If you cite this thesis please include its URL, which is http://www.tela.bc.ca/ma-thesis/). Thanks!
Chapter Three - Methodology.
3.0 Introduction.
The previous chapter outlined some of the previous research in the field of community networking. This chapter introduces the empirical research that was conducted for this thesis and presents the methodology used.
3.1 Methodology.
This thesis is exploratory in nature, and thus a qualitative research methodology was chosen. The basic goals of community networks are highly subjective. Community building, a notion of central importance to this thesis, is a personal and elusive concept that does not lend itself easily to numerical metrics. This thesis is concerned with the intentions and self-conscious directions embodied in each organization, as generally idealistic and ideological bases support the formation of most community networks. As Nicholas Jankowski comments,
. . . new communication and information technologies, such as interactive videotex services and computer conferencing, lend themselves to qualitative research. Access by the general public and the local community to these interactive media is an important component in a democratic vision of the so-called information society. Qualitative methodologies can help communities to understand not only how new communication technologies are being introduced at present, but also how the emancipatory potential of new media may serve community in the future. (Jankowski in Jensen and Jankowski, 1991, pp. 173-174.)
3.1.1 Interview Respondents.
Primary research for this thesis consisted of a series of detailed interviews, conducted with key informants. These respondents were generally long-time volunteers and, occasionally, staff with community networks across Canada. The majority of these networks were located in British Columbia.
Initial contacts were made over email for more remote community networks, and in person and telephone contacts in the case of Vancouver-based individuals. Interview respondents were thus largely chosen through an informal network of personal contacts that I have built up during my three-year involvement in the field of community networking. Many important initial contacts were made in person during the August 1995 Telecommunities Canada conference held in Victoria.
Respondents were chosen on a basis of their involvement with each network. Many, therefore, were founders, board members or presidents of their respective organizations. As most community networks are relatively small organizations these key respondents were generally involved in the day to day operations of each network and were very familiar with them.
Other respondents interviewed included long-time volunteers, who were not necessarily involved with their organization at the board level, and former volunteers. The former group were generally not involved with the setting of policy, but were simply getting out into the community and working with community organizations, and often offered a highly pragmatic view of their community network. The latter group were individuals who left their local community network for a variety of reasons, but who were often dissatisfied with the work of the organization with which they were once involved. The frustrations and criticisms that many of them expressed were valuable in gaining insight to the problems and challenging organizational difficulties in building a community network.
3.1.2 Personal Experience.
In addition to interviews with respondents, a great deal of this thesis draws upon the experience that I have gained as a volunteer in the area. For the past three years I have been involved with the Vancouver CommunityNet, formerly the Vancouver Regional FreeNet, in a number of areas, including system design, public relations and software authoring. I have been a board member and Webmaster (technical coordinator responsible for organizing the system's Web-based material and writing a set of Web-related computer programs) of the system since September 1994.
My experience has therefore encompassed a wide range of activity in the CommunityNet. I have seen first-hand the social dynamics of the organization from the point of view of both a volunteer committee member and a member of the board, and have been able to follow the development of the organization over a significant period - from its early days before it even owned any computer hardware, to the present. I have also been able to come in contact with many individuals keenly interested in the field of community networking.
It should also be noted that this experience may have its disadvantages. I did not interview fellow volunteers in the organization as a dispassionate observer and outsider, but as a colleague and participant. My position as a board member may also have affected interviews in a kind of socially Heisenbergian fashion. Nevertheless, I believe that the depth of insight I gained through my long association with the organization has been of great benefit in writing this thesis. In a sense, this thesis can be seen as something of a 'reflective' or descriptive account, which might be described by Jankowski as a work that "describe(s) developments and explore(s) policy options" rather than being one that focuses on theoretical concerns. (Jankowski, 1991, p. 166.)
3.1.3 Interview Structure.
The purpose behind the interview questions was two-fold. First, because most of the individuals interviewed were directly responsible for guiding the ongoing policies and directions of each organization, the interviews were designed to have each respondent articulate those policies and directions. Second, many of the interviewees were closely involved with community outreach aspects of their organizations and so had great familiarity with the response of their community to the system with which they were involved.
The questions asked are listed in Appendix A. Interviews were largely conducted in person when possible, with the remainder being conducted by telephone. They were not conducted by email, because I was more interested in establishing a dialogue with respondents than corresponding. Email was used to set up initial contacts with respondents, however. Additionally, much supporting material for this thesis came from email correspondence with other volunteers on other systems.
The interviews lasted from approximately half an hour to nearly three hours in length, with the average running for a little over an hour. A total of 19 individuals were interviewed.
Organization Name Number of Respondents Interview Method Campbell River Community Network 3 In person Mount Arrowsmith Community Network 3 In person Nanaimo Online 2 In person National Capital FreeNet 2 Telephone Nechako Access Network Organization 1 Telephone Prince George Free-Net 1 Telephone Vancouver CommunityNet 6 In person Victoria Telecommunity Network 1 Telephone Table I - Organizations Studied
I made audio recordings of all of the interviews. Interview analysis consisted of listening to the tapes, extracting commonly-recurring themes and transcribing them.
Drafts of certain portions of this thesis were also emailed to respondents in order to solicit comments and corrections from them. This was also an attempt to draw respondents somewhat closer into the interview process, and cast them more as participants than subjects.
3.2 Interview Questions.
The opening questions of the interview served both as a form of introduction and also as a way to determine the personal background of each respondent. Respondents were asked to describe their current line of work, how they first heard about community networks and what motivated them to become involved.
Each respondent was then asked for a brief capsule history of the community network with which they were involved, if applicable, which formed the basis for the descriptions of the community networks in chapter six. These histories were, therefore, almost entirely derived from the interview process.
The interviewees were then asked to describe the main goals and purposes of their community network: both the stated official organizational goals and, at a more informal level, the goals they believe their organizations actually achieve. Respondents were then asked if they felt that the goals they listed were typical of their perception of the movement as a whole.
If a respondent identified building local community (or a generally analogous concept) at his or her own initiative then he or she was asked what priority this area was assigned within the organization. If he or she did not identify community building then he or she was asked if community building was an implicit goal in the work their organization performed. Respondents were then asked to provide examples of community-building on their system.
To close, respondents were asked about their visions for the future of community networking in general and their own community network as a specific case.
The following chapter examines the underlying technology of, and the general history of, community networking.