The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Creation and Information Exchange in an Undergraduate Educational...

Running head: THE USE OF WIKIS IN KNOWLEDGE CREATION AND

1

The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Creation and Information Exchange

in an Undergraduate Educational Technology Class.

Robert A. Skiff Jr.

University of Vermont


2

Abstract

The use of wikis and other Web 2.0 media in learning environments is increasing at a

rapid rate. This innovation can have a potential impact on the way information and

knowledge are exchanged between teachers and students. This research project is a study

of wiki use in an undergraduate education class using various ethnographic methods

within the context of assemblage theory. It concludes with recommendations for further

research and possible improvements in online learning environments to support

knowledge creation and informational exchange.


3

The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Creation and Information Exchange

in an Undergraduate Educational Technology Class

The classroom is a complex space of negotiation, learning, hierarchy, and

resistance and is a reflection of the culture that creates and supports it (Bourdieu, 1984;

Lyotard, 1993; Hardt & Negri, 2009). The relationships in the classroom, like those

between the teacher and the student, are centered on the exchange of information and the

production of knowledge. It is this system of exchange that is the foundation of

education. Today, the nature of that exchange is changing both the physical form of the

classroom and the way in which pedagogy is practiced through the introduction of

disruptive information technologies (Lyotard, 1993; Taylor & Sarrinen, 1994; Galloway,

2004; Benkler, 2006; Toffler & Toffler, 2006). There are classrooms where the teacher

still controls the exchange of information and formation of knowledge. However, there

are also classrooms where education is being transformed by these technologies.

This paper is an examination of one such classroom. Just before the start of the

University of Vermont’s 2009 fall term, as I was beginning my doctoral program at the

College of Education and Social Services, I was asked to teach an undergraduate class

titled EDSC 11: Technology and Education. I was given less than a week to prepare a

syllabus and come up with a course of study. There was no time to order a textbook or

engage in any kind of professional development or collaboration. There was no

supervision by my doctoral advisor or department chair. I was on my own and left to my

own devices. It was a great opportunity.


4

The University of Vermont uses Blackboard, a content management system

(CMS), in all of its classes. However, with less than one week before the start of the term,

there was no way for me to learn how to use the software, publish the coursework online,

and create an innovative and exciting learning environment within the context of using

Blackboard. Forced by these constraints, I created a wiki and adapted it to serve as a

CMS. A wiki is a website that users can modify and change through a web browser rather

than having to change HTML code on a remote server (Tangient, LLC, 2012). The level

of openness, transparency, and accessibility depends on the creator of the wiki. This

contrasts with a CMS such as Blackboard, which limits students’ ability to participate in

content creation to discussion boards only (Blackboard Inc., 2010).

I created a wiki that was highly collaborative, transparent, and open. Students

could not only participate in discussion boards, they could also create content, modify

lessons, and collaborate in ways that I could not completely control or keep track of.

Since the course content was also open to the web, anyone on the Internet could

participate in the discussions and watch the class unfold (Class of EDSC11UVM, 2012).

This created a dynamic learning environment that not only altered the way in which the

students interacted with me but also the way in which we exchanged information and

created knowledge together.

This research paper will explore some of the ways in which use of the wiki

enabled very different spatial and temporal interactions between students and teacher in

this undergraduate class. In addition, it will show that the nature of information exchange

on a wiki quite rapidly overwhelms traditional pedagogical techniques that rely on

academic hierarchical structures of command and control. The findings of this research


5

paper are not generalizable to any extent but are an interpretation of the experiences of a

few participants in EDSC11. Nor are the findings generalizable to wikis as a whole or to

online education. Instead, this project points out one of the ways in which wikis might be

used in undergraduate classes to empower students to become more active participants in

their learning experience. The implications of this research are discussed in the

“Conclusions and Implications” section at the end of this paper.

[INSERT CENTERED HEADER? SEE COVER LETTER.]

Theoretical Lens and Literature Review

In Discipline and Punishment, Michel Foucault describes an eighteenth-century

classroom in which handwriting is taught. He analyzes the classroom using categories of

surveillance, normalizing judgment, and punishment to examine the concepts of power

and education (Foucault, 1977).

In the chapter “The Means of Correct Training,” Foucault traces how French

children learn to write and uses this example to form a theoretical framework for the rest

of his work. Foucault starts the chapter by describing how a teacher’s assistant would

hold a student’s hand as he made his letters, ensuring proper technique by continuously

adjusting the pen and the hand of the student (Foucault, 1977). These adjustments

provided the student with the information and feedback to produce the letters of the

alphabet. For Foucault, this created an integrated system of surveillance and discipline

that was a manifestation of the pedagogical theory of the École Militaire.


6

The disciplinary power to be absolutely indiscreet, it is everywhere and always

alert, since by both is very principle it leave no zone of shade and constantly

supervises. (Foucault, 1977, p. 176)

This constant surveillance allowed the body of the student to be fixed within the

disciplinary gaze of the teacher and his assistants while being acted upon by the

normalizing judgment of the École Militaire.

The physical layout of the classroom was an important component of the

disciplinary nature of the system. The classrooms were organized by keeping desks in

rows, with a teacher in front able to closely monitor his/her students while controlling

their actions. Foucault’s epistemology describing the layout of the classroom also can be

used to examine the pedagogical assumptions behind it (Deacon, 2006). He argues that

the development of schooling and education resulted from a need to control an ever-

increasing population, and this was achieved through the development of centralized

systems and authority (Foucault, 1977).

In some spaces, it is becoming increasingly evident that giving students access to

information and encouraging their ability to exchange and create knowledge

themselves—outside of the constant scrutiny of teachers—is creating different pedagogy

than the rigid traditional model described by Foucault (Castronova, 2005; Benkler, 2006;

Deacon, 2006). Students and teachers deploy social networking software, create

Facebook groups for their classes, use Dropbox to exchange files, and build websites that

produce all kinds of sophisticated collaborative work across both disciplinary and

geographic boundaries (Aime Project, 2012).


7

Assemblage theory is one way to help understand the complex set of networks

that arise from the interaction between human beings and technology. Assemblage theory

is used in the study of the dialectical relationships that are created at the interaction

between culture, individuality, and technology (Guattari & Deleuze, 1983; Deleuze &

Guattari, 1987; Latour, 1988; De Landa,1991; Latour, 2005; De Landa, 2006). The study

of information technology’s impact on social systems is a rich environment for the

application of assemblage theory because it allows the researcher to examine the meaning

that arises out of all kinds of networks of social, cultural, and political meaning and see

how they impact the lives of individuals and groups. This idea is discussed in greater

detail in the section entitled “Educational Assemblages” near the end of this paper.

The integration of information technology in the classroom is changing education.

The Internet, social networking software, wikis, and even massively multiplayer online

role-playing games (MMORPGs) are transforming the way that information is exchanged

in the classroom and how knowledge is transferred between teacher and student. As a

result, traditional sets of normative behaviors that occur in the classroom between

teachers and students are being fundamentally altered (Lyotard, 1993; Landow, 1994;

Resnick, 1994; Taylor & Sarrinen, 1994; Castronova, 2005; Benkler, 2006; Harman,

2009; Dean, 2011).

