The wiki way of thinking

I have had the pleasure this semester to teach a subject called Mobile Workforce Technologies at Griffith University under the expert eye of Dr. Alison Ruth. The subject covers the latest technology and practice in the field of mobile working. One of the most interesting aspects of the course to me, is the use of the wiki environment for assessment. Like a lot of academics I am used to a certain way of working. The wiki way of working involves the active participation and especially collaboration of people within a community of practice. A community who bounce off each other through constructing knowledge for sharing in an even manner. A wiki subverts the dominant work paradigm which focuses on the individual and reinvents it as participatory consciousness. So what can we learn from the wiki way of thinking.

Community and Fellowship

The term ‘fellowship’ generally does not appear outside the bible in modern times. One of the definitions of the word is ‘a community of interest’. I like that way of thinking for me because it summaries the wiki way of doing things. We participate in a community and work together to make things happen. What binds the community together is fellowship around something of interest. Community extends the definition of fellowship because it makes room for perspectives and interests on a broader scale. In particular, the wiki concept allows us to focus on our interest within a sphere of practice we are involved in. When you practice something, by virtue of the practice, you will learn something. That learning can become yours and yours alone or it can be shared and mutated until it becomes accepted by a community. The knowledge can also be used in this manner. There are some drawbacks to this which I will discuss a bit later.

Collaboration

The hallmark of a wiki is collaboration or involvement with people around a topic of interest. The way it works as a theory is that we are all involved in communities of interest so we can participate in a way in which we can shape and extend each others knowledge. The spirit of collaboration is that we work together to build something that others can likewise build and share. The typical business way of doing things is to succumb to competitiveness (although that goes on in wiki environments I can assure you). Of all the things the wiki is here is where most people struggle. Our students have a difficult time coming to grips with the concept of ‘collaboration’ when it comes to assessment. Perhaps this is our fault because are saying something paradoxical. Maybe we are saying, ‘rightio… collaborate with each other to make some interesting work and by the way you will be assessed!’ The two in the modern education environment I think are mutally exclusive. Competition is no good when collaboration is required if the individual members of the team are competing for attention. The wiki makes it so you can show off but really the attention is on the whole which is silly. So the wiki way of thinking is contrary to what business leaders might aspire to when they marvel about the competitive nature of the business world.
Participatory Consciousness

The other thing that strikes me thats different about the wiki way of thinking is the role ‘participating’ plays in the consciousness of those involved. By this term I mean those that participate and work together. We did an experiment we were asked six students to write down what they thought a blog was. Each one of the six students surveyed spoke about the subject in a completely different way. Yet when you put the streams of thought together you had a solid multi-dimensional definition. If you hold to the linear view of the world then this will be a problem for you because a wiki relies on the interchange of perspectives around something of interest. The community decides relevant and acceptable knowledge and forms it within the sphere of interest. This can be an issue as I will discuss later.

Knowledge Sharing

The hallmark, of course, of the wiki platform is the ability of others to share knowledge. All kinds of the knowledge that we can think of can be shared effectively within a community sphere over a wiki. The best element of it is that many perspectives can be drawn out and discussed chosen and discussed over the wiki. Underpinning such a philosophy is the idea of free knowledge and free culture which can be found in fundamentals of the open source movement. Knowledge that is not shared tends to be for sale or worse available to the elite will little chance of sharing. The wiki way of thinking is built around the concept of sharing and I think it cannot be divorced from it. At least not successfully.

The problem of collective consciousness
There are those that like VR pioneer Jaron Lanier who take exception with the wiki way of thinking citing ‘collective consciousness’ as being a limiting factor. The argument goes that collectively created knowledge will be determined by groupthink and not by a consideration of the alternatives. To some extent I think this is true but I also disagree on one main point. The ‘consensus’ view of a topic is usually dominant because it’s acceptable by the masses not because people are working together. It’s a well known truth in the problem solving research literatures that messy problems are created through intermingled perceptions from multiple viewpoints. A wiki has the potential to shape and argue against itself and present perspectives more so than one individual can. The idea that all wiki environments are some form of collective society gatekeeping knowledge is not true if the community is open to learning. If they are interested in maintainance of the status quo then I would suggest that we have a much bigger problem that this blog post can handle. There is the tendancy towards this is knowledge communities but with good practice it can be avoided. It does however remain a valid point.

The problem of the pioneer

Another problem is the issue of the pioneer. Groups can and do come up with new ways of knowledge. However, it’s been my experience that there are people who are exceptionally good at coming up with creative ideas. There are those that are gifted managers, doctors, lawyers as well. Some people have natural leanings towards creativity that is always going to place them out of step with the status quo. Leaders, visionaries or entrepreneurs… whatever you label them… these people are a problem for the wiki way of thinking. Why? Mainly because the innovative ones are always thinking about new ways of doing things and a wiki is less likely to support their activities if there is no community ‘fellowshipping’ around the invention or creative output of the day. The idea could be out of step with the status quo and not really open to a community that shares ’static’ knowledge. I am not sure why this is but most of the greatest people that I admire, will work collaboratively, participate, share and so on but get inspiration of ideas much easier than others. Now this is not an argument from support saying that these people are special. No. I am saying there are those that come up with new ideas by virtue of the fact that they are creative. A wiki gives them space for discussion but envelopes their ideas whole or ignores them in some cases. What are we to do with creative types in a wiki way of thinking? I am troubled by this.

We can learn a lot about wiki thinking and collaboration from it’s positives and it’s negatives. I have learned that people can and do collaborate, share ideas and knowledge and grow with the wiki they are making. I have also learned that people can be hidden away in such things at the expense of their right to be recognised. However, I would argue that the wiki way of thinking has enriched us because it’s taught us how we can create a community of interest and share this knowledge with the world. What can be so bad about that?

Technorati Tags: Griffith University, Alison Ruth, technology, mobile, wiki, community of practice, community, fellowship, knowledge, collaboration, Participatory Consciousness

Powered by MightyAdsense