Wow! Four months ago, identity was just a word to me. When I used it, it was usually followed by “theft” or “crisis,” depending on context. Today, after nearly completing CI597C, the word is much more than an adjective prefix (I just made that term up!). It is a conversation starter; a living, breathing, abstract concept; and a conundrum of sorts. My identity is who I am , or is it simply who I perceive myself to be? It is who I am to others , or is it simply who others perceive me to be? Even after so many questions and conversations about identity during the past four months, I can safely and confidently say that my definition of identity has not changed during the past four months. That would be too simple and finite, implying that I have reached the end, or a destination in terms of understanding. No, my definition of identity has not changed; it has evolved, moving forward along an existing journey, with more twists and turns ahead in every future conversation. You know the conversations: after a few minutes, someone makes an excellent point that really drives home the idea of identity and silences everyone for a few seconds as they retreat into contemplation of the idea. Then, someone begins, “That makes sense, but ” and sheds light on the exception to that rule, the one that reignites the discussion for another round. Really, is this evolution and flexible certainty over the definition of identity any different than my identity itself? I have been the same person for the past 10 years of my life for the most part. I am the same person with this set of friends as I am with that set of friends generally speaking, of course. I know who I am usually. I behave predictably most of the time.In a previous blog post about an individual’s identity varying between communities of which they belong, I state that the same person demonstrating one set of knowledge and abilities can be simultaneously viewed differently by two different communities. The example I gave is that I see myself as someone interested in researching camps. In the research community, I am sometimes identified as a ‘camp expert,’ whereas in the camp community I am sometimes identified as a ‘research expert.’ Both the research and camp communities would find the idea of me identified as an expert in their respective community to be humorous. What define my identity for each community are the elements of my identity that set me a part from other members in that community.Naturally, this led to discussion with classmates who disagree with this idea. The ideas and arguments include identity being as simple as your name or avatar, how others perceive you, or a thing that resides within you. Who is right? Is anyone right? Are we all right? Is one of us more right than any of the others?While thinking about the idea that identity is strictly something that resides within you, I remembered a sound bite from a talk show. It occurred after season 1 of Donald Trump’s The Apprentice had ended, when contestants were doing reunions and other talk show appearances. Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth was addressing how she was portrayed on the show in similar fashion to her quotes in this article about “the evil sista of reality television.” Omarosa was the villain of season 1, but she continually claims that she was the victim of editing, and that she is really a pleasant person. The other person at the interview said something to the effect of, “They can only edit footage that they have, sweetheart.” In essence, the other person was telling Omarosa that she can claim the screaming, aggressiveness, unhappiness, and laziness were part of an attack on her but those actions and traits are part of who she is. The editors couldn’t make that up unless it really existed.Identity can be defined and perceived in many ways. It can be split into little bite size samples, like appetizers at Fridays, with different people each getting a little slice. Sometimes you control who eats which appetizer, and sometimes the other people grab at the plate before you even see it. Identity can also be a concrete thing that changes when viewed by others, like a piece of art in a gallery. Determining whether the Mona Lisa of your identity is smiling or frowning really is in the eye of the beholder, even though the expression is identical on the canvas. Identity can be defined by an individual and redefined by others , or the individual.I wonder what my identity is with regards to my classmates in CI597C. Am I a pain the butt, or a humble apologizer, thanks to my post on Have Nots? Am I a technologically fluent person who likes to talk and philosophize? Am I a camp dork? Am I a Mac lovin’, Tweet rockin’ geek? Am I someone who loves The Office and Scrubs and invites you over to watch? Am I a car-selling, house-buying, bike-riding, job-hunting adjective-verb lover who shares with the community? Or are these suggestions merely my own construct of my identity, and how I think and prefer I appear to you, based on who I think I am when I am around you. I’d be interested in hearing you tell me what you think my identity is…The point is this: in the argument of whether your identity is something that resides in you or is determined by other people, you have to remember that they can only edit footage that they have, sweetheart.
identity
Two Become One: Whose Identity Is It Anyway?