While the Internet has been around for quite a long time and much has been

written about technology in the classroom, there is still little research that captures the

experience of learning in an online environment and combines it with an examination of

social networking in the context of assemblage theory. The earliest example of a study of

online learning environments is a 1992 ethnography on a seminar in which students and


8

teachers used e-mail, teleconferencing, and hypertexts (Taylor and Saarinen, 1992). In

addition, George Landor (1994) tried to develop a theory about the impact that hypertexts

would have on both critical theory and narrative. Both of these early explorations hinted

that the explosion in the amount of information available to students and teachers

overloaded the ability of hierarchical pedagogic structures to perform their traditional

function of surveillance and control. At the time of this research, some of the more exotic

forms of learning involving simulations and virtual reality had yet to be developed.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, French post-structuralism and other post-

modern philosophies created new epistemological categories in the realms of philosophy

and sociology and applied them to technology. These categories attempted to deal with

the entire concept of agency from a nonhuman point of view. Manuel De Landa (1991,

2009) looked at the development of the biotechnological phylum that could impact

human individuals and cultures in terms of their ability to process information and

influence the public sphere. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari’s concept of assemblages

is very useful in the study of wikis and other Web 2.0 applications and their impact on the

classroom learning environment. The authors deconstructed many of the epistemological

categories that are the basis of the social sciences, including individual, culture, and even

society (1987). Instead, the authors developed a method of recognizing the categories in

between and beyond individuality and agency. Deploying the concept of assemblage to

study different educational systems is very useful because it allows for the identification

of constructs that are outside the usual units of analysis in the classroom, such as the

teacher and the student.

The study of nonhuman actors’ impact on human society is not a new approach to


9

examine the influence of technological change on individuals and cultures. In the late

1980s and mid-1990s, Bruno Latour made the exploration of nonhuman actors the center

of his research into technology and culture (1988, 1996). John Law created a similar line

of research when he developed Actor Network Theory (1999). The importance of these

thinkers creating a more nuanced understanding of technology and its impact cannot be

underestimated. Law, De Landa, and Latour deconstructed the epistemological and

ontological categories centered on human agency. Their epistemology has influenced the

understanding of the role and meaning of teacher, including my own understanding of the

ways that wikis alter our understanding of pedagogy and the culture of the classroom. In

addition, their examination of nonhuman agency and its impact on cultural, social, and

political institutions are quite useful in an exploration of the dynamics of power and

change. According to Google Scholar, Latour’s work is cited in more than 35,000

different books and peer-reviewed journal articles (Google, 2012). John Law has around

5,000 citations, and Manuel De Landa enjoys around 2,000 (Google, 2012; Google,

2012). These are legitimate scholars having a major impact on the academy (Google,

2012).

Information technology is just one set of forces that is changing education;

globalization and the world economic crisis are two others (Hardt & Negri, 2004). These

forces impact the classroom environment and the relationships between teachers,

students, and technology. In the past ten years, Hardt and Negri have emerged as

important thinkers in a reformulation of Marxist theory that examines issues of power,

control, and resistance in individuals and society (Hardt & Negri, 2000, 2004, 2009).

Their theory of “commonwealth” has direct bearing on the learning that occurs in


10

educational communities and how it functions in a world of global capitalism. Instead of

looking at learning communities as groups of individuals transmitting knowledge, Hardt

and Negri analyze the social capital that is created and shared by all participants in these

communities. This commonwealth is quite difficult to measure, but it serves as a source

of democratic and egalitarian power (Hardt & Negri, 2009). Learning in the classroom

and online impacts not just individuals, but society as a whole. Developing the tools to

measure this commonwealth of knowledge and information is critical to an understanding

of social, cultural, and political capital in the twenty-first century. Hardt and Negri are

also cultural theorists examining the impact that technology is having on philosophy and

institutional power. Drawing on the writings of Foucault, Latour, and De Landa, their

theory is useful in understanding the disciplinary role of technology in reinforcing

systems of surveillance and control (Harman, 2009).

Research Methods and Design

This study drew heavily from ethnographic methodology, with a few important

modifications. The elements of ethnographic study consist of “fieldwork (informal

interviews and participant observation), formal interviews (unstructured open-ended, or

semi-structured interviews) . . . and a diary (researchers reflections/interpretations). It

also includes ‘other’ data that the ethnographer sees as fit . . . and whatever will help

[them] answer the research question” (Morse, 2003, p. 192). Creswell (2007) lists all

these elements as possible data sources, but he also includes electronic documents such as

e-mail, public records, and even phone text messages (Creswell, 2007).


11

Traditional ethnographic research such as Malinowski’s (1922) Argonauts of the

Western Pacific focused on the interpretation of non-Western cultural traditions within

European epistemologies (Clifford & Marcus, 1986; Bhabha, 1994). It used various types

of observations, interviews, and data collection techniques to study cultural groups as a

way to improve the efficiency of imperialism. George Stocking (1992) wrote, “Although

colonialism threatened to destroy the object of anthropological inquiry, it was at the same

time a condition sine qua non of ethnographic fieldwork” (p. 217). Today, many of the

techniques and issues are the same, but the application of ethnographic methodology has

expanded to examine organizations (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011; Hatch, 2006), global

counterinsurgency (Kelly J., 2010), virtual worlds (Castronova, 2005; Denzin & Lincoln,

2011), transportation networks (Latour, 1996), and urbanization (Davis, 2006), among

others. In all these cases, there is a focus on the way in which power is deployed within

institutional or cultural frameworks to exert influence on individuals, either singularly or

in groups (Holstein & Gabrium, 2011).

Ethnography is also used in educational research to study the impact of

institutions on individuals. Carspecken and Walford (2001) edited a collection of

ethnographies dealing with the implications of power in education on an individual and

institutional level. In addition, other authors have published textbooks on educational

ethnography, including Spindler and Hammond (2003). The Journal of Anthropology and

Education has published four issues annually for the past forty-three years. It contains

articles on critical race theory, post-structuralism, social justice, science education, and

development theory. The application of ethnographic methods to the study of online


12

environments is generally accepted within the academy, and they can be deployed by

researchers (Howard, 2002; Domínguez, Beaulieu, Estalella, & Read, 2007).

In many qualitative research projects in the social sciences, human beings are the

focus and unit of analysis. In order to understand the impact of online learning

environments on the classroom, teachers and students are interviewed. The interview

questions that I developed for this study were quite open ended. They challenged the

students to make meaning of their online experiences, especially those that occurred in

learning environments. Using this data, I developed an insight into how they are

experiencing both information exchange and knowledge creation on the wiki.

Since the location of this research study is limited in scope, I chose to look at the

experiences of one set of individuals in a particular wiki. This study could be considered

ethnographic. By concentrating on one specific location and/or event defined as

www.edsc11uvm.wikispaces.com, I am attempting to gather all kinds of information on

meaning making and value through the use of interviews and observations. The fact that

this wiki was created and maintained by me transforms the researcher into a participant

observer and makes generalizing the findings problematic at best. Although I’m

attempting to use this data to gain an understanding of larger theoretical issues centered

on knowledge creation and information exchange in Web 2.0 environments, my ability to

conclusively answer any of my research questions is limited. In this study, I can describe

some of the experiences that certain individuals had and what these experiences meant to

them, describe my thoughts on assemblages, and discuss the differences between

knowledge creation and information.

