"Dad, what's your 3rd favourite colour?" 

My youngest daughter is known for asking these types of questions. She has actually asked that one but usually the questions are more about a favourite part of a movie, what's your favourite vacation spot, etc. That's pretty typical for kids and even adults. We love to order and rank things. [...]]]> "Dad, what's your 3rd favourite colour?" 

My youngest daughter is known for asking these types of questions. She has actually asked that one but usually the questions are more about a favourite part of a movie, what's your favourite vacation spot, etc. That's pretty typical for kids and even adults. We love to order and rank things. I have many favourites. But when does it go too far? Are these lists of favourites personal or is their value in crowd sourcing our favourites?

I think there is a place for ranking. But not for everything. 

Trip Advisor is a great example of crowd sourcing and rating. It may not be definitive but provides a useful beginning in making a financial investment. Digg and Youtube are fine examples of places that use rating systems to determine popularity but not necessarily quality. That can be useful but not definitive. 

It starts to bother me however when we feel compelled to create list of greatness when it comes to people who, because of their generosity have chosen to use their cognitive surplus to share online. These folks, and I'm mostly speaking about educators, have joined a revolution of sharing and connecting and have worked together, mostly for free, to learn together. That's pretty darn cool. Deciding to rank and rate them is a little like having a potluck dinner and then having a vote at the end as to who made the best meal. What would be the point other than to single out a few and let others feel less than worthy. 

I love the social nature of the web. Anyone who knows me gets that. I also like recognition. I like to contribute and like to know I'm helping folks. I get that recognition from trackbacks, comments, Retweets, mentions, links and thank yous. I know how important they are to me and try to respond in kind, partly because it's natural and partly because it's the right thing to do and partly because it's how all this will continue to work.

I've been on a few lists of best blogs or whatever. I'll admit, it's flattering but I can't tell you how many times these lists are derived by a single person and looking deeper at the lists, many blogs appear that are inactive or are just plain bad. They always leave out many that should be included and in the end do little than cause controversy. I haven't linked to one of those lists in years. I appreciate a thoughtful comment much more than making a list. 

I do think that those who create the lists or awards mean well. I'm sure they either want to raise the profile of others or give recognition to those that have influenced or supported their learning. That's cool. But I think we've now reached a new way of filtering content.  Dave Weinberger talks about the power of folksnomy, tagging and personalized sorting. This is what makes the web great. Yet, our natural instinct is to rate and order and better yet,get others to agree with our rankings. I'd love great work to be promoted and shared more  but I'd like to see that done by using the tools of democracy that the web offers. Retweet like crazy, leave a comment, tell somebody but leave the rankings alone. 

We live in a metric obsessed world. Moreover, our education system is based on the ranking and ordering of students. Who's the top of the class? Who had the highest mark? Anyone involved in education know how silly that is and how it often fails to recognize many students who deserve recognition. We know our measuring tools are flawed and that at the end of the day we want our students to learn because learning is life and rankings aren't all that important. In the same way that ranking damages and can discourage those who don't get noticed, I worry we do the same for those who are just beginning to discover the power and value of sharing online. I can't imagine any teacher who introduced their students to blogging and sharing online start to have students rate and rank each other. It's hard enough to be transparent and open with your learning. To start to sort out the best from the worst borders on offensive if not unethical. If it's wrong to do with students, why would we do it with each other?  I'd hope that as educators we could model sharing, celebrating and learning that doesn't have to classified as "best", because best implies there's worst.  

This has largely been a think aloud post. I'm up for questions, clarifications or disagreements.

Search is highly overrated.

I have a serious problem. As I build presentations I get a clear vision of an idea or concept I want to discuss and I immediately want to visualize it. For better or worse, I gain and make meaning with visuals. To that end I’ve continued to create slides that I reuse and [...]]]> Search is highly overrated.

I have a serious problem. As I build presentations I get a clear vision of an idea or concept I want to discuss and I immediately want to visualize it. For better or worse, I gain and make meaning with visuals. To that end I’ve continued to create slides that I reuse and share with others. Fortunately others have shared my passion and created a nice set that others are free to use.

Today’s vision was around filtering. Not that kind of filtering but the kind I’ve discussed here. On more than one occasion, I’ve quoted Clay Shirky’s quote about filter failure. It has been begging to be visualized, at least for me. So I head over to flickr and realize that my vision lacked easily searchable terms. I had envisioned a larger quantity of some item with one item standing out. I tried several search terms and phrases but didn’t find what I wanted.

