-
Website
http://www.dougbelshaw.com/blog -
Original page
http://dougbelshaw.com/blog/2008/03/28/the-map-is-not-the-territory-the-changing-face-of-the-edublogosphere/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
I remain more committed than ever to the goal of pedagogic sea-change in our public and private schools, however. I hope in the not-too-distant future that I'll be able to write many of these ideas down in a book... That's been a goal of mine for years. I'm not naive enough to think that just writing a book is going to change the world, but I do know that the conversations I've had and continue to have with educators like you around the world because of these tools have changed my thinking in very important ways. I see myself actually living now in both this virtual space as well as the face-to-face world of relationships. My virtual relationships and interactions with others are just as important and influential on me, my thinking, and my behavior as F2F interactions are. In some cases, I think the virtual interactions are MORE impactful because the depth of idea sharing which can and does take place here goes beyond what time and geographic restricts can permit in F2F discussions.
I think we all need to maintain a focus on school change. I certainly want to. I continue to struggle with where I want and need to personally "plug-in" to make a positive contribution to this effort, and both a local and a larger level. I don't have the answers, but I DO know that we're armed with communications abilities that previous reformers like Dewey, Freiere, and Holt of which probably never even dreamed. What are we going to do with these communication tools? As you point out, we certainly can use them to swap stories and links about the latest web 2.0 tools and services. I enjoy and benefit from that, but my main focus continues to be on learning and helping others (as well as myself) operationalize the increased potentials we have to extend and expand our opportunities for learning far behind what was traditionally possible.
Thanks for your thoughtful post. This is a good reminder about "focus."
Do you think the ineffectiveness of the conversation reached it's tipping point and to console our woes we turned to the giddyness of finding some new tool or kvetching about our kids?
The conversation changes us, not our circumstance.
I'd be curious, what's had more impact on you professionally, the conversations from days gone by or your Ed.D program?
Chris
@Wes: We need people like you, Will, etc. - I'm certainly not disagreeing with the need for evangelists. But we need people in classrooms arguing for change and showing what can be done. I'm a bit concerned that all of the 'best' people are going to end up as full-time consultants...:-o
@Doug: Indeed, but the problem with parties is that they end. Are you prepared for the hangover in the morning? ;-)
@Chris: That's an impossible question to answer. I couldn't say which has impacted me most, as my thoughts and conversations with others interact with one another. That's partly why I'm blogging here instead of at my teaching blog now. My experiences and thoughts can't be neatly separated and sectioned off. What I do impacts what I write about - both blogging and towards my Ed.D.
Who knows? Maybe they're not of interest. Maybe they're irrelevant for other people. Maybe they're just hard to find in the cacophony of bland Joneses.
May I tentatively and hesitantly suggest, however, that they are a tad... well... insular? There's some great things going on in Scotland (not least Glow) but a lot of time seems to be spent discussing the ins-and-outs of the current specific system rather then where it's all headed.
Having said that, Scotland is still light years ahead of England when it comes to reflective practitioners - and a lot of that's down to forward-thinking people like yourself in prominent positions. Keep up the good work! :D
I think the blogosphere is changing but honestly, I think more people are twittering than reading RSS, particularly the blogging type.
There are lot of people adding us all to their RSS readers for the sake of having an RSS reader but not really to converse.
And we're all forced with reinventing ourselves. However, sometimes I feel "plain and boring" just chugging along in my classroom -- I can barely eek out time to blog and handle the kids and house!
(Oh, and I only started blogging in November 2005 -- so you predate me!)
Anyway, I too think the blogosphere is changing and also have issues with a lot of what I see too. It is hard to find really fresh thoughts and innovations and we need to begin highlighting teachers who are innovating as well.
Then again, things always change. LIstening to Danah Boyd this past week on Wow2 talking about that social networks are moving out and the kids are moving more to cell phone to cell phone communications after "resumeifying" their facebooks. We have a whole new set of issues to deal with relating to these mobile devices full of hope and danger called cell phones!
I don't know the answer, Doug. I do know, though, that as many Web 2.0'ers get on the circuit and out of the classroom that we need a continuing influx of classroom innovators like Kate Olson and Louise Maine.
Best wishes!
I wasn't saying that you are outside the classroom - of course, I know you're not - but the temptation's there, isn't it? We need people who are both au fait with the day-to-day world of schools and the possibilities open to us with new technologies. I'm delighted to see what you're doing with the Horizon Project, for example.
Keep up the good work! :-D
Surely harking back to a "golden age" of edublogging is the last thing you would have thought you'd be doing when you started blogging. If you're accusing the Scots for being insular, then maybe you are just being a tiny bit elitist?
