Log on:
Powered by Elgg

Nimer Alrushiedat :: Activity :: Just Me

People: Everyone | Friends & Community | Inbox | Just Me
Display: Full-text | Summary
Include: Blog Posts | Blog Comments | Files | Wiki Page | Wiki Comments

Page 2 of 2

Newer >>

nalrushiedat | weblog | Sep 27, 2006 - 1:47pm

Response to Dr. Allan Wicker

 

I really enjoyed Dr. Wicker’s guest lecture.  I found it to be insightful and have certainly contributed to improving my level of understanding for naturalistic social science and documentary filmmaking.  It always makes a difference when a researcher is passionate about his work.  His cases were well chosen and they indeed portrayed a broader and realistic picture of the environments.  He deliberately chose those two cases and left the comparing and contrasting to us (the audience).

 

He used models (e.g., Encounter of Amerigo Vespucci del l’Amrique) that were somewhat disruptive to our thoughts.  The social interaction was relevant to Berger & Luckman’s where the two persons come from entirely different social worlds.  There were points to be made about individuality and collectivity.  I liked his explanation about how we see our world; phenomenalogically as the way it affects us. 

 

The models had multiple perspectives.  As we try to make sense out of them, we do not necessarily have to bind ourselves by anyone’s account, but rather by our own. 

I think it is neat that he is planning to attend a conference in Cuba to represent his paper (which I enjoyed reading).  Particularly when given that Cuba is not a common destination for many Americans.  I would be interested in his thoughts about the trip upon his return. 

As a future researcher, it is always enlightening to get different perspective on how and what can research also include.   Now, for me if I can figure out how to tie the context of such research to IS, then it would be worthwhile.  I hope to see Dr. Wicker again and I would very much be interested in his take about his visit.


[More]

Leonardo's Laptop (I)

nalrushiedat | weblog | Sep 27, 2006 - 12:24am

Chapter 2

 

Q1.  The five most frustrating experiences that I have personally had using modern
         technology:

  1. A couple of months ago, I installed SP2 via automatic update notification.  SP2 completed successfully to the point that it says you must restart to complete the installation.  When I restarted my laptop, it got hung in a reboot loop, and I could not get to safe mode, after several attempts, I continued to get the “blue screen of death” with the message “Stop: C000021A Fatal System error, the windows subsystem system process terminated unexpectedly w/ a status of 0xC0000005 (0x7FFE0297, 0x0015FAB8),” the system has been shutdown."  After several searches I could not find info for C000021A and C0000005.  I ended up buying a new laptop.

  2. About four year ago, I purchased an anti-spyware software online, it did not work, and instead it downloaded a bunch of spyware and malware programs that made my desktop unusable.

  3. A few years ago, I had to retype my entire report, because my desktop crashed, and my work was not recovered.  Also, since then, I learned to save my work every few minutes.

  4. Every day I waste precious time by having to move spam mail to my junk folder.

  5. My cellular calls getting dropped right in the middle of a conversation.
  

Chapter 3

 

Q2.  An issue relating to having Internet access to many involves the relative high cost of getting Internet access.  For example, in Jordan, the cost of using the Internet is about 1 Jordanian Dinar (about $1.40) per hour.  Now, many people earn no more than $10.00 a day, and a good number of people labor to earn about $7.00 a day.  To them, going on the Internet for an hour, is a treat.  You will hear them talking about it for days. 

In this case, universal usability of the Internet is practically limited to those who can afford it.  The digital divide is clearly growing between the people who can afford it and those who cannot.  This is the Internet apartheid that Ben Schneiderman has talked about.


[More]

Qualitative Thought and Human Understanding

nalrushiedat | weblog | Sep 20, 2006 - 3:41pm
1. Is "Soul of the New Machine" a qualitative study based on the six criteria outlined in "The Enlightened Eye?"  

To a high degree a judgment can be made to indicate that Kidder’s “Soul of the New Machine” is a qualitative study.  This can be supported by invoking the on the six criteria outlined in "The Enlightened Eye."  First, the writing was based on experience and observation, which he expressed inductively.  He had a field focus.  He visited Data General’s offices and observed, interviewed, recorded, described, interpreted, and appraised the settings as they were. 

Second, Kidder himself was the instrument.  He was an expert (connoisseur) with a great deal of personal insight.  He was perceptive in his presentation and interpretation.  Every moment of every character’s time was a step in the stairs. 

 

Third, his interpretive work pertained to the ability why things were taking place.  He sensibly shaped the way the new recruits were treated was described according to the practice of “the mushroom theory of management.”

 

Fourth, his use of language was very expressive.  He used metaphors and adjectives (e.g., Hardy Boys and Microkids).  He was a good writer; he practically put us there in the room observing the events as they were unfolding.  It was as if we were people watching and wondering what Tom West or the others were going to do next.

 

Fifth, Kidder paid a great deal of attention to particulars.  He gave us the flavor of the atmosphere that was taking place at that time.  It was “war” for example when there was some type of communication with those North Carolina people.

 

Sixth, his writing pertained to the criteria for judging.  The work had a coherent flow of events.  His style was persuasive in nature.  What counted was a matter of his judgment. 

 

On the quantitative and qualitative continuum, I would categorize it as much closer and the direction of Hamlet rather than Duncan Luce’s (1960) mathematical psychology work.



