Newmedia5

Mapping knowledge at

hybrid spaces and interac5on within these spaces

Lecture 5

William Gibson in Spook Country: “the ar5st Beth Baker is here, her apartment. You will come, you will experience the apartment, this environment. This is an annotated environment, do you know it?” “annotated how?” “Each object is hyper‐spa5ally tagged with Beth Barker’s descrip5on, with Beth Barker’s narra5ve of this object. One simple water glass has twenty tags”

Topics

•  What is knowledge. Concepts. •  Ontologies and soM ontologies •  Spa5al representa5ons of knowledge •  Mapping knowledge and interac5on at hybrid spaces.

•  Mobile and ubiquitous learning

For essay

•  Learning at hybrid places: applica5ons of the triplet Content‐User‐Tag(geotag) –  In this empirical essay you should inves5gate and explain interac5on, knowledge building and learning possibili5es in hybrid environments (combined from real loca5ons and new media)

Knowledge as a social construct

•  Knowledge is the non‐digital or digital applica&on of Informa&on, either as ac&on or communica&on, which occurs within individuals, groups and organiza5ons (Coleman & Levine, 2008).

•  Knowledge appears as individual tacit or explicit knowledge, temporary shared group knowledge in collabora5ve ac5vi5es, and organiza&onal knowledge.

Knowledge in Web 2.0 social media environments

Implicit knowledge

Explicit knowledge

Implicit (tacit) and explicit knowledge

•  Forms of individual knowledge are tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. – Tacit (implicit) knowledge is the ins5nct and tui5on gained from experience, which remains implicit (De Pablos, 2006)

– Explicit knowledge refers to the Knowledge as a system of rules and informa5on that is easily communicated and shared as Knowledge objects and Knowledge assets, in knowledge building and knowledge management.

Knowledge assets and knowledge objects

•  Knowledge assets represent various measurable forms of implicit individual and organiza5onal knowledge.

•  Knowledge assets may be created, modified, stored and/or disseminated in knowledge objects in which these knowledge assets can be par5ally externalized (Young & Mentzas, 2001; Nonaka & Toyama, 2007).

Knowledge asset examples

Human assets: –  a person is a knowledge asset that can create new ideas, learning, and proposals (knowledge objects);

–  a community of prac&ce is a knowledge asset that can create new ideas and best prac5ces (knowledge objects);

–  Networks is a knowledge asset that creates and holds social capital

Structural assets: –  a work process is a knowledge asset that can create and/or store and disseminate best prac5ces, company standards, and RTD material (knowledge objects).

– market assets as brands

Shared group knowledge

•  Shared group knowledge is the temporary knowledge forma5on that appears as a result of shared cogni5on (shared perspec5ves) in the collabora5ve ac5vi5es of groups, and refers to the knowledge upon which the group shares common understanding.

•  Shared knowledge is intersubjec&ve

Organiza5onal knowledge

•  Organiza&onal knowledge refers to – various forms of knowledge assets (e.g. networks, community prac5ce; social capital; brands, ontologies) that organisa5ons cul5vate

– and the representa&ons of these knowledge assets in the form of knowledge objects (e.g. learning objects, norma5ve documents, collabora5on and workflow pagern documenta5ons and visualiza5on tools, network visualiza5ons etc.).

Knowledge building

•  The majority of contemporary scholars follow “social construc&vism”, which assumes that knowledge is not sta5c and objec5ve but is constructed by groups of people.

•  Knowledge building is the individual and social construc&ve process of crea&ng new cogni&ve artefacts, which result in the forma5on of various forms of knowledge by individuals, groups and organiza5ons (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 2003).

•  It is the crea5on, tes5ng, and improvement of conceptual artefacts as a result of common goals, group discussions, and synthesis of ideas.