Also, I think it is widely agreed among those in the edublogorsphere that new pedagogies for the 21st century will be shaped in large part by these tools. If the tools that will shape this new pedagogy are in a state of dramatic flux, evolving at alarming rates it is almost paralyzing to write or discuss how we should make change since change is the nature of the landscape. We are challenging institutions of learning who have for years operated with pedagogies that have largely gone unchanged in an environment that was highly predictable to look for new pedagogies that address a new constantly changing environment, an environment that demands that pedagogies change to adapt to the tools. This is like asking all painters in the mid 1800s to become photographers.
The second issue is change itself. Change is difficult enough for an individual but for an institution it is extremely difficult. I fear that the change necessary to adapt to this changing landscape is going to be too great for our traditional institutions. Web 2.0 is a disruptive technology and disruptive technologies have a tendency to evolve to a point where they become superior to the prior industry leader. Change is easier if you are building something from scratch. Perhaps what we need to be discussing is how new schools, new learning environments, and new models for educational institutions should be created that maximize the effectiveness of these new tools and address the need for flexible pedagogy.
I rarely use yahoo for internet search, now I use Google, tomorrow I will use _____________. I rarely use my landline for phone calls anymore, now I use VIOP, tomorrow I will use _______________. I don't use Prodigy anymore, or Netscape, or Internet Explorer, now I use Firefox, tomorrow I will use _______________. We no longer send our kids to school where they are sectioned off by grade level and then by some metric that determines their reading or math efficiency level and have to sit in rows where they do worksheets and listen to a teacher talk at them, now we send our kids to classrooms where they sit at a computer in rows and listen to a teacher talk at them and sometimes do projects but still get a grade that defines them, tomorrow we will send our kids to schools that _____________________.
I still use Yahoo from time to time. I still use my landline from time to time. I don't use Prodigy but sometimes I open up IE to see how my webpages look in another browser. I still like to listen to lectures from time to time. I still use worksheets from time to time. I still think there is a place for traditional ed but I believe it will need to step aside and become another pedagogical tool we have and another one of many learning options available. If web 2.0 is marked by a flood of diversity in applications and services then learning 2.0 will likely see the same explosion of diversity. Right now we are seeing what looks like the deployment of many small escape vessels fleeing a sinking ship full of passengers either convinced the ship won't sink or believe it can be saved. By the time the water hits the deck, how many people will still be on board?
@John: I suppose you could read this post as 'harking back to a golden age of blogging'. But that's not what I'm doing really. What I want is for those new to the edublogosphere to understand the importance of having a rigorous pedagogical (or, as I'm sure Andrew Field would argue, androgogical) approach to using new technoglogies in education.
@Carl: Love a couple of metaphors you've used there - especially the one about fleeing a sinking ship! My issue is that it seems to me that people are shoehorning these immensely powerful and potentially transformative tools into existing pedagogies. That, somehow, doesn't feel right to me... :-(
Nice post.
In my experience, the sad reality is that despite all the noise in the edublogosphere, the overall impact of all that has been written is still just a drop in the bucket. So, let's continue to encourage educators to read blogs, to move on to commenting, and then to creating their own blogs. Let's encourage each other to connect in productive networks. There may indeed be too much focus on the latest and greatest new application, or on the network, or on any number of other peripheral issues. This seems a small price to pay for helping to prod and shape much needed change.
It sometimes seems to me that the term "lurk" is used in an almost pejorative sense by edubloggers. I know that I for one, however, have learned a great deal, and my thinking has been challenged, by lurking on the fringes of the edublogosphere. It can be a little intimidating to dive in and swim with the big eloquent fish who are already well established in a pond where a couple of years seems like forever.
I knee-jerked a tweet last night with my tongue in my cheek but I do think blogging is a bit young for you to realistically ask blogs to be fixed. Once there is a set idea of how things should go we will really be bogged down.
The way I blog now is very different to the way I blogged 6 years ago and if I am still blogging in another 6 years I hope I'll be doing something different.
As to Scottish EduBlogs being insular that doesn't seem to be the same ScotEduBlogsers I read. This week Ewan has been in Finland, John has probably looped the world several times and Scotland is pinned on the map as a place of edu innovation and goodness. A pile of others have been blogging about what goes on in their classes which I guess might be seen as insular but often a source of practical ideas.
