Questions ~

Questions ~

by Ian MacLeod -
Number of replies: 21
Hi everyone and greetings from CIT 2007 in Nashville Tennessee. I'm sorry I couldn't join you live yesterday, but we've had some poor connectivity issues here (and boy am I suffering :-)) . You don't realize how social the Web has come until you are away from it for a few days.

There are already a lot of amazing conversations happening here and I am really looking forward to seeing where the next three weeks take us.

Here are some of the things I would like to know and get all of you to help figure out:
  • Are we facing a fundamental a paradigm shift in how we will reach and help learners learn, and is that shift being driven by social media or something else?
  • What are some of the things we are doing well now that we can take with us into the brave new world of social media?
  • Who is driving social media in the education space? learners. educators, administrators...
I'm sure that there will be all sorts of other questions as we go along. One of the big themes here at CIT 2007 is the whole idea of open educational resources (check out OER Commons) and collaboration. In combination with social media this will definitely change the educational landscape.

Where do we go next...




( Hmm, intriguing questions Ian...I've split this post off to another thread. Edited by Therese Weel - original submission Wednesday, 14 November 2007, 06:44 AM)

In reply to Ian MacLeod

Re: Questions ~

by Deirdre Bonnycastle -
Are we facing a fundamental a paradigm shift in how we will reach and help learners learn, and is that shift being driven by social media or something else?

I certainly am in the middle of a paradigm shift because of Web 2.0. I use blogs, wikis, podcasting, Ning and Facebook, etc. daily as tools for communicating (both transmitting and receiving and remixing). My blog podcasts reached 95 downloads last month, my personal wiki counted over 2,000 hits last year. I've met new people and built relationships in a way that would not have been possible two years ago when I started this process.

I use these Web 2.0 tools because they are so easy compared to constructing websites or uploading html to Blackboard. I look back on my introduction to ed tech in the form of CD creation using Authorware with horror at its complexity and immense cost. Now within minutes, an instructor/student can be creating and sharing content with others in their class and around the world.

Am I worried that it's just another form of instructor transmission of knowledge? Yes! Instructors seem to be creating ways of putting lectures online a lot. I include myself in this category.

On the other hand, I see people from every generation using social media in some form (there are 20 people over 60 using Facebook in Saskatoon primarily to keep in touch with family - none of them are educators unfortunately). I see non-geek users sharing apps with each other. I see sophisticated and amateur creations sharing space on U-Tube. Revolutionary, you bet! In some ways, this taking learning out of the traditional classroom reminds me of Frontier College where people worked as laborers during the day and taught classes in the camps at night.
In reply to Deirdre Bonnycastle

Re: Questions ~

by Cynthia Alvarado -
I have just spent most of the day in meeting about designing curriculum for middle school that integrates wise use of Web 2.0 applications with my traditional teaching of how to do a research paper. It is a paradigm shift and one the administrators in my school district find hard to swallow. It demands they release some control. My job, as a veteran media specialist ,who has done this paradigm shift thing before, seemed to be to remind them that I can still teach the curriculum that they hold dear, using new tools. (I designed a unit on the spot to demonstrate.) I also reminded them that we've done this before when I dragged them kicking and screaming onto the Internet. Now none of them could function without email. Soon, they will learn to use and accept social networking tools, as well.
In reply to Cynthia Alvarado

Re: Questions ~

by Tia Carr Williams -

Cynthia,

You have highlighted two issues that Ian and I discussed about the necessary paradigm shift. Moving from the orthodox linearity of teaching methodologies to incorporate a more flexible flow of engagement between educator and student in ways that the student is already acclimated with is the first.

Clearly educators have formal systemic models to impart and metricate the learning process. However, as someone who has been researching how to map the 'learning curve' to see how online engagement substantively demonstrates transferable skills through gaming, I think it behooves educators to come together and create a 'learning matrix' that charts 'before and after' evidence of learning when using the social media environments and deliverables.

The second is a requirement to explore. Ian has identified from his own experiences the requirement to relinquish certain 'tried and tested' formulae that used to provide relevant benchmarks to evaluate learning. Now, having experimented with a 'wiki' whereby he threw his students a challenge to deploy the space to collaborate and utilize the environment during a semester, I think he was delightfully surprised at the outcome. As with most things, when we invest confidence in young people, they invariably rise to the occasion.