I turned to twitter.

After this initial request:

Over the next 30 minutes I recieved 20 various image suggestions and 4 other ideas of how to create one. Here they are:

@robletcher offered these two:

http://bit.ly/80zrS?r=td

http://bit.ly/cWAUc

@triareanews suggested these three:

http://images.inmagine.com/img/imagesource/ie236/ie236003.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3533/3931819587_48fdec1fd9.jpg

http://artforprofits.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/stand-out.jpg

Here’s four from @tuchodi

http://www.flickr.com/photos/15202064@N03/2435295029/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hollyclark/450509297/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/unlearn_art/3143041781/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkay/3924381425/

@bookminder responded to my "needle in the haystack" concept

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/140/335350003_9ca033ba68_m.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanorwood/1046416640/

I nearly went with this one from @dlsio4 who apparently thought of something he had and took the picture on the spot

http://img96.yfrog.com/i/dyu.jpg/

@njtechteacher offered to take a photo of a pile of legos but did suggest this one

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pagedooley/1804080776/

In the end, Sean Nash gave me six to choose from:

It was that last one that I chose. I could have picked any of the ones offered me and I’m sure you might have chosen differently. The point is that sometimes search doesn’t get it done. Google only goes so far. I needed people to help me sort out my ideas and provide inspiration to reach a satisfying conclusion. I feel badly for folks who don’t have this resource.

Oh by the way, here’s the final product.

cc licensed flickr photo shared by Will Lion

As this article states, the problem of attention isn’t particularly new but it certainly is becoming more and more an issue. I remember teachers back in the 1980′s lamenting that they felt they were competing with the MTV generation. MTV seems pretty tame and managable compared to what we are [...]]]>
cc licensed flickr photo shared by Will Lion

As this article states, the problem of attention isn’t particularly new but it certainly is becoming more and more an issue. I remember teachers back in the 1980′s lamenting that they felt they were competing with the MTV generation. MTV seems pretty tame and managable compared to what we are dealing with today.

There aren’t too many days that go by that someone doesn’t ask me about "keeping up". I certainly don’t claim to have all the answers.  Even highly connected and media savvy folks struggle. I struggle with it too, but I have developed a few beliefs, principles that have been helpful to me. I’ll avoid the "top 5" or "best ways to" kind of approach and simply share a few things I think can be helpful in a day of attention deficits.

Filters

As an avid reader of Clay Shirky, the most important lesson I’ve learned from him is about filter failure. As he so eloquently states, it’s not information overload it’s filter failure. We’ve always lived with an abundance of information. Our libraries were filled with books we never read, movies we never saw and conversations we never had. Today, it’s mostly access that makes us feel like it’s too much. In that past we just weren’t as bombarded with information. It took work to go to the library. We had to physically go to see people. Today we carry around our friends and the bulk of human knowledge in our pockets.

While search engines are getting better and better at filtering information, I prefer human powered search. Three places where that happens for me are:

• Delicious I’ve got 29 people whose daily readings come directly to me. I could have 100 people, I could have 5. I can change these 29 people but the point is most of what they find is of interest to me. They are weeding out the junk to give me what they think is noteworthy.
• Google Reader While I subscribe to over 300 sites but the shared portion of Google Reader is the one place I’ll check everyday. 55 people who share the best of what they find in their reading is pretty much all I need.
• Twitter A bit more random but yet potentially very valuable, usually I find great stuff in the conversations. Great links usually get retweeted. If you just check RTs you won’t miss much

Simply the Complex

Information and technology can seem very complex but in the end, it’s important to distill and synthesize. This is why the Common Craft videos are so popular. The LeFevers have taken the time to take some pretty complex technologies and make them simple. One of the ways I attempt to synthesize is to blog. Writing often helps me figure out what is really important. When educators reject using technology in the classroom it’s often because they think it’s too complicated. What they fail to do is determine for themselves what the key ideas are. Digital Storytelling is a great example. There are upteen dozen ways to tell stories but in the end, it’s always about good storytelling. We can spend lots of time examining the intracacies of using media but without a good story, it doesn’t matter. That’s not to say that simple means easy, it just means it doesn’t have to be that hard to understand. Once you have a clear understanding of a topic, you can more easily sift through irrelevant material and noise.

