Tigers+Rule

__Definition__: Process of learning by socially interacting with others toward a common goal. Not only do you rely on your own knowledge of the subject, but also that of those you are working with. As Gee says through his observation, "So learning here is social, distributed, and part and parcel of a network composed of people, tools, technologies, and companies all interconnected together..." (Frankel, 21) NOTE: 'Community of practice' are usually referred to as 'Affinity Group' __Importance__: One can put this idea into practice with others that share the same end goal by using their personal experience, and develop an idea of what they want they want to achieve as an end result. By taking what you know on a subject and you work to achieve a goal, you find others that are working toward the same goal and you can eventually work together to achieve that goal together. __Questions__: Could this be a good way for students to learn and work on things in class, such as papers and research projects? Is it acceptable in a high school setting to have more than one student working on the same project to get the same end result, or would most teachers have a problem with this since they are not working by themselves. I know when I was in high school my teacher would not let any of us research the same topic because she did not want us to work together. But could it be better for students to practice this idea in the classroom at least once so they can learn how to work as a team to reach the same goal? __Complications__: The fact that this term is so interchangeable with 'affinity group'. The idea that the word 'community' is often thought of with ideas of togetherness and acceptance when the concept also defines who is excluded (as Gee describes it).
 * COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE** by Jessica Dodson

__Definition:__ An affinity group is a small group of people, ranging from 5 -15 members, or activists who work together towards a common idea, opinion, or action. Some characteristics of an affinity group are: - consensus decision making - made up of trusted friendships - common ideologies - run in a non-hierarchical manner - autonomous - since membership is through friendships, each member knows the others strengths and weaknesses Gee explains that "affinity groups can be good, evil, or anything in between." (Frankel 22).
 * AFFINITY GROUPS** by Kali Begley

__Importance:__ Online affinity groups are important because it makes people engage in activities with various people all over the world. It also provides a template for conversing with these various people. Because of the programs affinity groups invest themselves in, each [program provides a challenge for the user-pushing them to either transform the current program, or create their own. (**connect the notion of affinity group to that of identity -- what do both have to do with learning?) )**

__Questions:__ How can a teacher incorporate affinity groups into a classroom efficiently,**( why is efficiency an issue?)** but still be able to provide that face-to-face interaction within the classroom? **(not sure what the issue is here -- are you defining affinity groups as on-line ?)** Should classrooms try to include online affinity groups in the classroom, to influence student learning in a different manner? **(interesting question)**

__Complications:__ Pertaining to the web, affinity groups can have a negative aspect because when a user develops an identity, that identity may be masked or fake; which in turn can influence their actions. For example, these users with "characters" may become blinded to important information about the program or the user. (**Again this doesn't seem to me to be the issue -- or perhaps I am not sure of what you are saying here.)**

__Definition:__ Affordance is described as “action possibilities” of something. This means that one thing can have multiple uses. It involves the properties of a thing that influences how it can be used. On wikipedia it gives a good example of this concept: If a person walks into a room with a soft ball and a recliner, it is most likely that he will throw the ball and sit on the recliner but it is also possible that he will throw the recliner and sit on the ball. All the possibilities of what he can do with the objects are the affordances. In the reading from Dennis Baron, //From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technology//, he presents another example: The pencil. The pencil was originally developed for measurements and not writing. The affordances of the device, the pencil, was more than what it was originally invented for, which ended up being the reason for the switch from orality to literacy. Below in the Importance section it discusses affordance and its connection to literacy.
 * Affordance** By Sarah Bastian