As you are experiencing Cynthia, the willingness to adventure these 'brave new worlds' (with reasonable caveats) must come from faculty.

In reply to Tia Carr Williams

Proving learning

by Jim Wolff -
Tia

While not exactly providing evidence of learning, this fascinating up-to-date research study into Web 2.0 usage in the UK gives a clear statistical overview of the potential for Social Media in education.

The author David White of Oxford University, who was also referenced in the recent JISC report on E-Learning, identifies the volume and user-characteristics of popular web 2.0 functions. The report indicates predictably that for almost every internet Web 2.0 function (social bookmarking, content sharing, blogging, etc) the Under 18 age group has the highest percentage of users.

What is also interesting is that use of Wikis, Wikipedia, reading blogs and discussion forums is about the same in all age groups, even up to the 65-74 age bracket. It seems that some web 2.0 functions have caught on much quicker in the older age groups, perhaps due to their tendency towards 'serious' content.

There is also evidence of online games/spaces use, where games such as World of Warcraft and Half Life are predominantly favored by young people, whereas Second Life appears to have a much broader age appeal.

with so much positive evidence to suggest the potential for social media in education, hopefully faculties won't have to be too 'brave' to adventure these 'brave new worlds' ahead

Jim
In reply to Jim Wolff

Re: Proving learning

by Tia Carr Williams -

Jim,

Excellent reading. I thought we could all benefit from a read of this document regarding the 'cross over' that is anticipated between our inworld and real life:

http://www.metaverseroadmap.org/overview/

My holiday reading is SnowCrash to remind myself how the mind morphing insinuates itself into our observed and experienced reality...and it does have an educational component when we consider why we learn what we learn. To make us effective members of society and to explore reality but what about when that reality is merged with an augmented reality?

In reply to Tia Carr Williams

Re: Questions ~

by Ian MacLeod -
Good point Tia - in my case we had great success, and you are right it is up to faculty to make that first "leap" into the new social media world. Just be sure to take your learners along with you. In my experience many of them are not as "digital native" as we think they should be. In fact a very wise friend of mine tells me, and I agree with him, that the true digital natives are the generation currently in middle and high school - when they reach post-secondary education - look out!!
In reply to Deirdre Bonnycastle

Re: Questions ~

by Ian MacLeod -
I think you have made some great points - and I think that the use of social media tools have certainly levelled the technology playing field significatly - we are seeing users creating quite elaborate sites that a few years ago would have been the purview of Web site developers. Now with blogs, Facebook, and other tools just about anyone can have a comprehensive presence on the Web.

I'm like you - Web 2.0, social networking, and environments like Second Life (hondomac Dalgleish in world) have allowed me to develop relationships with people whom I would never have met otherwise.

Here's a question I get asked quite often - is it possible to be friends with someone who you have never met face to face? Do we need a new definition of what a friend is?


In reply to Ian MacLeod

Re: Questions ~

by Jeffrey Keefer -

Ian, your comment

I'm like you - Web 2.0, social networking, and environments like Second Life (hondomac Dalgleish in world) have allowed me to develop relationships with people whom I would never have met otherwise.

sparked an interest in me. While some of my professional colleagues would probably not believe me, I am somewhat reserved when it comes to meeting new people. This is not because I am not interested, but rather because I am very conscious of not appearing to want something ("He is only interested because he wants something . . .") for some selfish reason. Thus, the idea of approaching somebody or sending a friend request or the like to somebody I do not know is a very foreign concept to me.

How do you handle this? Are you naturally outgoing (I think of the marketing or consulting "mode"), or is there some other way you begin to engage people online who you do not know? While I am not a big Facebook or Twitter user, I know that when I get contacts from people I do not know, I normally decline them since I cannot fathom engaging in conversation without some form of introduction.

This is an issue I am struggling with regarding social media, so I figured it may fit here better than elsewhere. I suppose understanding this will help me with a facet of my teaching that I have thus far not been able to determine how best to approach.

