Entry #3: Reaction to McLuhan Tetrad Wiki Task

“A wiki is an online workspace that allows members to collaboratively create and edit Web pages without requiring HTML knowledge, using no more complicated technology than a Web browser” (Barrick, Cuddihy, Maust, Spyridakis, Wei, 2005). As this was my first time using a wiki, I appreciated how easy it was to learn and use. Although, I think it would require a lot more time to more effectively use it and create a more aesthetically pleasing design, as there were many features I did not have time to explore. Another advantage of using the wiki was that it was simple to post all the materials for everyone to see. Thus, after the page was created, it was easy to add ideas, comments, and edit our work.

One downside to using the wiki was that it did not foster good discussion about changes/improvements and it created an interesting group dynamic. We used different colors to insert our comments within the text, but I could sense everyone’s hesitation to change anyone else’s work. I believe we were all used to a typical collaboration with group projects where members each do their separate part and then bring the pieces together in the end. The wiki on the other hand, allows the work to be entirely a group effort. It “erases some of the boundaries that exist between author and reader” and reinvents how teams think about working together (Barrick, et al., 2005). I would be interested to learn how other groups used the wiki and how they felt it changed their view of working as a team. In some ways, the wiki gave us the ability to all contribute and feel confident in the final product. But I can see groups encountering trouble when disagreements arise or when group members feel the need to be acknowledged for the parts on which they specifically worked.

Another feature of the wiki I did not like was the setup, because all the changes are kept in a version history list. Trying to go back to find something in a previous version would be difficult. Lastly, the formatting and design leaves a lot to be desired, and it was missing the helpful tools typical of a word processing program. The convenience factor, however, definitely encourages me to explore this tool further and I look forward to our second wiki task.

Lastly, one point I wanted to bring up was the notion of technology implementation. I realize that with any new technology, people must perceive it as a great deal better than what it is replacing, in order to desire to spend time learning the new technology. In this case, I didn’t really feel that the wiki was much more advantageous than just using email to correspond with group members. Also, the editing, formatting, and commenting features in Word are very helpful and I would have preferred to use that. I realize however, that I had limited time to use the wiki so I would be willing to explore it further. I think with more long term projects, the wiki would be helpful for cutting down on emails and really creating a collaborative piece of work. But, this is something to keep in mind when trying to create buy-in for a new technology. People must perceive it as a good use of their time to learn and use.


Resource

Barrick, J., Cuddihy, E., Maust, B., Spyridakis, J.H. Wei, C. (2005). Wikis for supporting distributed collaborative writing. Tools and Technology, 204. Retrieved September 25, 2006, from http://www.uwtc.washington.edu/research/pubs/jspyridakis/STC_Wiki_2005_STC_Attribution.pdf.