Just a couple of thoughts on what's obviously a provocative post. First, I'm constantly struck by how limited the reach of the edublogic (new word) conversation is outside of the sphere. From the perspective of someone who within the span of two weeks has spent significant time in both inner city New York schools and in the most expensive, well regarded private schools in the south, let me just say that the vast majority still don't have a context for this conversation. We all talk about it every day at every turn, and it feels like everyone should be "getting it." Just not the case. This despite the fact that, as you note, the number of edu bloggers compared to 4-5 years (or 7 years ago) has exploded.
Second, I think Twitter and Ning are changing things in a significant ways. Twitter has meant less "blogging" in terms of depth of thinking, the thing you are doing here. Ning has made the whole network piece easier. I wonder sometimes if the folks in Classroom 20 feel as tightly connected as some in the more "traditional" folks feel. Not sure. And I'm not saying it's either better or worse. But it is different.
For me, the longer I stay in this conversation, the less it becomes about schools, frankly. It's about learning. And if I can provoke teachers to consider what these technologies mean in terms of their own learning, and help them then think about the changes in terms of their classrooms, then so be it. I just don't know how schools change (except in unique circumstances) before systems change, and the only way systems change is if enough people in the system demand it.
Thanks for the thinking.
1. I think John Sutton above has it right. These people are new and they're trying to find their own meaning, just like we did earlier (and continue to do). How else are they supposed to understand the power and potential of these tools if they don't play with them, reflect on them, share about them, get feedback about them, etc. I know that I didn't understand the power of blogging and the 'network' until at least 6 months into it. I needed that space and time to learn the ropes. Don't others deserve the same, particularly if we want them using these tools in pedagogically sound ways?
2. You said, 'The danger is that people new to the edublogosphere never read some of the seminal posts which outline the vision of an education system that uses these tools.' And where would newbies find these seminal posts? Buried in the hundreds of other posts on key bloggers' blogs? It's not like there's a 'Newbies Guide to the Seminal Posts' out there. Maybe you should make a wiki page (or add to one of the ones at www.movingforward.wikispaces.com)?
I have blogged about all sorts of crap for a while now. Last year I thought I would give the blog a bit of focus.
I have returned to the secondary school classroom to teach history. This is after ten years in educational technology in corporate and tertiary fields. I have experienced some fairly incredible highs and also one incredible low that left me in a Singaporean hospital for about five days in 2000. Nothing like being bullied into submission and having your self-esteem surgically extracted by an abusive boss all in the name of IT, portals, eyeballs and stickiness.
The classroom restored my focus and I thought I would rebirth the blog and write about education and technology and history. It was time to enjoy education technology. I enjoyed it at first and garnered a few comments here and there and made some contacts. But then late last year and early this year I began to get this sinking feeling. The blogs that I read were becoming homogenous. So many blogs began to look and sound the same.
I was on quite a roll myself early January but then the wheels fell off my litte red cart. Something about the education blogging environment was gnawing at my guts. Whatever it was it must have been gnawing at your guts too.
I may elaborate further on my own blog Doug but in short I agree with you wholeheartedly that "...the edublogosphere has changed from being about ‘the conversation’ to being part of ‘the network’. It all smacks a little too much of ‘keeping up with the Joneses’ and, to be honest, viral marketing of Web 2.0 apps"." I know I have been a part of that. Forgive me father for I have sinned.
Wes Fryer is right. We need focus. We need a little chaos and anarchy as well. Is that what Graham means when he writes that there is room for all users? I think I sound confused. Must make sure that the focus does not create an all over grey world of bloggers.
I worry about the education bloggers that are guiding the more recent entrants to the medium how to blog. New bloggers have surfaced recently, have been adopted by "more seasoned" bloggers and have been moulded into the image of their guide or mentor. These may be like the "bland joneses" that Ewan McIntosh refers to in his comment. Some of these "bland joneses" are now centre-stage in the education blogging environment.
I have observed a number of new education bloggers join the networks of late and they soon become mirror images of the more seasoned or ‘vocal’ edubloggers. By vocal I do not mean provocative or innovative. I simply mean they have a voice within the edublogging environment that is taken as gospel. It is a pity. I feel that the twitter networks play a role in the establishment of this sameness. It is quite intriguing to observe.
Lisa Stevens makes a good point about the intimidation regarding new tools. I have been caught up in that as well but nothing incenses more when I blogger mentions how they spotted that app before such and such did. Who cares? The earth will still manage to rotate on its axis without that knowledge.
Perhaps I am getting old but the excessive positivity about this tool and that tool in some blogs annoys me. Does that make me a 'grumpy old man'. I am a little tired of the excessive use of bold font type and exclamation marks in some blogs to proclaim some ‘new’ tool. Lately it has been Diigo and Friendfeed. As you mention there is a diigo craze on the moment. I think there is now an inverse correlation between the number of exclamation marks a new tool receives throughout the education blogging environment and my willingness to give the tool a try.