Ethnography allows the researcher to participate in the observation of a culture,


13

and for the purposes of this study a wiki is a culture. Several different anthropologists and

sociologists have also developed interesting methodologies that can be used to study

culture and technology, including De Landa (1991), Latour (1996, 2005), and Law

(1999). In the discipline of anthropology, Nancy Munn (1986) examined the exchange

network centered on the trade of Kula shells in the Trobriand Islands of Indonesia. Her

attention to detail, value, and gift exchange around the study of the concept of “fame,”

Kula shells, and food creates a methodology that can be applied to the complex

interchange between information and knowledge in online environments and the

classroom itself.

In Munn’s work, her unit of analysis was the individual, but she also assembled

individuals into cultures and even used the Kula shells themselves as sources of

information. For example, the possession of a particularly valuable shell would help

spread an individual’s “fame” across many islands. Without an analysis of these

individual shells, the entire system of exchange and meaning in this culture would have

been missed. Munn’s extension of analysis to include nonhuman agency was critical to

her discovery of what lies at the heart of how Gawans organize social construction of

knowledge, meaning, and culture. Her sensitivity to the cultural categories of the

Gawans’ weltanschauung is an excellent example of an ontology that can be applied to

intersection between human beings and the as yet undiscovered assemblages that exert

influence on humans beings and their social networks.

Site Selection and Participants

In the course of writing my initial research proposal, I applied for an exemption


14

under Section 46.101(b) of the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects by

the University of Vermont Committees on Human Research. The process of writing,

reviewing, and reexamining my research protocols was quite time consuming but

invaluable. Formal approval took many hours of work and delayed my ability to review,

collect, and analyze any data related to the wiki, but I did receive an Exempt Certification

on April 12, 2010. This granted me three years to complete the research.

Our learning community occupied a place that was both physical and virtual. On

Friday mornings, we would gather on the fourth floor of the Waterman Building at the

University of Vermont. However, most of the interesting interactions in the class

occurred online as the students created content that they would share with the rest of the

class. Throughout the semester, students developed their own profiles, created avatars,

played with historical simulations, and even developed their own wikis. At the beginning

of September, I asked the students to start thinking about a term project that they could

use as a focus of their learning and research. In December, I was amazed at the

sophistication of the results. It would be nice to claim credit for all the interesting

innovations and interactions that the students produced over those four months. However,

the truth is that something happened to our learning community in regards to the kinds of

information exchanged in the classroom and the knowledge the students were creating.

Much of this change was enabled by the wiki.

The twenty-one participants in the class were largely drawn from students at the

University of Vermont. Of the participants, 76.2 percent were women, 90 percent were

students, and 81 percent were between the ages of 18–29. The students all majored in

secondary education, with concentrations in English (4), history (4), math (3), geography


15

(1), French (1), social studies (1), sociology (1), secondary education (1), and unknown

(3). Every student had access to the Internet through either their own personal computer

or a university-supported lab.

In the first week of the course, students were asked to introduce themselves to

their classmates by posting an online biography of themselves. The instructor posted his

biography first, along with a simple set of instructions that students should only share

information that they were comfortable with and that they should feel free to use a

pseudonym. The amount of personal information that students shared varied. Many

identified the town and/or the state where they were from (14), their interests outside of

school (16), and their plans after graduation (9). The biographies created the opportunty

for students to describe themselves on their own terms and reach out to their classmates.

For example, a sophmore with a concentation in English warned her classmates that she

was “incredibly sarcastic . . . [and] technology hates me” and that finances were a

concern (Class of EDSC11, 2009). Mprim shared the fact that she was “31 years old and

share my house with my husband, daughter, 2 step sons, and my 2 cats (Class of

EDSC11, 2009).” One student described her commitment to social justice through

membership in a “White Aspiring Ally Club” and a minor in ALANA studies (Class of

EDSC11, 2009).

Interview Protocol

In most ethnographic studies, interviews play a key part in the gathering of

information and the development of a theoretical framework. During the creation of my

interview protocol, I wanted to create a series of specific questions that would help


16

provide me with specific information that could be used to answer specific research

questions on information exchange and knowledge creation in wikis. Moreover, I felt it

was important to repeat questions about wikis in several different ways, so that I could

not only make sure that the interviewee understood the questions, but that the answers

were consistent when I transcribed and coded them afterward. Finally, I asked a series of

open-ended questions relating to social networking software, their relationship with

technology, and the teacher-student relationship in the classroom.

The first interview was conducted in my office at 530 Waterman with a

participant assigned the codename 001. After reading the IRB-approved information

sheet and answering any questions that 001 had about the research project, I started to

record the interview. I booted up my computer and entered my password. The

conversation was recorded on my computer using Audacity. The interview lasted just

under one hour. During the interview, I asked all my questions but also added some

follow-up questions as needed. I worked very hard to create a relaxed atmosphere during

the interview and attempted to limit either affirming gestures or sounds that might taint

the results. After the interview was completed, I transcribed the audio and sent a copy by

e-mail to 001. I then erased the audio file of the interview. The interview was then

analyzed using Dedoose 4.2.81.

Data Collection and Analysis

There are more than 83.6 MBs worth of text, 727 web pages, and 97 files of

information on this wiki. If you factor in the twenty-six members and their interactions,

edits, and textual posts, the number of interactions creates a very large pool of potential


17

data points and analytical structures that can be examined. I concentrated on examining

twenty-six web pages, a selection of wiki usage data, three video files, and the

transcription of one interview. The first part of my analysis consisted of converting the

digital files on the wiki into .doc files on my computer. This involved cutting and pasting

the text of discussion groups, history files, and transcripts and creating links between

these .doc files and Dedoose. Once this process was completed. I started to create a series

of cases centered on each one of the participants in the wiki. Then I linked the text

created by these individuals to their cases on Dedoose. The data included their discussion

posts and several examples of their content editing. This allowed me to start cataloging

the student interactions and develop a few initial codes.

Codes are the lens through which we see in qualitative research. These

epistemological categories do impact both the researcher’s understanding of an event and

potentially how others understand that event. The creation of codes and categories in a

qualitative research generates the discourse, and “discourses are objects of appropriation”

(Foucault, 1984). Therefore, it is very important that in the creation of codes, an attempt

is made to allow the data to “speak for itself.” The tension between the creation of a

priori and a posteriori knowledge lies at the heart of this research process. In attempting

to gain an initial understanding of what actually was happening in the learning

environment of the wiki, it was important to not impose many constructs/codes on the

data.

I created several word-frequency searches using NVivo for the interview and

discussion groups. The analysis allowed me to search for constructs and ideas that were

important to the participants. In the case of the interview with 001, the concept of


18

community appeared several times and played an important part in my evolving

understanding of wiki and its impact on the class (interview, April 16, 2010). I created a

hierarchical coding system based on five categories: knowledge creation, information

exchange, connections, information technology assemblage, and learning environments.

