The participants of NGL are a group. According to Downes (2011), groups are defined by the commonality between its members, then the number of members in that group. Downes goes on to state that a group is like a school or a class. The participants of this course are a “class” – a small online class, but a class nevertheless. We are bound by common features that may vary slightly between each member, but include the following:
- We are all enrolled in EDU8117 and have an interest in NGL;
- We are all striving for an education/degree;
- We are all online students studying through USQ
In contrast, a network is determined by an association that is facilitated or created by connections between entities (Downes, 2011). I view my profession as a librarian and the concept of librarianship as a network, rather than a group due to its extensive connectivity. For example, if I gathered all the librarians within Australia into a room, I am sure I would find they would not be bound by the commonalities of a group. There would be academic librarians, public librarians, school librarians, research librarians, law librarians etc. Librarianship is viewed by its nature and its connections, which is the essence of a network.
I’m not sure how agreeable or accurate my response is as I’ve notice Keturah argues the complete opposite in her post (and she makes great claims to her views too).
Downes, S. (2011). Groups vs Networks: the Class Struggle Continues. Retrieved 15 August, 2017, from http://www.downes.ca/post/42521