Two Clarifying (hopefully) Assumptions
I’ve read through the debate going on at the Economist web site between Ewan McIntosh and Michael Bugeja, about social networking and education. I have not had time, however, to read the entire conversation that is expanding around it.
I got pulled back into the conversation yesterday afternoon, when I took a few minutes away from my computer to scan my aggregator through my phone — and discovered Will Richardson’s reflections on Danah Boyd’s post about the debate. So many thoughts, ideas, reactions, and confusions filled my head that I could hardly contain myself (not a pretty sight). But, I got distracted by tasks and a virtual consulting appointment and had to cool down.
In the long run, it’s a good thing that I didn’t just spill out immediately, because after having slept on it (well, not really that much sleep), my reaction has congealed into two main items, and they both come from the notion that we are holding this debate in some pretty foggy space. This entire topic is so new that I suspect it has not yet fully formed.
So I’d like to suggest two assumptions that my thinking is based on. They seem obvious to me, but I may be missing something. It’s why I’m putting this out there for you to read — so that I can learn…
- There is a difference (right now) between social networks (or social network sites), and social networking. In my mind, a social network is a single site with features that facilitate social experiences. Social networking, on the other hand, is what is done in social networks, but can also be done with smaller and personally combined tools, such as blogs, wikis, podcasting, aggregators, twitter, etc. Neither (at this time) fully encompasses the other.
- Facebook is an example of a social network site. They are not synonymous. What frustrates me about Facebook, MySpace, and LinkedIn, is that their feature sets are way to limiting. I think that a social network has enormous potential, especially to education. But not in its current form. I’m afraid that if we are limiting our notions of social networks to what’s already been developed in FB, MS, and even Ning, and dismiss them as a result, then we may just miss a wonderful opportunity.
A few weeks ago, I wrote an unrelated blog post (Is Pedagogy Getting in the Way of Learning?), which included some ideas about social networks. In it I suggested that there may be some sort of merger between the functionality of social networks, course management systems (virtual learning environments), and eportfolio products. I could envision a social network site (SNS) where a portfolio can be casually built by users and mined for artifacts of learning, and where a teacher (learning leader) can maintain the site, to some degree, so that curriculum can be applied, where standards (what ever they evolve into) can be learned through appropriate pedagogy (what ever that evolves into).
In review:
1. Social networks and social networking are two topics.
2. Social networks are still evolving.
2¢ Worth
The Two Clarifying (hopefully) Assumptions by 2¢ Worth, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Dave,
I see SNS trying to move toward learning spaces (and no doubt, you can learn a lot in there already), but for some reason, right now I’m pretty wedded to the idea that there is more power in rolling your own, so to speak, by connecting the social (as danah defines it) and the social learning (which I think is what I’m more engaged in) in the context of our own “loosely joined” spaces. And the other point, as danah acknowledges in her comments, is that SNSs are being used differently as we get older, that the exclusively social use of SNS occurs in adolescents.
I may change my thinking at some point, but for right now, it feels like there is more potential for my own kids’ learning outside of the pre-packaged, highly branded sites that I’m sure will play an important part in their social connections.
Reply to Will RichardsonI tend to agree with Will’s hesitations about using a social network site. Yet, I can envision a tool that, like Moodle, can be shaped by a teacher and/or by learners, to facilitate learning tasks and generate portfolios of achievement.
My caution about more loosely joined spaces, which is what I vastly prefer right now, is that it requires more knowledge and practice on the part of the user — teacher or learner. I’m looking for a shorter route. It doesn’t exist yet! But It’s worth talking about.
Thanks, Will, for the honor!
Reply to DaveDavid,
I think there is a delineation here between some different tools. As you have been pointing out, each of these sites has it’s own niche market. Sure our kids are using facebook for creating social networks…and they are social. This isn’t the tool I want to use for classroom collaboration, because I would want my classroom to be more than social. It probably doesn’t interest my kids much either, because who wants to mix their playground with work.
What I think we need is a tool that allows students and teachers to work collaboratively in a sandbox that gives them the tools they need to work in a traditional learning setting or in one that is more progressive.
What we need more than good social networking or collaborative tools - we need good curriculum that would benefit from these tools. We need good teachers that know how to use these tools and are willing to learn how to use them better along with their students. Good tools makes all of this easier.
I feel that there hasn’t been a product made yet that has all of the tools built into an environment that easily supports a collaborative learning environment. Those that do exist that try to do this (Moodle,Blackboard, of a mix of a variety of online tools) have a steep learning curve, are cumbersome, or are blocked by school webfilters. On top of all of this teachers that are using these resources don’t have a large enough collection of good vetted lessons or activities that use collaborative tools.
I believe that we will eventually reach a critical mass where the right combination of hardware, network, software, curriculum, and teacher ability come together and use social networking tools to impact learning. I feel that time is not now. Now is the time to build and prepare for that time - unfortunately in the meantime we are leaving kids unprepared for the changing world - but isn’t that the tradition of schooling?
Hank
(I also copied this comment to my blog - thanks for the thoughts!)
Reply to Hank ThieleAgreed on #1 and #2. As for the terminology, I think it’s useful to distinguish between the social network itself (the people and the connections) and a site on which people interact with subsets of their networks (a social network/networking site, a la Facebook). This helps emphasize that even those who don’t have access — or prefer not to use the existing crop of sites — are part of social networks.
It could be that the battle’s already lost, at least when speaking colloquially. Still, I think it’s an important distinction, and one worth finding a way to emphasize.
Reply to jon