These categories allowed me to start sorting through the massive amounts of data in both

the interview and discussions and in the wiki itself.

Themes

Connections, Power Critiques, and Knowledge Formation

Technology can either facilitate or decrease the social connections between

individuals (Haraway, 1990; Crary & Kwinter, 1992; Castronova, 2005; Benkler, 2006).

Connections are increased in a community when the technology supports cultural norms

that encourage information exchange and knowledge creation (Galloway, 2004; Benkler,

2006). Conversely, if a culture does not want to encourage information exchange, then

technology can be deployed to have the opposite effect (Taylor & Sarrinen, 1994;

Benkler, 2006). Exchange depends on a dialectical relationship between culture

norms/constructions and the technology that facilitates it (Munn, 1986).

A wiki in and of itself does not create a dynamic environment of exchange. While

the editing tools allow for the students to change the content and engage in very different

forms of communication outside of the classroom space, this norm must be supported and

encouraged by the teacher. In the case of EDSC11, students were encouraged to not only

post their comments in discussion groups but also change the content of the wikipages,


19

which added to the creation of knowledge in this learning environment.

The page “Learning Games” is an excellent example of this dynamic. The

purpose of this lesson was to introduce students to the idea that simulations and gaming

are also pedagogical tools (Class of EDSC11, 2009). Students were asked to explore

issues of identity and knowledge formation within the context of virtual worlds through

the creation of avatars in the game World of Warcraft. In addition, they were asked to

read an article on computer modeling and simulations by Michael Resnick of MIT

(Resnick, 1994). Students were encouraged to play with two simulations—one an H5N1

virus pandemic, the other a trench warfare game—and reflect on how they might be

integrated into a biology or history class (Class of EDSC11, 2009).

The online reaction to the lesson was quite interesting. In the reflection that

generated the most reaction, one student recognized that she was not able to create the

avatar or understand how to move through that virtual world. Instead, she focused on a

major theme of Resnick’s writing on the growing decentralization of power in the

classroom and its transition from being teacher controlled to student centered (Resnick,

1994; Class of EDSC11, 2009). Another student picked up on this theme and critiqued

the shifting power relationships in the classroom by writing:

I have definitely been in classes (mostly in history) where some students,

although not in “power positions,” really knew more about the subjects presented

than the teacher who was presenting them (or just reading facts from a textbook).

Obviously this was not received well by teachers who thought these students were

“know it alls” that were trying to make them look bad in front of the class. (Class


20

of EDSC11, 2009)

While the ability to post these comments was facilitated by the wiki, the fact that this

student felt safe to make this type of statement may have to do with the environment that

I created. However, it is clear that the wiki played a role in making this kind of exchange

possible.

The discussion posts also allowed for exploration of other issues involving ethics

and morality while at the same time reflecting on pedagogy. One student, with a

concentration in history, reflected on using simulations to develop critical-thinking skills:

I found myself feeling challenged and excited as I planned my next attack, etc. It

never crossed my mind that I was using problem solving skills and learning about

World War I and the spreading of diseases as I played the games. (Class of

EDSC11, 2009)

While some students also reflected on the beneficial aspects of simulations in the

classroom, still others raised different ethical issues. The idea of using simulations in the

classroom that were violent or dealt with mature themes struck a few students as

problematic. Is there a difference between reading a description of trench warfare and

participating in a simulation of the exact same event? This issue was raised by one

student and highlights a few important dynamics about wikis in education. First, students

were able to use simulations because of the availability of information technology and

broadband that was not possible just one decade ago. Second, the students were able to


21

reflect and post their comments outside of the traditional classroom time. In the case of

this student, she posted her thoughts at 1:30 a.m. on a Wednesday morning (Class of

EDSC11, 2009). The comment was clearly important to her. The wiki enabled this

interaction by providing access to her classmates outside of traditional class meeting

time. The ability to reflect and communicate asynchronously can also change the

dynamics of learning if the technology is available and the teacher is supportive.

Another interesting dynamic involved the changing of the page content and thus

the point of the lesson. The wiki program allows for the tracking of user changes to the

content of a page. While the administrator has the ability to prevent changes to the

content by “locking” the page, it is also possible to create a more open system where the

users also generate the content. Students ended up making substantial changes to the

content of eight out of the eighteen wikipages. These substantive changes involved either

the addition of material taken from the web or modifications to the teacher’s text. In the

case of all wikipages, the instructor allowed students to change content if they wanted to

do so. Since the program kept track of these changes, they could also be reversed if the

instructor so desired. For example, in “Learning Games” students altered the grammar

and polished several of my sentences to make them more readable (Class of EDSC11,

2009).

The most interesting changes involved students altering the content of the lessons

by adding material. For example, two students altered the content of the page in a very

profound way, raising the issue of dependence on information technology and the

epistemological difficulty in defining reality. Most of the lessons on the wiki include

instructional video clips of various lengths along with interviews, music videos,


22

television shows, and even movie scenes. One student posted a video to the page entitled

“Wall-E . . . the sad future of human kind (Class of EDSC11, 2009).” Another student

posted a video lecture of the MacArthur Foundation by Prof. James Gee of Arizona State

University on the role of gaming in education. This student added content that supported

the main ideas and themes that were raised in the earlier sections.

The clip from the Pixar movie Wall-E generated an interesting response from the

students. The student selected a chase scene from the movie when the character Wall-E is

attempting to follow the character EVA through a spaceship that holds the last remnants

of humanity. The ship is run by robots and artificial intelligence, with humans connected

to various augmented realities. The human beings are unaware of their surroundings and

are utterly dependent on technology and the corporate culture that owns the spaceship. In

the discussion tab, the student who added this clip wrote:

I can see how people want to continue on and spend so much god-forsaken time

doing this. I see it. It’s just, hmmm. I feel like I’m wasting time. It’s just, I only

get so much time here on earth and it just seems so silly to spend, what could be,

days, weeks, etc on a virtual game. Wouldn’t I rather live in the present? In my

own body? The existence of these “other”, virtual worlds is incredible, and mind-

blowing, but it just makes me think of Wall-e. I feel like we will become those

people in outer space. And it scares me. A lot. (Class of EDSC11, 2009)

While the instructor was interested in introducing students to the use of simulations and

avatars in the classroom, the student added a very important ethical and ontological


23

question to the learning environment. In fact, I would argue that adding the video

fundamentally altered both the purpose of the lesson and its meaning because it changed

the subject of the discussion and my goals for the lesson. For example, in response to her

post, another student discussed the addictive nature of simulations and virtual reality and

the dangers of such immersive technology. Still another wrote, “One of my biggest

concerns of using certain simulations in the classroom—will students want to do anything

else?” (Class of EDSC11, 2009). This insight was not something that I chose to examine

in the original lesson. In fact, I wanted to avoid this ethical issue but instead it became the

focus of discussion.

