At this stage I will not make any detailed analyses of the logs from the MOO sessions, but rather try and point to some more general trends that emerged in the group sessions over time, and which I will look at in more detail in some later articles. I shall draw not only on the log materials from the MOO sessions, however, but also on the students' comments during our face to face sessions, and on some of their more reflected points of view from their written examination papers.
All in all we logged eight hours of MOO sessions, six while I was in Italy, and one organized after I returned to Trondheim, where I was at home and the students at the computer lab at the university (with the exception of one student who had a home computer with modem, and who took part in the session from there). This resulted in over 140 pages of log materials, i.e. about 17 pages from each session. After each session the log was distributed to the whole group, on the understanding that we all would read through it and reflect on the changing norms in the MOO environment. It turned out very useful to have these logs as a common point of reference for our subsequent discussions.
The first MOO session we had was on October 17th, and the final one, after I came back to Trondheim, was on November 8th. Looking through the logs in retrospect it is easy to see at least some general trends emerging during these three weeks. The first couple of sessions were fairly chaotic, since none of us (including myself) were used to structuring this kind of commnication situation in a MOO, and quite a lot of time had to be used to clear up problems and misunderstandings in this connection. A lot of time too went to discussing purely practical issues such as how to use the "session" function in the virtual classroom, which sets other parameters for communication when it is turned on than when it is turned off. I had felt in advance that I ought to try and structure the discussions in some way by introducing some premade topics for the sessions by means of World Wide Web . But this did not function at all at this stage, since everyone obviously needed much more time to accomodate to the freer environment of the virtual environment before we could get down to having more serious discussions. In the light of some of the discussions that I had read in other MOO logs between more experienced MOO-teachers, this breakdown in `structure' did not really bother me too much, since this often seems to be the case when groups of people are brought into a MOO for the first time. The sequence below comes from the first log, just after I had shown the first page of the Web page with the topics I had suggested for discussion at that session. At this point Peter suggested that we might have to establish some rules for conversation.
Patrick says, "what do you others think: do we need any rules?" to the others at the red table. Patrick waits eagerly for reactions Alison whispers, ""maybe you should lead the whole thing a bit more?"" from red table. Susan says, "I can't manage to see the www" to the others at red table. Patrick [to Alison]: I am trying, but its not so easy as you see... Patrick whispers, "did you write look www ?" to Susan. Margaret speaks up, "I think it would be easier if there were les at each table" Patrick clears his throat Patricia says, "I think that at the the moment we should fllow the golden rule of cyberspace about rulelessness, then we can think until the next session."" to the others at red table. Sally leans back relaxed and rests Karen says, "to Patricia "have you speakers' cramp?"" to the others at red table. Sally says, "Maybe it's not rules ,but concentration we lack... I mean, we never chatter like this in other classes" to the others at red table. Patrick speaks up, "Patricias suggestion is a starting point, but we can try several different things I think" Karen says, "what do I do when I want to say something to a person, but still don't want to whisper?"" to the others at red table. Patrick speaks up, "but there are many who arent saying anything. What do you others think?" Patricia says, "OK"" to the others at red table. Patrick whispers, "you can use 'page' "person"" to Karen. Alison says, "patrick, had you thought we were going to discuss anything special today?"" to the others at red table. Sally says, "What I in fact notice is that its not really that we talk more than in other classes, b,ut that here at DV all that's said is equally loud and equally important" to the others at red table.
Sally's point is well made, since the conventional role of the teacher is challenged by the fact that unless one chooses to prepare and download large quantities of text into the virtual environment, it is very difficult to hold a traditional one hour lecture in a MOO. The form of presentation in a MOO in fact needs a great deal of forethought. Too much text to read will be boring for those who have to sit and read it off a screen, and if there is no concensus on a clear focus for the conversation as there was at our first MOO sessions there is a serious risk of complete anarchy developing, which enjoyable and interesting as it might be to begin with, is not really conducive to serious work. The fact that "all that's said is equally loud and equally important" is probably the most challenging and exciting part of the MOO-environment, since it forces everyone taking part in the session to take responsibility for the development of the conversation. If everyone succumbs to the temptation to express themselves freely, then the situation can become very confused indeed, and a lot of time is apparently wasted in more or less aimless chat. The only way to cope with this however is to tolerate the situation humorously to begin with, and to be flexible with regard to new situations that arise, as the initial confusion seems an important part of the (re)constitution of a group identity in the virtual environment. On the other hand, if no one says anything, then there would be no possibillity of constituting the group at all. The MOO environment seemed to have a very positive effect with respect to getting the students to be active in the conversations. Everyone had something to say, also those students who had been more reserved in discussions in the real world classroom discussions (see also some more detailed discussion of this later). To give some impression of the atmosphere in the group in the first session I have included the sequence below which comes from the log quite early on in the session as Peter, who was a bit late on this occasion, joined the group.
