the process of posting a letter.
We continue cutting off one of
communications’ connection but link the separate member to the middle one of
the chain, thus we gain the Y pattern. Y pattern is similar to the Chain
pattern yet the one who can communicate with three members plays a more
important role in the group.
It can be seen more easily that the middle
member’s status isn’t the same as others if we keep on cutting off the
connection and do the same thing that link the apart one to the middle member,
where we get the Wheel pattern. The middle member is called as central person
or key person. Nowadays, many enterprises’ management structure is using this
Wheel pattern to managing the company and normally the key person is exactly
the CEO. Centralized networks is recognized as a structure that is both
appropriate and fast to deal with simple task while decentralized network is
apt to handle complex task.
The Concom pattern is formed if every two
members can communicate with each other and it is the most popular pattern in
building social networking communication. In this pattern, there is no such a
central person or leader existing, so everyone in the group plays an equal role
with the highest participants’ satisfaction. Members can talk without any
hesitate like in the real life because that the social network doesn’t have
his/her boss or superior. We can hardly see any e-commerce social network don’t
use this pattern to form their social networking and thus the users have the
highest flexibility to buy things from one online-shop
to the other.
To sum
up, Communication Networks is diverse and each of them leads to different level
of leadership among the members. To find out the most suitable and effective
communication pattern to solve different problems is very important in social
networks.
As for
the lecture 6, we have learnt some concepts about collaboration and specially,
we have an assignment in class, that is, to do a reading and answer two
questions as an individual and as a group.
As a
solo assignment, my answers of the questions are as follows:
The
first question is that what is the definition of Social Cloud? By highlighting
in yellow color in the article, I found the definition: A Social Cloud is a
resource and service sharing framework utilizing relationships established
between members of a social network. It leverages pre-existing trust
relationships between users and its resources exchanged need not be symmetric
and can represent vastly different capabilities.
The
second one is what are the possible applications of a Social Cloud? Also by highlighting
in gray color, I found that there are mainly five aspects of possible
applications of a Social Cloud which are as follows: social computation cloud,
social storage cloud, social collaborative cloud, social cloud for public
science, enterprise social cloud. Each has its own property and difference between
others.
As for
class activity, our group create a Google document to edit, share and discuss
the answers.
The former
answer becomes that a Social Cloud is a resource and service sharing framework
utilizing relationships established between members of a social network. It can
change the situation that some individual users of a social network are bounded
by finite capacity and limited capabilities. A cloud-based usage model is used
to enable virtualized resource sharing through service-based interfaces. And the
Social Cloud leverages pre-existing trust relationships between users and its
resources exchanged need not be symmetric and can represent vastly different
capabilities.
The
latter one turns to be like this:
There
are mainly five aspects of possible applications of a Social Cloud which are as
follows: social computation cloud, social storage cloud, social collaborative
cloud, social cloud for public science, enterprise social cloud. Each has its
own property and difference between others.
Examples:
Social Computation
Cloud : Onlive.com
Social Storage
Cloud: SkyDrive by Microsoft, Google drive(docs can be shared with others),
dropbox
Social Collaborative
Cloud: Google Docs
Social Cloud
for Public Science: Wikipedia, SETI, Rosetta, Docking
I think
the epistemic aim in Class Activity One is just the metacognition part. We find
the answer from the article and highlight it, whose process is exactly the same
as knowing the knowing and learning the learning. We just classify which
sentences are relate to the questions and acquire the most correlative belief
and explanation. But in Class Activity Two is totally different. We discuss the
answer of our own and explore more information about the social cloud. We correct
our wrong understanding by listening others’ elaboration and relearn the same
thing in a different point of view which you don’t think like that before. You
absorb others new idea or knowledge and think the question again to find the
best definition, which approaches the truth, that’s why we change our aim from
just understanding.
According
to the assignment as individual and group work, the epistemic cognition is
different and the group work reaches the third level of the cognition. The reason
is mainly because the aims at the two stages are different. For individual
part, we just try to understand the key words. Meanwhile, we modify and correct
our understanding in a group discussion. Besides, limitation and justification
of knowledge are different from person to person, which affect the belief of
one own.
When talking
about the process of approaching to those problems, I do the different ways in
two activities. As individually, I read the whole article first, then find and
highlight the key words or sentences which relates to the question, summarize those
highlight part to get the answer as well. As in a group, I put my understanding
to the group mates and express my thoughts. Then listen to the others and
discuss with them not only to find the consent but also to inspire myself
through group mates’ ideas. Finally, we share and summarize the ultimate
answer.
In addition,
I find it interesting that everyone does the metacognition in different ways.
Some of them highlight the original sentences in the article and some of them
just underlining the key word in the sentences. Moreover, some write down their
answer using their own words.
To sum
up, everyone has his/her way to achieve the cognition and metacognition. Yet we
usually achieve the epistemic cognition as a group, and it mainly rely on the individual
cognition, understanding and knowledge.