In the case of the “Learning Games” page, the addition of two video clips altered

the purpose and focus of the lesson. Instead of the teacher being in charge of the content

and meaning of the lesson, the students were able to participate in the knowledge

formation and information exchange that occurred. Their ability to alter the teacher’s

lesson created the opportunity to transform these exchange networks. Such a

transformation would have been very difficult to achieve without the willing participation

of the teacher and the availability of technology to facilitate it. In a traditional classroom,

the students receive the information from the teacher/instructor who controls the

information flow, their interactions, and knowledge creation (Bossert, 1977;

Emanuelsson & Sahlström, 2008). The ability of students to modify and disseminate a

lesson is constrained by the fact that they usually do not have access to lecture notes or

the ability to communicate these changes directly with their fellow students during class

time. The fact that changes to the lesson can be done by the students themselves alters the

amount of control that the teacher has over knowledge formation in the class. Foucault’s


24

description of the teaching panopticon, which places the disciplinary, examination, and

knowledge-creating power in the hands of the teacher, is altered (Foucault, 1977).

Students’ ability to create, interpret, and disseminate knowledge in the classroom is

strengthened, but only if the teacher deploys and encourages the use of the wiki.

While it could be argued that this kind of exchange happens in many classrooms,

it is also true that this particular exchange was enabled through the use of the wiki. First,

the program allowed for the change of lesson content, which altered the focus and goals

of the class. Second, meaningful discussion and reflection also occurred outside of face-

to-face class time. For example, both comments on the lesson occurred in the early

morning hours, and it might be the case that this asynchronous exchange creates the

possibility of deeper student reflection and exchange (Class of EDSC11, 2009). While

these types of interactions do occur during face-to-face classroom time, they seem to be

facilitated and encouraged by information technology (Taylor & Sarrinen, 1994; Benkler,

2006). In one of the first online classes integrating hypertexts and e-mail discussion

Listserves, Taylor and Saarinen (1994) remarked on the increased sophistication and

depth of online discussions. Such exchanges forced the students into a more reflective

mode and allowed for moments of inspiration to be captured and communicated outside

of the limited face-to-face time in the classroom. This insight was also supported by the

research of Banker (2006) when he argues that these discussions create exchange

networks that are not dependent on traditional resource limits (in this case, face-to-face

time in the classroom). Such technology creates the opportunity to develop varied and

complex forms of social and cultural production.

In many of the classes that I attended as a student or teacher, the exchanges of


25

information among students were generally constrained by the amount of face-to-face

time in the classroom. This was especially the case during classes that took place at a

specific location at a predetermined time. While the in-class exchanges were rich and

varied, it was also the case that discussions were limited by the amount of class time

available and the amount of information that could be exchanged in short bursts of

conversation. When the class ended, discussion generally ceased. The time for exchange

was also limited by the need for the professors to explain assignments, introduce new

material, and perform housekeeping functions (Taylor & Sarrinen, 1994). While

technology can enable different kinds of information exchanges and knowledge

formation, it seems that the instructor’s choice to deploy and use this communication

form has a major impact on the success or failure of its use in the classroom. This is an

area in need of further study and examination.

Network Formation and Information Overload

In the Internet Age, information overload is a problem for individuals,

organizations, and society as a whole (Brennan, 2011; Dean, 2011). This issue is

impacting education at all levels with the wide-scale use of the Internet and related

technologies since the late 1990s (Garson, 2000; Benkler, 2006). Wide-scale use of

computers, cell phones, and other web-capable devices enable students to access and

communicate all kinds of information during in-class lectures. The learning space is no

longer under the complete control of the teacher as students access data from the web and

share it with their fellow students during class (Landow, 1994; Castronova, 2005). While

this kind of exchange has happened in the past—we have all passed notes to friends


26

during our school days—they were only written texts or crudely drawn pictures. Today,

students use a variety of devices to exchange all kinds of information, including texts,

website URLs, videos, instant messages, and social network status updates. Some even

play video games during large lecture hall classes (001, 2010; Castronova, 2005). As a

teaching assistant/graduate student, I have seen fellow classmates with their laptops

appearing to be taking notes during a lecture while actually watching music videos or

using Facebook to comment to their classmates on the quality of a lecture. Other times, I

have witnessed students accessing information on the web to increase their understanding

of the material. For example, in a lecture where a teacher references a philosopher that

the student is unfamiliar with, a quick Google search can illuminate an otherwise obscure

reference. These informal networks of exchange may be impacting the way in which

students interact with a classic lecture more than we realize.

During a review of editing logs, I found that students not only changed the

content of the lessons during class time but also posted to the discussion tab during class

while the lecture was underway (Class of EDSC11, 2009). In such an interactive

classroom environment, where information is being exchanged at a rapid rate using both

covert and overt means of communication, is the teacher still in control of the learning

space? On September 30 at 9:14 p.m., I edited the “Learning Games” page by adding an

article about how World of Warcraft was being used by Yahoo to evaluate the leadership

qualities of potential employees. It was not the final edit of the night. At 9:24 p.m.,

someone from Brunswick, Maine, read the post and added a more detailed description of

this article to the wikipage (Class of EDSC11, 2009). At 9:37 p.m., a student from the

class made a modification to the video I posted saying, “They [teachers] do not want to


27

give up their privileged position” (Class of EDSC11, 2009). What followed after this

comment was a series of posts to the discussion board by six individuals from 10:12 p.m.

until 1:08 a.m. in the early morning. Discussion posts started again at 8:01 a.m. and lasted

until 12:00 p.m., with one post or content edit happening every fifteen minutes. The

afternoon proved a bit slow, with only three posts between 1 and 5 p.m. After the early

evening hours, the discussion and content editing got going again, with fourteen posts

and edits happening between 9 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. (Class of EDSC11, 2009). Finally, in

the hours just before class, three students posted and edited even more material, creating

thirteen contributions. During class, nine different individuals changed the content of the

lesson while I was delivering the lecture.

It is not humanly possible for a teacher to keep track of the changes that these

students made using this technology or even to meaningfully comment or guide the

discussion in a way that is comparable to what can happen in a face-to-face classroom

exchange (Landow, 1994). In reviewing the posts and exchanges in the discussion, it is

clear that the students are engaging the material and each other in a meaningful way. The

fact that they communicated during the evening and early morning hours shows a high

level of engagement. However, unless the teacher is willing and able to remain online at

all times, the control of information exchange and knowledge creation becomes more

collaborative, and power shifts from the teacher to the students. Just as Bentham’s

panopticon creates the possibility for the centralization of power by putting surveillance,

discipline, and punishment in the hands of the state, the wiki decentralizes the power of

knowledge creation and information exchange and places it more in the hands of the

students (Foucault, 1977; Hardt & Negri, 2009).


28

During the third week of class, students were asked to form teams and decide on a

research topic. However, if they wanted to choose a topic of their own interest and work

alone, that was also allowed. Since this was to be a graded paper, they were not required

to share this work online but were required to have at least twenty scholarly resources

and post these with links on the “Conference Papers” wikipage. Most students quickly

organized themselves into affinity groups, started researching topics, and reached out to

members of the UVM faculty. Here again, the ability of the teacher to keep track,

analyze, and comment upon the work of the students was limited by my ability to process

the large amounts of information and knowledge that the students were generating.