The Hedgehog Principle

Jim Collin’s book Good to Great talks about success among business who deploy the hedgehog principle. In a nutshell it’s the idea of finding your niche or what your focus is and sticking with it. Other companies, in his examples, often get distracted and sidetracked working on things that aren’t part of the core of the company. Instead, he says, find out what you’re good at and stick with it. Now you can argue this idea to some extent but in today’s world, we have to set limits on ourselves. So at some point you have to decide what where you want to develop your expertise and focus your attention. When the latest and greatest tool or resource comes your way, you need to be prepared to pass on it from time to time.  I tend to rely on others to become experts for me. Simply knowing that someone else can be a resource, relieves me from having to know all there is to know. I never would have anyways but limiting the discussions and ideas that I pursue is of great value.

Another resource that I think about a lot when it comes to dealing with choices and focusing on a few things is the great TED talk by Barry Schwartz called The Paradox of Choice. This video has been very important for me in understanding the greatest of our time as well as the challenges. If you haven’t seen it, watch it, or maybe even watch it again. After watching it again, I’m adding another principle that feeds off of this one.

Sometimes Good Enough, is Good Enough

Dave Weinberger talks a lot sometimes settling for "good enough’. That notion rubs many people the wrong way, in particular educators. Most teachers spend hours telling their students to always do their best and while this is certainly a valid trait we want to instill, at times, we have to settle for good enough. When it comes to information, this is very true. When you get 3 million search results, sometimes you settle. Wikipedia is often good enough. It’s not perfect but most of the work we do and understanding we are needing doesn’t have to be. Again, this isn’t always the case but learning how and when to accept good enough is a badly needed skill. I find this particularly true when I’m searching for an image on flickr. With over 3 billion photos finding an image that depicts an idea isn’t usually that hard, finding the perfect one is. Even the image I’m using on this post could be better, but it’s good enough.

Snacking versus Eating

For me, this is most challenging. I could spend a great deal of time snacking on twitter. While there are many quality ideas, resources and conversations shared, it’s still a snack. I hadn’t thought about it in terms of time and money but this quote from the Globe and Mail article explains it:

The cost of one’s time (approximated, for example, by the average wage) relative to the cost of data manipulation, transmission and storage has increased roughly 10-million-fold in just over two generations – a change in relative “prices” utterly without precedent. This, above all, is what is driving the evolution of online behaviour and culture, with profound implications for the production and consumption of knowledge. The primary consequence is the growing emphasis on speed at the expense of depth.

I like speed and like quick but I have to discipline myself to dig deep. I need to be able to move from a 140 character blurb, to a link-filled blog post, to an essay to a book. It’s not easy but like trying to eat well, I know what’s good for me.  I like a bag of chips as much as the next guy but as a steady diet, you need to peel the potatoes and cook them (even better if you can grow them yourself). Sure it takes more time but it’s way better for you in the long run.

No question that how we manage information and how we teach students to manage it will be a huge part of our lives. It is already. I refuse to engage in conversations about "the good old days" in which we usually look back and attribute fonder and more positive memories about the past that we grew up in. It doesn’t really matter anyway. It’s never going to be like that. If, however, you want to discuss timeless values and characteristics that may be forgotten at times, that’s worth my time. I hope these are some timeless principles that I can get better at implementing.

Smarter people than I have written about this article by Clay Shirky but this quote hit me like a ton of bricks. This clearly points to the need and urgency to rethink many things we’ve [...]]]> Smarter people than I have written about this article by Clay Shirky but this quote hit me like a ton of bricks. This clearly points to the need and urgency to rethink many things we’ve always understood.

Growing up, my parents had a very active social life. A huge part of this involved the “pop-in”.  This  was the spur of the moment visit to friends with simply a quick phone call to say, “we’ll be over in 15 minutes, put the coffee on”, or sometimes just showing up at someone’s house. This worked [...]]]> Growing up, my parents had a very active social life. A huge part of this involved the “pop-in”.  This  was the spur of the moment visit to friends with simply a quick phone call to say, “we’ll be over in 15 minutes, put the coffee on”, or sometimes just showing up at someone’s house. This worked both ways. I clearly remember sitting quietly, watching television and the doorbell would ring and friends would come over to play cards, have a game of pool or just visit. Mom would dig through cupboards to find something to eat and sometimes all they had was coffee. My memory may not be accurate but this seemed to happen weekly.

