Hi all
Here are two forwarded messages from Carol Linehan, a participant who is
having address problems with the weber gremlins. She is already contacting
xfamily@weber.ucsd.edu
about her disagreement with the gremlins -- all others who may have similar
problems, that should still be the address to use. Hope I'm not promising
too much....
Eva
>message 1:
>
>I've noticed your thread on VR spaces and in particular Eva's contribution
>on these as a 'space for identity construction'. I'm currently engaged in
>some research looking at the processes of organisation and change in a
>virtual newsgroup community. The newsgroup involves people who want to
>collect child porn pictures (facilitated perhaps by the affordance of
>anonymity on the net?). Anyway one of the most striking features of their
>chat seems to be the problem of creating a 'virtual' identity for
>themselves in the group (so that they are seen as regular contributors and
>trustworthy) while maintaining their 'real' anonymity (so they can't be
>identified by LEA etc). Does anyone know of any work that has looked at
>these kinds of issues or that would be relevant to these themes? I would
>appreciate suggestions.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Carol Linehan
>
>message 2:
>
>In response to Sara,
>
>I have drawn on the 'community of practice' metaphor as part of my
>interpretative work in understanding classroom practices. Similar to your
>dilemma (which I hope I've not misunderstood) I wondered what my analytic
>focus should be. I don't know what your 'site' is but in the classroom I
>found it possible to examine how participants discursively constructed
>legitimate knowledge(s) and how students were positioned as a result. In
>some cases what was deemed legitimate knowledge by the teacher shifted with
>respect to the student involved in the interaction. Thus while there may
>be valued knowledges (in a broader cultural and historical schooling sense)
>these are worked out in very specific ways in particular interactions in
>the classroom. Through such interactions there can be a strong sense of
>how exclusionary practices are constructed from the ground up so to speak.
>So I suppose in terms of 'what to analyse' I found it useful to consider
>particular relationships and interactions on site. These relationships can
>then be considered through a number of interpretative lenses dependent on
>your research question(for example what emerges as valued knowledge, or how
>are participants positioned with respect to each other). These 'lenses'
>could then be integrated for a richer account of the kinds of activities,
>knowledges, identities (elements of C of P in lave and wengers writing)
>etc that are emergent from the site you are interested in.
>
>Good luck with your work!
>
>Carol Linehan
>
>Carol Linehan
>Department of Applied Psychology
>University College Cork
>Ireland
>Phone: +353 21 904510
>Fax:+353 21 270439
>email:clinehan@ucc.ie
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2000 - 01:03:20 PST