Students from different working groups also exchanged information and

commented on the writing and research of their fellow classmates. Some created

networks of information exchange with people outside the UVM community. For

example, one group of young women decided to examine the “Leadership Roles of

Women in MMORPGs (Massively Multiple Online Role Playing Games)” (jennabower,

pbanning, & Lockh, 2009). They not only read various feminist theories of leadership,

but also developed a network of female guild leadership informants in World of Warcraft

(Class of EDSC11, 2009). This research project attracted the interest of people outside

the class, including a commentator from the Howard Center in Burlington, Vermont, and

a location near Wichita, Kansas (Class of EDSC11, 2009; 8detect.com, 2012). At 10:23

p.m. on October 23, 2009, Lockh announced that the research group had created another

wikipage entitled “The Power of Girls” outside of the class wiki structure (Class of

EDSC11, 2009). Interestingly, two members of the group had been working on this site

for two weeks and had neither sought permission nor guidance from me. They had


29

decided to create their own system of exchange outside of the classroom space

(jennabower, pbanning, & Lockh, 2009). To use Foucault’s epistemology, this space was

out of the control, monitoring, or disciplinary control of the teacher. They created their

own exchange network and developed associations, contacts, and sources that I could not

possibly monitor or control.

“The Power of Girls” became a complex network of information exchange and

knowledge creation connected to but outside of the EDSC11UVM learning space

(jennabower, pbanning, & Lockh, 2009). Over the course of the next two months, the

students changed the content of the wiki sixty-four times—not including the changes

each made to the text, field notes, and e-mails that they sent to various companies,

individuals, and guild leaders (jennabower, pbanning, & Lockh, 2009). The wiki that they

created included twenty different files, documents, and webpages. This figure does not

include hypertext links to other material and discussions posts that are included on this

site.

These students explored several very complex issues of gender, leadership, and

identity in this learning space. In the research findings of their wiki, one student asked:

Do young women play these virtual games and obtain high leadership positions

because they don’t have as much opportunity to in the real world? (jennabower,

pbanning, & Lockh, 2009)

The student explored this question by interviewing several female guild leaders,

reviewing the published literature on the subject (of which there was little), and reading


30

non-peer-reviewed material on the topic. In a very balanced and thoughtful way, she

argued women actually proved to be superior guild leaders because of their interpersonal

skills and maturity when compared to many of the male guild leaders (jennabower,

pbanning, & Lockh, 2009). If purpose of education is the liberation of the mind and the

creation of social justice (Plato, 1968; Freire, 1993), then it is fairly evident that this

group of three young women were engaging in critical thinking and analysis that changed

the class’s understanding of power, gender, and justice. Today it still attracts almost one

hundred unique visitors a month (jennabower, pbanning, & Lockh, 2009). That is quite a

lot of visitors considering their project ended three years ago.

Educational Assemblages

As teachers, it would be nice to claim credit for the excellent work that our

students produce. In the case of both EDSC11UVM and “The Power of Girls,” it was the

unique mix of the teacher, students, information technology, and educational culture that

created this pedagogical environment. It is this assemblage—to borrow a construct from

Deleuze and Guattari—that generated the positive results. Let me explain what an

assemblage is.

In the early 1970s, Deleuze and Guattari wrote the first volume of Capitalism and

Schizophrenia entitled Anti-Oedipus. It examines how desire and the need for order

created totalitarian and fascist tendencies in capitalism and society. It is also an attempt to

examine the causes of the May 1968 student revolts in Paris and the reasons why they did

not continue (Guattari & Deleuze, 1983; Dosse, 2011). Another subtext to the work is an

examination of the impact of economic, political, and social networks on the


31

subconscious and vice versa. This journey forced Deleuze and Guattari to develop a set

of linguistic and methodological constructs that significantly challenged continental

philosophy and opened up a space for the study of the nonhuman agency that Davis,

Latour, and De Landa have further developed. This methodology has not attracted much

interest in the field of education studies because it deconstructs the human experience in a

way that runs contrary to popular social science theories and methodologies (De Landa,

2006; Harman, 2009).

One of the most interesting constructs they developed was assemblage. In A

Thousand Plateaus, the second volume of Capitalism and Schizophrenia, the assemblage

is defined as both a material and a force, but also an examination and becoming (Deleuze

& Guattari, 1987). The authors use the analogy of a book to show the multiple networks,

forces, meanings, and materials that create this literary assemblage. For example, a book

isn’t just the object in front of you. It is also the embodiment of social, cultural, and

economic relationships that distribute the words on its pages. The book also is a vehicle

for the ideas of the author, the editing of the publisher, and even the profits of the

distributor. The relationships between human, nonhuman, and hybridized networks of

distribution, control, and exchange create the book. Deleuze and Guattari challenge the

philosopher/social scientist to think in terms of material, meaning, and exchange in the

quest for the origin of ontology.

All we talk about are multiplicities, lines strata and segmentarities, lines of flight

and intensities, mechanic assemblages and their various types, bodies without

organs and their construction and selection, the plane of consistency and in each


32

case the units of measure. (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987, p. 4)

The last seven words are the most important, because they force an explicit link to an

empirical exploration of discovery where what has been hidden can be revealed. Instead

of relying just on categories of individual, group, and culture to explain social

phonomena, Deleuze and Guattari create a freedom to measure and name other

combinations and combine them into assemblages. For Deleuze and Guattari, the

individual is not just a lifeforce and matter that create the mind. In addition, the mind is

not only conscious and subconscious but is connected to the economic, political, and

cutural systems of society—each informs the other (Guattari & Deleuze, 1983; Deleuze

& Guattari, 1987). The power of assemblage is that you can look for connections and

networks outside of traditional epistemolgical conceptions and alter the ontology of any

object so long as you are explicit about your assumptions, measurements, and ontology.

In many studies of education, agency occurs at the individual human level and

involves an analysis of the teacher on one side and the students on the other (Lier, 2008).

There are also many studies of agency that take into consideration the sociocultural

context of students and teachers (Bossert, 1977; MacLeod, 1995; Blount, 2003; Frongillo

& Jyoti, 2003). These studies involve the choices and strategies of human beings that

occur within a traditional classroom setting. They may react or be guided by the

sociocultural forces, but never constrained in a deterministic way—free will and choice

still form the ontological basis of being.

If we apply the idea of the assemblage to the EDSC11UVM wiki, you can

identify its three main parts: the teacher, the group of students, and the wiki software.


33

Each influences, constrains, and limits the choices of the other, forming a collective self-

organizing network of meaning and information exchange which is the wiki itself. For

example, the wiki technology enabled the students to communicate and exchange

information outside of the face-to-face class time. It is highly unlikly that knowledge of

“The Power of Girls” would have even been created in the first place without this

technology. However, it is also important to recognize the desire and interest of the

students themselves in the creation of the wiki and the knowledge associated with it.

In addition, if the teacher did not deploy the technology and create a very

collaborative and open learning enviroment, then neither the wiki or the exploration of

these complex issues would have happened. All of these separate agents are necessary to

create the complex social, technological, and pedagogical network that resulted in the

wiki. Each part of this assemblage is acted upon by the others because the whole

arises through the constraints of its constituent parts and larger environment they

are embeded in. In other words, in order to understand this classroom experience, it is

important to examine this educational assemblage as a whole while keeping track of the

impact and agency of its consitutiant parts.