Today, we had about 10 friends over for a little pre-birthday party. My wife called people about 3-4 days ahead of time, spent a good part of Saturday and most of Sunday baking, cleaning and getting ready for our guests. We ate well and had a lot of fun. We likely have these types of events more than most people I know but even at that, we don’t do it weekly.

In praise of the pop-in

The pop is a lost art for most of us today.  Socializing for most of us is pretty structured and planned. We check our calendars and plan a meeting, gathering or event weeks, even months in advance. When we get together and have a great time, we say, “we should do this more often”.  That rarely happens.  Our culture has changed. Bowling Alone is a book by Robert Putnam.

Putnam draws on evidence including nearly 500,000 interviews over the last quarter century to show that we sign fewer petitions, belong to fewer organizations that meet, know our neighbors less, meet with friends less frequently, and even socialize with our families less often.

You can think of many reasons why this is but certainly most of us can nod our head in agreement. The “pop-in” existed because the value of socializing superseded the  busyness and frantic lifestyles that has evolved over the past few years. We’ve devalued socialization and traded it for privacy, achievement and money. We’ve lost a great deal of social capital. This social capital served to strengthen relationships. The line we’ve tried to pawn off to ourselves is that it’s about quality, not quantity. I wouldn’t say that’s a load of crap, but it’s not totally truthful.

It’s not about the media, it’s about the social

I apologize because I can’t remember where I read this (probably on twitter, if you read this and said, please let me know) but this is a big deal. It’s not about the media, but the social. We crave to be social.

Twitter is the ultimate pop-in. You can easily jump in when you have a few minutes. Enter a deep conversation, share a piece of trivia, announce an accomplishment or just say hello.  Don’t over think it. If you do, you’ll drive yourself batty.  Socialization is good, it’s right, it’s human. It’s more about quantity than quality.

I recognize many would cite other behaviours and concerns with time spent online but this is the real reason Facebook, Twitter, et al is gaining so much attention and use. While the pundits might argue that folks should be making more face time, for the most part it’s extremely difficult. This media is the natural evolution of society and helps to solve a huge void in people’s lives.

The real reason of course that we use these mediums, is to be together in person. The value of these tiny bite sized interactions is that it strengthens the bond of our relationships and allows our face time to be much more meaningful.

Can schools learn from the pop-in?

I’m going to suggest that the pop-in for our schools is found in serendipity. Serendipitous learning is desperately needed in our schools. Not that we abandon curriculum or structure, that’s good too. But when classrooms cannot make changes on the fly or take advantage of learning opportunities, we cheat our kids.  With classrooms that use media like ustream, skype or even twitter, they afford their students the chance for informal learning to take place. Their classrooms don’t revolve around these tools but the possibility of learning something unexpected exists. I remember teaching 3rd grade and having the teacher and students next door routinely pop in to share something interesting or something they learned. I kept my door open most of the day. Learning was natural and social.

Learning isn’t always sequential or linear. Sometimes we need an injection of serendipity to spark interest and make connections to other curriculum.  When something out of the ordinary happens, we should have the capacity to respond in some way.  When unexpected company arrived, we didn’t panic, we welcomed them in and enjoyed the conversation. No preparation necessary.

With the advancement of distance education, we may soon see a book called, “Learning Alone”.  I don’t want that. However there is an efficiency involved in online learning that is hard to resist or deny. I’ve never want us to move in that direction which is why I ask teachers, what are you doing in your classrooms that will make your students want to come to school?  Social learning may well prove to be the glue that keeps our schools viable.  The pop-in style of social media might be important to maintain and build relationships.

I don’t know if you can take my analogy too far but  my observation as my wife cleaned the house (I helped too but she did the bulk) was that the conversation or fun wasn’t directly related to the cleanliness of our house or the quality of the food. Don’t get me wrong, we had a wonderful evening and the food certainly added to the fun but it wasn’t required, just something nice to do for friends. But I’d be willing to trade this planned gathering for more informal visits with my friends.

I recognize this may not be the most coherent piece of writing but as these ideas rolled around in my brain, I felt I needed to get it out.

Not that this is the definitive reason for the web but certainly the potential for collective action for good needs to be emphasized and highlighted as teachers and schools work with students to move beyond the “looking up stuff” mentality.

