Teacher beliefs

How can we promote successful change in education? Schools are notoriously conservative institutions, so it is often difficult to introduce new ideas. Much of the resistance to change comes from teachers who 'have always done it this way' and who have the mentality that 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. Teacher beliefs about pedagogy are central to the successful integration of new technologies into schools. The extent to which they see technology skills as relevant and valuable directly relates to the extent to which these skills are practised and applied in their work. If teachers believe that technology adds no value to their teaching, they will simply not use it. New technology really has to be shown to be relevant and useful. The technology in any given school can be as high quality, shiny and compatible as you like. Technical support can be second to none, and all the support in the world on offer, but if the teacher is not convinced of its usefulness, forget it.

A long history of psychological research supports the argument that an individual is more likely to perform a behaviour when there is a high probability of a positive outcomes. See for example the work of Ajzen and Madden (1986) or Doll and Ajzen (1992). Teachers will only adopt new technology if they can see the benefits and are convinced something can be improved or enriched.

Perhaps even more important is the issue of professional practice. If teachers see no need to question or challenge their own practices, another barrier to the adoption of change arises. Reflection on practice is therefore a vital component in change management.

Put the political issues (such as regulation of activities and bans on the use of certain technology in schools) to one side for a moment. Do the same with the technical issues such as lack of bandwidth or hardware, or human issues such as lack of knowledge or skill. These have an impact on the success of technology integration in schools, but by far the biggest barrier to change lies inside the head the teacher.

More on change management in schools next time.

References
Ajzen, I. and Madden, T. (1986) Prediction of goal-directed behaviour: Attitudes, intentions and perceived behavioural control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453-474.
Doll, J. and Azjen I. (1992) Accessibility and stability of predictors in the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Behaviour, 63 (5), 754-765.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Teacher beliefs by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Thinking in networks

'Build your network and always think in networks. They create a sonor map of intelligence, expertise, information and insight. Your allies, your connections, can help you to navigate the larger number of challenges that can ultimately derail a startup company'. - Reid Hoffman (Founder of LinkedIn)

When he made this statement at Babson College in May 2012, Reid Hoffman was referring to startup companies, but he could very well have been giving advice to any undergraduate student, or indeed any teacher or academic. Let's be honest. We all need help. Education has always been a team sport, whatever side of the classroom you sit on. I know I increasingly rely upon my own colleagues, but that collegial reliance has extended beyond the walls of my institution. In fact it did so several years ago, even before the introduction of social media, through the use of e-mail and bulletin board services (remember them?). Social media has simply provided an increasingly powerful range of tools to extend personal learning networks (PLNs) to virtually any part of the world. I regularly hold conversations with colleagues in multiple time zones, because I can. I am connected, and I am thinking now as Reid Hoffman advised, in networks.

It would be a mistake to think of networks simply as connections (See my previous post entitled 'the importance of being networked'). They are much more complex than that. Networks involve connections, but they also hold the capability to boost the power of those connections exponentially, through multiple nodes of knowledge production and rapid amplification of ideas. In a mimicry of the myriad connections in the human brain, each node has the potential to link with many other nodes, and thus extend the power of the network exponentially. I can send out a Twitter link, which may be retweeted by a dozen of my Twitter followers. Each of those may have thousands of followers who don't follow me. They in turn retweet to their independent followers. Within a few minutes, or even seconds, my link is being shared by potentially hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. If they like my content, they may track back and follow me on Twitter too. This is why I say that retweeting is not repetition of ideas - it is amplifcation.

And Twitter is just one of a multitude of social networking tools available to teachers and academics. Other networks are available. The ability to connect these networks together (e.g. Twitter feed into your blog, or Facebook links mirrored in LinkedIn) means that teachers are never alone. Suddenly the team sport has become a relay that can go in any and all directions simultaneously, and every time the baton is passed on, it reproduces itself, so other teams can join in. As I have already suggested above, all we are really doing with social technology is replicating what we see in nature. Cell division and rapid proliferation of genetic material across an organism. Viral reproduction of genetic material between and across organisms. Rhizomatic spread of connections in a similar manner to brain cells or underground root systems. We are passing on memes instead of genes. It is the meosis and mitosis of ideas. At the moment though, we are merely scraping the surface of immense, almost infinite potential, and Reid Hoffman is right. If we want to exploit the power of this for the benefit of our students, we need to start thinking in networks.