__Importance:__ When it comes to literacy, the concept of affordance can be seen in the technology, such as writing, the pencil and more currently, computers. All of these technologies have had multiple affordances. According to Baron, when it comes to computers, it’s technology was originally developed for mathematical reasons and have now evolved into personal computers. The affordances of this technology have changed the way we write, the way we communicate and even the way we teach and learn. It has changed the way we write through email and instant messaging. Pretty much a whole new language has been developed for this purpose alone. Email, instant messaging and also social network sites have changed the way we communicate with other, which in turn influences out relationships with others. Lastly, the one affordance of the computer technology that is beginning to emerge is how it is changing the way we teach and learn. Many classes, especially in college are offered online with no face-to-face classroom environment. It’s too early to tell how this will affect future classrooms but it is inevitable that it will have an effect. Also literacy itself can afford many action possibilities. By being literate, it opens many opportunities for a person and can afford them a better future in some cases. __Questions:__ Is it still considered an affordance if it hasn’t happened yet? Like Socrates’ theory that writing would corrupt the human mind and destroy human memory. This hasn’t happened yet but there is still a chance that it will, or maybe it has and we haven’t noticed it yet. Is human memory loss still an affordance of writing even though there is not proof yet of it happening or is just considered a possible affordance? In other words, is anything that is possible considered an affordance?

__Complications:__ Does it change what that object is if the use of it changes? For example, a computer used for math problems is a calculator and a computer used for writing is just a computer. But also a pencil is used for writing but you can use that same technology and use it to draw a picture. These are two completely different uses with the same thing but it is still called a pencil.


 * (Let's connect the idea of affordance to the effects of literacy -- and let's think about how we practice literacy and what the tools afford -- what action possibilities are present in the book, in paper, in the computer and how does literacy change if you change the tools, the material surround? -- )**

__WEB 2.0__ - Chris Trudell

 * __**Definition:**__ WEB. 2.0 is still in a working definition as more technology broadens the definition. However, WEB 2.0 is linked with web development, web design, and interconnected systems/networks(ings) that allows for common internet users to be interactive with web information and development of system user-based networks. In other words; WEB 2.0 is very user-generated design friendly. "Wikipedia" provides a great definition: WEB 2.0 (wikipedia) Another interesting way to understand WEB 2.0 is our very own WIKI - "**Literacy Theory Rodby"** page that you're currently reading. This is a fine example of what WEB 2.0 facilitates. Each of us can be editors of this page, rearrange the structure of text, edit passages, and add or elaborate to what is already provided (or even delete). For example: I can do this with the //text// that ** I ** //__type, **copy,** and **paste**.__// **:-)** (Of course there is more to it than that).

I provided a link to videos about WEB 2.0 - I highly recommend watching them. It will help define WEB 2.0 and its' current and future uses.


 * 1) Web 2.0 Explained
 * 2) An Anthropological Introduction to YouTube

// //
 * __//Related terms with WEB 2.0://__
 * Tagging
 * JavaScript
 * FLASH
 * user generated content
 * consumer generated media
 * social networks (Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc.).
 * collective intelligence
 * networking
 * cloud computing
 * text 2.0
 * many more...
 * DO CHECK OUT THE "WEB 2.0 RESEARCH" PAGE THAT IS CONNECTED TO OUR WIKI - VIA DR. JAXONS CLASSES (There are great articles and passages). *
 * __**Importance:**__ The accessibility and affordance of WEB 2.0 allows anyone to access text in a very multi-interactive way. Now, not only are "we" provided "stationary text," we as users of the world wide web have allowed text / literacy to become interactive and easily manipulated (edited). This greatly impacts the way we look at and understand written work, text, and how we define text. Now everyday users have access to written works and have an ever increasing ability to interact with it. This influences the way that classrooms embrace technology, and in turn, the way that individuals / groups learn. WEB 2.0 now incorporates video. Written work can be transformed into entities like YouTube, DIGG, Facebook, and many other social-networks.


 * **__Questions:__** How does this change the way we read, write, and eventually identify ourselves in society? How will WEB 2.0 influence the way that written work is shared and exchanged within communities? Will user-generated content be as "recognized" as highly as certified professionals? Will written work need to be physically printed (paper)? How can we consider the future affordance of WEB 2.0? Will there be a WEB 3.0?


 * **__Complications:__** User-generated content can be changed by anyone. WEB 2.0 is a limited access entity. Not everyone can utilize a computer, let alone the new skills of text editing and HTML transforming. **Sources and citations. (and why are these complications??)**