Tom’s shoes (thanks to a tweet by Terry Storch) is a great example of corporations willing to [...]]]> Not that this is the definitive reason for the web but certainly the potential for collective action for good needs to be emphasized and highlighted as teachers and schools work with students to move beyond the “looking up stuff” mentality.

Tom’s shoes (thanks to a tweet by Terry Storch) is a great example of corporations willing to do things differently.

tomshoes, terrystorch, carrotmob, kiva, xo, clayshirky

“When I was your age, I didn’t spend hours on the internet or have social networks, we watched a lot of crappy TV and memorized the periodic table and we loved it!”

It seems a bit early but we already have a plethora naysayers of new media. It’s always good to have critical voices in our lives [...]]]> “When I was your age, I didn’t spend hours on the internet or have social networks, we watched a lot of crappy TV and memorized the periodic table and we loved it!”

It seems a bit early but we already have a plethora naysayers of new media. It’s always good to have critical voices in our lives to question thought and behaviour. (those of you who are married should be quite familiar with this concept) It’s good, it really is. But I can’t help but wonder if some of what I’ve read lately about the demise of our culture because of the participatory and social nature of the digital world is not only a bit on the cantankerous side but almost self-righteous.

Within my network there seems to be a  “whac-a-mole” reaction to anyone who gets the least bit excited about a new tool or device.  I’m getting a sense that some are jumping the gun a bit early.

Today I read this article thanks to Mr. Jakes and his delicious feed. The article quotes a number of folks who worry about the decline of our culture to focus and be diligent. As I read the article I could hear my son who for 3 hours was playing WOW with his friends online (real, friends who live in the same city). Not exactly a high level academic pursuit I know but one of the arguments of late is that kids can’t focus.  When I look back at my childhood, I certainly wasn’t sitting around reading Tolstoy. I’m not sure there’s solid research to back these claims.

I think about the book by Steven Berlin Johnson, Everything Bad is Good for You. Maybe he needs to do some research and write a second edition in order to combat the more recent naysayers. I’m not saying there aren’t any ill effects of new media, instant access and social networks. We need to be aware of how machines and media may be manipulating us and begin to take control. My fear is that these types of perspectives aren’t necessarily research based but observational.

I do admire when folks I trust begin to reflect honestly and openly about their digital life. I pay attention because they’ve proven to be trusted sources. Thinking out loud is good sometimes. They aren’t complaining, but simply trying to sort things out on a personal level. I think ultimately that’s the proper response.  The tone of some of the article is lopsidedly pessimistic and seems to miss a historical and evolutionary perspective.  That’s why I like Shirky. He deals with the printing press and then more recently made an interesting tie to gin and sitcoms as examples of what happens when there is cognitive surplus. This is not to say that all change is for the good or that the internet and social media has not caveats or downsides. But I’m simply bothered by a desire to categorize anything as making us stupid. Does it not always come down to usage? We could make the same arguments against alcohol, video games and television they all have destructive qualities but needn’t necessarily be categorized as bad. Instead we seek balance, and determine how to make the most of these resources.

Still, the early sense of nostalgia for “the good old days” seems a bit contrite. I hear parents talking about the good old days of school when kids sat in straight rows and never questioned their teachers. Is there some things from those days that are appealing? Absolutely but I’d never want to go back.  As much as educational reformists would suggest we need big changes, I still say we’re moving in the right direciton in most cases. Still miles to go but to say we’ve digressed is wrong. Again, there is a great deal of generalizations with these statements and can always point to examples that would dispute any claims but my generalizaiton is that today’s world has the potential for more good than harm.

I’ve been writing this post over about 3 days and just now read George Seimens post on it and he does a nice job of synthesizing in about half the space what I really was thinking:

It is rather obvious that information abundance and multitasking are contributing to our collective anxiety. We start jonesing after only a few minutes of broken contact with email, mobile phone, or internet (ok, you might not, but I do). Weak, often shallow social, connections don’t result in deep understanding. At least not in themselves. I’m not satisfied, however, with the tone of this article. What is the solution? Stop the information flow? No new software? Hardware? Um, ok, that won’t happen. The road we are on does not yet suggest suitable off ramps. The primary options left are about adapting ourselves or our tools. Realistically, do people expect that the solution to the problem is as simple as focusing more and becoming less distracted? It’s a good article of complaint. And it’s easy to complain. Suggesting solutions and future directions is where the hard thinking occurs.

So if George was not satisfied with the article, that makes me feel a lot better.