Radio Lab recently had a show called (So-Called) Life in which a woman in need of a transplant test her children’s DNA. They find that the children match the father’s DNA, but not hers! Additional testing reveals that the DNA in her blood is completely different from the DNA in her saliva — she is, essentially, two different people.<SPOILER ALERT>Basically, doctors have concluded that she is a chimera. That is, her mother was pregnant with two embryos that fused within the first few days of life. They did not blend, but rather the new embryo contained some of the parts from baby A and some of the parts from baby B — she was her own twin sister. To put it into perspective, if the eggs had not completely fused, this woman would have been Siamese Twins. Instead, she is both twins in one body.She started talking about the thought the she is two people, that her salivary glands differ from her circulatory system, that she has two different bodies inside of her. Naturally, this raised some interesting questions. What is her identity? Is she two people? Is she one person? What is a person, if the DNA suggests that she is two persons?
Tweet Talk 3 – TLT Symposium Review
Here is Tweet Talk 3, featuring Mike Montalto-Rook, Lis Boyer, Donna DeNoble, and myself (Brandon Rubenstein). We feel like we have hit our stride in terms of dynamics, content, and flow, but we welcome your feedback!Tweet Talk 3 – 2008 TLT Symposium.mp3
Clark Kent, or Secret Identity Articles
Ok, so the articles I discuss in this entry aren’t secret, but they may be hidden from you — until now!As previously mentioned, I am enrolled in a class that studies Community Informatics – the study of how communities use information technology to accomplish and develop their goals.In week 7 we read some articles that studied the development of community and engagement in virtual communities. I previously mentioned a paper by Blanchard and Markus that provides definitions for physical and virtual communities, and Sense of Community and Sense of Virtual Communities. That article is available on the Week 7 section of our class website (click here) or on my previous blog post.The theme of this week’s class is Identity, and it directly coincides with the theme of this week’s Wenger’s readings, which Scott and Cole mentioned are moving into the realm of Identity. The Week 8 section of the class web site (click here) has three articles on the subject that you may find interesting, relevant, or helpful in making sense of our class themes.Take a look around the site. I think you will find multiple weeks with topics and readings that you may find applicable to our discussions on community, identity, and design. Some of them are even mildly interesting =)
Tweet Talk 1, Edited
Hi All,I shaved Tweet Talk 1 down to 23 minutes, and I added
some music tracks that I made up for the intro, transitions, and
finale. I also converted it to mp3.Listen to this new version and enjoy!Tweet Talk 1 (edited).mp3
Reading Assignment for 03.06.08
Just in time for our visit from the master of serious games, we get to the chapters in Wenger where he starts to talk about identity. So we have been in the community space almost exclusively so far. A few people (Becci you know who you are) have dropped the I word into the mix, but we have really not gone after it. So, here are Wenger’s thoughts. There are lots of ways to think about identity, so don’t get tied down to this one, just try to evaluate it. Some questions to think about (really whenever you are examining an explanation of identity): Who defines it? How is it constructed? Where does it reside? What is its relationship to the community / context?
Should a cop ever say to you “Sir (or Ma’am), please identify yourself…”
You can honestly respond with “Ok, but it depends on who is asking.”
Some thoughts on identity…first, I’ll start with my title and lead-in.
Before I go any further, it is important to know that my primary
interest is non-formal education, specifically the camp industry, and I
have worked at a summer camp for the past 13 years of my life, as a
counselor and now Program Director. With that in mind, I recently (and
successfully) defended my comps exam. Many of my questions centered
around applying youth development concepts and theories to the world of
summer camps. Afterwards, my committee complimented me by sharing, to
paraphrase, that I am somewhat of an expert on camping. That made me
feel good.
Since I just built myself up, it is only fair that I knock myself
down. If I told my colleagues at the summer camp that, they would
laugh at me and probably ridicule PSU’s credibility for making such a
statement. Part of their warm response is because we are all sarcastic
jerks to each other and this is how we keep our egos in check. But I
think the main reason this response is that none of us see any one of
us as any more of an expert on camping than the rest of us (wow, that’s
quite the usage of “us” in one sentence). My camp colleagues see me
merely as one of them.
At the same time, the camp colleagues have declared me an expert on
youth development and literature, and often ask me for advice and to
recommend sources when they are in need of help. Please note, this is
in direct contradiction to the aforementioned sarcastic jerkiness
theory. Ahh, I feel good about myself again.
But here comes the kick in the knee: I will be the first to admit that
my research and academia skills are quite inferior, particularly
compared to the great minds that I theoretically encounter on a daily
basis in State College. Some of my PSU colleagues would likely laugh
at the thought of me being a youth development or literature expert
and, unlike the camp colleagues, they are generally nice, encouraging
people.