Image source


Thinking in networks by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

The changing Web

This is number 4 in the series of blog posts entitled 'Shaping Education for the Future.' Yesterday's post can be found at this link.

The web is constantly changing. Social media - often referred to as Web 2.0, or the participatory Web - is shaping up to be one of the most important tool sets available to support the promotion of change in education. Almost everyone, it seems, is using some element of social media in the planning, development, delivery, management or evaluation of teaching and learning. One of the greatest changes (and challenges) for education over the last few years has been the proliferation of user generated content. My own students create a lot of their own content during their study, usually in the form of podcasts, videos, wiki and blog content, and are encouraged to share these publicly online to gain additional feedback. Doing this, they tend to engage more deeply with learning, and find themselves collaborating more and learning from each other, as a result of using Web 2.0 tools. Essentially, Web 2.0 enables them to take more responsibility for their own learning. They like to share their ideas, and they enjoy playing their part in the production of knowledge. Learning is changing, and their experience is being shaped by the participatory Web. The Web is constantly changing, but it is also a change agent.

We need to acknowledge that 'Web 2.0' remains a contested label for new and emergent properties that are found on the Web. It is a complex network of dynamic resources that we all acknowledge is constantly changing to adapt to the growing demand for entertainment, communication and access to knowledge. Debate focuses on whether the emerging social applications constitute a sea change or revolution in the Web (cf. Van Dijk, 2002) or simply another phase in its relentless progress. Personally, I find myself in agreement with Brian Winston (2003) who views the Web as a facet of gradual evolution rather than symptoms of sudden revolution. Essentially, the Web has become more social. As with most other technology innovations, Web 2.0 applications have grown out of the need for people to connect together, share experiences and knowledge, enhance their experiences and open up new possibilities in learning. Social software is software that enables people to both read from, and write onto web spaces. It truly is the ‘architecture of participation’ (Barsky and Purdon, 2006) and demands active engagement as a natural part of its character (Kamel Boulos and Wheeler, 2007).

Web 2.0 tools include popular applications such as blogs, wikis and podcasting; social networking sites such as FaceBook and LinkedIn; photo and videosharing services such as Flickr and YouTube; familiar utilities such as RSS feeds, social tagging (e.g. Delicious, Diigo), microblogs such as Twitter, mashups (e.g. geotagging). Web 2.0 has spawned concepts such as folksonomy, ‘Darwikianism’ and the ‘wisdom of the crowds’ (Kamel Boulos et al, 2006). Also, we need to pay attention to the growing power, ubiquity and utility of the mobile phone and the central role it is already playing in enabling ‘anytime anyplace’ learning for students.

More is becoming known about the effects the changing Web is exerting upon teaching and learning. We know of some of the benefits and the limitations it brings to education and training. But there are still many questions to be answered. How for example, does this architecture of participation help to scaffold remote learners and how can it promote quality learning outcomes? What is the extent of the capability of social software to encourage a culture of sharing and collaboration? How much will Web 2.0 applications help to shape the education provision of the future? What roles will online games and mobile, personal technologies play in developing the skills young people need to study independently? These are questions we are beginning to address in some of our current research. More on this in future posts on this blog.

References
Barsky, E. and Purdon, M. (2006) Introducing Web 2.0: Social networking and social bookmarking for health librarians. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 27, 65-67.
Kamel Boulos, M. N., Maramba, I. and Wheeler, S. (2006) Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6, 41. Retrieved 14 April, 2008 from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/6/41
Kamel Boulos, M. N. and Wheeler, S (2007) The emerging Web 2.0 social software: An enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and healthcare education. Health Informatics and Libraries Journal, 24(1), 2-23.
Van Dijk, J. (2002) The Network Society. London: Sage.
Winston, B. (2003) Media Technology and Society: A History: From the Telegraph to the Internet. London: Routledge.