Flickr image: grizzled_old_man_large by Derrty Mario
http://flickr.com/photos/derrytmario/1620013533/

I’m not much of an environmentalist although I recycle a bit and am trying to be more aware but this video raises many interesting questions and ideas. Carrotmob Makes It Rain from carrotmob on Vimeo.

Carrotmob takes Tuangou (group buying for discounts) to a more altruistic level.

Very Shirykesque wouldn’t you say? I recall Shirky stating (sorry I [...]]]> I’m not much of an environmentalist although I recycle a bit and am trying to be more aware but this video raises many interesting questions and ideas.

Carrotmob Makes It Rain from carrotmob on Vimeo.

Carrotmob takes Tuangou (group buying for discounts) to a more altruistic level.

Very Shirykesque wouldn’t you say? I recall Shirky stating (sorry I can’t find the page number) that although group organization is now ridiculously easy, that most organizations were reactive rather than proactive. This is the type of thing that illustrates the ability to be proactive. The democratization of economics is one idea that I hadn’t really considered. The monopolization of companies in reality or practice doesn’t need to exist.

I’m looking forward to seeing passionate, connected teachers leading students in group formation that changes our world.

As I exited the NECC conference by exploding a cherry coke all over the Blogger Cafe, I knew I would have to take some time to provide a brain dump of the experience. I know that many discussions will continue to force me to reflect deeply over time. Hanging around with that many smart, passionate folks [...]]]> As I exited the NECC conference by exploding a cherry coke all over the Blogger Cafe, I knew I would have to take some time to provide a brain dump of the experience. I know that many discussions will continue to force me to reflect deeply over time. Hanging around with that many smart, passionate folks will do that you. So here for you is my reflections on the people and the ideas.

The People:

Of course the danger here in singling out people is the fear of leaving someone out so I’ll just begin but apologizing right off. These are just a few thoughts about people that I managed to spend a varying amount of time with. Some quite and others just a brief conversation.

Bud Hunt. I spent quite a bit of time with Bud. He’s one of my longest online connections and there’s a reason for that. He makes me think. Bud has a way of framing ideas and throwing curveballs that have just enough spin on them that you better pay attention. There’s only one complaint I have. He needs to publish more.

Scott Floyd and the Texans. While I was vaguely familiar with Scott, I didn’t really know all that much about his work and thinking. He’s smart and extremely politically savvy. He helped me understand much more deeply about the issues facing US schools and in particular why we need to be watching companies like Pearson like a hawk. I consider Scott one of my great discoveries from NECC. In addition to Scott, Paul Wood, Mike Gras, John Maklary and Brian Grenier put on an amazing BBQ and made me and others feel incredibly at home. So much so I almost was going to stay here for 11 more months. Paul went out of his way to pick me and and drive me to their hotel where I was whisked into a live netcast and stayed to have some great talks. Texas hospitality is alive and well.

Ewan Mcintosh. Ewan’s international perspective (I actually was considered international…but don’t have a buttery Scottish accent so I barely count) and fresh look at education always provides me with enough fodder for about a year. I just barely have gotten over talks from a year ago. This time I only have 6 weeks.

Jeff Utecht. He is batman. He’s everywhere. Even on the plane ride home I grab a magazine and who’s face is staring back at me? I actually had to crop him out of the Texas boys photos. He’s unstoppable. His energy and passion are electric. He just does stuff. I’m sure he’ll be in Bangkok before the technicians can return all his hacks and tweaks back to normal. Although if my idea takes root, he may still get away with more.

Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach. She couldn’t be any nicer. I know she’s also brilliant and a tremendous facilitator but she’s all about people and helping others connect. What a treat to have a meeting on the river walk with Wes Fryer and Darren Kuropatwa. That was truly a highlight.

Konrad Glogowski. I’ve been reading Konrad for a while and although he lives 2,500km away from me, I can’t help by feeling pride that he is also Canadian and really exemplifies so much of what good teaching is all about. We had a great chat Saturday night about his upcoming travels and work in Africa with Sharon Peters. I’m sure it will lead to more highly reflective and challenging writing.

Craig Nansen. Craig lives about 4 hours from me in North Dakota. He was kind enough to invite me out with some other Distinguished Apple Educators for a lively discussion. Nice to know he and Chris Webb are just down the road.

