Received a very interesting comment from Simonfj (who only identifies with EDNAGroups 
regarding my post relating to Glen Davies’ thoughts and ideas from the Rob Curley keynote. I finished that post expressing the usual frustrations of trying to get institutionalised teaching practices, and institutionalised learner expectations to change and start adopting a far more multi media, web2 approach. I said, “how do we get this market to the conversation” - referring to the Cluetrain of course.
Simonfj inverted the slogan and asks how do we get this conversation to market, making some observations of the comparativesuccesses that web2 has in attracting numbers of people when compared to a classroom.
We can compare the mindsets (and their results). (institutionalized) Teachers will use Web tools to communicate but try and keep their media limited to their local PLU’s. http://www.groups.edna.edu.au/
Market growers will look to their global peers and create environments to help them learn from one another. http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/
..and there are those who straddle both.
I recently unplugged myself entirely from EdNAgroups, and I’ve noticed a few edubloggers stating a similar decision. I want to focus on the glocalisation, and am tired of the introverted discussion in may arenas, sapping the energy of people who would clearly be better off having their views considered by a wider network.
Simon finished with this strange line however:
One thing we do know. Peers can only change institutions from the inside. Otherwise all they can do is set up a blog, wiki, etc and throw stones at them.
I’m not sure where Simons perspective comes from on this. What is the effectiveness of those ’stones’ if we consider their impact on other institutions like politics and elections, journalism, and marketing… just to name a few biggies. And most people I know who work on the ‘inside’ say its almost impossible to seed change there.
I think 2007 will be an interesting year for the adoption of the new socially networked, open source practices. The change agitation has been building in pressure on/in institutions for some time now, I’d hope that at least a few of the suggestions for socially networked and open source will have made it through and there will be a suit of attempts towards those new practices. I’d expect 2 big crashes for every 1 project that makes it through though - as this is the second wave, and earlier adopter euphoria and persistent passion has started to wear off. For those institutions with extreme web filtering turned on, and huge investment on what amounts to nothing but an expensive reinvention of a wheel (sharepoint for example), I’d expect almost 100% failure. See Simon’s comments.
As an interesting relation to this topic Alec Couros has pointed to a turn of events over at BECTA. Perhaps this is an indication for what 2007 will bring - the year where the end began. BECTA released a report last year (or was it the year before) that basically said open source in education is a good thing for UK schools and saves a lot of money. They are currently working on a report on Microsoft Vista and Office 2007 with some initially damning comments we should all make sure our IT departments see. The bewildering bit about it all though, is the fact that BECTA is continuing their Microsoft contract.
To me, this is the sign that the end for Microsoft’s monopoly in Institutionalised Education has begun. BECTA’s left hand is not yet getting heard by its right hand, but is getting heard loud and clear by the BECTA readership. This will have an inevitable end, unless that right hand is corrupt. When in the face of its own research BECTA’s right hand cannot rationally justify its continued relationship with proprietary software like MS, then the left hands suggestions will take hold. BECTA will adopt open source technologies, a few other educational flagship will follow suite and the snowball will roll. OpenSource usability and reliability will surpass proprietary software, the user base will grow, more product developers and service providers will include support for open source, the market will shift etc. Not all this in 2007, indeed most of it is already happening, but the clear beginnings of socially networked, open source change in instutionalised education will occur in 2007.
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 23, 2007 at 7:58 pm
simonfj
Thanks Leigh,
That was good. And this is a fair comment, “most people I know who work on the ‘inside’ say its almost impossible to seed change there.” But with people like you, me and our peers who straddle the divide, the problem is how to turn the stones into lessons, so the “routine habituated”, with all their fears of being quoted, might be encouraged to talk above the radar. This is getting to the point with education.au’s management, as “owners” of the edna domain, where they are beginning to realize that the premise of these kinds of forums is that one must be able to read before they register, and do as your excellent peers do, offer an inclusive institution, not an exclusive one.
This is an attitudinal thing not an intellectual one, and I’m old enough to be able to put it to the oldies that we are monitoring a change in media from one way to interactive, and that institutions like edna will either adapt to the new model or become increasingly irrelevant.
The thing that’s a bit frustrating though, is that I can’t point at the numbers who view your blog, and your mates’, so it makes it hard to convince the thick hides of National institutions just how far out of the Global loops they really are.