Image source


The changing web by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Five things

This is the third in a series of blog posts entitled 'Shaping Education for the Future.' Yesterday's post can be found on this link.

Previous posts in this series have outlined the need for universities to respond to changes, and to develop strategies for survival in a world where the future is uncertain. It is increasingly apparent that learning technology and digital communication will play a key role in the shaping of future higher education. For digital technologies to become as successful in education as ‘paper and pencil’, I believe that five strategies will need to be put into place:

1. Technology will need to become more ‘transparent’ (Wheeler, 2005). That is, technology will need to become so embedded into the day to day experiences of teachers and students that it becomes common place, and even mundane. The novelty value and opacity of technologies often prevent users from ‘seeing through them’, beyond the shiny toy with the buttons and lights, to a tool that is useful because it does something previous tools could not do.

2. Universities must offer better support to academics. Often teaching staff are pushed into situations where they need to cope with new ideas and new technologies without clear guidance. In such situations, many teachers will struggle and fail with technology, or they will resist to the point of rejection. Very few will actually succeed without help. Appropriate training, support services and dialogue will invariably overcome many of these issues (John and Wheeler, 2008).

3. Teachers need to see the relevance and application of new technologies. For teachers to adopt new technologies, they must first see the applications and understand the benefits (as well as the limitations) of the tool. If a tool adds nothing new to the teaching and learning equation it will be perceived as irrelevant and will be rejected (cf. Norman, 1990). I would add that new technologies should only be adopted widely if they have a use and can actually add something new to the learning experience (see point 5 below).

4. Teachers will need to gain greater confidence in the use of new technologies. This will mean that they will need to be continually adaptive and responsive to change as it happens. This relates back to training, which brings familiarity, but teachers also need to see beyond the technology, using it as an extension and enhancement of their own cognitive capabilities,in the sense of a ‘mindtool’. They will also need to see that technology can be contextualised into real and authentic teaching situations. And they will need to be willing to change their own practice occasionally.

5. Ultimately, more research is required into what can be done and what cannot be done with new technologies. How do we know whether or not something works, who it works with, and under what conditions it becomes less successful unless we study it? We can of course find out through trial and error, but more preferably, we can evaluate through thorough and systematic research where new technologies are tested out in authentic situations.

References
John, P. D. and Wheeler, S. (2008) The Digital Classroom: Harnessing the Power of Technology for Learning and Teaching. London: Routledge.
Norman, D. (1990) The Design of Everyday Things. London: The MIT Press.
Wheeler, S. (2005) Transforming Primary ICT. Exeter: Learning Matters.

Image by Freefoto


Five things by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

A tale of two keynotes

This is the second in a series of blog posts entitled 'Shaping Education for the Future' Yesterday's post can be found on this link.

‘May you live in interesting times’ (Old Chinese curse)

We live in tumultuous times where change is constant and disruptive and where technologies are increasingly pervasive throughout society. Such change and disruption has been in the background of my thinking about learning technology for the past decade. In May 2000, I was invited to present two keynote speeches about the role technology would play in the future of higher education.

The first keynote was presented to the European Universities Continuing Education Network (EUCEN) at the University of Bergen, Norway and was entitled ‘The Traditional University is Dead – Long live the Distributed University!’ (Wheeler, 2000a). In my speech I outlined the economic and organisational problems faced by universities in a time of radical technological change and economic stringency in which traditional catchment areas and boundaries were being eroded. I argued that in order to survive the economic and societal challenges, universities would need to revise their approaches to education provision. I urged universities to develop new strategies that were based upon digital technologies to widen access, increase quality of provision and generally subscribe to the idea that students need no longer attend traditional lectures to achieve quality learning outcomes (Wheeler, 2004). I also pointed out the need for universities to create their own niche markets of unique or signature courses, and that universities would need to co-operate together in order to survive the economic turmoil and to make sense of the strictures and limitations that would be imposed due to governmental pressures.