Peter joins you. Peter arrives from nowhere. Patrick says, "hi Peter, welcome" Karen says, "well, I'm starting to get the point"" Sally says, "hello to the dane " Margaret chuckles Patrick says, "Peter, sit down by all means (write 'sit')" Sally chuckles too Peter sits down at the white table. Patricia chuckles as well Margaret [to Peter]: hello,hello Peter stands up from the white table. Peter sits down at the red table. Patrick smiles to everyone Peter says, "sorry I came so late" Sally says, "APeter we're sitting here at the red table" Patrick [to Peter,]: no problem, we're still in the process of getting orientated Margaret says, "How is it no? Is everyone sitting at the red table?" Karen says, "how do you chuckle, Margaret?"" Susan ogles with her eyes Patrick [to Margaret]: to see where we are sitting you can write 'look' Sally says, "Yes it's not so easy to orient oneself like this round a red table" Patrick [to Sally]: a good point Patricia says, "yes, I'm at the red table. Tott has left me."" Karen says, "is the colour essentially important?"" Susan says, "Isn't Jennifer coming today?" Peter says, "I only am abl to say things - I'm not gtting anything back?" Patrick says, "but listen here everyone. I've written something on the blackboard. Can you all read it? You write 'look blackboard'" Sally says, "It's our 'giding light' Karen... a kind of Jesus you might say" Patrick [to Peter]: you see nothing of what the others are saying? Karen says, "oh yes, Jesus,yes..........."" Patricia says, "Patrick's sitting in Bologna, the most communist city of them all. Of course the table for the meeting mst be rd"" Patrick smiles broadly and laughs Karen says, "oh that's how it works..."" Peter speaks up, "yes now it's going better"
As one of the group sums up in her examination paper (I have added some word in [square brackets] for contextual clarification):
"The first log is strongly characterised by the fact that we are unsure of how this [focusing on a theme] should be done. We spend a lot of time find ing out about the various commands and chatting a bit. The whole thing is more or less unstructured and as Karen says in the first log there is a lot of "much ado about nothing" going on there. But as time went on there was an increasing structure in the MOO. It is especially noticeable that everyone became much more careful about making humorous remarks. As time went on we became more selective about what we said and what we did not say. Everything took a long time, both producing, interpreting and reading utterances. We discovered that it was disruptive with humorous comments and one can see a great difference between the first log and the last logs."
As teacher and presumptive leader of the group, I was concerned about what the role of the teacher/ leader could be in the virtual environment. When my early attempts at structuring the conversation through the discussion topics I had set up in advance had seemingly failed to provide enough focus to do that, I decided to put that down to the time not being ripe for that, and to let things run their course a bit, and take things as they came, while at the same time trying to maintain a more general focus on discussing changing norm systems in the group. Since this was a new situation for me too, I did not really have any fixed preconceptions about how structuring of the situation ought to be done either, so I tried to get the group members to take more responsibility for the structuring of what was happening collectively, and to content myself with showing some of the structuring tools that were available in the MOO environment. This meant I deliberately took a more background role than in our face to face classes at the beginning of the semester, and tried instead to give some practical assistance, suggestions for more general discussion topics and constructive response to what was said, and to influence the course of the sessions through my active participation rather than be the only one who took initiative to providing "input".
With regard to the response I gave, I considered it important that I initially followed up specific initiatives taken by individual students during the discussions, and by means of the answers I gave and questions I asked steered the conversation as much as possible in the direction of the main theme of the role of the mediating technology in relation to changing textual norms in the virtual environment. This was because I wanted to foreground and bring out into the group discussions the students' own experiences and evaluations more than my own, since I had considerably more experience with MOO environments, and they were looking at the situation with a completely fresh gaze.