Old friends. Will Richardson, David Jakes and Chris Lehmann continue to provide me with a solid pedagogical leadership. I rely on these gentlemen more often than most. It just so happens we have a lot of fun together too.

The blogger cafe was an ongoing series of “Hi-how-are-you-good-to-see-yous” and time was often the enemy of moving beyond that. I wanted to especially thank Lisa, Maria, Brian,Vicki and Julie who contributed in mentoring students and teachers. These folks do a great deal for me.

More acknowledgments and thoughts as my twittified brain goes into full gear about the week that was. Here we go.

Mark Wagner kick started my brain with a frank question…Laura Deisley will be a new and trusted friend…Brian Smith is older than he looks apparently…Wendy Smith is married to Brian Smith…Lisa Thumann sometimes shuts down like me….Did you Know Karl Fisch is very quiet but did throw out a great one liner (see what did there?)…Gary Stager never stops and is highly entertaining…Everybody loves Clarence….Having NECC in your hometown has its disadvantages…Doug Johnson is a funny guy….I think I’m stealing this paragraph style from Scott McLeod…Kyle Stevens isn’t sure if Chris is Christ…..Diane McCordell is short….Kurt Paccio is not…Lee Kolbert likes Plurk…Marcie Hull wants people to be afraid of her, but I’m not…Mark Pennington needs to post more photos….I saw the Tech Chicks but didn’t see them together…Was Al Upton sick or is his voice that raspy?….Stephanie Sandifer lied to me…I owe Jennifer Kraft $4….I’ll never remember everyone I met….Wes Fryer is also batman….I’ll never mention boiled ribs again…Barbara Barreda will stop at nothing to help kids….the riverwalk is awesome……John Pederson, Darren Kuropatwa and Christian Long shouldn’t be allowed to stay home…I wonder if I overuse the dot,dot,dot?…Ken Pruitt leads a nice session….Christian wins as best blogger not be be present at NECC….you can’t use a loonie to buy coffee in the States….flying first class isn’t that great…I used the phrase, “throw under the bus’ too often…I bet the Aussies would have been fun to hang with…Wagner broke more iphones than my dog chews electronics….I saw Jeff Boulton, who I work with once randomly Friday night and never saw him at the conference…Do you have any idea how long it takes to link to all these people?…Chris Lehmann started say y’all quite a bit…David Jakes likes Bill Lamineer….Will Dan Meyer attend NECC or any conference that has the word technology in it?….Joyce Valenza was surprised when I told her I read her blog. I didn’t know why…Wireless at conventions suck unless you have your own or know Mark Wagner or Scott Floyd…I saw Will Richardson demo Geopedia 17 times…. people are nicer than I imagined.

The Ideas

Now that the NECC love fest is over. (I know I was guilty of the discussing the edublogoshpere’s favourite subject, themselves) here’s where I go from here. These are four ideas, that while not new, I think I understand better now and hopefully can articulate. There were certainly seeds of other ideas that will grow but these ones I just feel better about.

1. Online communities exist for people to be together face to face. Being online is about being face to face. Shirky talks about the the ideas expressed in Bowling Alone. The idea of a society that has lost much of what it means to develop community and opportunity to be together. As many argue against the value of online communities and question there importance, it usually points us to being together. Having fun, working, building, playing, you name it.

We gather together because we like to, and because it is useful.[pp.195]…Meetup groups for virtual contacts shows that even online communication that emulates face-to-face interaction still leaves people wanting real human contact. [pp.199]

Even as we discussed the book and tried to see the connections to learning, it was evident that we wanted to be in the same room. The energy, the passion, the body language all make for a much richer experience. I would dare say many of the folks in my community have used the most current technologies that facilitate online discussion and I can’t imagine any of those tools coming close to the face to face experience. It’ll never happen.

2.Vendors are way off. I have to preface this since I never went into the giant exhibit hall even once but from what I heard and witnessed, these guy for the most part are out to lunch. Mike Gras told me of a vendor who was selling a product that could tie all your web 2.0 apps into active directory. While I barely know what that means, it demonstrates how so many are driven to control based products. Check out this ad from the NECC daily magazine. Basically we can shut everything down as tight than a monkey fist . Now grant it, they are just responding to what schools are asking for but you have to wonder if they don’t see the writing on the wall. How long will it be before raise the white flag of surrender and simply try and work and learn in real world, DIY environments? I know, I’m too naive. I’m not discounting the commercial component of schools and technology just the context of the presentation and marketing. Don’t even get me started on clickers.