My main recommendation however, was one grounded in the technology mediated learning approach. I argued that due to advances in information and communication technologies (ICTs) that traditional student catchment areas would begin to disappear or become less obvious (the death of distance) and recommended that universities turn their attention to blended and distance methods to broaden and extend their reach (the distributed model). I advised my audience that a number of new technologies were becoming increasingly available, easier to use and more economically viable to purchase into. I pointed out that one of the key technologies for the future would be the World Wide Web (I was of course unaware at the time just how vital it would become) and that managed (virtual) learning environments would become a useful means of organising and supporting online learning for large groups of distributed learners (again, I have revised my opinions a little on this). I took a risk and argued that universities that could not or would not rise to these challenges would either cease to exist, or become subsumed into larger universities who could respond to the challenge. In this speech I was deliberately provocative, and was rewarded by a passionate response from the delegates. Many were convinced that I was correct, whilst many more were equally convinced that I was wrong. It prompted much debate and led to a number of publications which presented my thinking to a wider audience (Wheeler, 2000b; 2001).

Later that same month, I presented a second keynote speech at a Teachers’ Conference held at the University of Western Bohemia, Plzen, in the Czech Republic. In that presentation I focused on the role of the teacher and how it was changing as a result of technological drivers, such as the introduction of new ICTs as well as political, societal and organisational demands (Wheeler, 2000a; 2000b). I drew upon my experience working in British and American schools to describe some of the new technologies and media methods that were emerging, and outlined their applications in teaching and learning. I argued that new information and communication technologies offered teachers an unprecedented chance to enhance and extend their practice. I went on to suggest that teachers needed to modify their classroom management, curriculum design, resources development, assessment and evaluation methods and communication techniques, if they were to remain effective and responsive practitioners. Again, this was a somewhat contentious speech, particularly as many teachers at the time were traditionally minded, conservative in their approach, pressed for time and notoriously resistant to change.

My first keynote dealt with the strategic changes institutions needed to adopt to survive in the new knowledge economy; my second keynote argued for changes at the level of the individual practitioner. In hindsight, neither argument was too wide of the mark. Across Europe and other western industrialised nations, most universities now have their own corporate e-learning strategies, and most manage their own virtual learning environments or VLEs (McConnell, 2006).

Furthermore, many teachers and lecturers are now adapting their everyday practice to incorporate digital technologies into the classroom and to extend learning beyond the traditional boundaries of the institute (Bach et al, 2007). Distance education is high on the agenda of most higher education institutes and a great deal of effort and time has been invested into staff development to ensure that teachers are up to date and aware of how to teach remotely using new technologies. Teachers have now started to harness the power of ICT and the web and personal networked computers within their working practice, for organisational, communicative and pedagogical purposes (John and Wheeler, 2008).

It is not only the role of the teacher that has changed. The embedding of digital technology into the fabric of everyday study has also changed the way students learn (Colllis and Moonen, 2002) and is more in keeping with what younger people tend to expect from higher education (Veen and Vrakking, 2006). Now students can assume more responsibility for their own learning and design their own study trajectories. They are able to learn on the move using mobile technologies, and are able to access a vast storehouse of knowledge through ubiquitous access to the World Wide Web. Communication is an easier prospect also with instant messaging and shared learning spaces becoming more common place. In many ways, and for most students, it would be hard to conceive of a way of learning and working that was devoid of the World Wide Web, e-mail or word processing.

Next time: Disruptive technologies in Higher Education

References
Bach, S., Haynes, P. and Lewis-Smith, J. (2007) Online Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Collis, B. and Moonen, J. (2002) Flexible Learning in a Digital World: Experiences and Expectations. London: Kogan Page.
John, P. D. and Wheeler, S. (2008) The Digital Classroom: Harnessing the Power of Technology for Learning and Teaching. London: Routledge.
McConnell, D. (2006) E-Learning Groups and Communities. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Veen, W. and Vrakking, B. (2006) Homo Zappiens: Growing Up in a Digital Age. London: Network Continuum.
Wheeler, S. (2000a) The Traditional University is Dead! Long Live the Distributed University! Keynote presentation for the European Universities Continuing Education Network (EUCEN) Annual Conference, University of Bergen, Norway. May 4-7.
Wheeler, S. (2000b) The Role of the Teacher in the use of ICT. Keynote presentation for the Czech Teachers’ Conference, University of Western Bohemia, Plzen, Czech Republic. May 20.
Wheeler, S. (2001) Information and Communication Technology and the Changing Role of the Teacher. Journal of Educational Media 26(1), 7-18.