The group were a bit ambivalent in regard to this, sometimes demanding more structuring and leadership from me, but most of the time seeming to revel in the spontaneity and freedom from a more traditional classrom environment. When I inadvertantly forgot to close the door of the room we were using in the second session we received a rash of unexpected visitors in the group (fortunately around the time we were about to have our mid session break), who obviously had noticed that something was going on there and decided to drop in and see what was going on. It was interesting to see how the group tackled the unexpected visitor:
Patrick says, "I wrote something on the blackboard for you. Write look black to see it" Patrick says, "do you see it?" Sally says, "Yepp" Karen says, "yes"" Patrick says, "and you others?" Francois arrives from nowhere. Alison says, "yes" Margaret says, "yes" Susan says, "yes" Janet says, "I'm following"" Patrick says, "hello Francois, where are you from?" Francois is parisian.. Francois bows You say, "bonjour Francois" Francois says 'hei' to the scandinavians.. Karen says, "and all we others were suddenly silent ....."" Patricia sits down at the red table. Sally says, "Bonjour Francois ca vas?" Francois is getting ok if it were not for the bomb.. Karen sits down at the red table. Patrick [to Francois]: we have a meeting now (kind of class) It will be in Norwegian...or maybe we should switch to english or french...? Janet says, "hei,Francois! Welcome!"" Francois was in oslo yesterday..:) Sally sits down at the red table. Francois was just wondering what was happening Patrick [to Francois]: really, tell us what you did there.. Francois visited a friend Francois says, "hmm i guess i will let you meet..what is the topic" Janet sits down at the red table Patrick [to Francois]: well, you are welcome to sit in, but we cannot guarentee you will follow.. Francois says, "btw if you plan to teach norsk on DU tell me.." Patricia [to Francois"Were]: you there really or virtually?"
The first part of the sequence above was in Norwegian (which I have translated to English for this report), but when Francois appeared most of the group switched to English or French almost immediately and seemed to enjoy the situation immensely. Some were a bit more reserved and just followed what was going on. Sally organised a Norwegian and an English table so those who did not want to talk English could do that. At that point I also got involved in an unexpected "paging" conversation (see below) with Richlieu, one of the Diversity University administrators who had been planning to shut down the MOO when he fortunately discovered we were there and called to check how long we would be using the room. Shortly afterwards a German visitor dropped in, followed by an American, so there was a short period of multicultural conversations before the students who had gone for the break came back, and Sally got fed up and wanted the door closed so we could get back to work again:
Patrick [to Francois]: mathematical meanings? Patricia says, "Hello, Margaret, I`ve missed you to!"" Francois nods to you. Sally what about oure session? Francois says, "in order to see programs as mathematical objects and hence be able to prove things about them" Patrick [to Francois]: you mean true or false? Patrick [to Sally]: sorry, but this is a bit characteristic of MOO worlds too. I guess I should have closed the door... Sally [to Patrick]: turn on session and close the door, we have to get something done here Assistants of the local psychology institute arrive to cart Gail off to their dream-research labs. Karen [to Sally]: " I think Patrick and Francois are too busy with their discussion, or whatever...."
For me the most interesting part of the MOO experience was that I as teacher was forced to constantly reexamine my role as pedagog. Since all enunciations[37] or utterances have a tendency to appear as equally "loud" and "important" in a MOO, it is not enough merely to have interesting things to say, and even the verbal and rhetorical ways and means to say them with, one must also gain the floor for long enough to be able to say them.
There is a certain quality of unpredictability, or of the unknown, involved with working and collaborating in virtual environments, such as the appearance of unexpected guests as in the above-mentioned case, and perhaps more importantly, the fact that the whole context of situation is completely technologically mediated and regulated, and in fact depends precisely on that technology working smoothly in the background in order to exist at all. This is one of the most fundamental differences between face-to-face and mediated communication, and one that is often neglected or toned down in discussions about collaboration in distributed virtual environments. If the mediating technology gets in the way of communication rather than facilitating it, then it will only create an illusion of increased openness, and much of the inherent potential will remain unrealised. This is why technology-related humanities research should focus on evaluation of technology as a tool or medium for communication and inter- and intracultural exchange, and set the agenda for further development of the technology based on deeper understandings of the differences between processes of communication and cultural change and evolution in virtual environments and those already taking place in the real world.
