Connected and Exclusive?



In the #clmooc conversations on Twitter the other night, the idea of inclusivity was tossed around. How do educators ensure that everyone has the ability to participate in online activities? Do we exclude some from participation? Can connected learning be fully realized without complete engagement?

Connected learning by its very definition requires some ability to access the internet. There was a time when this constraint was difficult to overcome, but today, most people, especially those in developed countries, have access via smart phone, tablet, or computer. There are exceptions, of course, particularly in rural areas and in places where a number of circumstances slow the process, but the hardware issue is increasingly resolved, and will continue to improve as costs go down. In that sense, more and more people are able to be included.

The social part of connected learning is possibly the easiest to access. A Pew research study found that in the US, 74% of online adults actively use social media. I suspect those numbers will continue to rise as the next generations reach adulthood, as 95% of US teens are on social networking sites. Educators must learn ways to harness that connectivity for more than social interactions, but the social is a good place to begin. Twitter and Instagram (and SnapChat) seem to be the biggest players in the current teen market (based solely on my observation as a parent and teacher of teens), while Facebook is increasingly relegated to the “old people” (anyone over about 25). SnapChat’s limitations seems to preclude education applications, but there may be a creative way to utilize its popularity. Twitter and Instagram hold more promise.

So, connection is not the primary issue. Engagement is the greater challenge. Of course, that’s true in the face-to-face classroom as well, but distance seems to create a boundary or buffer that is more difficult to break through. While a smile or nod may encourage a reluctant student in a brick-and-mortar classroom, the same cannot be said of the virtual realm. In order to be truly connected, everyone has to fully engage and participate.

So, how do we educators avoid excluding people who are already connected? Some form of exclusion is inevitable: language barriers, time zones, type of media (Twitter? Google+? Instagram?), expectations (real or imagined), and miscommunication. Some exclusive elements can be thwarted with creative thinking and commitment to communication, but some cannot. What does one do with a student who CHOOSES exclusion?  How can we provide a new community atmosphere in a relative void? How do we structure or scaffold this idea of connected learning to students (along with parents, other teachers, and administrators) who are new to the concept?

This is where I believe the “social” part of social media affords an opportunity. Since so many people, both teens and adults, are already using social media to connect their non-academic lives, we who promote connected learning need to begin with a social structure.  Gee’s “affinity spaces” certain offer a place to begin. I think this is why I’m drawn to unique ideas like the “untroductions“. They may reveal personal and social commonalities that can then be built on to create a learning environment that inspires creative production in a collaborative community. I can’t count the number of Doctor Who fans I have met around the world through various Twitter communities and learning events. That bond, as superficial as it may be, can become the foundation for something greater: new stories for the TARDIS, what it means to be “bigger on the inside” or even an exploration of the science involved in space-time travel. (I just read The Martian by Andy Weir – talk about geeky science meeting literary nerd! I loved it.) Finding the element of common interest is a beginning.

A safe place may be the most important. Even in the most free-flowing community there must be boundaries for appropriate behavior, speech, and respect. A good facilitator must be able to quietly minimize both awkwardness and poor judgement. The community must welcome all who choose to participate as long as those participants are willing to maintain mutual respect, edification, and support. These communities must not become places where bullying is permitted on any level. Everyone should be welcomed for whatever they bring to the table. There is no distinction between ages, genders, religion, politics, or whatever else may create a divide. The mission of the community must be clear–and clearly communicated. Within that, however, there must be freedom of expression, creativity, unusual ideas, and multimodal forms. The idea of becoming community means that everyone has something of value to contribute, and everyone can learn. When the educator abandons the role of expert and becomes a member of the community who has much to learn, even the most insecure participant may be encouraged.

Having said that, there will be those who choose to isolate themselves, not for reasons of shyness or inability, but because they truly do not want to participate. They will do the very minimum required, make their hashtags particularly snarky (#required), and avoid dialogue with other members of the community. While is it important to reach out privately to these, we must accept that not everyone is going to see the brilliance in our plan and that inclusion is sometimes a decision. In those cases, it may be beneficial to remember the old adage, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.”

I opened this rambling post with a picture of a bridge. The internet is like that bridge, connecting people and ideas that are otherwise separated by insurmountable challenges of time and place. Most people can get to the bridge one way or another, but unless they begin the journey across, they will never connect to the adventures on the other side. And who wants to miss out on that?

10 responses »

  1. The internet is a constructed thing. I agree. But it is also a “being constructed” thing. I think it is the ‘bridging’ with all manner of diverse folk, lurkers/trolls/excluders/takers/givers that lends its saving grace. Love your post. Am thinking about connected learning principles and values myself as I reflect on this first week of #clmooc. I appreciate especially your take on building many affinity spaces to afford all a chance to be with others.

  2. Great posting; you captured some of the challenges many of us have with teaching and learning online, especially when involving social media in our work.

    I am wondering at your final comment, “Having said that, there will be those who choose to isolate themselves.” I agree that this may be the case for some, but others may not participate for other issues (self-conscious, afraid for some reason, concerned about potential employment, stalkers, bullies, etc.), some of which may not quite fit with the severity that “isolate themselves” seems to imply. For example, if I felt I could not be active for some reason or another, I may not describe myself as isolating myself, as opposed to “unable to participate for some reason.” The same end, agreed, though somehow a little less intense (as self-isolation seems a bit sinister to me).

    Looking forward to reading more!

    • I think I was trying to identify the ones who choose not to participate rather than the ones who cannot for various reasons. Hmm. May need to clarify that.

      • Again, choosing not to participate may mean many things. I do not want to get all Platonic (one who knows the good will do it…), but there are lots of things involved with “choosing” to engage or not. I suppose I am just focusing on those grey areas, where what people say and do may point to much more complicated experiences.

  3. Love the bridge metaphor and the questions you are asking .Very similar to ones i have been asking myself

    Speaking of bridges. Can i take the metaphor further ? Others who never tried connected learning want to know what’s on the other side of the bridge. For us it’s a leap of faith that the bridge may lead us somewhere interesting but ss yet unknown. Even if we had clear goals (we sometimes do) and faith the bridge would take us there, it’s the journey i value most BUT also the conditions of that journey may turn ppl off (who are less digitally literate or less disposed to openness). What do you think ?

    • Oh wow. So, at the moment, CL is territory for the adventurous and until we can really paint a picture of what is on the other side of the bridge, we need to demonstrate the joy of the journey.

      • To this point, much of learning brings us through grey areas where we do not know where we may end up. This is the issue of learning objectives (“objective” stuff the teacher expects learners to know at the end) and learning subjectives (We never know how learning may change us). For many people, learning objectives are enough, as they are intentionally intended to lead to a particular place or with a basic set of knowledge on something (like with undergraduate education or teaching for tests or the like). Personally, when I teach (I adjunct), I only teach graduate and doctoral courses, so much of where I try to bring my students is very personal with how they interact with the course content.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.