Tips for Teachers - 4th meeting Fall 08

In our fourth Tips for Teachers of the semester, we read and discussed the article, "Introduction: Reshaping Campus Communication and Community through Social Network Sites", by Nicole B. Ellison. It is published by Educause Center for Applied Research, Study 8 2008, in the compiled readings, Student and Information Technology, 2008. It can also be found online at:

http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0808/rs/ers08082.pdf

This article discussed the popularity of social networks, such as Facebook and MySpace, and we talked about how incoming freshmen now, as soon as they are told their room assignment in the summer before starting college, go on to Facebook and start to find out about and communicate with not only their future roommate, but also all the students who will be on their floor in the dorm. This is amazingly different from just a few years ago, when an incoming student, once presented with the name of the roommate, would at best e-mail or phone this person a couple of times. 

The question then arose as to whether or not professors should go on Facebook. It would seem to make the student-teacher relationship more informal, but would this be good or bad? It was thought that it could certainly become awkward if there was a dispute over grades. Also some members present felt it would be inappropriate for students to know private details of their lives if they went on Facebook, and did not much welcome the thought of a student wanting to become their “friend’ through this medium. One teacher present thought a better option for being online with students, while maintaining academic boundaries, is to use the Chat feature of Sakai. 

Another teacher mentioned Steven Johnson’s book, Everything Bad is Good for You, and drew the analogy that students could use these social network sites to enlarge their social relations network, which could be beneficial for them. But whereas many of us present saw a potential advantage to these networks for social reasons, we found it hard to trace any particular academic relevance beyond such endeavours as reaching out to alumni or other student bodies, and marketing courses. Possibly they could be used for collaboration, as in peer reviews of student papers, but there would be such a large potential distraction, such a yawning desire once on Facebook to trace old high school friends and others, that its costs might outweigh its benefits. And once again, there is always Sakai for such activities as online peer reviews. 

Some of us had concerns, too, for the real life implications of these social networks. What might stop someone creating a whole new persona online, as occurred, according to one of the teachers present, who told us of someone who pretended to have a Ph.D. when, in fact, he had dropped out of college? And what might the implications be of becoming a “public person” akin to a superstar, without the reality of actually being a superstar? And what again might be the ultimate impact of being “friends’ with so many, and does this make some of those friendships inauthentic? 

This lead to a discussion about “bridging” relationships, which are not built on emotional closeness but instead on common interests, and what one person might possibly be able to offer another in terms of job opportunities and so on. This seems to be a utilitarian relationship, based on how useful one person might be to another. One teacher proposed that instead of calling this relationship a friend, Facebook should introduce other categories, such as “colleague, coworker” and so on. 

We moved on to talk about how it is likely that being online helps shy people to be more courageous and get to know others who they normally would not have a chance to know. One teacher even talked of how she created an opportunity for a Facebook dialogue for her 101 class prior to their final exam, and found that those who participated actually performed better on this exam than those who relied solely on class discussion. 

But why use Facebook rather than Sakai? We reasoned that Sakai might be better as it is a defined community of the class members, with authorized access only, rather than the more amorphous Facebook in which people might get “lost” and not return to the actual collaborative class discussion. It was proposed that the platform that we use will inform the work that we do. In Facebook some people discuss their personal values, but some of these might be offensive in a classroom setting. However, the argument for Facebook as opposed to Sakai is that more young people are familiar with Facebook, and that this is very much the new way of communicating in society today. 

One teacher talked of there being a very real need to network, but she wondered if there is almost an addictive component to much of today’s technology: the need to send text messages, speak on the cell phone, and so on. Alcohol used to be the source to connect, she said, whereas now people don’t need to drink to dare to talk to someone else, but can do so online. 

A profound statement was made by one teacher who said, “One hundred years from now, the notion of the individual will be obsolete.” He was extrapolating from current technology, and how when we stroll around campus, we see people cut off from others by their headphones or cell phones. But then we cast our minds back to one hundred years ago, and asked whether there was networking then, and concluded that indeed there was, albeit on a different and more local scale. There were clubs, taverns and lodges for the men – and slightly less for the women (such as sewing circles). Perhaps a possible advantage of the new technology is that it is not selective and does not preclude anyone on the basis of gender. However, there is still the digital divide, so not all income groups have equal access to the opportunities that technology can provide. 

And what is the impact on academic prowess of the new technologies? We thought that the increase of the visual image might not necessarily help students with reading and writing skills, as watching a film is more passive than reading, and does not need as much imaginative input. 

We also considered the implicit imperative to respond very quickly when receiving an electronic message, but one teacher thought back to when Oliver Sacks came to campus, and how he said sometimes ideas need time to percolate for that individual to be truly creative. Perhaps, therefore, it has less advantage for academic writing, which needs more time for reflection. 

We concluded our meeting with the question that since today’s 13 year olds think differently from us because of being brought up with technology, will we be ready to teach them effectively? And what is the best way in which to relate to them?