In reply to Jeffrey Keefer

Re: Questions ~

by Deirdre Bonnycastle -
I really empathize with what you say because I am extremely reserved/shy by temperament, but am forced to be outgoing by vocation.blush I like social media because people gather for a common purpose that I am interested in (Second Life is more awkward). In these environments, everyone is here because they want something (to share knowledge, find contacts, get help with a project, commiserate with like minds), so your neediness is assumed by your presence.thoughtful
In reply to Deirdre Bonnycastle

Re: Questions ~

by Ian MacLeod -
I too consider myself an introvert and I've found that in environments like Second Life it is actually easier for me to engage in conversation with total strangers, but like in "First Life", I tend to meet people with common interests - in my case as an educator that is through the SLED mailing list and in world sessions like NMC's Teachers Buzz. I agree that the common purpose makes it much easier to meet and get to know people.

I have always found it interesting the number of introverts who gravitate to teaching and are extremely outgoing and engaging in their learning environments (myself included).

As for social networking I'm not sure if it is the level of anonymity that allows me to get over that initial discomfort of meeting new people, but once I do get to know people through social networking, they very quickly become just as real and personal as if I knew them in real life. I have never face to face with any of my fellow facilitators in this seminar yet we work together well. I think this is a phenomenon that will become more prevalent as our learning, teaching, and work patterns change and we all become more engaged in virtual and online learning environments...


In reply to Ian MacLeod

Re: Questions ~

by Cristina Costa -
Dear Ian,
what you say is SO true!

I am - or used to be - one of those introverts.
Most of my high school and University teachers might not even remember me. I was that students that sits quietly and listens to, digesting the information for myself. I wasn't the brave one. I liked to have time to think and then once you knew the time was up and I had no time to put my ideas across. Also maybe because Ia m a little bit shyer in face to face situations.
The online world has made me a better person I think. I am now able to give more of myself. I trust myself more as here (online) I am put on the constant test. The only way to prove that I am interested in these topics and that I have an opinion about it them is to share my opinions with you all.
Since most of the interactions online are asynchronous it gives me time to consider and ponder about what I want to say - it doesn't mean I will always come up with something smart! - but It means I have been able to develop ways to trust me enough to interact . It has has its reflections on my face to face behavior as well, as the online interactions have been really good practices.

The other thing that you also mentioned and that I totally agree with is the fact that I consider my virtual friends to be true friends. In many cases the interactions and interaction online become even stronger than many of the acquaintances I make only face to face. And I also think that is because online people trust themselves more to give more of themselves, and also because online people have more time to reflect about what they say and thus show the better side of them more often.
In reply to Cristina Costa

Re: Questions ~

by Jeffrey Keefer -

Christina, I know what you mean about needing time to process discussion topics and then reply. I think this phenomena is something different from the lurker phenomena (lurkers being another group of nameless, faceless students in a class), and I am now starting to wonder if there has been any research in this area. I find myself drawn to research in areas where I have a direct connection to the topic.

Tell me, as you mentioned you consider your virtual friends to be true friends, do you find yourself communicating with them outside of the initial point of contact? In other words, I do speak with a few SCoPE people outside SCoPE, but not too often in Facebook or Twitter. Vice-versa as well.

In reply to Ian MacLeod

Re: Questions ~

by Janet Salmons -

Ian, you make a valuable point. As anyone who has taken the Myers Briggs knows, some of us are introverts and some are extroverts. And some approach tasks with a "just do it" attitude while others say, "let me sleep on it." Online dialogue has the flexibility to work for either style.

To take it a step further, while online text-based dialogue lacks the visual cues, at the same time we take race, age, gender, attractiveness, accents etc. out of the equation. When we dialogue online we do not know who is participating via an assistive technology device, and who is sitting in a wheelchair. Whether we are aware of these characteristics or not, online we truly judge each other by the content of our characters, as demonstrated by the respect we show for all contributions of thoughts and ideas. Going back to earlier posts about trust and collaboration: the important thing is whether I can trust you to be honest with me, fair, and reliable.

Janet

In reply to Janet Salmons

Re: Questions ~

by Jeffrey Keefer -

Janet, that is a really good point you are making about assessing people based on what they say rather than on other factors.

Of course, with our networked world, when I see people participating online in discussions (such as we are doing here), I do find myself looking into their biographical information if I want to learn more. I look for whatever they say about themselves, and then Google them. If I cannot find much, I then get suspicious. If I do find things, then the initial anonymity will gradually disappear.

