The Personal Mobile The Personal Mobile LibraryLibrary

Team:Younes HajjiMagnus HørvenAnne Merete DrivekleppKien Trung NguyenDariusz Mateusz ZasadaIsaiah O. OmoloHenry Ssekyewa

JustificationJustificationStudents find it irritating to not

have overview over annotated articles and having to search manually for them.

ObjectivesObjectivesEnhance learning for students

◦Simple organizing and accessability for annotated articles

Project IdeaProject IdeaAnnotate application with unique way to

organize and search through your articles

Search results with generated mind thoughts (cloud) user interface

Inspired by◦iAnnotate◦iThoughts

We think our application will make it a lot easier for students to find the exact articles they want to read.

iAnnotate appiAnnotate app

iAnnotate appiAnnotate app

The Mind Map appThe Mind Map app

iThoughts appiThoughts app

Implementation/ Implementation/ MethodologyMethodologyInterviewsObservationsSurveyPrototypingIterating

Mobility in CollaborationMobility in Collaboration

Researchers: Paul LuffChristian Heath

CSCW/ACM,1998

ObjectiveObjective Examine the ways in which mobility of

personnel and artefacts is critical to collaboration and communication – considering how individuals rely upon their own mobility and that of particular artefacts to support collaboration as well as the resources that might enhance their current tasks and responsibilities.

JustificationJustificationTools for remote collaboration are

staticCurrent technologies are rigidSystems for co- present

collaboration are located on inflexible workstations

Mobility features in collaborative work largely overlooked

BackgroundBackgroundEvolution of organization and effect of

technology - Understanding how new communication

technologies support organizational transformation and re-engineering of business processes to dynamic fragmented networks

Effect of physical configuration of technology on activity and collaboration

MethodologyMethodology The researchers use three case studies to

understand the collaborative environment to which conventional systems are subjected.

Namely1. Medical consultation- focus on ecological

mobility of traditional paper in professional medical practices

2. Construction site – technological limitation in support of collaboration

3. London Underground- focus on multimedia support for mobile collaboration

Case 1: Medical Case 1: Medical ConsultationConsultationA case of ’micro- mobility’- defined as a way in which

an artefact can be mobilised and manipulated for various purposes around a relatively circumscribed domain.

Paper record supports synchronous and asynchronous collaborations between clients(doctors, patients, & other professionals)

Critical features of paper in interaction;Portability, ecological flexibility, handlable,

dismantlable, manipulable, reassembled and reordered

Limitation of ’desktop metaphor’: Inability to imitate how traditional artefacts and tools reconfigure on desk with regard to on going interaction with others.

Case 2: Construction siteCase 2: Construction site A case of remote mobility. Mobile system developed to support foremen-

designed to replicate the action of allocation sheets used on site.

Allocation sheets are resource for synchronous and remote communication (record activities undertaken, time spent, and problems identified and managed)

Effect: Technology hindered mobile collaboration- the mobile system made the user less mobile , less able to monitor the ongoing work and less available to engage in activities. (system remained in a fixed location and used to document data and thus did not offer interactional support of paper allocation sheet)

Case 2: Construction site... Case 2: Construction site... contdcontdTechnology challenges: Misunderstanding by the proponents of the

system concerning the nature of interaction around the objects and artefacts, the sketches, notes and work schedules utilised between foremen and gangers.

Size, shape and low intensity lighting of screen made it problematic for items displayed on it to become topics of discussion.

Failure to account how documents form basis for real-time collaboration and communication

Case 3: London Case 3: London UndergroundUndergroundA case of remote and local mobility.Problem: Centralization of bulk of information and

communication resources – resource isolationCharacteristics of interaction Access to real-time information and general

data Collaboration with others in their immediate

vicinity Visual access to areas Audio communication with station staff

Case 3: London Case 3: London Underground…ctdUnderground…ctdFeatures of Mobile systemGraphic information, textual information,

Audio, Portable, size, real-time communication

Potential tech. for supporting London Underground

High bandwidth wireless communication system to extend station capabilities while supporting graphic and textual interface, access to system controls and commuication system.

ConclusionConclusion Use of objects in interaction are interweaved

within interaction and activities of others. Individual orientations towards objects are

continually shifting and being transfromed with repsect to ongoing interactions and activities of participants – that is personnel inconventional environment rely upon their own mobility and that of artefacts to accomplish their work.

Relevance to The Online Relevance to The Online LibraryLibrary Mobile systems need to support a range of

different types cooperation and collaboration – heterogenous combination of technologies

Critical consideration of tasks and responsibilities of individuals as well as how access to information requires and engenders cooperation and collaboration ??