My paged conversation with Richelieu reveals the inherent ephemerality of the whole context of situation for our virtual meetings quite well (here the interspersed conversational components of other actors are removed for clarity):
Richelieu pages, "what's going on over there?" [...] page Richelieu we are having a class on uses of MOO's Richelieu has received your page. [...] Richelieu pages, "oh.. I didn't know there were any classes this early in the morning.. how long will it be?" page Richelieu til about 1pm GMT Richelieu has received your page. [...] [from Vulcan's Heart] Richelieu was just about to restart the server to apply some patches when he noticed there was a big group of people online in a conference room.. [...] page Richelieu thank god that you checked. Can you a'wait til after 1? Richelieu has received your page. Richelieu pages, "let's see.. that's in about an hour and 15 minutes?" [...] ___________________________________ | | Patrick holds up a BIG sign:| just talking to a DU-MOO person...| |-----------------------------------| [...] page Richelieu yest, that's right Richelieu has received your page. Richelieu pages, "well, I always check first.. only a little bit ago I was one of 2 people online and then all you showed up.." page Richelieu I mentioned this session to ULf, but meybe I should have told you too? Richelieu has received your page. [...] Moonstone_Guest says, "guten tag" patcop waves t Moonstone_Guest Richelieu pages, "well, that'll put things around 8:00 am EDT.. maybe I'll just have to wait till tomorrow night.." Francois smiles...i left new orleans in june..sorry for the old info..i am back in Paris.. Richelieu pages, "when do you have these classes, for future reference?" [...] page Richelieu is that OK? Richelieu has received your page. Francois has the feeling he is interrupting your meeting [...] page Richelieu we have them tuesday and wednesday from 11.15-13.00 next week and the week after Richelieu has received your page. [...] patcop [to Francois]: a bit, but this is all good experience [...] Moonstone_Guest says, "Ich gehe jetz" Moonstone_Guest says, "danke" Moonstone_Guest goes home. Richelieu pages, "ok, I guess I'll do my server upgrade tomorrow night.."
Towards the end of the period I was in Italy the content of the discussions during the sessions became gradually more "serious", and as another of the students commented in her examination paper:
"The written form of the MOO meant that it was not possible to see who was talking to who and at the begining this was very stressful. As time went on I managed to calm down and concentrate better. I also learned to be more selective, e.g. by not reading, or "scanning" through, less important things like room descriptions etc.. Comparing the first and the last log one can also see that utterances have become longer. This is probably also a result of the fact that the content of the logs changed too. At the same time as the length of the utterances increased they have also become less playful and to a greater degree express concrete meanings."
Another writes (inserts in [square brackets] are mine):
"The adjustment model [of communication] is I think the most useful one to consider here. Its disadvantage is that it is difficult to differentiate between what is information and what is communication, in that every sign is interpreted as communicative action, and one overlooks the intentionality of these actions. All [possible] signs are not materialised in the MOO (cf. above). But apart from that, I think it can be relevant because power and social relations have an important place there. These are things that I believe I have observed in the MOO, and otherwise where people communicate, namely that one communicates in order to position oneself, professionally and socially, in relation to others.
Then it is not necessarily most important what one says, but that one says something. (If one wants to position oneself as a professionally competent person, what one says is more important).
We in the AVS 6 group knew one another relatively well in advance, and those who did not know one another quickly got to know one another early in the course.
What consequences did it have for the communication that went on between us and the lecturer that we knew we would talk together in the cantine afterwards and all in all see quite a lot of each other?
I have thought about this, because the fact that we could be anonymous - everyone knew who said what - could influence the degree of spontaneity. Maybe we thought more about whether we made fools of ourselves. We also knew that what we were saying was being logged and that we were going to base our examination answers on this. All in all the communication norms have changed quite a lot from the first meeting, which was very much just playing and trying things out, and practical questions to the lecturer. We discovered ourselves that we needed norms in order to gain some academic benefit from it. Getting to know one another socially we after all did/ already had done outside of the MOO-meetings."