Sometimes the tools are not all that new and have escaped the attention of the majority of education bloggers until one of the old-guard, blogging elite or a member of the newer 'generation 2.0' drops a line about a tool on Twitter or their blog and all the acolytes jump on board and go into orgasmic delight about the world changing benefits of the ‘new’ tool. It is the acolytes that add the bold font and the exclamation marks. As Carl Anderson commented the evangelising of new tools is indeed sickening. I have been caught up in that. I guess I need to say ten "Hail Marys" and stand in the corner now.
Vicki Davis is also right. It is "hard to find fresh thoughts and innovations". I have also wondered about the conversations and the reducation in th diversity of thought within the edublogosphere and at least within the blogs that I read there seems to be a sameness creeping into the environment. I articulated these thoughts a little further on Christopher Sesssum's blog when he posted about social networks the other day. Some of them are repeated here.
I have sensed of late that segments of the “edublogosphere” are dominated by a small coterie of seasoned bloggers who are followed by a dedicated core of disciples that hang off their every word. I think this is stifling original thought and creating a sameness in some edublogging arenas. The conversations are limited to a few yet cloned by many.
Christopher Sessums asked “What sort of mechanisms can we set up to encourage creativity and diversity among edubloggers?” I agree that the world of education bloggers should be more like an agora as Christopher alluded too with a highly varied range of discussions, debates, marketing of ideas and the ‘playing of games’ (as per an agora). (The agora of ancient Athens was largely responsible for the creation of democracy, philosophy and western thought).
Vicki Davis mentions that more people are Twittering. Twitter is a strange beast. I wonder how an educator can rack up 4000 updates in 3 months? That is an obsessive compulsive disorder in my opinion. It is bizarre. Do they actually teach in a classroom?
I wonder about the relationship between Twitter and education blogging.Has anyone else observed anything peculiar about Twitter? Is it just me? I have written positive posts about the tool but I also have uneasy stirrings in my gut about Twitter. I cannot help but feel that there is an us and them tendency in some Twitter networks. Am I imagining this? Is there a sense of exclusivity that is related to the number of updates or followers? Perhaps I am paranoid.
Your readers may think I am full of sh*te but its how I see things. There are of course great and humble educators that produce excellent blogs that are not a part of the self-flagellating and mutually-masturbating and occasionally elitist group that I have observed. Why do these bloggers not get the voice that they deserve? Are their Twitter ranks too low?
I recently spoke about these trends and a friend simply said why give the education bloggers that you feel do not contribute or lack innovative thinking a voice? Why link to them? I agree. I mentioned to Christopher Sessums that perhaps it was time to look for fresh contacts. Elements of my Google Reader list have indeed become stale.
Doug, you are the first of those new contacts. Thanks for reinvigorating my interest, restoring my faith in the medium and giving a voice to the thoughts I have felt.
Best wishes, John.
Here in Canada a great deal of the "visioning" exercise is placed in the hands of school boards or parent councils. How many edubloggers are actively engaging these decision makers? (I'm a decision maker and I've only come across a few others who are engaged in this conversation and see the potential for 21c learning.) Until you get those who are responsible for the long-term visioning (and often control the funding, and don't necessarily appreciate disruptive technology)to embrace the potential of web 2.0 tools and their potential in delivering improved learning, then you are preaching to the choir.
If we are ever to move to the model Carl Anderson described above (new schools, new learning environments and new models of education) we are ALL going to have to be part of the conversation.
Great post, great comments!
I think I am probably an example of the type of new edublogger Doug was talking about in his original post. I get very excited at what new apps can do and I want to try them out. But, that doesn't mean that I don't think about how these can improve teaching and learning in my classroom. I work in a school where 90% of teachers, including me, have very limited access to computers and using powerpoint on the IWB is seen as a good use of technology. However, because I have been so excited by some of the things I have learnt about the past months, I have used every opportunity to tell and show people what these tools are and how they can be used to improve the learning experiences of our students. Whether my vision of how and why fits in with the original "revolutionary message", I don't know because I wasn't part of that conversation.
Surely everything has to start in the classroom, without the desire for things to be different by those who will have to implement the changes then change will not happen, regardless of anything else. My experiences in my classroom and working in small ways with colleagues has started to have a wider impact in my school as I have been asked to work with other teachers to introduce a new course for our yr 7s (11 yr olds) which will make technology central to what they do in all of their lessons. More than that it will change the way we teach and learn and by "we" I mean both students and staff.
