UCSD Everyday Life Issues Changes In Labor Market Institutions Paper Please give me the outline(one page explanation) in three days, and then I will extend

UCSD Everyday Life Issues Changes In Labor Market Institutions Paper Please give me the outline(one page explanation) in three days, and then I will extend the time limit for another three days for you two write the whole essay.

What was that about? Why do they keep doing this thing that’s not working? They always do this. Everyday life is usually familiar, habitual — those happenings and practices we rarely take notice of. But breakdowns happen. These can include, but aren’t limited to, miscommunication, mistreatment, problematic patterns, marginalization, or devaluation of that which you value. This project asks you to identify a breakdown and use tools from the course to gain insight.

For the final, you will choose one breakdown, observe and describe it in thoughtful detail, and analyze the situation using two different theories from the course. Conclude by reflecting on what you have learned in the course. For this project, a breakdown can be any situation you find problematic.

Process

1. Plan and observe: Choose the problematic situation you want to analyze. Write notes on your memories of the situation. Carefully observe and make notes about people, practices, and spaces related to the situation. Choose the two readings you would like to use to shed light on why the situation happened.

2. Write a 1 page note explain the problematic situation, your observations to date, why it is important or interesting to you, and what readings you think you might draw on to shed light on the problem.

3. Write up the final deliverable: Your final project will be a report with the following four sections. Make sure you have incorporated feedback from your TA. The format should be 12 pt double spaced with 1-inch margins:

I. Description of the problematic situation: Who and what practices did it involve? What details of the situation offer clues or evidence for understanding what happened and why? Offer evidence from your notes and observations. (1-1.5 pages)

II. Analysis using the first reading from the course (1 page)

III. Analysis using the second reading from the course (1 page)

IV. Reflection on how what you observed and analyzed is different from how you would have understood the situation before 100A (1-1.5 pages)

V. Appendix: Notes on your observations

Here is the concepts…If you need any reading from this excel, please let me know…

Theme / Key Concepts

Theory Reading

Example Reading

Mediating the Person: Infrastructure

Torque
Infrastructure
Classification

Bowker & Star Ch 1

Bowker & Star Ch 6

Mediating the Person: Communities of Practice

Communities of Practice
Legitimate peripheral participation
Membership
Visibility / Invisibility

Lave & Wenger, pp. 52-58, 76-79

Forte & Bruckman

Irani

Mediating the Person: Institutions

Access
Description
Labor

Cavallo (2015)

Dr. Louise Hickman’s lecture

Membership
Body project
Body as process
Body as product
Passing
Fragmentation
Multiplicity

Ong (2005)

Ong (2005)

Conveying the Person: Infrastructures, Movement, and Community

Space-time compression
Power geometry
Social differentiation
Progressive sense of place

Massey (1991)