3. I need to talk about student learning way more. In the fervor of all that is edtech and wonderful, the odd dissenting voice appeared. “Where is the student learning?” That question bothered some but it’s a good one and ones that need to be asked. As I made the most of my extra night, Christine, Mike, Paul and Scott I wrote down a quite piece of logic that helps me particularly as we consider the value of social networks, online communities and more specially K12 online. Let’s start from the students.

• We all want to help students learn more.
• Teaching and learning is hard.
• Professional learning is essential.
• Schools devote way too little time and money and much of it is not applicable or specific to each teacher in their quest for improved student learning.
• Enter online professional learning. which provides time shifted and customizable learning. Not only that but it’s about content combined with access to real teachers doing real work. This all can lead to your very own research team.

If helping a doctor become better is about improving patient care then professional development is about student learning. I’m going to be gentle but ruthless is selling that idea.

4. We have no idea how small we are. My guess is about 300 of the 17,000 attendees have any sense of what powerful online communities are all about. That would represent about 2% of an edtech community. These would be the teachers that you’d like have the best shot at building a network. Reading some of the teacher reflections in the last NECC daily made me shudder somewhat. The focus on buying stuff, teaching tools is missing the boat big time. It’s easy to understand why an average teacher would have no idea of how and why. While it’s been written about lots, when you see it in this context it’s quite amazing. If you believe in point #1 and #3 you see why I think this is important. So while I have my network who support me and challenge me not to mention the possibility of those outside my network who occasionally challenge me most of our teachers have nothing. Again, not a new realization but I got to see it first hand.

There, I feel better. (My first every blog post largely constructed from 30,000 feet. I might turn into Wes Fryer or Ewan Mcintosh if I became a frequent flyer.)

Konrad Glogowski photo by Will Richardson
Breakfast with Craig Nansen and Chris Webb photo by Kevin Jarrett

Reference:
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody. New York: The Penguin Press.

I’ve been on a bit of a Clay Shirky kick for the past couple of months. I’m about half way through “Here Comes Everybody“, been reading his blog, watched a nice video of a recent lecture and trying to synthesize his ideas.

The older concept that struck me in a new way is the fact that while [...]]]> I’ve been on a bit of a Clay Shirky kick for the past couple of months. I’m about half way through “Here Comes Everybody“, been reading his blog, watched a nice video of a recent lecture and trying to synthesize his ideas.

The older concept that struck me in a new way is the fact that while many understand the significant shift in society that is just beginning, many see it as a fad, including educators. Shirky, interviewed by a TV producer about a possible guest appearance defends the producers claim that all this social media was a fad.

I was arguing that this isn’t the sort of thing society grows out of. It’s the sort of thing that society grows into. But I’m not sure she believed me, in part because she didn’t want to believe me, but also in part because I didn’t have the right story yet. And now I do.

I was having dinner with a group of friends about a month ago, and one of them was talking about sitting with his four-year-old daughter watching a DVD. And in the middle of the movie, apropos nothing, she jumps up off the couch and runs around behind the screen. That seems like a cute moment. Maybe she’s going back there to see if Dora is really back there or whatever. But that wasn’t what she was doing. She started rooting around in the cables. And her dad said, “What you doing?” And she stuck her head out from behind the screen and said, “Looking for the mouse.

Here’s something four-year-olds know: A screen that ships without a mouse ships broken. Here’s something four-year-olds know: Media that’s targeted at you but doesn’t include you may not be worth sitting still for. Those are things that make me believe that this is a one-way change. Because four year olds, the people who are soaking most deeply in the current environment, who won’t have to go through the trauma that I have to go through of trying to unlearn a childhood spent watching Gilligan’s Island, they just assume that media includes consuming, producing and sharing.

The shift is obviously more clearly demonstrated by our young people. Older generations continue to be more irritated by teens texting and gaming than they are interested in understanding that participation in social media is not a fad and it’s not all bad.

My brain is reeling with many concepts that include distribution of participation, one that suggests equality is not something that is required for social media to work. Many of these ideas fly in the face of today’s educational structures. We know that. What I like about Shirky’s approach as with any good writer is that stories are the key to the message. He builds the theory and depth out of the stories. We need to continue telling the new story. I’ve got my eyes and hears poised.
Image: Clay Shirky by Joi