Keep throwing them stones, and I’ll keep trying to find ways to catch and count them.
January 23, 2007 at 9:39 pm
leighblackall
Hello again Simonfj. A tool I used to use to measure readership on the old site for this blog is Blogflux. From that link, and other tools like Technorati.com, Del.icio.us and Bloglines.com you can get numbers to use in your arguements. Unfortunately, I recently shifted to this wordpress and am not sure how that has affected readership. I don’t watch such things too closely unless, like you - I am having to quantify something.
I’d be interested to know what you come up with in terms of relative comparisons though.
February 6, 2007 at 11:43 pm
simonfj
This is certainly a prettier blog than the other, and you know how it works, if you write interesting stuff, they’ll find ya.
Re the comparisons. It’s hard. On one side yu have the old approach, like edna, who just don’t measure readership. On the other side yo have people like yourself, alex, etc, who do such good stuff but you can’t measure their readership unless you have a counter on each domain, and between them.
The thing I’m attempting to get a handle on, as an old media bloke, is what influence you and your peers are going to have on the old institutions as the geeks on the networks start to get their global grids organized.
Stones turn into planets pretty quick, so long as you get the centre of gravity right. I know you don’t like the edna asylum, but we had an interesting lurker throw a few stones around inside last week. http://www.groups.edna.edu.au/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=11695
If yu want to throw a few more around, it would help the wardens used to the idea that the inmates won’t take over the asylums; they’ll just ignore them. cheers
February 7, 2007 at 12:26 am
leighblackall
Hello again Simon
I had a look at the EdNA forum you pointed to. I saw a few familiar names, one that I just can’t take anymore of. Apart from the familiar difficulty of orienting myself into how those forums flow - I couldn’t get into it. I couldn’t see the lurker you mentioned, nor anything that was particularly suprising - except that Alex (god bless him) is still in there and trying to broaden the scope of the conversation. Perhaps he’s the lurker you mention - but I’d hardly call him a lurker… but certainly one that throws stones that I hope and prey may turn into planets.
February 9, 2007 at 12:59 am
simonfj
Hiya,
Understand. Yeah, it’s it bit like walking in quicksand. The navigation is, well, unnavigable. It was just the first one from Robyn which was a nice one for me. The story about how she’s got a coaching business - 1000 students in about 48 countries. Helps turn a few heads.
OK forget edna. Too many bad memories i can see. Give me your opinion on these guys. They act as a planet for the web design/programming communities. Navigation/layout/content/feel, etc. Out of 10?
http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/
February 9, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Leigh Blackall
Hello again Simon. I’m not sure why you are pointing me to that site either.. Nothing there draws me to it. The subject matter might be of interest to me, not because I enjoy the subject, but because I need to know. I need that suject (web development and IT) to become enjoyable. It needs to be more personal, personally inviting, real. From the superficial glance I gave it, I saw commercial. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing… I think the real point is the same as the one against EdNA - depersonalised, old web 1 portal type thinking. EdNA especially, would do better if it found ways to streamline a network of individuals, not by asking them to join email groups and threaded forums, but through RSS and blogs. Perhaps both, as there are clearly many people passionate about surrendering their online identity and IP into EdNA like blobs,, so EdNA needs to find a way to help bring the two together.
February 10, 2007 at 6:23 pm
simonfj
OK. Well you did say “streamline a network of individuals”, and that our institutions “need to find a way to bring the two together”.
Perhaps i should have pointed you at the blogs page, rather than the forums page. http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/
, your preferences being different than my own. The articles usually link off to an individual’s blog or group’s pages.
I just thought you may have liked the idea of, as you see down the bottom of the forum’s page, of seeing a couple of thousand people online, reading and communicating (with IM & probably Skype). This is how it is 24/7 and growing, (about 200/month) so it’s obviously real and personal to them.
As yu said, the problem is that individualists will see this kind of ‘portal’ and only give it a “superficial glance”, the size & ads being a turnoff straight up.
But if you expect the old institutions like edna to “find a way to bring them together”, forget it. Only groups of individuals can do that. Sorry, now I’m teaching (a subject), which is dead. Long live learning (about students’ behaviour). Just thought you may be interested in how those in the web design business have found a reasonably happy compromise.