Distributed knowledge •  Situated cogni5on theorists concept of knowledge assumes that knowledge inheres in social prac&ces and in the tools and ar&facts used in those prac&ces (Bereiter, 2002, p. 57) . Knowledge is regarded as distributed. This does not mean merely that it is spread around, a bit here and a bit there… knowledge does not consist of li>le bits…all the knowledge is in the rela3onships – rela3onships among the people engaged in an ac3vity, the tools they use, and the material condi3ons of the environment in which ac3on takes place.

Bereiter, C. (2002). Educa5on and Mind in the Knowledge Age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Connec5ve knowledge •  Knowledge: Knowledge rests in networks. Knowledge may reside in non‐human appliances, and learning is enabled/facilitated by technology (p. 31). –  The pipe is more important than the content in the pipe. ‘Know where’ and ‘know who’ are more important today that ‘knowing what’ and ‘how’ (p. 32).

•  The act of knowing is offloaded onto the network itself – to a connected network of specialists. The network (or web) of connec5ons is the structure, which holds the knowledge of individuals in a holis5c manner (p. 33).

•  Content is imbued with new meaning when situated in network (or is more accurate to say that the network acquires new meaning when new content is added?) (p. 43).

Siemens (2006) , book Knowing Knowledge

Knowledge as a representa5on of world •  The knowledge must cons5tute some sort of representa&on of "the outside world”.

•  A concept is an abstract idea or mental symbol that is associated with the objects in outside world and with its representa&ons with words, symbols etc.

•  A conceptual system is a system that is composed of ideas and concepts.

•  Conceptual system is a conceptual model that represents the outside world.

hgp://giladgoren.terapad.com/index.cfm?fa=contentNews.newsDetails&newsID=28238&from=list

Representa5ons of concepts

Conceptual system /conceptual model

Tagging: adding the annota5ons to the ar5facts presen5ng conceptual

representa5ons

•  A tag is a freely chosen keyword or short sentence that is applied to digital content.

•  Tagging is the process of applying freely chosen keywords or short sentences to digital content.

Organize Classify Filter Find Sort Aggregate Publish Share

LocaLon Signaling IdenLty building

Collabora5ve tagging •  A collabora&ve tagging system is a computer‐based piece of soMware that enables several users to add keywords or short sentences to shared digital content.

•  There is typically no synonym control in a collabora&ve tagging system.

From: hgp://www.codedanger.com/caglar/?p=172

Folksonomy •  A folksonomy is the result of collabora5ve tagging. Unlike taxonomy‐based metadata, folksonomies directly reflect user vocabularies.

•  The centrally defining characteris5cs of folksonomies are thus their boOom‐up construc&on, a lack of hierarchical structure, and their crea&on and use within a social context.

•  In a narrow folksonomy, there is only one instance of each tag (belongs to 1 person), a broad folksonomy is the result of many people tagging the same items.

Folkosnomy indicates popular tags Clay Shirky writes that they are “socially created, typically flat name‐spaces” (Shirky, 2004).

The long tail of tags

hgp://www.elliance.com/aha/infographics/b2b‐long‐tail.aspx

People themselves make search op5ons more precise

Searching for par5cular targets becomes possible because users have described them

Tagging triple (user, content, annota5ons)

•  Tagging creates a triple (user, content, annota&ons) which indicates user’s rela&onship between resources, users, and tags (Golder and Huberman, 2006, Marlow et al., 2006, Sen et al., 2006).

•  Such underlying structure allows flexible social naviga5on (e.g. tag‐item, tag‐user, user‐item)

Typical user ac5ons with contents

Geotag Tag

Comment

Write a review

Rate Sharing

Embed

Evaluate

Bookmark

Assemble & modify

Annotate Store

Reuse

Distribute

Search

Search owners or users Search places

Search similar or related contents

Create

Content descriptors for oneself

Social signaling

Iden5ty crea5on

Owning, controlling Task‐based aggrega5on

Geong feedback

For co‐crea5on, modifica5ons and remix

Informa5on Retrieval (old search op5ons)

•  Old methods for search – Explicit search: comprises the tradi5onal search box with text and filtering op5ons based on mul5lingual metadata.