Rivera (2006), Sleep Dealer

Strategies
Tactics

DeCerteau pp. 25-26, 29-37, 91-93 Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of Participation
in a Collaborative Online Encyclopedia
Susan L. Bryant, Andrea Forte, Amy Bruckman
College of Computing/GVU Center,
Georgia Institute of Technology
th
85 5 Street, Atlanta, GA, 30332
susan.bryant@att.net; {aforte, asb}@cc.gatech.edu
New forms of computer-supported cooperative work have sprung
from the World Wide Web faster than researchers can hope to
document, let alone understand. In fact, the organic, emergent
nature of Web-based community projects suggests that people are
leveraging Web technologies in ways that largely satisfy the
social demands of working with geographically distant
collaborators. In order to better understand this phenomenon, we
examine how several active collaborators became members of the
extraordinarily productive and astonishingly successful
community of Wikipedia.
ABSTRACT
Traditional activities change in surprising ways when computermediated communication becomes a component of the activity
system. In this descriptive study, we leverage two perspectives on
social activity to understand the experiences of individuals who
became active collaborators in Wikipedia, a prolific,
cooperatively-authored
online
encyclopedia.
Legitimate
peripheral participation provides a lens for understanding
participation in a community as an adaptable process that evolves
over time. We use ideas from activity theory as a framework to
describe our results. Finally, we describe how activity on the
Wikipedia stands in striking contrast to traditional publishing and
suggests a new paradigm for collaborative systems.
Design, Human Factors
In this introductory section, we describe the Wikipedia and related
research, as well as two perspectives on social activity: activity
theory (AT) and legitimate peripheral participation (LPP). Next,
we describe our study and how ideas borrowed from activity
theory helped us investigate the ways that participation in the
Wikipedia community is transformed along multiple dimensions
of activity as newcomers enter and become established in the
community. Finally, we summarize our conclusions and the
implications of this study for designing systems that support
online collaboration.
Keywords
1.1 What is Wikipedia?
Categories and Subject Descriptors
J.7 [Computer Applications]: Computers in Other Systems –
publishing.
General Terms
Wiki, Wikipedia, Community, Legitimate Peripheral
Participation, Activity Theory
Wikipedia is an open-content encyclopedia, built on wiki
technology. The first wiki was launched in 1995 by Ward
Cunningham on the premise that publicly editable webspaces are
a promising way to achieve fast, productive online collaboration
[16]. Established in 2001, Wikipedia is among the most prolific
collaborative authoring projects ever sustained in an online
environment. As of July 2005, the English-language version
contains over 650,000 articles [32] and smaller but active
Wikipedias also exist in German, Japanese, French, Swedish,
Polish and over 100 other languages.
1. INTRODUCTION
Shocking things happen online. Consider the scope of extreme
activities that can and do emerge in the comparatively unregulated
landscape of online environments, where inhibitions are reduced
[11], social norms are emergent [22, 26], and regulating behavior
is still difficult at best [15]. One unexpected scenario is that of
individuals around the globe coming together, unsolicited, to
contribute their knowledge and provide volunteer editorial
services to create a high-quality, freely-accessible information
resource. It is at best counterintuitive that such a resource, written
by committee, where anonymous contributions are acceptable,
and anyone anywhere can edit any content at any time, could be
accurate by any standards. Yet that is precisely what has happened
at wikipedia.org.
The fact that Wikipedia content is publicly editable is essential to
its rapid growth. Anyone with an Internet connection can edit the
content at any time without registering or otherwise applying for
editorial privilege. Beneath the veneer of encyclopedic authority,
constant editing renders the Wikipedia perpetually incomplete and
in flux. Articles are likely to have been touched by a variety of
editorial hands and are likely to be touched again. It may seem
surprising that the daily frenzy of editing has resulted in a
resource that many individuals regard as well-written and
factually accurate. In fact, many of the individuals involved in the
site’s genesis initially had little confidence that an openly-editable
website could ever come to resemble an encyclopedic information
resource [19]; however, citation of Wikipedia articles in news and
other media is now common [17, 31]. An important factor in
Wikipedia’s success may also be the guiding editorial policy of
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies
bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise,
or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior
specific permission and/or a fee.
GROUP’05, November 6–9, 2005, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.
Copyright 2005 ACM 1-59593-223-2/05/0011…$5.00.
1
neutral point of view [29], to which most Wikipedia authors
subscribe and endeavor to uphold.
of a community initially by participating in peripheral yet
productive tasks that contribute to the overall goal of the
community. These activities are typically simple and carry low
risk to the community as a whole. For example, Lave and Wenger
describe the activities of novice tailors as they learn their trade.
Initially, tailor apprentices work on informal children’s clothing
and undergarments while they practice sewing [14]. They begin
by attending to “finishing touches” on garments, and only later
move on to sewing and, eventually, to cutting the cloth.
Gradually, they accrue enough experience to create the garment in
which their shop specializes—men’s trousers. Through peripheral
activities, novices become acquainted with the tasks, vocabulary,
and organizing principles of the community. Gradually, as
newcomers become oldtimers, their participation takes forms that
are more and more central to the functioning of the community.
Questions of authority and reliability in Wikipedia have attracted
the attention of academics. In a comparative study, researchers
applied discourse analysis methods to better understand genre
differences between Wikipedia articles and other information
sources. They found that, unlike the online encyclopedia
