Dubious notions
Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 08:10AM 
I've recently run across an abnormally high number of blog entries that I think ought to be thought twice about. Must be the summer heat cooking otherwise cool intellects.
1. In "The Birds Will Be Singing" Ryan Bretag asks "how I could possibly make my upcoming presentations deemed as lectures more interactive?... why not use Twitter?" and suggests setting up a special account to allow attendees to electronically converse throughout his lecture. Personally, I always appreciate groups that actually listen when I am speaking. Adding one more distraction to an already overwhelmingly distractive world sends small shudders up my spine. Sorry, Ryan. I am looking for a wi-fi blocker, not another means for people to engage in side conversations. It's an ego problem, I suppose.
2. "I do see that a lot of people are very stuck on the idea of having face-to-face meetings for things that could be better accomplished online just because that’s the way they’ve always done it or because they just aren’t comfortable with the new collaborative technologies." laments Meredith Farkas in her post "No more f2f meetings… EVER!" Actually the title is the idea I dislike. In the entry itself, Meredith gives a pretty balanced look at the the pros and cons of both f2f and online meetings. The dubious idea here seems to be the complete elimination of either format.
3. Sylvia Martinez does an outstanding job of articulating some of the big questions I've been having about Second Life in her post "Second Thoughts on Second Life." I loved her quote "Second Life is primarily a platform for adults to explore their sexual identity. Ignoring the overtly sexual nature of Second Life is like going to a strip club and then wondering why there are naked people there. The owners of Second Life, Linden Labs, have expressed their support for education, and have discussed their intent to provide more educationally appropriate worlds. However, this is a business model that has to work for them and it’s not going to be driven by education no matter the best of intentions." I've always had the same philosophy as Mrs.Campbell that it doesn't make any difference what you do in the bedroom as long as you don't do it in the street and frighten the horses. Second Life itself just plain creeps me out too much with its half-nekked vampires and programmable penises to ever see it as a viable educational venue. MUVEs, themselves, have brilliant possibilities.
4. Scott McLeod gives "technology advocates" the Vision Challenge Part 1 and Part 2, asking "Can we articulate in a few short sentences or paragraphs what the end result looks like?" and "...what if these visions aren’t compelling enough?" I will forgo the grumble about the label "technology advocate" (if I am to advocate it will be for something carbon-based, not silicon), and get to the heart of this: Who am I to be the one articulating a vision for education, the end result? To a very big degree, I am a servant of the state. I get my marching orders from the people of Minnesota via their elected officials. Is it my job to lobby for the goals of education or only to recommend in a professional capacity the means of best achieving the goals set out for me? Now as a parent and citizen, I have every obligation to lobby for how I think education ought to be conducted. The smell of hubris hangs heavily on too many edtech blogs...
5. Scott is right now and then (surprisingly often for a college professor). He writes "... I don't like them [Internet filters] because of the message they send to students: in an information economy, we don't trust you with information." Welcome aboard, Dr. McLeod, to the intellectual freedom train. I've been hammering on this one myself for a while...
- Internet Filters: Censorship by Any Other Name?, Emergency Librarian (Teacher Librarian), May 1998
- Maintaining Intellectual Freedom in a Filtered World, Leading & Learning, May 2005.
We need more technology advocates ;-) like you willing to speak out against the overuse of filters.
I hope everyone reads blogs with his/her most skeptical eye and is always alert for the dubious notion. Be especially suspicicious of any blog with Skunk in the title.
Rants 
Reader Comments (9)
While I agree that a decicated twitter account in a lecture could be too distracting, I'm not sure that banning Wi-fi is always useful. It could be that students are using their laptops to do related research - e.g. if you've used a term that they aren't familiar with; if they want to get the lecture notes from your webspace or whatever.
Afterall, when I was a student, no-one frisked me to make sure that I'd not got a newspaper/ novel on my person - that I'd only got Geography text books.
The main problem I've noticed when we have many students in the classrooms with laptops is that the sides are suddenly more popular than the back - as that's where the power sockets are!
Hi Emma,
I have to admit that I would be lost without my wi-fi connections during most presentations I attend. But I think I only get about 1/3 of what I would without the distraction of the laptop! (But I am NOT a good multi-tasker either.)
Doug
No problem Mr. Johnson :-) Opinions will always vary and I'm one that enjoys people making me rethink a thought pattern, so thank you!
As for your thoughts, I've never been keen on lecture though they have to be done in many situations. I guess it doesn't fit my hyperpaced personality or I just have to realize I don't lecture well (stopping pawning it off as I'm a constructivist and have a distaste for lecturing... hahahaha)
For me, this offers a chance for discourse that is already happening in sessions whether you like it or not. Whether a person is whispering to the person next to them or making chicken scratches over their notebook, there are audience members engaging in activities outside of just the lecture. That doesn't even begin to touch upon the Skype sessions, live blogging, and twittering that was happening all over and will more than likely grow at other sessions.
