Web 2.0 Aps and Distractability

While reading about the issues and challenges of using web 2.0 tools in the classroom I came across some pretty interesting things that I'd like to share with you in regards to distractibility and whether or not the new social networking tools have a place in our classrooms.

On the heels of a story about a Ryerson science professor who attempted to have a student expelled for creating a social network where students discussed work done in his class (the teacher wanted students to work completely independently) I learned about a professor who has incorporated Twitter into his class. Twitter, the most distracting social networking application yet!

Distractibility is an important part of our own nature. 2-million-years ago, human-like creatures that were not distracted by something rustling in the bush didn't survive to be our ancestors. Distractibility is an important part of our nature. It has followed that as we read a hypertext-rich text, we tend to go off elsewhere following related stories or background information. We do this because distraction is an integral part of our nature and therefore it has been built into digital media. Researchers may prove that this is actually a good thing.

When we read we build meaning by stopping and considering how new information fits into what we currently know. Our brain links existing knowledge to knew information via synapses or links of understanding. (Such links may also be destroyed if they don't stand up to tests of credibility.) Therefore, reading and then following suggested links provides us with extended means to make sense of information. The distractable nature of online reading actually provideds greater opportunity for deeper understanding.

So now I return to the professor who uses Twitter. Here is a medium that only allows users to publish 140 characters at a time, usually answering the question, "What are you doing?" I had seen how it was used and couldn't get past its banality.

This professor, however, simply rephrased the question. He asked his class, "What are you THINKING now?" and took advantage of those flash thoughts we have during lectures. Traditionally we write them in our own notes, sometimes we share then with a neighbour, but there are no opportunities to broadcast those little revelations. Using Twitter, however, this guy grabs onto the opportunity tobroadcasts these little observations to the entire lecture audience.

Overhead, accompanying his PowerPoint presentation is a parallel screen displaying a view of Twitter responses to what he is talking about.

A lecture on its own is a monologue but here the professor is allowing a multitude of ideas or connections to be broadcast, noted by others, and hopefully provide meaningful connections for some. His screen and and the Twitter screen take advantage of our innate tendency to be distracted during prolonged activities such as lectures, weddings, etc where our minds wonder. Ideas flickering onto a screen naturally attract our attention, making the lecture a less passive activity than a monologue.

This type of note exchange is being called back channelling and it provides the opportunity to think more deeply about concepts before they drift out of our short-term memory.

While I look forward to seeing how the battle will fare between academic spelling and txt speak in a medium challenges users to express themselves within 140 characters, I do look forward to the interactive nature of such lectures and the richer learning experience they promise.