Learning Networks and Professional Growth

Professional growth is not only about finding like minded people. Our professional learning networks can be built in this way, adding people from similar backgrounds or roles to our Twitter network. But that might just confirm the bias we already have.

I see great value in the exposure to alternative thinking. We gain access to perspectives that differ from our own and that may be in obvious opposition. Our social learning networks provide easy access to thinking and development from beyond the domain of education. I have deliberately built connections with practitioners in a wide variety of fields not just education.

Yes, your professional learning network should help you tap into the expertise and ideas of fellow educators. But I think the real value emerges as your network matures and you build connections far beyond the walled garden of education.

These connections challenge us to think critically about our work and what we think we know. The dissonance instigated by diversity of thought and alternative viewpoints can be a springboard to empathy.

Photo by Daniel Hjalmarsson

Can teachers stand idle any longer?

In last Friday’s Times Educational Supplement an article I had written was published about the use of social networking in schools. It seems to me that we are getting to a point where children in schools are experiencing a hidden social curriculum that we are no longer part of, this is especially the case for their use of social networking. In my own words:

Social networking should be taught more widely and in more depth in schools. No longer are we able to stick our heads in the sand about these communication tools. Nor should educators distance themselves from using them.

The paragraphs that were missing from the piece went as follows:

This is not simply about how much time students spend learning about social networking in GCSE ICT. This is an issue for every subject and teacher, a system wide issue, a social issue that needs the whole school to act, and it won’t just take the one or two teachers who use Twitter or write a blog to do it.

Those of us who are willing should take steps to develop a more supportive and positive ethos around the role of social networking in learning, school and society. Those who are unwilling need to get out of the way, because where we continue to remain idle we further disadvantage our students.

Teach it, don’t fight it” was published in the TES magazine on 16 September, 2011 

Interesting Ways to Use Google+ to Support Learning

Many early users of the latest platform for social networking have begun sharing their ideas about the potential for supporting learning. There is much to be anticipated – I always believed that the community element was missing from the use of Google Apps for Education.

Perhaps Google+ could provide the platform for schools to help positively teach social networking and tie in the use of the different apps more seamlessly together.

Take a look at what educators think so far and feel free to share your own ideas with the Google doc, or leave them in the comments here.

Will Google+ Encourage us to Sidestep Serendipity?

tangent

Since leaving the classroom I have had the opportunity to read more widely then I have done at any point over the last 10 years. The work I am doing now takes me down paths including design thinking, business, social media and of course education. It is the variety of new domains of information and perspectives that I have found so engaging.

Not only have I been able to work with and immerse myself in ideas from outside of education but I have begun to see ways learning can benefit from them.

I have seen Twitter grow and grow into a huge global tool for educators. However those of us using it are still, for the most part, in the minority. However difficult it is to admit it, teachers using any digital tool to connect with fellow teachers are still in the minority. The prospect of a new social tool, such as Google+, was hugely exciting to see. It was great to start in a fresh space with the customary intuitive interface we have come to expect from Google products. So all rosy? Well not quite.

My main concern is a key difference between Twitter and Google+. When Twitter users connect with each other they basically ask themselves is this person interesting or in my line of work? Yes = follow. We all have our different methods but I suspect that covers most people. When I look at those people who have followed me on Twitter recently I can see very quickly (on a single page which I can just scroll up and down) what they do from their profile and just click follow if a) they interest me or b) they are in education. That’s it.

Importantly with Twitter there are no ways to target your messages to groups within those who follow you, it is an “all in” sort of method. My updates go to designers, teachers, classes, professors, executives, artists, whoever makes up your network. Do I think this adds value to the replies and perspectives you gain? Absolutely.

With Google+ Circles are we creating silos of information? By saying to users, “do you only want to share with those that find it 100% relevant?”, are we in fact encouraging a narrowing of perspectives? What about those that might find it 60% relevant? Or whose current project makes it highly relevant to them, but perhaps not at other times. Of course we have the choice to make things public in Google+ and the choice to have different circles, but Twitter’s default broadcast state is always set to public. An open style of sharing is not a choice.

Perhaps targeted sharing, in the style of a Google+ post, will just give me what I always get. The isolation of ideas, fuzzy-warm acceptance but nothing to challenge them. Alternate expertise has no way of peaking in or seeping into the reaction.

Of course this idea of cross-fertilising ideas from different domains has a strong history with, for example, Innovation Time Off or 20% time from Google or bootlegging product development at 3M that led to the early concept of the Post-It note.

I think I will probably not use the Circles feature of Google+ because I think that I will be limiting the reactions I get and actively avoiding the opportunity to connect with other professionals who could add a valuable perspective beyond education. I still prefer a model that is more open by default and puts the responsibility of information filtering on the consumer, not the producer of the information.

//

Pic Back of Beyond by violscraper

The Google+ Project: targeted sharing

circles1

Having spent a little bit of time using the Google+ Project I thought I would share some initial thoughts and reactions.

From the very beginning it is all about people, as always with these new network tools it is about adding people into your space to enjoy and share it with. I was immediately impressed with the Circles feature which helps you organise people into different groups. The user interface is really nice and it was easy to grab people and drop them into the right Circle for them.

You can create lots of different circles and name them whatever you like. Once you are using and sharing if there is someone who either adds you to their Circle or you see their name mentioned, all you have to do is roll over their name, then the Circles icon and then tick which they belong to in the pop up window – really easy.

Within Google Apps for Edu I can see each class having a specific Circle with which you can share content.

As many people have said, this level of organisation is much more like real life as we have distinct and sometimes overlapping connections with people. What is currently missing seems to be (amongst other things):

  • to share a whole Circle with others
  • to add inner circles to a group – say for groups within a class
  • build on other social media groups, LinkedIn or Twitter lists

This compartmentalised approach to our social networking behaviour is very much at the core of what the Google+ Project seem to be developing. When you look to share any type of content you can be very refined about who you share it with. As Vincent Mo from Google explains:

On Google+, anyone can add me to their circles, and they never see more than what I share with them. It’s as easy as not adding them to a circle. That means people can add me all they want. If I post something private, I’ll only post it to a circle, and they won’t see it. Go ahead. Add me. I don’t care.

So the focus is on the creation of Circles of connections which then allows you to dictate who you share content with. Vincent Mo says that Google+ is “built around targeted sharing”. Seems obvious – and Google have executed these crucial elements really well.

Even if you have not had the chance to use Google+ I would be interested to hear your thoughts regarding the Circles style of organisation and how it differs to what we are used to.

//

Pic: Flickr’ng lights by josef.stuefer