Wheeler, S. (2004). Five Smooth Stones: Fighting for the Survival of Higher Education. Distance Learning 1(3), 11-17.


Photo taken during Zukunft Personal Conference, Cologne, Germany in 2011.


A tale of two keynotes by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Who will survive?

This is the first in a series of posts entitled 'Shaping Education for the Future'

The dynamics of education in the 21st Century are very different from those witnessed in previous years. In the last century, education (in all its forms) was based on the assumption that knowledge content was scarce, and that formal education (university, college, school) was the only place it could be accessed. Then along came the World Wide Web. Things changed, and they changed dramatically. Within a short space of time, user generated content in all its forms began to assume prominence. In the age of social media, content is no longer scarce.  It is abundant, and although questions still remain over the accuracy and provenance of some content, much is usable and useful for informal learning. Do you want to know how to make Baked Alaska? (with Gordon Ramsay as your personal tutor no less!) Need to know how to build a computer? Like to learn how to waltz, or play blues guitar? Interested in the link between quantum physics and consciousness? It's all there on YouTube, waiting for you to watch it. For free. Wikipedia, the online crowd-sourced encyclopaedia, hosts over 14 million articles on just about every subject under the sun. They are constantly being updated as events occur around the globe. Citizen journalism is now a regular feature in much of mainstream media news coverage. We could go on, but I think the point has been made. Content is now abundant, accessible, and can be created as it is required. Content isn't king anymore. Context is.

What will the future hold for education? The education systems of the previous century are outmoded, based on factory models of mass instruction that was fit for the period. There is a new world of work now. It demands change from education. Many universities and colleges are traditional and conservative, but change is constant and exponential. Institutions will need to respond to these changes if they wish to survive. Fortunately, new models of education are now emerging, many of which avoid content and instruction, and instead focus on expertise, tutoring, mentoring, guidance and specialism. Student centred approaches focus on personalised learning, and exploit the potential of personal technologies that enable any time, anywhere learning. This is quite a departure for education. It is a seismic shift that will have profound implications for formal education in the coming years. We can expect to see many institutions scrabbling to change their business models over the next decade as they compete for ever shrinking markets, and more demanding students. The more conservative institutions, placing their trust in their tradition and past reputation will stay as they are, resisting change. Many of these will die. In the worst case scenario, we can also expect to see many institutions going under, because they will not be able to respond to the new demands, or compete in the new market. At best, some institutions might expect is to be subsumed into more successful institutions.

The successful institutions will be those that see the gaps and exploit them; they will be leaner, more efficient organisations that understand why knowledge is no longer a commodity. They will be institutions that can clearly discern the connections between learning and business, between technology and pedagogy, between individuals and society. The successful, surviving educational organisations will be those who have the ability to adapt, respond quickly to global trends. They will be the universities and colleges that are agile enough to change when needed and stand their ground when required. Will we see the death of the educational institution? No, we will not. There will always be a need for sound, organised education. What is in question is the nature of that organisation. The factory model of educational provision is no longer relevant, and no longer desirable. Universities and colleges that persist in this mode can expect hard times. What we will see is a drastic pruning of the dead wood, to make way for new shoots of growth to emerge.

Next time: How institutions can respond to the challenges


Who will survive? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

The importance of being networked

In yesterday's blogpost Separation and connection I talked about the nature of social media and their capability to amplify human contact. Specifically, I made the point that Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) are enabled and strengthened when we make connections through social media tools. One of the key reasons educators need a PLN is to keep in touch, to maintain dialogue with their community of practice. Never before have there been so many opportunities to make contact with educators world wide, many of whom have wonderful creative ideas to share. Indeed, the fact that many social media users are altruistic and are willing to share their ideas for free to their community should be enough to convince most educators to join in. Clay Shirky had it right when he wrote:

'...the use of social technology is much less determined by the tool itself; when we use a network, the most import asset we get is access to one another. We want to be connected to one another, a desire that ... our use of social media actually engages.' (Shirky, 2010: p. 14).

