Some notes about the workshop

October 10, 2006

There were nine of us in the workshop: “Lively memory”. The kinds of questions raised at the end:

  • How do you negotiate the norms – what is private or not?
  • How useful is technology to a community really?
  • Why did we do the workshop? What was the purpose? Should know before.

Main issue to come out – privacy

We should have talked about taking the photos before the workshop. Otherwise pepole end up feeling pissed off. It should be negotiated first.

It’s about power. Allow people to make the decision themself. You could say that we might ask you about publishing photos later. Within an organisation, feed this back within these four walls. Shall we as a group move on to flickr?

Difficult to start talking about this in a session. “I’m going to take some photos, does anyone not want to be in it?”

It’s about being mindful of broad methodological processes.

Sense of accountability

How to serve the learning of the wider community?

Informed consent

If you have organised something, up to organisers to give the reasons why they are there.

Patricia – try to share experience first and then reflect on it. Rather than present goals …

Launching an extended conversation that lasts long enough. A primary concern is a sustained conversation.

Provide an explanatory statement.

The photos are in the computer, they are further removed. Reduces trust. Talking with researchers, so it would have taken a few minutes to do that.

There is a general assumption that photos will be taken.

In many communities, to talk about permissions beforehand can’t be done.

It’s about treating people as pairs. It’s about addressing the power issues.

Stop for coffee

Blogged with Flock

Advertisements

12 Responses to “Some notes about the workshop”

  1. andyroberts Says:

    It sounds a bit of a bumpy ride, but hopefully significant for learning. What happened after coffee?

  2. btrayner Says:

    We had to present our paper after coffee. A lot of work was done by all!

  3. Christina Says:

    Does anyone fear that their personality might be misinterpreted or that they might even get fewer contracts in future due to certain pictures taken and presented on the web?

    Of course, this is not the case. It’s simply ridiculous.

    Anyway, can we afford to expose our “private life identities” to the world, to potential employers? Pictures could be taken by persons who are not benevolent towards us – and we might not even realise it.

    Any thoughts?

  4. andyroberts Says:

    I feel that the ethical question over needing permission to take photos has been largely overtaken by
    technology. I live in a part of London where there are
    more surveillance cameras per square metre than anywhere else on the
    planet I think, so my image is being captured and processed every time
    I walk down the street or use a bus, train, shop – anything. And they are connected to facial recognition software too. ( See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/202024.stm )
    Then from other members of the public, nearly everybody is carrying a mobile phone which also serves as a camera or video camera and you can’t tell when they are
    being used. So the concept that you own the rights to your own image is really only enforcable if you are fabulously rich and famous. What the people who demand privacy seem to be insisting upon is the right to
    conceal the truth to others about where they have been, what they did and who with.

  5. btrayner Says:

    Given that taking photos has become quite standard practice for conferences I’m also interested in the question of why the people who objected didn’t say anything when we started taking them.

    That doesn’t detract from the pertinant question it raises about taking them and about informing people what they will be used for.

    It’s more a question about how we structured the workshop that even people who are used to attending conferences, doing research, and who are used to being assertive, didn’t feel comfortable enough to object to photos being taken – even when they felt strongly about it.

  6. Christina Says:

    As for the different layers of interaction:

    We talk about the photos taken during the workshop in Florence here, don’t we? I’m asking this as I found out that some participant(s) of that very workshop do not have a hint of what’s been discussed here in the blog.

    One more stupid question (forgive me): Did you clarify why you decided to use the different “layers of interaction”, i.e., the CP2 space, the blog here, flickr (somehow) and now also wiki to discuss about one event? Was it simply an experiment or has the benefit of using different tools been evaluated or are you going to do that?

  7. btrayner Says:

    Are you offering to do that evaluation
    Christina?

    🙂

    I think you’ll find memories of the reasoning behind using the blog scattered in the CP2 space and the telephone notes or recordings.

    In many online communities flickr has become a fairly standard shared practice for sharing photos at conferences.

    The wiki is the CIRN conference wiki. I’m not sure if anyone has put anything about our workshop in it yet.

  8. Christina Says:

    If it fits into a bigger whole! 😉


  9. […] Although Nancy White’s posting on “Feedback from Sydney LearnScope Event” was written at the end of her marathon in Australia, I’ve thought about it quite a few times since then, perhaps because of the strong feelings I had after our workshop at the Prato Conference during the same month. Capturing feedback in a wiki is an interesting example of how technology inherently changes our experience of face-to-face meetings just as it changes what’s possible. Reading what the more than 64 people said about the session with Nancy was a bit overwhelming so I made a note to myself to come back and take another look. One easy way to do it was to put the comments into a tool like http://tagcrowd.com/ (a tool that happened to hear of from Nancy). Here’s the output: […]


  10. […] There are risks when you assume that the context is a longer relationship than is really the case. People may be offended by the assumption or its apparent consequences. At the CIRN conference in Prato last October, Patricia Arnold, Beverly Trayner and I appeared to be assuming too much familiarity. […]


  11. […] are risks when you assume that the context is a longer relationship than is really the case. People may be offended by the assumption or its apparent consequences. At the CIRN conference in […]


  12. […] about it quite a few times since then, perhaps because of the strong feelings I had after our workshop at the Prato Conference during the same month. Capturing feedback in a wiki is an interesting example of how technology […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: