Oriol Miralbell's_research

After more than two years working on the theoretical framework for my PhD research on “Evaluating Online Social Networks in generating knowledge among tourism professionals”, together with my two directors Dr. Francesc González Reverté and Dr. Jaume Guia, i’ve reached the point to launch the survey which is the first visible part of the epirical study.

I’m happy to be at the point where the first outcomes are visible, after this long period of readings and discussions, of questioning and asking to experts and friends about online social networks as learning environments.
I’m really excited on the possible results of the analysis I will do once I receive the information from you, the experts. At the same time, I fear I won’t ger enough responses from all of you.
This is a fantastic opportunity to learn about the web 2.0 tools and to have a better picture from this new and still unknown Network Society. I have found in this study one of the most exciting intellectual activities I’ve ever had. It has stressed from me all the rational and intellectual abilities I had, if I ever had one. It has kept me connected to the issue all time I was awakened and sometime in my dreams too.
Thus I want this project to finish with a set of conclusions that can help us all, users, academics, experts and, in general, followers of the web 2.0 and the social media and of e-learning to get more from it.
I’d like to invite you to participate in this survey that is directed to all those professionals, business people, academics, consultants, experts and lovers of tourism, that use online social networks to communicate and learn.

Here’s the link for the survey in SPANISH and here’s it ENGLISH.

I want to thank you in advance for your help by answering to this survey, that will take you only 15 minutes of your time.
I WISH YOU A PEACEFUL XMAS TIME AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR

Approaching te last session of the PDF_EU forum (Personal Democracy Forum Europe, 09) celebrated at the Torre Agbar in Barcelona, I start to feel that things get repeated, though the final outcome is incredibly reach.
During two days, this forum that started in New York some years ago in its US version,the European one has taken advantage of the knowledge and excperience of US professionals and organizations in making e-democracy and e-activism something useful for society, but also has shown the most emerging and succesful examples of e-activism inicitaitives in Europe, giving their promoters and managers he opportunity to explain their insights and to speak abou their experience.
In the debates, many issues came into foreground, but especially the specific reality of Europe’s politics compared to the ones in the US. The Obama campaign that has been the star for months among the e-democracy campaigns (and still is) has shed lots of doubts and disapointments to Europeans when looking at our e-political reality, right when the new and first EU President has been elected in such a dark and undemocratic way.
The deficit of democracy in European Institutions and the problems to separe citizens’ democratic avtivism and institutional policy, brought us also to more empirical discussions like the communication problem that cause 23 different official languages inside the EU. There’s a discouraged view of most experts in regards on making Europe’s e-democracy strategies coherently active at a global European level, however there exist several good projects at a national level.

I want to go through the positngs of most participants in PDF_EU and then make a broader and deeper report on what has been discussed in this forum, though I’d like to advance that many new things have been said in PDF_EU that will, probably change the attitudes and hopes of many of the activists that make e-democracy posible in Europe. Or at least, I hope so!

The great Eluminate session today with George Siemens shed some light into my doubts, but it also raised lots of questions that will require long tinking before putting them in order.
The session was the most active and participative I’ve seen in Eluminate thanks to George’s moderation and the dynamics he cretated on people inviting to write on the board, and raising questions directly to the audience.
The participation was, sometimes, chaotic, but it also showed what our technologies are still missing. I felt that in F2F collective sessions we have natural skills in identifying the origin of the messages, and we can concentrate in what we have interest on, whilst we can ignorate what we don’t want to listen to. In a digital synchronous session this is much more difficult.
The voice and the spoken language are an environment where we feel comfortable and we can even pay attention to two messages that are give simultaneously, even if we don’t get all of them. On the opporite side, I feel that our vision focuses and concnmtrates more in one direction and we miss all those messages that are out of scope. This doesn’t happen with oral communication.
On the other hand, vision and sound lets us idntify what and when things are happening. In a social event we learn that there exist protocols and latent rythms that we have to follow. In a session running only with sound and chatting, even with collaboration board, like Eluminate, these protocols and rhythms are less evident.
For the first time, after e-lecturing for several years, I felt that IT have to provide much more instruments to build rules and protocols similar to the ones developped in presential meetings, if we like to collaborate simultaneously on a digitla way.
Most of the issues raised by George where reinforcing my questions and also did the many messages wtitten by the other participants on the board or in the chat area.
We were dicussing about methodological concepts for teaching and collaborative learning, whilst the problems that emerged in the discussion where more practical and empyrical. It was a great feeling beeing in such a metaphor of collaborative learning experiment.
Thanks to George Siemens and to the rest of the moderators, and to all the coursemates.