Fun with numbers
- Hi Nigel--
Sus is preparing some interesting data on number of
turns that indicates far more than 8 major
participants, but that doesn't account for timelines
of participation (we take turns being boundary members
also), nor the quality of participation, nor the
length of a "turn."
Perhaps those 3 turns mentioned in the study below
were crucial to the discussion? In one group I
observed, the moderator/group leader had few turns,
but they determined the direction of the discussion
subsequently. Also, 3 turns might be 300% more
participation than zero turns in a land-based
discussion. Hence "more equitably," a relative term.
My own observation is that chat induces far more
equal participation in discussion than classroom
discussion, or say, e-mail lists or BBs. (We are a
list, not a chat, after all--apples and oranges.)
Numbers also don't account for the fact that some
of us communicate outside the list, esp. when we have
a specific project underway, as recently the case with
the PCI proposal on the one hand, and Daf's
video-based class on the other, and Sus's CSCL
conference planning on the third hand, and Chris
Johnson's diss research on the fourth, and Asra's
research on the fifth, etc. I would suggest that these
are all part of our community effort, even though
these discussions don't show up on the list. "Turns"
are quite differently defined when you have a specific
project to do with a specific group leader.
Other factors: a "free" list where you can
participate or not is quite different from a class
list where a teacher might require a minimum number of
posts from a student. Also, if all 100+ of us posted
every day, a large number of us would quit the
list--list members have to exercise good judgement in
when to participate and when not.
Stats in educational research _never_ give the
>>>>>Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:10:23 -0400
From: Nigel Caplan <nigel@...>
Subject: Participation (number of posts)
Hmmm ... according to the technophilliac literature,
communication promotes equal participation. Some
claimed (on rather shaky data) that CMC is fairer,
more democratic, and
less subject to sociolinguistic variables (age,
gender, status) than
discussion groups in class.
Yet, in a large list like this, 8 voices predominate.
My favourite example from the literature is the
He claimed that his students participated more
equitably in computer
chat than in class discussion, but his data reveal a
range of 3-23
per student in a 50-minute session, meaning that he
online participation as "speaking" 3 times in 50
minutes, and allows
speaker to take more than twice the mean average
number of turns.
Doesn't sound very equal to me.
Kern, R.G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction
computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of
production. "The Modern Language Journal", 79, 457-473
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
I also find the idea of a logo competition interesting, but , like Don
I think we should agree on some basic criteria.
These are my opinions:
On Tue, 06 May 2003 22:41:11 -0700
Don Carroll <dcarroll@...> wrote:
> Dear all,In my opinion 250x250 is too large even for the title graphic, 150x150
> It seems to me that designing a logo has to start with a set of design
> criteria. For example:
> 1. What size(s) are needed? 250x250 (title graphic) 150x150 px (large)
> 50x50 px (small)
is ok and so is the small one (or even smaller 45x45)
> 2. Should the small logo be the same as the large logo?Yes!
> 3. Should the logo be bitmap or scalable (vector) graphic?Vector
> 4. What color should the background be? Or should it be available as aIf it is to be used by everyone it should be transparent.
> transparent .gif as well?
>I agree, and I also agree with Clair when she said it should not be
> The easiest solution would be to design the largest logo and then reduce
> it. For this to work the logo has to be graphically simple -- which is a
> characteristic of any good logo anyway. Small detail (including small
> text) with disappear (or just look ugly) at smaller sizes. IMHO, the only
> text (if any) that should appear on the WIA logo is WIA.
> I would also argue against too much "symbolism" and just go for simplewell, the colour depends on the site on which it is to be included.
> graphic impact. Just think how successful the "Happy Face" has been. For
> example, something like the letters WIA (colors?) artistically superimposed
> on a blue ball.
Escola Secundária Sebastião da Gama
- Dear all,
It seems to me that designing a logo has to start with a set of design
criteria. For example:
1. What size(s) are needed? 250x250 (title graphic) 150x150 px (large)
50x50 px (small)
2. Should the small logo be the same as the large logo?
3. Should the logo be bitmap or scalable (vector) graphic?
4. What color should the background be? Or should it be available as a
transparent .gif as well?
The easiest solution would be to design the largest logo and then reduce
it. For this to work the logo has to be graphically simple -- which is a
characteristic of any good logo anyway. Small detail (including small
text) with disappear (or just look ugly) at smaller sizes. IMHO, the only
text (if any) that should appear on the WIA logo is WIA.
I would also argue against too much "symbolism" and just go for simple
graphic impact. Just think how successful the "Happy Face" has been. For
example, something like the letters WIA (colors?) artistically superimposed
on a blue ball.
Anyway, these are just a few opinions from the boundary.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- I have just came across an interesting and professional program for
"Icons" desing not logo design, but I think it could help and enrich our
experience as many of us are trying to explore more skills.
The software is "AxiAlis - AX Icons" versions 1.1 and 4.5. I tried both
shareware versions and I find it very flexible application. These icons
that you will desing can be used in your web site in the address URL
bar, I am not sure how, but we can try it together as well.
You can find the shareware of the software at <http://www.axialis.com>