Here I want to return to the issue of the effect of being in the MOO environment on the quieter students in the group, and also to tie in some thoughts about the positive effect of MOO collaboration on certain kinds of speech and reading/ writing problems. Since I had got to know the group quite well before I left for Italy I had noticed that some of the youngest students were rather reserved in the discussions we had in class. When the MOO-sessions began I was surprised to notice that these students too, took lively part in the discussions, and one of them, Margaret, even took initiative to try out a role as discussion leader as this log excerpt shows:
Susan says, "yea, well I thought to ask if there are any kinds of rules that we might have used " to the others at blue table. Sally says, "What do you mean by rules?" to the others at blue table. Susan says, "WEll in order to prevent confusion " to the others at blue table. Patrick says, "in a way I think they might have to develop over time?" to the others at blue table. Patrick says, "if we see some kind of potential here, then we're all interested in this, no?" to the others at blue table. Sally says, "I think they are starting to emerge" to the others at blue table. Susan says, "Yes, they may well be, I just wondered if we had found any already" to the others at blue table. Patrick says, "me too.." to the others at blue table. Patrick nods and is pleased Margaret says, "Couldn't we try to use putting our hands up? Just for a little while to see how it works?" to the others at blue table. Susan says, "Will we manage that before the class is over?" to the others at blue table. Patrick puts up a hand Patrick says, "I'm trying now, that might be an idea, yes" to the others at blue table. Susan says, "Do we need a discussion eleader?" to the others at blue table. Margaret says, "Yes, Pat." to the others at blue table. Patrick puts up a hand Patrick says, "this idea of a discussion leader might well be a good idea, what do you others think?" to the others at blue table. Margaret says, "Seems like I promoted myself to discussion leader" to the others at blue table.
Another student (or at least I think so, since I do not know which of the students wrote this particular examination paper) mentions this explicitly:
"For those with a more quiet kind of personality there is the possibility of getting attention without everyone looking at one. Here, everyone can be heard as well as everyone else. It is also possible to be anonymous.
Also, spontaneity is promoted more than in normal lectures - here dialog is more easy than monolog.
Appearance and gender are not so prevalent, and precisely this point I assume will influence the process of meaning making (or semiosis) to a large degree. Normally a large part of our identity is namely tied in with gender, but here one can be genderless if one decides to."
At the penultimate MOO session before I was due to come back from Italy I asked the group if some of them would be prepared to take responsibility for leading the session the next day. After some discussion Alison decided to take this, no mean achievement on her part as later discussion on her part will reveal (see further on in this section).
Patrick [to Alison]: my original idea was that we shuod have at f2f meeting next week Alison says, "ok, dthat's fine"" Patrick says, "on wednesday we can go back t the MOO and try again" Jennifer says, "That sounds ok" Patrick says, "Then we have a basis in the day before, where we sum up a bit and talk about the differences between f2f and MOO conversations" Patricia nods Patrick [to Alison]: but Alison, if you can prepare a bit, poss. together with some others and take responsibility for a little presentation for tomorrow that would be great... Patrick says, "then I will only be a fly on the wall... (or try at leas)" Patrick smiles Patrick [to Alison]: if you need some help with writing on the blackboard we can do that together afterwards... Alison [to Patrick]: "but how can I hold a presentation HERE? then you'll all just be sitting looking at an empty screen until I've finished writing or.. ? Alison says, "oh yes....the blackboard...that was smart!" Patrick [to Alison]: yes, it this that is the challenge. You have to put something on the blackboard, and then develop it for the others while they are watching and maybe ask sensible questions or mak comments Patrick [to Alison]: to get some help on how you work with the blackboard you can write help blackboard Alison says, "fine, I'll try and cook up something for tomorrow..." Sally [to Alison]: And it must'nt be lomger than that you can read it on the blackboard without being disturbed by people talking or moving Patrick [to Alison]: you can also poss. send e-mail to everyone in advance. But my experience is that you cannot be100% certain that everyone has read it in advance Margaret says, "Fantastic that you are doing this, Alison." Patrick agrees with Margaret and thinks everyone should clap for Alison
Alison's session was a high point, and in many ways the turning point for the developing norm systems in the virtual environment, at least if this student's impressions are anything to go by:
"One of the logs stands strongly out from the others, namely Wendesday November 1st. There we had other expectations to the meeting. Before we had namely had a so-called "flat structure", but this meeting was to be led by Alison (aligol)[38] and everyone was prepared for someone to be leading. We were all extremely expectant and let Alison take command. In this we did not have to spend a lot of time on negotiations about a theme, because Alison also decided that. When the discussion started to float out Alison was quick to come with a Big Sign which told us which comments we should focus on. In this way we saved a lot of time and everyone became more focused on the same theme. The first log is strongly flavored by the fact that we were unsure how this should be done."
Alison too, had positive experiences with the session she led. As she wrote in her examination paper (it was obviously her, since she wrote in first person):
"The fact that the interactions are text-based creates a certain distance and can be a factor to include students who otherwise would not be active. Personally I took it upon myself to lead one of our MOO meetings and prepared a presentation for this, and this is something I never would have volunteered for in a normal classroom situation. On the screen no one can see that you are nervous, redden or stammer."