The last line gives it away. We have an innate need to talk to others, to share and compare, reify our own ideas, learn from each other, and gain a sense of belonging to a group of like minded others. This is a deep seated human trait that many psychologists down through the years have researched. Think of Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs (1954), and note that 'belonging' to a group and gaining respect from others are fundamental to his theory. In previous blog posts I have highlighted the need for professionals to share their content for free, and many are doing so. The advantages are enormous, bringing the altruism of others into play. When I share my slides and blogposts under a Creative Commons licence that enables repurposing, somewhere, someone has translated my content into Spanish, opening up a huge new audience for me in Latin America. None of this would be possible without social media, and the ability to connect into a world wide body of colleagues who are striving for exactly the same ends as me. To enrich, extend and enhance learning experiences for their students.

References
Maslow, A. H. (1954) Motivation and Personality (Third Edition). London: Harper Row.
Shirky, C. (2010) Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. London: Allen Lane.

Image source


The importance of being networked by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Separation and connection

The Internet has taken the act of human contact and amplified it exponentially. We are witnessing a time where a mobile world wide web of connections is proliferating, and in which social mores, human relationships and communication conventions have been irrevocably changed. This is not hyperbole. At the time of writing, Facebook boasts over 845 million subscriptions and this statistics grows each month. What is even more remarkable is that these 845 million user accounts have so far generated over 100 billion connections. These connections exist not only in links between 'friends', but also in fan page membership, tags, 'likes' and comments, image uploads (at least 250 million photos each day), hyperlinks and a whole host of other digital artefacts created by people simply linking into content and interacting with it. And that's just Facebook.

In his 2003 book 'Six Degrees', Duncan Watts expounded the idea of being connected in the digital age, drawing upon the theories of psychologist Stanley Milgram. Milgram had previously postulated that although the world's population is relatively huge, person X could, through a series of links to people who 'know each other' connect with person Y. Milgram wanted to discover how many people would be in an average 'chain' of connections between X and Y. Through his research, he came up with an answer - there are six degrees of separation.

Six Degrees of Separation is a useful book because it illuminates the science behind our daily use of Facebook, Twitter and other social media. Watts, for example, discusses the nature of biological viruses and uses the concept as a means to develop his ideas and theories around social connections in a digital world. He suggests that social connections mimic biological viruses, because they have one aim - to proliferate as far as possible. He cites a number of instances where content has gone 'viral' through the use of technology, and warns that such global connection potential has the power to influence just about everything .... genetics, 'global synchrony' and political revolutions (the latter was realised during the Arab Spring uprisings, where social media played a central role in the overthrow of despotic regimes). This approach to network theory is still refreshing, almost a decade after it was written. But what does this mean for education? For me, the concept of social connection means that as an educator, I am able to discover any kind of knowledge I wish, and converse with just about anyone I choose, as long as I am locked into the appropriate social network. It also means that for learners, there is absolutely no limit to the extent they can develop their personal learning networks. They have the power in their hand to make as many connections, and create as much content as they wish, regardless of time, space or geographical location. As an observer and commentator, I believe we have not even started to scratch the surface of the massive potential of social media and mobile technology to disrupt and transform learning. That's why it's so exciting to be an educator in the digital age.

But what of the original research? In 1967, in a pre-Internet world, Milgram proposed that there were only an average of six degrees of separation between any two people in the world. The question now, in the light of the rapid penetration of social media and mobile communications, is - is that number being reduced?

Reference
Watts, D. J. (2003) Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age. London: William Heinemann.

Image by Richard Giles


Separation and connection by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Lost in the crowd?