– “Find by subject” offers browsing through pre‐defined categories.

– Personal search: Looking for bookmarks from one’s own personal collec5on of bookmarks

Ecology of social search for learning resources hgp://dspace.ou.nl/bitstream/1820/1799/4/vuorikari_koper_socialsearch.pdf

Social Informa5on Retrieval (new search op5ons)

•  New methods for search include Social Informa&on Retrieval (Goh et al., 2007) such as social naviga&on and collabora&ve recommender systems. –  Social naviga&on involves using the behavior of other people to help navigate online. Social naviga5on types are: Interest indicators, which can be acquired either directly from the user (e.g. ra&ng) or indirectly (e.g. &me spent on an object). Collabora&ve recommender systems use explicit ra5ngs to find like‐minded users


Social Informa5on Retrieval (new search op5ons)

•  Community browsing: these are social naviga5on features such as: – accessing resources through tagclouds and – specific lists of most bookmarked resources, but also

– “pivot browsing” which means using tags or usernames as a means to reorient browsing.


Tag‐networks enable “pivot browsing” across tags

Is social informa5on retrieval mainstream?


Only 20 % of users benefit from social annota5on ac5vi5es

Ontology •  A conceptual model has also an ontology ‐ a formal representa&on of knowledge as a set of concepts within a domain, and the rela&onships between those concepts.

Example: the structure ontology describes individual library resources in terms of their physical and logical structure.

Social Web and Seman5c Web

Social Web only involves the symbolic domain (tags) and the Informa&on Elements domain

The conceptual models are in the minds of the people who interpret the symbols (tags) and the Informa5on Elements

The Seman&c Web adds the conceptual domain (ontologies) to the Social Web, which computers can use.

hgp://giladgoren.terapad.com/index.cfm?fa=contentNews.newsDetails&newsID=28238&from=list

Informa&on elements on the web (e.g. mul5‐media documents) that presents things in the real world.

Ontology and Seman5c Web

•  Seman5c Web is a group of methods and technologies to allow machines to understand the meaning ‐ or "seman&cs" ‐ of informa&on.

•  Informa&on is the data put into context by a human to give it meaning.

•  Ontologies are used in seman&c web technologies for nego5a5on between soMware services, media5on between soMware agents, orchestra5ng the components in seman5c scien5fic workflows, allowing ontology based automa5c annota5on and data retrieval.

Ontologies must be dynamically updated using social ontologies

There are no good methods to do this yet.

Represen5ng knowledge on conceptual spaces

•  Gärdenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual spaces. Geometry of thought.

•  He proposed represen&ng informa&on on geometrical structures – conceptual spaces

•  Conceptual spaces consist of a number of “quality dimensions” that are derived from perceptual mechanisms

•  Conceptual spaces can represent various kind of informa5on, par5cularly similarity rela&ons can be modeled in a natural way

Conceptual spaces •  A natural concept may be defined in terms of conceptual space.

•  A conceptual space can be defined as a collec&on of one or more quality dimensions.

•  The primary func5on of the quality dimensions is to represent various “quali&es” of objects.

Concepts posi5oned in 2‐dimensional conceptual spaces

Conceptual ac5on spaces

•  Many of our everyday concepts are based on ac&ons and func&onal proper&es.

•  The func5on of an object may be analyzed with the aid of ac&ons that it affords.

•  Func5onal concepts can be described as convex regions in an appropriate ac&on space.

In Euclidean space, an object is convex if for every pair of points within the object, every point on the straight line segment that joins them is also within the object.

Conceptual spaces

•  Learning new concepts is, consequently, oMen connected with expanding one’s conceptual space with new quality dimensions.

•  The brain of humans and animals contains topographic areas mapping different kinds of sense modali&es onto spa&al areas. Conceptual space of wovels

Conceptual spaces •  The quality dimensions of conceptual space form the “framework” used to assign proper&es to objects and to specify rela&ons between them.