I recall having a conversation around the issue of online identity (and thus authenticity) -- if you do not have and own your online identity (from your website, jobs, education, blog, postings, etc.), then somebody else will eventually own it for you. This was not referring to identity theft, but rather somebody who has more of an online presence will get indexed faster if they state something critical about somebody than the person criticized if that person does not have enough of an identity to get noticed.

It seems this may have an effect with online education.

In reply to Janet Salmons

Re: Questions ~

by Ian MacLeod -
Really good points Janet - I find that as I spend more and more of my time online interacting with people (well I think they are people :-)) online I am focussing more on what they say than what they have to say than what or eho they are - it's like a lot of the "social static" is gone and their transmission is clearer.

This I think has implications or me as an educator as I move away from my traditional classroom roles to more of a blended and online universe - I will have learners who could potentially do most or all of a diploma programme (I'm an academic chair at Nova Scotia Community College in Halifax) online and all I will "know" about them is what they will write. Thing is in my mind at least, based on all of the time I spend online in places like SCoPE, Second Life, and other forums and lists is that is OK for me - as I said - in many ways find it easier to communicate online than face to face. Thing is I have to get faculty to that point - why I think this seminar is so important and timely as we move into a new paradigm of delivery - the future of education for me is blended and online - an environment that is collaborative, engaging, mobile, and open and meets learners literally where they are...
In reply to Jeffrey Keefer

Re: Questions ~

by Therese Weel -

How do you handle this? Are you naturally outgoing (I think of the marketing or consulting "mode"), or is there some other way you begin to engage people online who you do not know?

Jeffrey

This was new to me as well. I have been an "IT" person since the 80's. I started investigating the net with gusto in late 2003 I was amazed by the human element. The net itself is pretty simple - a website is simply a fancy file on a hard drive somewhere. Add human beings to the equation and it takes on a life of its own.

it is important to be authentic so that when you do skype or meet that person you maintain the trust you have built up in an online relationship. Many people meet their spouses online - having a text relationship can help them determine if they are compatible.

OCLC Report Oct 2007
Last month I had a look at this report on Sharing Privacy and Trust in Our Network World. It is the result of a formal study of online users in several countries. People are becoming more open to interacting with each other on line.

It is 180ish pages long but has lots of charts and diagrams - it gave me a feel for how people use the net these days.



In reply to Therese Weel

Re: Questions ~

by Janet Salmons -

Thanks for posting this report!

kissAlso, I am one of those people-- I met my husband online. We are very happy together!

In reply to Jeffrey Keefer

Re: Questions ~

by Tia Carr Williams -

I do understand the difficulty of shifting behaviour from a realworld reserved disposition to becoming a more open, receptive virtual one. However, the opportunity to be willing to welcome a new connection is, of course, a critical element of virtual world socialisation.

Every week I augment my network with new connections. People I wouldn't have met otherwise. Therefore, I have shifted my normative 'conditioned' social cues in order to capacitate what must be in order to build organically iterative hubs of interlaced nodes (people) who potentially may find value in me or one another. I also make several new introductions between people who I perceive will be able to do business between one another, and this over international boundaries. I have only yesterday introduced Truls, CEO of www.EctoLearning.com with Henry, CEO of www.Trudox.com and so it goes, week in and week out.  Its a new world online and a new way of engaging. I usually use some quite formal introduction language to allow each party to 'feel' as if they have been formally and properly introduced and this seems to help smooth the path.

Deprived of the normal visual cues, other than a static picture, we are often reluctant to form new alliances because we cannot build sufficient data to ascertain the 'raison d'etre' for this person in our world. Ive seen many people think that networking 'does itself' ...alas not the case. Someone must hold out a hand and another must grasp it. Not in all cases, but more often than not.

In reply to Ian MacLeod

Re: Questions ~

by Deirdre Bonnycastle -
Stephen Downes has an interesting video about the difference between groups and networks http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540
In reply to Deirdre Bonnycastle

Re: Questions ~

by Therese Weel -
Great link Dierdre

Kind of hard to follow - Steven Downes describing his white board scribblings in a noisy room. I like it because it is authentic. I've listened to it more carefully now prompted by your posting. I like networks much better!-
thanks-
In reply to Therese Weel

Re: Questions ~

by Deirdre Bonnycastle -
I've noticed that Stephen Downes isn't the best user of media but what he says always intriques me. His description is exactly why I prefer networks to groups as well.