Week 2 of Social Media and Open Education has flown by. I was particularly interested in how the Elluminate session would work. Alec took the opportunity to demonstrate the various tools available in the course and it was great to track comments from the participants as the session progressed. For example, as Alec showed how he had embedded an RSS feed into the wiki to automatically update and display the shared Delicious links, the comment “clean up in aisle 4, exploding brain” could be seen in the chatroom J
The Elluminate screen displayed Alec’s desktop and he ‘wrote’ on the screen with a highlighter to illustrate the points he was making. There were about 70 people ‘watching’ the session live, and they could interact in the chat room or raise a question if passed the microphone. The big advantage for me (and other European participants, given the time difference) was that the full recording can still be accessed and replayed as required – it is linked from the bottom of the week 2 wiki page which summarises all the course activities.
It was a great idea to have a moderator in the chatroom to display links as they came up in discussions and respond to questions. Alec also managed to bring in comments and questions from the chatroom as he talked – who says men can’t multi-task?
Final points on Elluminate – the “passing of the microphone” to allow student voice contributions is clunky and resulted in a few lengthy silences, but the virtual round of applause that it permits the group to give to the speaker is a nice touch!
The reading for the week was Richard Schwier’s paper “pursuing the elusive metaphor of community in VLEs” and Richard himself presented the next Elluminate session. A number of interesting points arose from the paper and discussions:
· Some people are merging their F2F and virtual worlds, others maintain a clear distinction – “whatever works at the time” was one comment from the chatroom.
· Don’t mistake interaction for engagement. It is possible to interact without engaging, and to engage without interacting
· The technology can get in the way – if you are new to the tools, or if they don’t work well, then your focus is on the mechanics of sorting that out rather than on the actual course content
There was an intriguing debate about the role of “lurkers” or “social loafers”. Obviously, we cannot determine the opinion of total lurkers, but the consensus seemed to be that everyone should contribute in some way, but not feel obliged to respond to everything. In other settings, I’ve noticed how some (usually insecure) individuals feel the urge to dominate the discussion, but that is difficult in this type of course where there are so many parallel communication channels. Others chip in occasionally where they feel they can make a contribution that ‘pays back’ in some way for what they have taken out from others, but they are relaxed about dipping in and out without feeling the need to comment constantly.
Great stuff – I’m looking forward to week 3
Recent Comments