Maybe it is just me being a borderline Millenial and multitasking is just second nature. However, I wouldn't mind the instant feedback coming across the stage. I wouldn't mind Twitter Debates breaking out in sessions. Heck, if there was such a debate, why not open it up right then live?
In any case, nothing I'm sold on but something I'm willing to try. Who knows, it could "crash" hard ;-)
Ryan, who appreciates the challenge
I don't think we should give up our rights to advocate for change just because we're state employees. Yes, we have these rights as parents and citizens, but we also need not forego them as employees, even of the state. The age of the unquestioning 'organization man' is long, long gone (thankfully). I would argue that the state is better served by having its knowledgeable educational employees advocating for educational goals, not having them simply enacting what the state wants. When's the last time you saw inspired goals or visionary leadership from the state?
I will never work for an organization that doesn't want employee input about its goals and direction. That's organizational hubris and disempowering leadership and I want no part of it. I know many who feel the same: so does Richard Florida (Rise of the Creative Class). I'm not a servant following marching orders. I'm a talented, capable employee, not a mindless automaton, and my employer better recognize it or I'm gone.
[I know you didn't say all of this about my post. Sorry. Got a little rhetorical there! Thanks for the kind words too!]
Rant on, Mr. Skunk!
I tried to join in the skype for BLC (Carolyn Foote did her best to keep me connected) but found it difficult to follow all of the discussions and digressions. Probably an undiagnosed LD, but I can't focus on multiple conversations. Even the transcriptions are confusing. I can see how twittering or skyping could add depth and immediacy to workshops, conferences, etc. but I would be uncomfortable if participants were "talking" while I was presenting: I'd want them to consider my information before veering off into (undoubtedly interesting) parallel (or unrelated) discussions.
As for Second Life, I admit abject defeat. Maybe I haven't invested enough time in trying to maneuver through the site, but I have other things to do, other promises to keep. I've got to get a handle on this world, before I tesser into another one!
Hi Ryan,
Finally getting a moment to respond to some of these excellent comments on the blog. You never know what hits a nerve...
I like interactivity in my talks and plan for them. I had a speech coach once tell me you never let 15 minutes pass without a chance for participants to "act" in some way and I've tried to take that to heart. I guess I am more of a control freak and find the sub-conversations distracting (more as a participant than as a speaker.)
I remember seeing a study on what I think were called lateral learning lines or "pink" lines showing that participants learn more from each other than they do from presenter. I've been trying to find that work and if you have any ideas who might have done it, let me know!
Thanks for the conversation!
Doug
Hi Scott,
Here is my conundrum.
- Were I working as a road contractor, I would feel it is my job to make sure the road was built as strongly as possible, but not my job to say where the road goes. As a citizen I would lobby for good local roads, but not as a contractor.
- Were I were a general, I would do my best to win battles, but I would not be the one choosing the enemy. I would as a private citizen vote for the politicians who help choose the enemy.
- Were I were a physician, I would do my best to heal, but I would feel I should be running the hospital, helping set policy, but not running the place.
I am a strong advocate (yes, even within my district) for educational change, but what I also know is that it is my job to support board and state decisions unless I think they are demonstrably harmful to kids. I'm no fan of online summative assessments, but I would unprofessional not supporting those efforts in my school.
Lead from the middle when one can, but be a good follower as well, perhaps?
Good luck with your move to Iowa! Nice to know we'll be able to stay in touch virtually.
All the best and thanks for the comments - as always.
Doug
Hi Dianne,
The joys of "bleeding edge" technologies!
I like "controlled" discussions - in fact find them vital to good presentations, but the under current to me (as a participant) is only distracting.
And yes, I go on and off Second Life - mostly off lately. It seems to unstable and complex and adult for anything much than recreation at this point. Given the choice of sailing on a virtual ocean or sailing on my Minnesota lake, the summer the lake wins!
Thanks for writing and all the very best,
Doug
Doug,
Your post today on dubious notions reflected concerns I have had also--particularly with Twitter and Second Life. However, I hear what Ryan is saying about the lecture format and I think that is where we are losing kids. They are multi-tasking outside of the class (try tutoring a student in algebra in their home while they have their computer screen on with AIM, music, and email) and you'll see what I mean. I can't multi-task like that, but I am finding that if I"m in a presentation that isn't interactive and participatory, then I am anxious to find a way to make it so. Hence, my laptop is always with me, and I'm generally taking notes as I listen along...