2. In comparing and contrasting non-fiction, documentary, and naturalistic social science, we find both similarities and differences as they pertain to explaining knowledge about every day life.  In non-fiction the representation of the subject is presented as fact.  For example, Wicker (2006) writes about Raymond, where he seems to give an accurate account of Raymond’s circumstances, and they are taken at face value. 

Wicker accounted nearly for every moment of Francisquito’s one morning.  He described every act as a fact.  While this scenario was documented, it too can be perceived as documentary in nature.  This was expanded upon by including the surrounding and environment where Francisquito lives.  The expression was broadened with the aim of outlining the nature of the surrounding.  The intent was meant to show more than what Francisquito’s morning looked like.  At the same time the setting was preserved by its nature.  The recording took place “on location,” focused on “real people” who played themselves.  In essence, this was a field research.  It occurred in its natural setting.  

In this regard, the episode presented her shares the attributes of all three (non-fiction, documentary, and naturalistic social science) categories.  However, research may not be comprehensively exhaustive.  It can include any or all of the categories.  This will depend on the subject, intent, environment, and what aspects are central to the focus.  Deliberate selectivity in choosing the material can dictate the nature and style of representation. For the work to be non-fiction, it has to describe reality.  Naturalistic social scientists’ work entails thorough grounding, which in turn can stimulate documentary films.   

[More]

The Soul Of A New Machine

nalrushiedat | weblog | Sep 13, 2006 - 3:05pm
1.       Why is the book titled "Soul of a New Machine"?
The soul is what shapes the force(s) behind the energy.  Aristotle identified it as the “form,” which is the organizing principle that shapes the chaos of matter in a human, a living thing.  Kidder apparently chose the title “Soul of a New Machine,” to show that the new computer embodies similar characteristics to a living thing.  The creators of the new machine had to work diligently to ensure that the creature is not just a matter of matter, but may share (appear to share) similar characteristics to a living thing.  Algorithms give it the sense of logic, ensure that the machine respond according to various commands when asked (typed) of it, even though on occasions it may not recognize what it is that you are asking of it, but it still replies.  To design and build this machine, much has to be done.  Teams of people have to spend days and nights drafting and redrafting, designing and redesigning, prototyping, and debugging.  It is as if they are living with this thing.  It is almost not just a thing anymore; they are breathing their souls into it.  They are kind of giving it life.  This thing has a name; they have shaped all of the chaos they encountered into an organized and functional thing.  Now it has form.  It needs electricity to breath.  It has a soul.

2.      How would you characterize Tracy Kidder's writing style?

Tracy Kidder wrote an effective narrative.  He made a story out designing a computer.  He focused on a company and team, telling us about their stories.  He did not just describe; he brought in the senses into his writing.  Emotions, thoughts, touch, smell, hear, see, imaginations, were all on the menu.  He described in detail what took place behind the seen.  To kidder, there is no such thing as a black box.  Each component has subcomponents and each subcomponent has other subcomponent; he kept exploding each and every one, he dug deeper and deeper.  The computer was not the destination, but the journey is what made it fun to read.  Most of the time, his writing was superb, but then he chose to include some phrases that I may want to black out before my kids grab this book to read.

3.      Who is your favorite character and why?

My favorite character is the one who devoted much of the time to aiding and helping others, who

went above and beyond the call of duty, and who did not complain.  She is Rosemarie the

secretary.  She enjoyed her time, despite working with a bunch of “nut jobs.”  She did not mind

 working on a desk that was “found” as she put it.  She was the glue that supported the

operations.  She was conscientious about her work.  If the mail did not get to her, she went and

got it.  She stood up for her department and fought with others.  She believed in what she was

doing.  She was a go getter.  

Keywords: Algorithms, energy, force, Soul

[Edit] [Delete]

Posted by Nimer Alrushiedat |


[More]

I Blink, You Blink, We Blink

nalrushiedat | weblog | Sep 6, 2006 - 9:55am

1.      The concept of rapid cognition seems to be highly reasonable and sensible.  It is through it, that our decision making in a blink of a second can be explained.   Seymour Epstein’s "cognitive experiential self theory,” points out both types of learning, the conscious and the experiential.  This concept appears to be highly influential on the choice and type of scholarly activities that I take.  The process is evident, when I breeze through different articles and pick one that catches my attention for example.  It may also explain why I have chosen this major.  Many certain likes, and a few dislikes perhaps steered me towards IS.  In short, it appears that rapid cognition has been influencing my scholarly decisions all along.

2.       My favorite example, which I find fascinating, is John Gottman’s ability to read and interpret the various positive and negative signs that occur between couples.  I just wish that I had read this book before I got married.  I would have been able to then slice all of my future ex-wife’s signs.  For example, A few times I found myself on the defensive just like Bill, although I should not have been, because I believed that I was doing the right thing by pursuing a higher degree.  However, my fiancés reaction at the time was similar to that of Sue’s in the example.  She rolled her eyes; a sign of contempt.  Furthermore, she gave the waiter a hard-time.   Had I read the blink book by Malcolm Gladwell, I would have ran and screamed contempt, and moved to another planet.  But, I was not trained and I could not thin slice back then.  As a result of my experience, I believe that the blink book would be helpful for future husbands and wives to read.

3.       Dr. Stuart Oskamp is the CGU scholar mentioned in the book titled “Blink” by Malcolm Gladwell, page 139.


[More]

Page 2 of 2

Newer >>