I suppose the point of my contribution is that in my opinion, it doesn't matter how, why or indeed when, we join the conversation just so long as we do and if the conversation changes somewhat over time, as long as it continues that is the most important thing.
As per the request above, here is my first 'seminal blog post'. It's by Jeff Utecht and entitled Pedagogy defines School 2.0. I suggest everyone reads it. Now. :-)
Please don't take this the wrong way: I like your blog and read it now and then, you make some very good points, but I think this particular post reads a little self-important and a little pejorative.
It sounds as if you want to exterminate the weaker races, eradicate the inferior members of society in order to promote your own superior breed... I hope all those History books aren't getting to you!
The Blogosphere, as people call it, is receiving and influx of migration. It's growing and it's evolving and that is a good thing, Doug, not a bad thing. You can always choose who to aggregate to your feed reader so you don't have to mix with the chaff.
PS: I know text can very impersonal: I don't mean to offend and this is written tongue in cheek ;)
José
Reminds me of a Native Indian in the USA that once said to me, "Go back to Europe." I could have returned, "Go back to Asia," but what would be the point really? We are all here now. And, this is why tools need to evolve to help us manage the data and relationships. We each have a choice on our level of participation. Fresh voices along with seasoned experts is a mix that I have personally adopted. As a right-brainer, I like divergent thinking as a starting point. I can always converge when the time is right. Some people, however, are convergent thinkers at the start. As a divergent thinker and explorer, the Web and it's varied voices and ability to connect is the greatest gift of my lifetime.
I agree totally with Lisa about quality being much more important than quantity. I'll try to remember that everyday when I face google reader and decide what to read, rather than trying to read everything!
Insofar as what you wrote about not much changing in the education system/s it is disappointing to think that in the 21st century we are still so far behind where we should be and that our workplaces don't match up to our conversations. I would say we still have to realise that we are a small group (technology and Web2.0 wise I mean) who are pushing the boundaries and that change takes a long time, but sometimes I just want to scream "How much longer is it going to take!!! It's time for a change. The fact that you've been doing things this way for years is the exact reason you need to change it!"
I'm glad this blog (it would seem) is one of them! ;-)
Thank you for your comments. You have certainly been around and contributing much longer than I have, and I respect your ideas. However, I feel that I must insert myself into this conversation as one who is "building a network" and in the process listening in on and becoming part of "the conversation". I feel discouraged when you seem to classify those of us who are trying to change our part of the educational world in the best way that we know by suggesting that we “have no desire to transform education…” because that’s exactly what I think I’m trying to do. Granted, I may not follow someone else’s blueprint for change and I barely know how to operate my new blog – but I do have ideas for change and I do recognize that we must change our collective systems if we are to make a meaningful future for ourselves and our students.
This reminds me a little bit of a comment I overheard a few years back at a software training. There were many people at the training who had limited experience with using this software (isn’t that funny…it wasn’t that long ago, but that training was considered ‘cutting edge’ in my district) but they were there, nonetheless. One of the participants wanted to ask what I thought was a valid question, but felt afraid because – according to her – the instructor “made you feel like her knowledge only belonged to her”. At the time I remember thinking how sad that was, and this conversation makes me feel the same way.
To everyone who’s been around for awhile, I’m suggesting that you realize there are many of us who want to be part of whatever conversation is out there. The last thing we need is to feel unwelcome because we aren’t doing it “right”. I believe that we all have something to contribute and it’s okay to not be on the cutting edge as long as you are at least on the path. What do you think?
I'm certainly not suggesting (as Dan Meyer seems to think) that there's a black-and-white distinction between 'those of us who've been around a bit' and 'you lot'. Not at all.
What concerns me is the fact that instead of being driven by a notion of 'something needs to change in education' to 'right, what are the tools which will help me do this?', it seems to be 'wow! cool tool!' and then 'how can I retro-fit this to existing pedagogies?'.
I'm all for using Web 2.0 and other educational technologies in education. Even a passing glance at what I've been writing over the last 2.5 years would bear witness to that. I would hope, however, that my use of these technologies has mostly been driven by a desire to change the whole system. I think it's the case that, sometimes, people both new and old to the edublogosphere can focus on the 'coolness' of the tool rather than on the pedagogical impact it may have... :-)
Interesting post. I tend to agree that those who jump on the new technology bandwagon fail to fully grasp how this technology can change existing teaching methods or even how to properly use the tools.
However, I would rather see adoption of new technology than an outright fear of it -- which is something that I think is more likely among educators today.
Kristine
Cheers
Cheers