Alison, a complete MOO novice before the course began, started her session in this way:
_____________________________ | | Alison holds up a BIG sign:| READ THE BLACKBOARD QUICKLY | | EVERYONE | |_____________________________| Patrick wrinkles his brow as he reads Alison says, "I seem to have spelt vygotsky wrong I think...still, this was just a quick intro just to set our thoughts going..." Patrick puts up a hand Sally ser at Margaret er under veis Alison [to Patrick]: "shall I just start? have some info first Patrick says, "the citation about text and writing as a social system. Where does that come from?" Alison says, "Fnn Bostad" Patrick [to Alison]: well just go ahead, I think this looks exciting __________________________________________ | | | Today we are going to try an experiment! | | Since I was bright enough to volunteer | | for this great responsibilityr, I have | Alison holds up a BIG sign: | taken the liberty of moderating this | | meeting with an iron hand. ;-) (after | | consultations with some of you) - wait | | for more... | |------------------------------------------| Patrick waits patiently ______________________________________________ | Ishall try and lead a topical discussion, | | and by using BIG signs I shall gain your | | attention. I.e. that when you read | | Alison says !!!! that means that a sign is | Alison holds up a BIG sign:| coming at any moment, and then it is an | | advantage if you do not talk. (shall try not | | to interrupt) When you have read the sign it | | is free for all with comments/ opinions. | |______________________________________________|
To give some idea of how well the discussion developed here is a longer sequence from this particular meeting (the utterances with exclamation marks (!) were something we had agreed to try for a while to represent people putting their hands up to ask to speak)
Patricia says, "The written text we relate to in Moo is more coloured by spontaneity and orality than in e.g. school essays or in novels. I suppose it is like a "New dress" for a new party in a way I mean we will always make a distinction between form and content, won't we?" " Patrick [to Sally]: my point is that all text production and interpretation of texts is a sociocultural process of meaning-making. Text norms grow out of this process Alison says, "I THINK I WILL TRY WITHOUT GIVING THE FLOOR TO PEOPLE, THE ONE THAT IS FIRST TALKS FIRST, AND THE OTHERS HAVE TO TRY AND FIND AN EFFECTIVE WNAY TO READ" Sally ! Alison says, "OOF THAT TURNED OUT A BIT OF A MESS...SRRY, JUST GO ON" Patrick looks at Selly Sally [to Patrick]: But you understand what I mean by the difference between semantic and rhetoriical text norms, no? Patrick ! Alison says, "!" Patrick [to Sally]: not quite, but maybe you can develop a bit? Patricia [to patric]: " Isn't that the same as saying that the content/message/ semantics/ meaning creates the form/norms for text production, or what?" Sally Will be sitting and writing/thinking for a while , but will come back stronger again later (maybe) Patricia with reference to the last utterance but one Karen drank too much wine last night, can't quite manage to concentrate on today's theme Alison says, "maybe we should differentiate between form and content in a discussion of normative change though new technology?" Patrick [to Patricia]: apart from that by semantics I understand an attempt to define words' meaning in a precise, limited way, while meaning making is a process, where the meaning of words change and become accomodated to different contexts as time goes on Susan sneaks out Patrick [to Sally]: rhetoric is concerned with well-formed texts, but not so much with the context where the text is created/ used Susan has disconnected. Sally [to Patrick]: What I am doing is to tie in the meaning that is created in acts of using the language by means of choices of text norms (or infringements of text norms) to rhetoric, while I think that the semantic content can easily (at least theoretically) be distinguished from that which has to do with norms of language usage. Sally Hopes she was ont so late that this was completely confusing Janet has managed to forget her glasses. Squints at the screen Sally is not fully accessible for communication at the moment, because she is trying to read back through what has happened Patrick [to Sally]: I'm not so sure that it is useful to distinguish between semantic meanings and norms of language usage Patricia says, "We must at least agree that the text norm of the Web is different from the text norm in the MOO. While the Web is more static, the MOO is dynamic and it is we who create this dynamicity. With regard to the process of meaning making in the MOO this is in constant change dep. on who w rites and reads. In Web pages the texts are however stable, but can be interpreted in different ways by the readers."" Janet thinks things are moving very fast.Struggles to read and follow Patrick [to Patricia]: wel, this is also an artificial division, since WWW pages are often updated. Links come and go etc, but the speed is different, yes Patricia thinks what she said seems a bit pedantic, but her intention was an exchange of meaning to take part in the processen Alison [to Patricia]: "I though we could discuss MOO first and then web afterwards, unless there is a desire to take it in paralell inorder to be able to compare Sally ! Susan stands up from the white table. Assistants of the local psychology