A three part Easter bonanza post about how Twitter makes people flash-blind because no one speaks the same language, why Twitter might be useful for literary analysis and TweetFighter3 – another FREE game I’ve invented following on from Shelly’s awesome post this week “We don’t want more professional development” – which I know will make some people out there a bit nervous, not least Rebecca Black.
I wonder if one of the many side-effects of exposure to educational-technology discources is a kind of flash blindness.
We don’t always say it, but suggest a reflective practitioner is a more democratic and grounded facilitator-teacher, creating a classroom atmosphere of equality, reflection and shared wonder. Additionally, experts are presumed to know, and must claim to do so, regardless of my own uncertainty. The reason we hire teachers is because of their experise, not their reflective capacity, which is impossible to measure using the blunt tools called Resumés and interviews that we actually use to hire them (yet leaders say this is what they actually want) (brain-missing isn’t it).
At times, it seems messages are flashed before us so randomly, we forget that all of it no matter how motivating, empathetic or entertaining are just messages. Any real change in an organization results from an operation theory. A concrete statement – this is how we’re going to test that theory though action-orientated application.
In the worlds of Def Leppard – Action not words.
Right now, we seem to stop short and languish in a tense state of diversity between what we actually mean and say. We seem to devise so many labels (teacher, mentor, leading-teacher, ed-tech, integrator, educational developer etc) that we are constantly blinking in response.
The cafe at the end of the universe is closed. Please go back.
The array of variable lexicons in the many and diverse discourses around educational technology that we are exposed to (and in turn do to others) is breath-taking. I wonder if we are at a point now where we’ve invented so many new words, theories and praxes that a good deal of any newcomers time is spent trying to make sense of it, even before trying to build the new-grail of the PLN.
For example: A simple Twitter lexicon (which some people would have you believe is the highway to connected-enlightenment) – It’s a flash-gun, maybe a chain-gun of information, lies, truths, ideas and a million other things.
Re-tweet: someone sends you a tweet that you like so you re-tweet it on your account for your “followers” to read
Twoosh: when you make a tweet of exactly 140 characters
Twitterhood/Twitterville: the group of people (followers and those you follow) who elect to see your tweets
Twitpic: one of many applications that enable you to take a picture on your mobile then zip it straight to all your followers via Twitter
Twitterfeeds: news feeds that go straight to your Twitter account
To be a reflective teacher doesn’t mean expert, no more than and expert can be assumed to be non-reflective or reflective. At the base level, teacher educators must begin with persons, places and things. “Learning as transformation” challenges our past learning assumptions and teaching experiences, forcing us to integrate and comprehend old experiences with our present reality. So why are we paying people to chain-gun teachers with bad professional development no one wants?
Because the alternative is … Twitter? Not if you’re an overseer it’s not.
Twitter seems to be a refuge for edupunks – were everyone has a flash-gun and willing to use it.
It’s attraction to those (me) on it, is at least in part that it appears to have no preconceptions or preformed ideas of what ‘education’ is.
From this some people see emergent themes. While others see nothing, just a bright light.
Better teacher-education means better critical analysis of the world they live in.
What teachers want – from those offering professional development – is actually inductive clarity to make sense of social development. The speed at which information comes really stops reflection if we don’t have the time or cause to stop and wonder.
Do we ask students or teacher to try an unpack a “Tweet”? Should we? Does it matter which one, who from, when it was sent or from where?
Is this a viable literary analysis technique we should teach – even though it’s not directly called for in the syllabus?
- What is the narrative strategy?
- What is the narrator’ s tone?
- The meaning of literature often rides on paying close attention to the voice or tone of a text.
- Is the narrator reliable? Is s/he ironic?
- Are there multiple narrators?
- Doubles of the narrator?
- Consider the effects of the narration devices themselves?
- Take a large piece of paper and markers (all the same colour – black)
- Pull up a Twitter feed such as #edtech or other popular group-tag and instead of talking about social media for an hour, ask people to create a concept map.
- Draw out circles of the participants, try to categorize what the are saying by adding spurs to ideas.
- Keep building away for half an hour our so and you’ll end up with hundreds of bubbles and lines to ideas, key words and themes.
- Get more paper, just keep writing as tweets appear on the public timeline.
- Now spend another half an hour trying to collapse those into 20% of the size.
- Combine them, create subsets and pull out people, places and things.
- Finally choose the strongest catagory – the one with the most people, the most ideas and the most things … (maths needed).