•  The coordinates of a point within a conceptual space represent par5cular instances of each dimension.

•  Similarity of two concepts in conceptual space is defined by distance along the dimensional “axis”: –  Similarity between two objects drops quickly when the distance is rela5vely small

–  Similarity drops slowly when the distance is rela5vely large

Quality dimensions may be entangled (inseparable by percep5on), for example in case of mixed media

Entangled dimensions

Perceiving several dimensions simultaneously enables to tag loca&vely ac&vi&es, emo&ons and even these percep&ons that we cannot really transfer through virtual reality.

Conceptual spaces •  Culture may generate constraints on conceptual spaces.

•  Quality dimensions may be culturally defined and culturally dependent.

•  Conceptual spaces may evolve as a representa&onal form in a community just because people have to share knowledge (remember intersubjec5vity!)

•  Conceptual spaces facilitate the sharing of knowledge and may trigger ac5on.

Hybrid spaces of communi5es

•  Posi5on •  A) in conceptual space (tags) •  B) in geospace (geotags) Tags: Love and trees on Flickr images

What is a hybrid space? •  Hybrid refers to the structural property of the world that is achieved by deliberate blending of geographical spaces with conceptual spaces enabled by the collabora5ve environments (such as blogs, microblogs, wikis, social repositories and ‐networks).

•  The borders of geographical spaces and par5cipatory soMware environments can be blurred or eliminated embedding ar5facts across borders.

Place defini5on

•  Place is a personally meaningful spot in the conceptual and geospace, containing holis5c conglomera5on of events, objects, emo5ons and ac5ons of an individual in the place.

•  We no&ce, use and signify meaningful dimensions of the conceptual space and geospace and make them into our places.

•  In the course of ac5on we hybridize places, enabling for ourselves interac5on with the space using tangible, visible, audible, olfactory cues.

Place defini5on

•  Ryden (1993) includes four essen5al quali5es that contribute in making sense of a place: personal memory, community history, physical landscape appearance, and emo&onal aOachment.

Ontobrands in conceptual space •  Ontobrands are conceptual prototypes, which emerge if a person or a number of people con5nuously take same posi5ons in conceptual (ontological) space.

•  They serve as aOractors for the other people, constraining and guiding their enactment with the hybrid space.

hgp://brandmaster.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/ a‐look‐at‐the‐ontology‐of‐emo5onal‐brand‐agachment/

Triple: User‐Content‐Annota5on enables naviga5on across hybrid spaces

•  Annota&ons enable to relocate yourself in spaces.

•  Think what kind of possibili5es of interac5on

•  a) with other users and •  b) with contents are possible if to re‐locate yourself in conceptual space or in geospace.

Technical and Design Considera5ons for a Mobile Informa5on System. Mark Bilandzic & Marcus Foth (2009).

Reloca5on in conceptual space

Reloca5on in geospace

Finding user communi5es

New meanings to content

New places for ac5on

Dynamic spa5al ontologies

•  …Describe a domain of informa5on by means of spa&ally conceptualized proper&es, ontodimensions, that jointly define the ontological space (ontospaces) in which an informa5on domain ‘is’ or exists.

•  …Are open‐ended in the sense that they allow the crea&on of new ontodimensions, as well as the dele&on of exis&ng ones.

Test this tool: hgp://kerg.tlu.ee/demos/mul5‐perspec5ve‐explora5on

Test this tool: hgp://kerg.tlu.ee/demos/mul5‐perspec5ve‐explora5on

Dynamic spa5al ontologies

Ubiquity is the ability to be present everywhere or at several places at once. The term is derived from Latin ubique which means everywhere.

Mobile learning has ubiquitous ("anytime, anywhere“) nature.

“Ubiquitous learning” metaphor

Wikipedia

The father of ubiquitous compu5ng, Mark Weiser, men5ons that ubiquitous compu5ng forces the computer to live out here in the world with people.