In his 2004 book 'Distraction', author Mark Curtis argued that our sense of self - or personal identity - can become confused or challenged when we habitually use digital technology. He made several interesting points about the blurring of boundaries between public and private (think of webcams and Facebook status updates for example) and that technology tends to distract us from 'who we are'. There has been some debate over whether or not people should combine their personal and business social media identities.

Curtis argues from the position that identity is malleable, rather than fixed, and that we learn from a very early age that we can be someone else through role playing, imagination or masquerade. Our immersion in media, he argues, provides us with a myriad of alternative role models we can adopt or adapt. By the same token, social media also give us endless opportunities to engage with others, including sports stars, entertainers, politicians and other celebrities. The Curtis position is that other people's lives are more glamorous than our own, and therefore we wish we could be them to escape from the mundane, if only for a while. All very well, but I'm not convinced that this argument is applicable to everyone. Does wishing to be someone else mean that you actually adopt their identity? I think not.

Curtis also seems to be implying that people are often unwilling or at least unconscious participants in the digital obfuscation of their identities. Again, this is a far from convincing argument, but even if it were true, would it really so much of a bad thing that we are able to engage in multiple online identity performance? What dangers might there be? Also, do we really find ourselves forced into performing multiple identities against our will?

Those who follow this blog or my Twitter accounts (yes, plural) will know that I am very willing to experiment with multiple identities, because I am fascinated by the possibilities and intrigued by the psychology behind personal use of social media. However, I engage with this through choice, and I feel fully in control of what is broadcast/published.

Immersion in environments such as virtual social worlds (Curtis uses Habbo Hotel as his example) are also argued to be a means where the boundaries of identity can be blurred. He makes a useful point that in such environments you don't necessarily know the people you are interacting with, because they often hide behind pseudonyms and always represent themselves as avatars. This does not necessarily mean though, that your identity is being changed or that you are 'losing control' of who you are. It may mean though that you open yourself up to identity theft or manipulation of your public facing image by others. Curtis also makes a useful point that managing multiple identities can demand a lot of effort and therefore becomes a distraction. I have discovered the effects of this personally, because I maintain six Twitter accounts. I therefore need to be very careful especially when using Tweetdeck that I check carefully which account I'm using before I hit the send button. Do you have any thoughts on this?

Reference
Curtis, M. (2004) Distraction: Being Human in the Digital Age. London: Futuretext.

Image source


Lost in the crowd? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Inspiring a generation

Many of us have watched in awe as the drama of the London 2012 Olympic Games unfolds. Emotions ebb and flow, and we find ourselves transfixed as we witness the triumphs and disasters of competition at the very highest level. The extraordinary skills, strength and stamina of the athletes has been compelling, exciting, inspirational. Many of the back stories emerging from the Games could be rewritten as screen plays for Hollywood movies, and indeed some may very well be. For teachers and educators there must be many lessons that can be learnt by observing the supreme dedication and commitment of the athletes as they compete for the ultimate prize - sporting immortality. Last week I read this piece from Learning and Skills Group Chairman Don Taylor, which set me thinking:

In women's volleyball, team GB beat African champions Algeria in its first Olympic victory. This is remarkable given that the team is 53 places below in the rankings. Even more extraordinary is that they did it with no funding. The team managed to fund its own way to London2012 through a combination of money making and cash saving schemes. The team is an inspiration to anyone facing budget cuts.

Yes, we do live in a time of economic uncertainty and austerity. It is a time where budget cuts affect many of our learning and development activities. School budgets are squeezed, and CPD suffers from cutbacks. One challenge in the coming months and years is to try to optimise learning in these stringent times. It's a time where we must try to maintain good learning experiences regardless of the economic difficulties. But this is not the main challenge. The main challenge has and always will be to inspire learners to reach their optimum level of achievement. Doctors save lives. Teachers make lives.

The theme of London 2012 is 'Inspire a Generation'. I am certain the London Olympics will do just that for the next generation of sporting heroes. But inspiring the next generation of learners has, and always should be, the ethos and ultimate goal for all educators, wherever they find themselves.

Image by Fotopedia


Inspiring a generation by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.