Of course, all we can do at the moment is speculate. My speculation at the moment is yes, to all of the above; I'm basing that speculation on how I imagine collaborative writing activities in a college freshman level composition class may change given Wave. I'm thinking and projecting from this clip (#10 from my Digesting Google Wave post a few days ago) from the original demo at Google I/O last week:
Notice a couple of things in the video:
- the wave, with all contents, can be embedded in a blog or other website.
- the playback feature and the planned "power tools" for playback
- as contents are edited, the changes update, character by character in all locations.
- multiple users can edit a wave concurrently.
Right now, if we have learners collaborate on a document, they may do it in several ways - that I can think of at the moment; if you have others that vary significantly from the ones below, please comment.
- Send the document back and forth in email; discussion may occur within the email or perhaps use the "Review" features available in MS Word which allows comments and tracking changes. Problem is you end up with multiple copies of the document in various stages of editing.
- Create an online document to be shared among users; everyone can access and edit the document online, and Google Docs allows simultaneous editing, to some extent. Discussions occur in a different location typically - via email, IM or sidebar chat.
- Create a wiki for the writing exercise. Everyone can access and edit the document online, but simultaneous editing is somewhat limited. Discussions occur in an attached discussion forum or page or via email or IM. Generally, comments and discussion regarding the document are spatially removed from the document itself, and learners use specific methods of communication with which they are familiar.
- Learners may upload a document to a personal blog space for others to access; visitors can write a comment in a singular message that appears below the text. If CommentPress, a plugin for Wordpress, is used, comments can be made regarding specific paragraphs which are identified automatically by the plugin.
With Google Wave, things may occur a little differently.
- Initially, John creates a Wave with the first draft of his essay. Adding collaborators is now easier because he only has to drag and drop or quickly type the names of classmates; the wave containing the document will show up, near instantaneously, in the wave interface for his classmates: Ann, Joel and Susan. There's a few admittedly subtle steps in the current processes that have been made more efficient: emailing collaborators and collaborators going to the document where it lives on the web, at least.
With everyone being able to edit the document, Wave - like current tools - maintains version control and individual accountability for revisions. The editing and discussion process is quite different though. - Ann, Joel and Susan can add comments regarding individual sections of the document, but comments are inline within the document - comments and ensuing discussion reside immediatley next to the section. That's much like the review feature in MS Word, but appears to be an improvement over the displaced comments that occur on shared documents, wikis or blogs. Fortunately, the discussions aren't permanently part of the document; they can be minimized or the current version of the document (product wave) can be copied into another wave.
- If Joel's a bit of a slacker and doesn't look at the wave until three days after Ann, Susan and John have been collaborating, Joel can see all of the markups and changes, of course. However, with wave, Joel can use the playback feature to observe how the document and conversation has evolved from the beginning. Plus, once the planned/mentioned improvements for the playback feature are available, the Professor Smith can playback each individual's contributions to the development of the document - seeing juxtaposed all individual participation in the discussion and revision process.
- Here's where it gets a bit more interesting... Any edits update every instance of the wave instantaneously, character-by-character. Ann and Joel are online and have their wave interface open. Susan logs on and begins editing the wave. As I understand it, in Ann and Joel's inbox, the wave would highlight (much like a new message) as having revisions or new content as soon as Susan starts typing; basically, the act of editing the document automatically generates an IM/email like notification of the revision. Ann sees the wave highlight and opens it. She can immediately see all changes that Susan is making as she types them; Ann begins typing a reply and comment on the changes as Susan makes them. As Susan types, she sees Ann's comment coming in character-by-character. In that simple exchange, current models of communication - collaborative documents, email, instant messaging and real-time document sharing - have all occurred in a streamlined work process.
- It goes one step further though to a feature I don't believe currently exists - real-time, multiple, concurrent editing of a document. Ann and Susan can both be editing the document at the same time, and all changes (again, character by character) are shown instantly. Somewhere in the process, Joel and John both notice the editing and also begin editing the document and posting comments. Four learners all have the ability to instanteously make changes to the document with their cursors three characters away from one another. That is a feature not seen in any current product of which I'm aware. Even in face-to-face meetings in a conference room, it seems like this process could empower more people to collaborate more evenly (rather than one person being in control of the keyboard).
- The wave can be embedded in various locations around the web; the entire editing process noted above is visible in all locations and everyone with permissions to engage the wave can do so inline wherever they see it displayed. Certainly, the interactions above could also easily include other classmates and Professor Smith which further enhances the collaboration process.
3 comments:
Every time I look at Wave, I keep thinking "please at least let this get rid of Wimba." I'm no fan of most online collaboration tools that we have. They just need to be simpler, intuitive, Googlier. If that is a word.
Of course, we still have a problem just getting instructors to use an any interaction what-so-ever. I just sat in a meeting to talk about 4 new classes we are developing. In the meeting were the four instructors and some other people. When I talked about blogs and wikis and interaction, they just kind of politely nodded. But when my director showed them some animations with voice-overs, they lit up over that. Sit and stare is just sit and stare to me, whether students are starting at the screen at flashy animation or sitting in a desk watching a funny professor.
I think there have been a few products that allow concurrent editing to people that are networked (not online). Even if you go low-tech, there have always been attempts t let people edit the same paper at once, or write on the same white board at the same time. That was the way it was at a company I used to work for. I think the "one person in control of taking notes or editing" just comes from a sanity perspective. It's hard to have many people editing at once. Fights, disagreements, misunderstandings, etc. One person in control just keeps the peace.
"we still have a problem just getting . . . any interaction what-so-ever"
and then...
"'one person in control of taking notes or editing' just comes from a sanity perspective."
So which is it? We can't wish for interaction while accepting the need for control.
Those two are, to some extent, mutually exclusive. Other than one must have control if there is to be interaction; and the ones you mention maintain control by projecting a message - through animations etc - rather than facilitating a conversation.
Well, if you aren't interacting in the first place, there is no need for one person to control anything. Because there is no interacting, basically. We can't even get the instructors to go to that step - they just want the students to read a bunch of text online, then go fill out a test online, and repeat until end of course.
I think I was referring to who controls the editing of the document, not the conversation or the interaction. You can still interact over a shared document, even if only one person controls it's content. I've seen it happen. No one feels like they were controlled or left out. It was just one person took the interaction and transferred what was agreed upon to the shared document.
On the other hand, I do remember when some Wiki programs were experimenting with concurrent editing. We tried it at a conference, and the result was a jumbled mess that no one could decipher later. The problem wasn't the program, it was just too many chefs in the kitchen. The ability to concurrently edit wasn't the problem, it was the fact that everyone edited first before interacting and discussing.
It's just like doing a Google search - just because you can find anything you are looking for, doesn't mean people know how. You have to train students how to search. It is the same with concurrent editing - students will have to be trained to use it.
I'm also not saying that is my preferred way of doing anything, I am just saying I can see why people might find a problem with concurrent editing.
Post a Comment