Everything2, Wikipedia entries are stylistically indistinguishable
from those found in a traditional, print source [7]. They attribute
this surprising result to the fact that, because it is a wiki, multiple
authors and revision cycles are common on Wikipedia. On
Everything2, entries are owned and edited by individual users; if
the content needs to be revised, the author receives comments
from peers and can revise the entry. Here we find that the
traditional model of publishing print resources does not yield
comparable results in the collaborative, voluntary, online
environment. In this case, a new publishing model better supports
a seemingly conventional goal—writing in an encyclopedic style.
This study is an effort to understand the activity system associated
with the emergent publishing model on Wikipedia.
It is important to understand that LPP is not reserved for
descriptions of membership in formal organizations or professions
whose practices are highly defined. On the contrary, people
participate in multiple, overlapping communities of practice
(CoP) every day in their jobs, schools, at home and in other social
contexts. It is through their practices that the structure and
character of a community emerges [27, 2]. Researchers have used
LPP to understand the nature of online communities as CoPs in
the past [21]. Observations of members’ behavior in Wikipedia
reveals that the three characteristics of CoPs identified by Wenger
[27] are strongly present on the site: community members are
mutually engaged, they actively negotiate the nature of the
encyclopedia-building enterprise, and they have collected a
repertoire of shared, negotiable resources including the Wikipedia
software and content itself.
Attempts have also been made to establish quantitative metrics to
measure site growth and complexity [24], and to identify article
characteristics such as rigor (the total number of edits) and
diversity (the number of individual editors) for evaluating the
quality of Wikipedia content based on editing trends [17].
Although no definitive claims have been made concerning the
overall accuracy of information in Wikipedia, Lih observes that
both rigor and diversity improve following the appearance of a
Wikipedia article in the popular media.
The history flow visualization method was developed as a
collaborative effort between MIT and IBM researchers to examine
editing trends on wikis [23]. Application of the history flow
method to Wikipedia allowed the researchers to recognize and
describe four patterns of cooperation and conflict on the site:
vandalism and repair; anonymity versus named authorship;
negotiation; and content stability. They conclude that the
Wikipedia interface is designed to encourage surveillance of
others’ contributions. For example, watch lists help community
members find and repair vandalism. In addition, the discussion
pages provide a space for reaching consensus that is separate from
the article space. Finally, the emphasis on neutral point of view
provides an underlying principle that guides dispute resolution.
These design elements and the culture of Wikipedia contribute to
the knowledge building enterprise of creating a collaborative
encyclopedia by separating conflict from the articles themselves
and emphasizing the importance of consensus.
LPP suggests that membership in a community of practice is
mediated by the possible forms of participation to which
newcomers have access, both physically and socially. If
newcomers can directly observe the practices of experts, they
understand the broader context into which their own efforts fit.
Conversely, isolating newcomers can have negative effects. For
example, Lave and Wenger describe a scenario in which
apprentice butchers have little physical access to the tools and
spaces in which advanced meat cutting is done by experts
(Marshall, 1972, cited in [14]). This isolation from more advanced
practices limits apprentices’ possible forms of participation in the
community. In the world of online collaborative spaces, the
technological architecture of the community can be seen as
analogous to the physical arrangement of community spaces such
as the one in which the apprentice butchers practiced their trade.
Whether explicitly or implicitly, social organization also plays a
large part in determining what forms of participation are available
to newcomers in a community. Lave and Wenger use the example
of recovering alcoholics in Alcoholics Anonymous to describe
how the participation of newcomers in a group can be mediated
by social rituals and overtly defined relationships between
members of a community (Cain, in press, cited in [14]). Not all
forms of social organization are reified as strongly as those of a
12-step recovery program; however, cooperation online is often
highly structured according to ritual activities of members.
Emigh and Herring, Lih, and Viegas et al. all observe that the
character of Wikipedia content is influenced as much by social
norms within the Wikipedia community as by the technological
substrate upon which the community is built. We are interested in
the process by which individuals come to understand Wikipedia
as a community of collaborative authorship and claim
membership through participation and self-identification. How
does an individual become a skilled, valued member of such an
enormous cooperative enterprise?
In our investigation of participation in Wikipedia, we will
examine how users’ motivations and their perceptions of their
roles in Wikipedia change as they become more engaged in the
community. In particular, how do technological and social
structures mediate user activity in Wikipedia? What forms does
1.2 Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) is a theoretical
description of how newcomers become members of communities
of practice [14]. According to LPP, newcomers become members
2
initial participation in Wikipedia take? How does the character of
participation change over time as users become full participants in
Wikipedia? Do barriers like the physical ones that isolated the
apprentice butchers also isolate individuals in the online world of
Wikipedia? In what ways does social organization in Wikipedia
regulate the forms of participation that are available to
newcomers?
a structure for thinking about LPP and transformation of
participation. If the activity triangle above represents the context
of activity when a user first encounters Wikipedia, we can
imagine the triangle twisting and bending over time as
transformations in one dimension and then another stretch and