Possibili5es for ubiquitous learning

(Patten et al., 2006)

Pervasiveness

•  Pervasive ‐ experiences that are &ghtly interwoven with our everyday lives through the items, devices and people that surround us and the places that we inhabit.

•  Pervasive compu5ng integrates the technical approaches of emerging interface, wireless and posi5oning technologies to create experiences that combine both virtual and physical elements.

Spa5al awareness

•  Spa5al awareness is an organized awareness of the objects in the space around us, and also an awareness of our body’s posi&on in space

•  Spa5al awareness requires that we have a model of the three dimensional space around us, and it requires that we can integrate informa&on from all of our senses.

Spa5al awareness

Nicolas Nova (2005): People tend to make inferences/decisions influenced by the posi&on of others in space plus all the affordances of space (cultural meaning + physical seongs + topography…).

Nicolas Nova 2003

Spa5al awareness •  Awareness is an understanding of the ac&vi&es of others,

which provides a context for your own ac&vity •  P. Dourish, and V. Belloo, Awareness and coordina5on in shared workspaces, in

J. Turner & R. Kraut (eds.), Proceedings of ACM CSCW'92 Conference on Computer Supported CooperaLve Work, Toronto, Canada, 1992, pp.107‐114.

•  Awareness is knowledge about a state of the work environment in a limited por&on of &me and space: –  showing informa5on about presence (is anyone there?), –  their iden5ty (who is that?), –  their loca5on (where is an individual?), –  their ac5on (what is somebody doing?)

C. Gutwin, and S. Greenberg, S., A Descrip5ve Framework of Workspace Awareness for Real‐Time Groupware, Computer Supported CooperaLve Work 11(3) (2002), pp. 411‐446.

O. W. Bertelsen and S. Bodker. Coopera5on in massively distributed informa5on spaces. In Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Computer Supported CooperaLve Work ECSCW’01, Bonn, Germany, 16‐20 September 2001. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

•  Spaces are dealt with through movement •  Movement is a precondi&on for learning, par5cipa5on and experimenta5on – Common informa5on spaces have several centres and peripheries, and are composed of overlapping regions.

– Learning takes place in rela5on to the ongoing movement and juxtaposi&on of informa&on in the massively distributed common informa5on space.

Spa5al awareness

ShoutSpace or STAMPS a geographical messaging system

•  hgp://www.shoutspace.eu/contact.php •  An experimental soMware pla{orm for public authoring: a

form of knowledge mapping and sharing. •  It allows users to annotate a map collabora5vely with their

friends, with the goal of sharing useful informa&on about the city.

•  It allows to agach a sort of virtual Post‐Its to physical loca5ons with a mobile phone.

•  The produced notes are then available for all the other par5cipants.

•  Par5cularly the team is interested in the interconnec&ons of place and meaning, where loca5on signify something to the content and where it is signified by the context.

STAMPS

ShoutSpace client interface

How STAMPS works? •  Using this program you can see a map of the place where you are, visualised on the screen of your mobile.

•  There, you can write a kind of SMS and agach it to the map so that other friends can see your message appearing on their map.

•  AMer a while, we want to use all these informa5on to help the users to navigate the city. You can ask the system, for instance: "where can I relax near by?", and the system will search for other people's messages which refer to the term relax to give you an advice.

•  Cherubini, M. (2004). A collabora5ve ontology for ‘spa5alised communica5on’. In PosiLon paper for the workshop “PotenLal of CogniLve SemanLcs for Ontologies”, part of FOIS2004 , Torino, Italy.

•  Cherubini, M. (2006). Phd annual report. Technical report, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Ecoublens, Sta5on 1, CH‐1015 Lausanne, Switzerland, 2006.

•  hgp://www.i‐cherubini.it/mauro/publica5ons/Cherubini_PhDAnnualReport06.pdf

Mauro Cherubini

RoadForum •  Pierre Dillenbourg and Nicolas Nova“The RoadForum: Sharing informal

knowledge in a distributed team through a mobile audio environment” (2006)

•  Sharing informal knowledge in a distributed team through mobile audio

•  The goal of the study was to develop and evaluate a new approach to the use of mobile technology in training, focusing on sharing informal knowledge among colleagues.