The technology of the wiki creates the ability for the teachers and students to

communicate asynchronously. This ability opens up the possiblity for different kinds of

human behavior and information exchange to occur (Landow, 1994; Taylor & Sarrinen,

1994). As described above, the wiki created the possibility for the students and teacher to

engage in conversations outside the normal class times. Some students used this ability to

work late at night and early into the morning engaging in learning outside of the class

time. You might even argue that this newly created technological ability allows for the


34

creation of a more complex and critical pedagogy (Landow, 1994; Benkler, 2006). Thus,

the structure and function of this technology helps to create a context that empowers and

also constrains individual agency in very different ways. This “context” can be viewed as

the culture of the classroom.

This type of ontology has been traditionally deployed to understand the

relationships between individuals, groups, societies, cultures, and even technology in the

disciplines of anthropology (Malinowski, 1922; Munn, 1986; Mauss, 1990) and

sociology (Durkheim, 1980). Within the context of structural functionalism, the

relationships between the various parts of the “culture” remain static and guided by a set

of rules and norms that are decoded by the researcher. The concept of the assemblage

allows for both the identification of the parts and an exploration of their relationships.

These “structures” and “functions” are not static in any way and change over time—the

determinism interacts with agency. Deploying the assemblage construct in educational

studies might prove useful in making explicit some of the ontological assumptions that

dominate our research method.

The EDSC11UVM wiki is shaped, but it also shapes the experience of its

participants. The teacher is faced with a choice to either strengthen or weaken the ability

of the student to form networks for information exchange and knowledge creation outside

the classroom through the imposition of rules and norms that guide the behavior and

expectations of the students. The teacher is a catalyst that creates the classroom

environment, but the students are also active participants. The technology has a profound

impact on the kinds of exchange that take place (De Landa, 1991). One student explained

it this way:


35

You need the type of teaching style that you had and we need that technology to

achieve what we did. Because on our wikispace we were able to contribute to the

content literally in anyway we saw fit. We could post video blogs communicate in

new discussion pages. We all added on a daily or weekly basis to this wiki.

Students, teachers and everybody. Without that—the wikispace technology we

would not have been able to do that. (001, 2010)

In another section of the interview, the student pointed to the fact that not all technology

created such opportunties for dynamic exchange. For example, the popular content

management system Blackboard was described as being less collaborative:

In Blackboard, we were only allowed to add text in the discussion no new pages,

no new websites, no new videos nothing—just discussion board text…[with the

exception of] the discussion tab I am not really able to change Blackboard. (001,

2010)

The ability to add, modify, or delete content in the context of Blackboard is limited, and

so too is the agency of the students to create knowledge and exchange information. In

fact, the program itself is not capable of allowing students to modify lessons and content

(Blackboard Inc., 2010). A teacher and institution using Blackboard thus avoids dealing

with issues of power, control, and academic discipline to questions that are familiar to the

readers of Foucault, Bentham, and Dewey. Thus, the teacher remains at the center of


36

academic discourse with the ability to see all while maintaining a monopoly on content

creation in the classroom (Foucault, 1977). The wiki enables a teacher—if willing—and

students—if they are able—to exchange information and generate knowledge in more

complex and sophisticated ways.

Does the wiki have agency? If we limit ourselves to only examining how human

beings, both individually and collectively, influence each other, then no—the wiki has no

agency. However, if that tack is taken, then we fall back into a theory of change that is

still basically about structures and their functions (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987; De Landa,

2006; Dosse, 2011). Our strategy to change institutions can only be focused on changing

their structures and functions through the modification of various rules and procedures.

Yet we have already shown that without wiki, much of the information and knowledge

created by these human participants would not have happened. Is the change happening

because of modifications of the structures and functions of the relationship between the

teacher and student, or through the introduction of another agent in the classroom?

Agency is different than a concept embeded in choice, intelligence, or free will (Latour,

The Pasteurization of France, 1988). Agency presupposes influence. It should not

presuppose an ontology that valorizes these qualities and places them in the bodies of

human beings (Haraway, 1990; Crary & Kwinter, 1992; Harman, 2009). The wiki

technology did influence the participants in EDSC11UVM and “The Power of Girls.” It

had agency, but it is nothing like human agency.

Conclusions and Implications

The educational assemblage—teacher, students, and wiki technology—create a


37

dynamic, self-organizing system of exchange and knowledge control. The power to

change content is distributed among the participants within a context of rules and norms

created by the teacher, guided by the wiki technology, and implimented by the students.

This research project suggests the following:

1. Teachers exert a powerful influence over the formation of online learning

environments.

2. The amount of data generated by online learning environments soon

becomes too large for the teacher to control and edit. This information

overload on the part of the teacher allows for students to gain greater

control of both knowledge creation and information exchange in these

online educational environments.

3. When students have the ability form their own networks of knowledge

creation and information exchange, they have the ability to produce work

that is both complex and sophisticated.

4. Lesson content is improved by giving students the ability to modify,

check, and improve their content.

5. Students will communicate with each other and the professor outside of

the face-to-face meeting times if the technology and classroom culture

allow for it. These interactions can occur at all times of the day and night

and add much to the learning environment.

Can these assemblages transform education? That depends on many factors that


38

lie outside the scope of this research. Academic institutions are very slow to change, in

part because of the strong networks of capital, information, and knowledge that are

controlled hierarchically (Bourdieu, 1984). It is hard to see how the educational

assemblages described in this paper can be widely adopted at many institutions of higher

learning given the current economic and political environment. Faculty tenure and

promotion are judged by publications, grants, and service. These activities take up a lot of

time. While teaching is important to all professors, wikis do create an environment where

a lot of content is generated that needs to be read and commented on. Since faculty

schedules are already full, it may be unrealistic to expect them to look at and engage with

even more student-created material. In additon, opening up lesson plans produced by

professors to both modification and comment by students is a rarity. The wide-scale

adoption of such a move would represent a paradigm shift in the social, political, and

academic capital in academica. It is unlikily to occur in higher education due to the

conservative nature of these institutions. Just because a technology is transformative does

not mean it will be adopted by a culture or society (Jameson, 1991; Lyotard, 1993;

Latour, 1996). A technology can offer the possiblity for changes to existing structures of

information and knowledge exchange networks, but it cannot drive the process alone.


39


40

References

001. (2010 16-April ). Interview of 001. (R. Skiff, Interviewer)

8detect.com. (2012, June 6). http://www.8detect.com/,iplookup,ip/?ip=132.198.97.241.

Retrieved June 6, 2012, from 8 Detect:

http://www.8detect.com/,iplookup,ip/?ip=132.198.97.241

Aime Project. (2012 June). Digital Platform. Retrieved 2012 4-July from “An Inquiry

into Modes of Existence”: http://aimeinquiry.org/

Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge.

Blackboard Inc. (2010). Blackboard Learn Instructor Guide. Retrieved 2012 йил 13

April from University of Vermont:

https://bb.uvm.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_21_1

Blount, J. (2003). “Homosexuality and School Superintendents: A Brief History.”

Journal of School Leadership, 31 (1), 7–26.