institute arrive to cart Susan off to their dream-research labs. Patrick says, "otherwise I think the point Alison took up in one of the signs with the differences between spoken and written language was interesting" Patrick looks at Sally Sally says, "I don't know if the division between WWW and MOO is so artificial: Yesterday we talked about that in WWW one either puts in info. or one Fetches it out. While in MOO we make meaning together by chucking out questions and thoughts which one reflects over together" Sally ! Alison says, "Patricia mentioned earlier on that the language in a MOO is oral, is it? remember that the concversations can be printed out and looked upon as written documents. and in any case we are all talking bokmaal...." Patrick nods at Alison's comments Patrick is waiting for Sally Janet says, "We talked about that even though moo resembles spoken language, a "conversation" in a moo takes maybe 4-5 times longer than in reality"" Alison nods baffirmatively Patrick nods and wonders why Sally says, "To finish off what I was saying before: The difference between WWW and MOO is like the difference between Qualitative interview as an info.source and a readers' column in a magazine as an Info. source -Here we are making meaning TOGETHER!" Patricia [to Alison]: "Yes, it will manifest itself as a form as a written text, but I feel that I prepare myself mentally to say something spoken. If that is possible." Alison [to patricia]: "I agree fully with you on that, but our language is still not fully and wholly spoken language Patrick [to Sally]: yes, but here again there is a difference in speed, and at the same time more distance in the social space between actors.. Alison says, "at the same time it is not correct written norwegian that we are using either...." Sally ! Patrick [to Sally]: all texts, written or spoken address themselves to someone. In MOO this is however not always so clear Alison [to Patrick]: "but Sally's point about meaning making is still relevant though? Patrick smiles apologetically for forgetting to have put his hand up Sally says, "The fact that we neither use correct bokmaal or correct dialect or correct anything at all for that matter surely witnesses the fact that we are extremely concerned about communicating and are willing to sacrifice something for that...?"
As mentioned previously, Sally and Karen had both publicly made the group aware that they had respectively some degree of reading/ writing and speech impediments. To what extent did the virtual environment affect their perceptions of themselves in this connection? At the present time I have not had time to investigate this in depth from their individual points of view (this is something I hope to be able to follow up throught interviews later on in the project), but at this point in time I find it relevant and interesting to mention that Sally was one of the most active participants in the group, not only in the class discussions, but also in the discussions we had in the text-based virtual environment of Diversity University MOO. At this point it might be realistic to hypothesise that a text-based, but nonetheless primarily "oral" form of discourse is more conducive to active participation from people who have problems reading and writing longer forms of texts, and that the fact that the necessity of formulating oneself rapidly in writing in order to take part in a discussion, without the need to focus too much on formal correctness with regard to spelling and typically complex written forms of syntax may be liberating for those who have problems with processing of written language of the kind mentioned above. As one of the other students commented in her examination paper:
"Recently, there have also been a number of attempts made to teach dyslectics to write on typewriters, and this has helped many. When they learn the touch-system they can manage to avoid some of the errors that they make when they write by hand. Electronic text and writing does not then necessarily mean greater difficulties for this group, but one must on the other hand take account of the fact that many dyslectics read more slowly than normal."
This is an important point to consider in relation to collaborative writing in MOO environments, and in many ways underlines the advantage of the fact that MOO-communication seems to both necessitate and induce shorter, more orally oriented and compact message forms than other, more asynchronous forms of electronic discourse.
With regard to minor speech impediments, such as Karen's stammer, the text-based virtual environment also seems liberating. Karen herself mentioned this factor several times in our face-to-face class discussions as a positive aspect of MOO-communication, and it is interesting to note that she turned out to be the one member of the group who seemed to spend most time MOO-ing outside of the course timetable. On several occasions when I was logged in at Diversity University after the end of the semester, I "met" Karen there, and she told me herself that she had spent many hours logged in talking to various people that she met there, and obviously was enjoying this experience a lot. I do not wish at the present time to make any more wide ranging generalisations on the basis of these fragmentary observations, but will content myself with mentioning them here and hope to be able follow them up in more detail at a later date together with Karen and Sally.