•  The project included the development of an applica5on referred to as the RoadForum, a server‐side soMware accessible to phone users through normal audio communica5on.

Mogi Mogi2 •  C. Licoppe and Y. Inada, “Seing” one another onscreen and the construc5on

of social order in a mobile‐based augmented public space: The uses of a geo‐localized mobile game in Japan, in Proceedings of Learning in the Mobile Age Conference, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, April 28–30,2005.

•  Loca5on‐based game deployed in Japan called Mogi Mogi2 in which players have to collect virtual and localized artefacts in Tokyo.

•  The game, available commercially, is an in vivo laboratory for studying the development of loca5on‐aware collec5ve behaviours.

•  The authors analyse forms of mobility adjusted to the "augmented" city that the players experience via their terminal (how does one live in an "augmented" urban public space, in a game context?), and the interac&onal behaviours that develop in a loca&on‐aware community where the members' posi5ons are public data.

Expreriments with CatchBob! •  10 groups of 3 persons in the condi5on “with awareness tool”

and 10 groups in the condi5on “without awareness tool”. •  All the group members knew each other because different

levels of knowledge between partners may impact the representa5on each of them have about their teammates.

•  Players were also all familiar with the campus. •  Par5cipants were asked to find the virtual object and

surround it with a triangle made by their posi5on with one constraint in mind: They should take the shortest path to it.

•  We also told them that the goal was not to find the object in the smallest amount of &me.

•  No audio communica5on occurred since the only way to interact was using map annota5ons).

How Catch Bob! Works?

CatchBob results •  The players without awareness tool took beger advantage of the

annota5on capabili5es, using it to express their path and their strategy. The players with the awareness tool were able to annotate as well but did not use this opportunity.

•  In the context of this experiment it was beOer to leave users without the loca&on‐awareness tool, with a broad channel of communica5on.

•  They chose the informa5on they perceived as relevant (posi5on, direc5on and strategy) and sent them to their partners at the moment they wanted it to be known by the others.

•  Ledng people build their own representa&on of the spa&al informa&on appears to be more efficient than broadcas&ng mere loca&on informa&on.

•  The field experiment showed that communica&on about strategy was more important than automa&c loca&on‐awareness for building a good mutual model.

Nova, N., Girardin, F. & Dillenbourg, P

•  Nova, N., Girardin, F. & Dillenbourg, P.: 'The Underwhelming Effects of AutomaLc LocaLon‐Awareness on CollaboraLon in a Pervasive Game', Full paper for Interna5onal Conference on the Design of Coopera5ve Systems (May 9‐12, 2006, Carry‐le‐Rouet, Provence, France).

•  Nova, N., Girardin, F. & Dillenbourg, P.: 'LocaLon is not enough!': an Empirical Study of LocaLon‐Awareness in Mobile CollaboraLon Full paper for IEEE Interna5onal Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Educa5on, Tokushima, Japan. [pdf]

Chick Clique: Persuasive Technology to Mo5vate Teenage Girls to Exercise

hgp://www.cs.indiana.edu/surg/

HandLeR experiments •  Sharples, M. Disrup5ve Devices: Mobile Technology for Conversa5onal

Learning. Paper accepted for publica5on in Interna5onal Journal of Con5nuing Engineering Educa5on and Life‐long Learning special issue on Collabora5ve Learning in Networked Environments. DraM available as PDF (130Kb).

•  The children were split into to mixed‐gender groups of three, each accompanied by a teacher.

•  HandLeR presented their mission through an animated Powerpoint presenta5on.

•  A “mission” on the HandLeR screen, was to explore the canals in central Birmingham, answer two ques5ons, and return with evidence to support their answers.