Bossert, S. T. (1977). “Tasks, Group Management, and Teacher Control Behavior: A

Study of Classroom Organization and Teacher Style.” The School Review, 85 (4),

552–565.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Homo Academicus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Brennan, L. (2011). “The Scientific Managment of Information Overload.” Journal of

Business and Management, 17 (1), 121–134.

Carspecken, P., & Walford, G. (Eds.). (2001). Critical Ethnography and Education.

Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.


41

Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic Worlds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Class of EDSC11. (2009). Home Discussion. Retrieved 2012 15-June from EDSC11:

http://edsc11uvm.wikispaces.com/message/view/home/13930241

Class of EDSC11. (2009, October 23). Analysis of Female Leadership in MMORPG.

Retrieved May 14, 2012, from EDSC11UVM:

http://edsc11uvm.wikispaces.com/page/diff/Analysis+of+Female+Leadership+i+M

MORPG/97387240

Class of EDSC11. (2009, December 4). Learning Games. Retrieved June 13, 2012 from

EDSC11UVM: http://edsc11uvm.wikispaces.com/Learning+Games

Class of EDSC11. (2009, December). Learning Games Discussions. Retrieved 2012 13-

May from EDSC11UVM: http://edsc11uvm.wikispaces.com

Class of EDSC11UVM. (2012, 13-March). Usage Statistics. Retrieved 2012, 13 March

from EDSC11UVM: http://edsc11uvm.wikispaces.com/space/stats/overview

Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. (Eds.). (1986). Writing Culture. Berkeley: University of

California Press.

Crary, J., & Kwinter, S. (Eds.). (1992). Incorporations. New York: Zone Books.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five

Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. New York: Verso.

De Landa, M. (2006). A New Philosophy of Society. New York: Continuum.

De Landa, M. (1991). War in the Age of Intelligent Machines. New York: Zone Books.

Deacon, R. (2006). “Michel Foucault on Education.” South African Journal of Education,

26 (2), 177–187.


42

Dean, D. (2011, January). Recovering From Information Overload.

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia.

(B. Massumi, Trans.) Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Domínguez, D., Beaulieu, A., Estalella, A., & Read, R. (Eds.). (2007). “Virtual

Ethnography.” Forum: Qualitative Social Research Sozialforchung, 8 (3).

Dosse, F. (2011). Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari: Intersecting Lives. (D. Glassman,

Trans.) New York: Columbia University Press.

Durkheim, E. (1980). The Rules of Sociological Method. New York: Macmillan Press.

Emanuelsson, J., & Sahlström, F. (2008 йил April). “The Price of Participation: Teacher

Control versus Student Participation in Classroom Interaction.” Scandinavian

Journal of Educational Research , 205–223.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of the Prison. (A. Sheridan,

Trans.) New York: Vintage Books.

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. (M. B. Ramos, Trans.) New York:

Continuum.

Frongillo, E. A., & Jyoti, D. F. (2003). “Food Stamp Program Participation Is Associated

with Better Academic Learning among School Children.” The Journal of Nutrition,

136 (4), 1077–1080.

Galloway, A. R. (2004). Protocol: How Control Exists after Decentralization.

Cambridge: MIT Press.


43

Garson, G. D. (Ed.). (2000). The Social Dimensions of Information Technology: Issues

for the New Millenium. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

Google. (2012, 1-July). Bruno Latour. Retrieved 2012, 1-July from Google Scholar:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=bibs&hl=en&q=bruno+Latour

Google. (2012, 1-July ). John Law. Retrieved 2012 йил 1-July from Google Scholar:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=John+Law&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C46

Google. (2012, 1-July). Manuel De Landa. Retrieved 2012 йил 1-July from Google

Scholar:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=manuel+delanda&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2

C46

Grey, C. (Ed.). (1995). The Cyborg Handbook. New York: Routledge.

Guattari, F., & Deleuze, G. (1983). Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Haraway, D. (1990). Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New

York: Routledge.

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2004). Multitude. New York: Penguin.

Harman, G. (2009). Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne:

re.press.

Hatch, M. J. (2006). Organizational Theory: Modern Symbolic and Postmodern

Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.


44

Holstein, J., & Gabrium, J. (2011). “The Constructionist Analytics of Interpretive

Practice.” The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 341–358). Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Howard, P. (2002). “Network Ethnography and Hypermedia Organization.” New Media

Society, 4 (4), 550–574.

Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham:

Duke University Press.

jennabower, pbanning, & Lockh. (2009). Retrieved 2012 13-June from “The Power of

Girls”: http://powerofgirls.wikispaces.com/

Kelly, J. (Ed.). (2010). Anthropology and Global Counterinsurgency. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Kelly, K. (1995). Out of Control: The New Biology of Machines, Social Systems, and the

Economic World. New York: Basic Books.

Landow, G. (Ed.). (1994). Hyper/Text/Theory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University

Press.

Latour, B. (1996). Aramis or the Love of Technology. Cambridge: Harvard University

Press.

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor Network-Theory.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Latour, B. (1988). The Pasteurization of France. (A. Sheridan, & J. Law, Trans.)

Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Lier, L. V. (2008). “Agency in the Classroom.” J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory

and the Teaching of Languages. London: Equifax.


45

Lipietz, A. (1994). “Post-Fordism and Democracy.” A. Amin, Post-Fordism: A Reader

(pp. 338–356). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Lyotard, J.-F. (1993). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis:

University of Minessota Press.

MacLeod, J. (1995). Ain’t No Makin’ It: Aspirations and Attainment in a Low-Income

Neighborhood. Oxford: Westview Press.

Malinowski, B. (1922). Argonauts of the Western Pacific. Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland Press.

Mauss, M. (1990). The Gift. (W. Halls, Trans.) London: Routledge.

Meadows, D. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea

Green Press.

Morse, J. M. (2003). “Principles of Mixed Methods and Multimethod Research Design.”

A. Tashakkori, & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and

Behavioral Research (pp. 189–208). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Munn, N. (1986). Fame of the Gawa: A Symbolic Study of Value Transformation.

Durham: Duke University Press.

Plato. (1968). The Republic. (A. Bloom, Trans.) New York: Basic Books.

Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, Termites, and Traffic Jams: Explorations in Massively

Parallel Microworlds. Cambridge: MIT University Press.

Ross, K. (2004). May ’68 and Its Afterlives. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning

Organization. New York: Doubleday.


46

Spindler, G., & Hammond, L. (Eds.). (2003). Innovations in Educational Ethnography.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stocking, G. (1992). Ethnographer’s Magic and Other Essays in the History of

Anthropology. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Tangient, LLC. (2012). Wikispaces in Education. Retrieved 2012 June 14 from

Wikispaces.com: http://www.wikispaces.com/content/private-label/higher-ed

Taylor, M. C., & Sarrinen, E. (1994). Imagologies: Media Philosophy. New York:

Routledge.

Toffler, A., & Toffler, H. (2006). Revolutionary Wealth. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Wolfram, S. (2002). A New Kind of Science. Champaign, IL: Wolfram Media, Inc.

The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Creation and Information Exchange in an Undergraduate Educational...

Documents

Transcript of The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Creation and Information Exchange in an Undergraduate Educational...