Developing both public and private spaces

Wenger et al caution against focusing too much on public events. A community coordinator needs to engage in “informal “back channel” discussions (Wenger et al., 2002). “The key to designing community spaces is to orchestrate activities in both public and private spaces that use the strength of individual relationships to enrich events and use events to strengthen individual relationships” (p.59).

SCoPE is a combination of public and private spaces. Scheduled Seminar Discussions, the Community Library, and KaleidoSCoPE are all public. In addition, selected project groups and special interest groups are public and members are free to join and unenrol as they please. The private spaces include:

• Special interest groups with a closed membership, such as the University/College/Institute Professional Development (UCIPD) Committee
• TeleSCoPE, where discussions related to site upgrades and customization take place
• Metaforums, where seminar facilitators talk about their experiences
• Faculty CoPs, such as the Faculty of Health Sciences
• Practicing teachers enrolled in the Teaching and Learning in an Information Technology Environment (TLITE) diploma program at Simon Fraser University
• One-to-one messaging

As new ideas and requests for separate groups emerge, the issue of creating private space is always revisited. While there are obvious reasons for restricting access to certain groups, such as TeleSCoPE where server security could be in jeopardy with public access to discussions, there are many examples where discussions could be far richer if there were opportunities for broader input. Here is an example:

The seminar discussion format has provided opportunities for advancement of roles within the community – from participant to facilitator. As community coordinator, I provide behind-the-scenes support for the volunteer moderators to help with planning, and to discuss progress and offer suggestions. We have also begun a tradition of debriefing seminars. Facilitators are asked if they would like to spend some time reflecting on the seminar, and if so who they would like to include in the process. A private “metaforum” is set up for this purpose. These debriefing sessions have turned into very rich dialogue that will help to inform future SCoPE activities, and in many ways it's a disadvantage that they aren't shared openly. In fact, one debrief developed into a discussion about how to go about conducting debriefs, and naturally this would have been a good topic for all members to engage in.

During a seminar discussion in May and June, 2006, the facilitators made a behind-the-scenes decision to start a new “public debrief” thread in the seminar. The outcome was mixed: One member felt that this action essentially killed the discussion. Another member who had not yet participated felt compelled to comment on her observations, so in her case the debrief became her entry into the community discussion.  

On the other hand, a private space affords more candid discussions. Members feel safe in a private discussion space. I often engage in email correspondence with members on topics that could easily be shared in the community. It is difficult to find a good balance, but to be sure some private space is desirable. It is important to constantly question the value of keeping a discussion private, and the risks of inviting wider participation. As community coordinator, I see my role as bringing relevant feedback and ideas forward to advance the community while maintaining confidentiality of the private discussions that members choose to have.