•  For one team, the ques5ons were “What were canal boat used for in the 1850s?” and “How were the boats powered in the 1850s?” The other team were asked similar ques5ons about modern‐day canal boats.

HandLeR experiments

•  They could collect visual evidence by exploring their surroundings

•  Each group captured images to illustrate their finds and made notes by pen on the screen

•  They could also refer to pre‐cached web pages that were linked to the HandLeR idea map.

•  The groups were encouraged to converse via the mobile phone link and share informa5on.

•  The prototype soMware did not support sharing of data between the devices, but it did allow the groups to communicate by voice, using the microphone and speaker built into the computer.

•  Despite being brief the conversa5on served to coordinate the ac5vi5es and share knowledge.

Environmental Detec5ves

Geodashing

•  Is an outdoor sport in which players use GPS receivers for seaching dashes on a playing field that covers the en5re planet.

•  hgp://www.eduscapes.com/geocaching/kids.htm

•  hgp://www.cs.hut.fi/~rsarvas/sarvas_geocaching.pdf

Handhelds in museums

•  Interac5ve •  Memory •  Personalized context

delivery •  Bookmarking •  Visitor surveying •  Communica5ng •  Experience‐sharing

•  hgp://www.archimuse.com/mw2003/papers/proctor/proctor.html

•  hgp://www.archimuse.com/mw2004/papers/tellis/tellis.html

Possibili5es for informal learning

(Patten et al., 2006)

The ‘Lost Worlds of Somers Town’

The tour integrates a number of learning paradigms as advocated by Naismith et al (2004). It has been designed to support informal learning. It is context‐aware: user’s draw on the environment around them as they walk along the tour route, guided and informed by the PDA and its suppor5ng material. Learning about the area’s history is situa5onal, rather than museum based or desk‐bound. The tour also supports construc5vist learning as learners are ac5vely construc5ng their own view of this environment and its history as they progress through the tour.

CAERUS: a Context Aware Mobile Guide

•  complete context aware educa5onal resource system for outdoor tourist sites and educa5onal centres.

•  CAERUS consists of a handheld delivery applica5on and a desktop administra5on applica5on and provides a visual interface to add new maps, define regions of interest, add theme‐based mul5media tours, and deliver this informa5on to visitors through Pocket PC devices with GPS capability.

•  The visitor can view his or her loca5on on the map‐based interface and is presented automa5cally with audio content upon entering a region of interest.

•  Visitors can then select to view addi5onal mul5media content for that par5cular loca5on, capture their observa5ons or con5nue with their explora5on or tour.

CAERUS: a Context Aware Mobile Guide

Mobile interface

Laura Naismith, Mike Sharples, Jeffrey Ting, 2005

Personal Portable Pedestrian: Lessons from Japanese Mobile Phone Use

Ito, Mizuko hgp://www.ojr.org/japan/wireless/1043770650.php •  In Japanese, the mobile phone is called a keitai, which might be

roughly translated as “a portable,” or “something you carry with you.” In contrast to “the cellular phone” or “the mobile” which stress technology and func5on, the Japanese term stresses the rela&on between user and device.

•  "To not have a keitai (cell phone) is to be walking blind, disconnected from just‐in‐5me informa5on on where and when you are in the social networks of &me and place.“

•  "Keitai‐wired youth are in persistent but lightweight contact with a small number of in5mates, with whom they are expected to be available unless they are sleeping or working. Because of this portable, virtual peer space, the city is no longer a space of urban anonymity.“

Changes in spacial behaviours

•  Concepts like “space” and “being‐there” or the “learning environment” need to be revisited.

•  Mobile learning demolishes distance and boundaries (private or public), it will soon even demolish the very concept of what it means to be here or there (Laouris, 2005)

•  Fujimoto (2005) describes “nagara mobilism” as a central component of young people’s usage pagerns.

•  Nagara, which could be translated as “while doing something else” is a term used to describe young people’s tendency to mul5‐task, to read while watching TV, to eat while walking.

Education

Newmedia5