Instructor: Clay Shirky
Final Paper  

The Use of ITP Lockers In Replicating A Network: Final Results

Explanation: This explanation should be 4-6 word web page or pages explaining your network. This should be in four parts:

A: A description of the network itself, including the parameters along which it can vary.
The network, which I worked on, consists of using the ITP lockers in replicating the inner functions of a fully operational network. There were three versions, which I implemented and each one was different in its own way. The overview aspect was to show how a network can be recreated within the itp lockers here on the floor. I implemented my ITP locker network with the following three variations.

V1: one package per four colored section with rules on how they can be moved.
V2:three packages per colored section with rules on how they can be moved.
v3:three packages per colored section with no rules on how they can be moved.
v4: a network in which post-it notes were randomly assigned to various lockers (close to 30 post-it notes were used) with message requiring a response and small buttons in order to help start a dialogue between the students. Each post-it note had the locker number of the send and a response request blank section. Close to 60% of the post-it notes still have not been fully moved about but those that have are allowing for the opportunity of those who do not know each other the chance to meet and talk and begin a line of dialogue which was my intention.

B:A description of the three or more versions of the network you ran, including a list
of differences, and illustration of the network.
I ran three version of my network and all the information is listed below alongside the difference between each one. The three versions of the network were all variations on the overall idea of using the ITP lockers in replicating a network. The fourth network, which I attempted to build, was an attempt in fosters a sense of dialogue between the students through post-it notes.

V1:One package per four colored section with rules on how they can be moved.
Four colored sections, each consisting of a total of 12 lockers in each section were highlighted near the entrance of the ITP floor. In each section was one package which gave detailed instruction to the randomly selected locker node , on how they can move the package and as a incentive were given four mini kit kat bars in each package. The package were only allowed to be moved from one colored section to another therefore enforcing the overall fact that the package can be moved three nodes points and ensuring that it will reach the end of the network. The network was left in place for over a period of a week and there was a 50% rate of package completion.

V2:Three packages per colored section with rules on how they can be moved.
The second network was also a variation of the built upon the ITP locker network and this time I increased the number of packages within each four sections from one to three. I kept the same rules from the first version of the network and left the network to run its course for a period of four days. Due to a larger amount of packages available within the network, 75% of the total amount of packages made it to at least the destination point of having reached three nodes as compared to 50% within the first network. I believe that a larger number of packages available within the network increased the probability of a larger percentage of packages in reaching the final destination point. Since there was a total of three packages located in each of the four-colored section, there were a total of 12 packages available with the network to move about. Out of the 12 packages within the network, I received a total 9 packages, which reached their final destination point of three node jumps within the time period of four days

V3:Three packages per colored section with no rules on how they can be moved.
The third network was also built upon the ITP locker network using the same overall structure as the second network but without any rules on how the packages could be moved. The network was left in place for a period of four day and I experienced a very high return rate. Due to a larger amount of packages available within the network and the lack of rule on how they can be moved, 85% of the total amount of packages made it to at least the destination point of having reached three nodes as compared to 75% within the second network and 50% for the first network. I believe that a larger number of packages available within the network increased the probability of a larger percentage of packages as well as the restricting effect of rules on how these packages can be moved.

V4:A network in which post-it notes were randomly assigned to various lockers
My fourth network was a completely different type of network, which relied on post-it notes with to foster dialogue between students by placing the post-it notes with messages in various lockers as well as observing the movement within the network of the post-it-notes.With the help and advice from Anne Hong and Pollie Barden, we attempted in setting up the last version of my network example using post-it-notes in studying the movement of these notes throughout the network and attempting to foster dialogue and conversation between students.

Reason: I believe that with the appropriate stimuli and the close physical proximity of lockers to each, creating conversations between students can be implemented to some degree. The success in maintaining this dialogue depends on the initial reason on why the student would want to respond, which we attempted to answer by placing either complimentary messages on the post-it-notes and questions or gifts. This in its own was acted as an incentive for the receiving student to respond, as well as the curiosity factor because the student was only informed of the sending locker number and not the identity of the student. Within each post-it-note, the receiving student was informed of a certain message or question, and with an invite to respond to this as well as the locker number from where it was sent. Now in all actuality, we basically randomly assigned from lockers numbers to the receiving student so that this would attempt to create some form of dialogue. I am observing that several of the post-it-notes have been moving so far and there are some dialogues that are being created by the version of my network, how long they will be maintained can only be observed over a certain period of time.

I have noticed that at least 60% of the initial post-it notes which were randomly placed on the lockers have not been moved and this can be caused by any of the following reasons, lack of use of the lockers, not clearly describing the actions the students should take after they receive the first post-it note, or the fact that its finals week and everyone might be to busy to participate. I will continue to keep track of the post-it notes and update any progress to this network of my site.

Initial Posts-It Note Pictures:

Initial Posts-It Note Response Pictures:

List of differences between the above mentioned three networks:
The differences between the following networks are as follows, the first and second package had a varying amount of packages within each colored section in order to test my notion that more packages within a network will increase the probability that there is a higher chance of the packages reaching the final destination point. The third version of my network was different from the first and second because it did not have any rules which attempted to dictate the flow of the packages from one node to another.

The final network was quite interesting from all the other network because even through there were rules set on the post-it note as how the note can be passed, I have observed several people who were communication with their classmates via the post-it notes but were now running out of space on the notes. I also observed that some had crossed out the locker number and put in other numbers of their choosing as well as writing their own notes to lockers near them. Overall there were still a 60% percentage of post-it notes were did not move and I think this is due to the fact that I should have carefully though out the actual movement of the post-it notes as well as planning how they were supposed to interact with each other. The overall difference of the fourth network versus the other three was the complete lack of structure that did not exist within this network. *The attached diagram shows movements of the packages within the network: Will be added at a later time

C: What you learned from observing the differences in the different versions, and an accompanying visual explanation.
From observing the differences in the different versions, I learned the importance of carefully planning out almost every single aspect of your network. I also learned the importance of anticipating the type of interaction you hope to have occur within your network as well as understanding what type of incentives you offer in help the progress of any packages you may have within the nodes. I also learned how important it is to attempt to anticipate points of failure or use by end users within your network but with that said networks are constantly evolving and you can only attempt to modify them after you have observed and researched their behavior.

D: What you would do if you wanted t o build a larger, more robust or more useful version of the same kind of network.
If I wanted to build a larger, more robust and more useful version kind of my network, I would attempt to plan on how the end users would best make use of the network but overall in understanding that its the end users that dictate the flow of any network, I would research hoe it is being used and attempt to make modification so that the network can grow and become as useful in the end user needs.