Thu, 1 May 1997 23:15
From: Karen
Hmmmm...incentives and rewards. That seems so Pavlovian (not to mention arborific)...I think many people might feel we were back in elementary school. That reminds me of "Snoopy Dollars" back in second grade--each time we did well on a test, our teacher gave us so many "Snoopy Dollars" depending on our score. At the end of the semester, we could cash in our dollars for toys that the teacher brought in (I still have some plastic animals I bought buried somewhere in my closet back at home). That's not really what I want from my graduate school experience.
Fri, 2 May 1997, 6:22
From: Neal
Subject: Re: Listserv feelings
There is a real need for implementing the diffusion techniques in these class listservs, remember CCT the 505 one , it failed too, in fact, every class listserv I've been involved in so far has flopped. This is a real pedogogical (sp?) issue now that the academic community is attempting to use this technology in the classroom.
Karen, I find your comments pessimistic in the extreme. I know where you are coming from in regards to email volume, but if you are interested in experimentation in media and opening up intellectual dialogues with your peers, and I hope this is why you came to grad school (and not exchanging sentiments about Xzena), then this is one proven way to do it and could have value to you. I know the listserv could be useful, there are many documented examples of its usefulness in intellectual experimentation, we can't blame the technology for our lack of use of it, the diffusion literature clearly points this out, there has to be a will and a belief that it is useful or nobody will use it, and there has to be opinion leaders that encourage use by instilling the belief and creating the will to use it. What I'm learning about the relationship between technology and communities is that the community must be organized, motivated first, and then the technology gets used and is useful. The diffusion literature clearly shows how to encourage use and our class just didn't do what was necessary, we didn't hit any of the success factors and it wasn't useful. It is our fault, but we didn't know what to do to make it work. This can be fixed. We have the technology, (oops slipping into 6 million dollar manspeak), I mean knowledge. Ironically, we are having a peak in usage here in talking about the failure of it, and even more ironic is that you are one of the prime contributors.
Neal
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 10:03
From: Karen
First of all, that's "Xena" not "Xzena." Secondly, I feel as though you're taking a shot at me personally w/this comment. I never said I wasn't interested in fostering intellectual dialogue w/my peers. I believe I was arguing against a system of rewards for participation.
Perhaps you could take this opportunity to use the listserv to give a summary of this "diffusion" literature so I and the rest of the class can have a clear a idea of what you are talking about.
The ironly of this was hardly lost to me. In fact, I meant to mention that in my last email but forgot. Yes, email can be useful in creating dialogue. However, i don't think I was arguing against that. As I've said earlier, my argument is that I do not want to be "required" to contribute via email, not that email isn't useful. And, three contributors is a very small peak. I'm not impressed w/that aspect of your argument.
B>Sat, 3 May 1997 12:15
From: Neal
Dear Karen,
Sorry for the incorrect spelling of Zean.
Your argument included numerous condemnations of listservs as a communications medium. Now you are downplaying these statements and telling me I misread your comments. Nice spin.
As far as contributions are concerned, it is clear that you now are leading this discussion.
As for the personal shot, its not. I'm taking the other side of your argument. It benefits no one to stomp the idea of using the listserv for class. Its counter-productive, so I challenged you and offered a body of knowledge that addresses your question about motivating people to use technology.
RE: Technology Diffusion. Short version. For a network or a technology to be viable a certain number of regular users must adopt. In the case of networks, that's around 20% of the target population. This number is called critical mass. Opinion leaders play an important role in the achievement of critical mass. They must be recruited to promote use. This is an oversimplification. I recommend "Understanding Innovation Diffusion Helps Boost Acceptance Rates of New Technology," by James C. Brancheau and James C. Wetherbe. See Fall 1989 issue of Chief Information Office Journal.
Nela
Sat, 3 May 1997 12:24
From: Karen
Hi Neal (and everyone for the zillionth time):
I don't think either one of us has much to gain by continuing this discussion--it's bordering on a flame war, which benefits no one.