My point is this: I am a member of two different communities, the
summer camp community and the PSU research community. I don’t conduct
myself any differently in either community; in fact, I often try to do
things and complete projects that satisfy the demands and
responsibilities of both communities at the same time. Yet the
perception of my identity is different despite my uniform actions in
both communities. The camp community sees me as an expert in youth
development because I read more literature and am more familiar with
the academic community than the rest of the community, though my
research skills are quite ordinary in the academic community. On the
other hand, the academic community sees me as an expert on camping
because of my vast experience, understanding, and philosophical
abilities of the camp community, though my camp knowledge is quite
ordinary in the camp community.
Interesting how two different communities see me as an expert in the
opposite world, yet not in their own. My actions are important, but my
identity is dependent upon the context of the observer. Perhaps my
identity is not that I am an expert in camping or an expert in youth
development and literature, but that I am an expert in bridging these
two communities?
What do you think? Do you have any similar experiences, where two
worlds observe you as two different people based on the rest of the
community?
Reading Assignment for 02.21.08
Here they are at last. Sorry about the delay.
First reading is the next two chapters of Wengers book. This includes “Learning” and “Boundary”, both of which are critical to the way that we think about teaching and learning with technology. Learning is obvious, but based on our conversation in class yesterday, and my ranting about a definition of knowledge, think about how Wenger defines learning and the implications of his definition. The second chapter on boundary is particularly relevant in the context of our Web 2.0 world. Things to think about in that chapter are: What are the implications of Wenger’s ideas about boundary for identity? What are the “boundary objects” in a Web 2.0 world and how are they different or the same as those in RL? Also in light of our conversation in class pay particular attention to pgs. 113-121 and his discussion of practice.
The second reading is a classic on technology by Everett Rogers called “Diffusion of Innovations”. This piece bears directly on the question of how schools will change or not to adapt to new technologies. Pay particular attention to the social system aspects of diffusion as they are deeply connected to our theme of community. You may also want to think about the parallels between learning by individuals and learning by institutions (which is another way to think about diffusion of innovation).
These two readings again provide a complementary pair about learning without an explicit focus on technology and a reading about technology without an explicit focus on technology, yet the pieces seem to speak to each other (or at least I think they do). Happy reading and the next set of readings will be posted soon.
How Sticky Is Membership on Facebook? Just Try Breaking Free – New York Times
A good read related to how hard it is to get out of the facebook family.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/technology/11facebook.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
I Hate Movable Type — and Cluetrain eats soggy Cheerios
I just typed a nice, long entry reviewing Cluetrain only to find that my session had timed out and I lost the entire thing when I tried to publish it. AARARGHARGHAGRHAHRGH! I’ll try again to recapture my thoughts, which I was so proud of.After reading assigned sections of The Cluetrain Manifesto, I am amazed at the difference in tone between several entries. I agreed with the ideas behind The 95 Theses, but I wondered what the authors had experience that day that left them so bitter and angry towards the existing market/audience system. Was it that they were forced to eat soggy Cheerios? Or did they have an experience similar to Julie Snyder’s with MCI, as shared through NPR’s This American Life episode #253: The Middle of Nowhere? In it, Julie attempts to rectify an overcharge on her account, but nine months later is stuck in bureaucratic neglect and playing the company’s games. Give it a listen; it’s frustratingly refreshing. And while the Foreword (written by someone else) and Elevator Rap are not as aggressive as the 95 Theses, they share the same contempt for the ‘current’ design of markets and audiences.But then I reached the Introduction. Wow! Did the same four people write this section? This section is filled with hope and optimism, and left me believing that the Internet can change business and the world with it. The relationship between markets and audiences is shifting drastically. Markets, and the humans inside of them, are becoming audiences and audiences are, well, remaining audiences. But now everyone in the audience can have a voice, and everyone has an opportunity to hear that voice. The companies that hear the voices and truly listen are better poised to adapt their identities to better fit in with the new design. And once they evolve, they are better equipped to function in the new community envisioned by the Cluetrain authors.Alas, the authors have poured themselves a new, crunchy bowl of Cheerios. (And Movable Type has left my bowl out for too long.)