pull the rest of the triangle. Because each segment of the triangle
is connected to the others, changes in one dimension affect the
eventual character of the other dimensions as well.
1.3 Organizing the Data: Activity Theory
To understand how users become part of the community, we “take
activity as the term for the process through which a person creates
meaning in her practice, a process we can neither see or fully
recall but a process that is ongoing as part of the participation in a
community of practice” [3].
Activity theory suggests a structure for thinking through
technology use and emergent social norms on Wikipedia and how
they influence the transformation of members’ participation over
time. Activity theory (AT) is often described as proceeding from
the work of Russian psychologists Vygotsky, Leontev and Luria,
who sought to understand human activities as complex, sociallysituated phenomena. For an in-depth discussion of its theoretical
roots, see Engeström [8]. Today, activity theory is most often used
to describe activity in a socio-technical system as a set of six
interdependent elements:
2. METHOD
A purposeful sample of active community members was collected
by using communication channels frequented by active members.
Communication within Wikipedia happens largely through
something called talk pages. Individuals who have registered for a
Wikipedia account each have a personal user page and a talk page
where it is customary to post personal messages. We identified
several active Wikipedia users by looking at pages that list sitewide editing activity and placed recruiting messages on their
personal talk pages. One of those users then posted a message
about the study on a discussion area where it is appropriate for
community members to make announcements. Several
Wikipedians responded to the general announcement. We
conducted interviews with nine Wikipedians. Five interviews
were conducted by telephone, four by email. (A second set of data
from thirteen later telephone interviews is currently being
analyzed to extend and confirm these results.)
• Object – the objective of the activity system as a whole
• Subject – a person or group engaged in the activities
• Community – social context; all people involved
• Division of Labor – the balance of activities among
different people and artifacts in the system
• Tools – the artifacts (or concepts) used by subjects to
accomplish tasks
• Rules – the code and guidelines for activities and
behaviors in the system
Table 1. Study Participant Demographics
These six elements and their mutual interdependencies are often
depicted by the activity triangle diagram:
Figure 1. Model of an activity system [8].
Participant
Time Active
1
6 mos
Number of Edits
(in Nov. 2004)
399
2
1 yr, 9 mos
5,381
3
2 yrs, 6 mos
14,615
4
8 mos
2,106
5
7 mos
1,312
6
1 yr, 6 mos
13,377
7
1 yr, 3 mos
15,072
8
1 yr, 11 mos
2,190
9
2 mos
3,664
Each telephone interview lasted approximately one hour and was
designed to provide qualitative data about why the participants
contributed to Wikipedia, how they had gotten started, how they
perceived their role and, most importantly, how their perception
of Wikipedia and their participation in it had changed over the
course of their engagement with the site. On average, participants
had been active in Wikipedia for 14 months at the time of the
interviews, the duration of participants’ activity ranged from two
months to two-and-a-half years (See Table 1). All interviewees
reported daily or nearly daily activity on the site. Wikipedia had
been established for over three and a half years at the time
interviews took place.
Activity theory addresses complex features of human action and
has been adopted by theorists in a variety of forms. None of the
six dimensions is unproblematic; each is a multifaceted concept
and characterizing them in great detail is beyond the scope of this
paper. Activity theory helps explain how artifacts and social
organization mediate action [13]. It is useful to imagine that the
dimensions of AT provide a silhouette that needs to be filled in,
rather than a detailed map of human activity. These dimensions
have been used in the past as a framework for systematically
investigating socio-technical systems that emerge with the use of
computer-supported collaborative learning tools [10]. In this
paper, using the AT framework provides a common language and
3
it’s short. And then it just sort of…I just got into the habit
really.” (Participant 3)
3. FINDINGS
As users move from peripheral to full participation in Wikipedia,
we found that their activity is transformed in many dimensions.
The following sections use the language and structure of activity
theory to organize and present the different ways that
interviewees’ participation changed as they became full-fledged
members of the Wikipedia community.
Even as they contribute to the articles, new users tend to make
only minor changes. Several of the participants reported a
reluctance to make drastic changes when they first began
contributing to the Wikipedia:
When I first started I was hesitant about doing a lot of
structural changes. You know, I could go fix a comma
here and there but I wouldn’t necessarily edit the whole
text of an article or move a page or change the way a
particular disambiguation was done. (Participant 2)
3.1 Transformation of Subject: Goals and
Identity
Whereas the object of the whole Wikipedia activity system
remains essentially unchanged over time—the object is to build
and share knowledge in encyclopedic form—the subjects
themselves change. The notion of subject in the activity system is
complex; in this paper, subjects are defined as the participants in
the Wikipedia community, each of whom has numerous
characteristics that may change over time, including individual
motivations, goals, and perceptions of self. Transformation of
goals (which are different from the object of the activity system)
and of users’ self-perceived identities within the system are
fundamentally linked to transformation of participation.
Interviewees described a move from encyclopedia consumer to
encyclopedia creator.
Early on, I was cautious about shaking up something I
don’t know much about. I was careful if an article seemed
wrong, cautious about changing it. (Participant 6)
All the interviewees’ first edits of the Wikipedia involved topics
about which they had some personal expertise. Initially, the goal
of their activity on Wikipedia was to find information about their
own interests and sometimes they f…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment