tion
modera
presenta
OR
using
backchannel
for more
effective
conference engagement
Computers & Writing 2010, Purdue Univeristy
Saturday, May 22 • 10:15 - 11:30 a.m. • Panel F6
Vincent
Rhodes
?
backchannel
Map 1: Conferences before digital backchannel
Map 2: Computers & Writing 2009
Map 3: Keynote Presentation (Specific Articulation)
Ecotones and Crossroads: Re-imagining the Spaces of Learning in an In-between Time
Barbara Ganley, Centers for Community Digital Exploration
An active implementer of new media and Web 2.0 practices within writing classrooms since 2001, her research interests include the multimedia essay as a means of academic and vernacular discourse and social software as a vehicle for personal expression, community building, and connected learning. Since 2004 she has kept a professional blog to explore the pedagogical, philosophical and theoretical underpinnings to the emergent learning outcomes in her uses of digital communication technologies in the classroom and out in the world. You can find her blogging at bgblogging.wordpress.com."
"Barbara Ganley is Founder and Director of the new national organization, Centers for Community Digital Learning. Barbara Ganley has spent her career exploring integrated learning across formal and informal contexts. For nineteen years as lecturer in the Writing Program and English Department at Middlebury College, and director of Middlebury's Project for Integrated Expression, Barbara taught innovative courses in creative writing, composition, arts writing, and Irish literature and film.
11:00-12:15 Keynote (Friday • June 19, 2009)
(from C&W 2009 Program, p.29)
Keynote Address
Barbara Ganley
(speaker)
Ganley's
Presentation
Audience
Tweeters
Twitter
mobile
devices
computers
http://prezi.com/108186
At the time, there was no easy/comprehensive way to collect all data (tweets) without programming skills and "whitelist" status. Twitter imposes API call limits that impact the number of tweets that can be collected at one time and the time period for which tweets can be viewed.
Inconsistent search functions confuse the data collection process.
These factors lead to the need to "reconstruct" data. [The tweetstream for this conference is, therefore, incomplete.)
Other research on Twitter has noted these difficulties as well (Honeycutt & Herring 2009; Krishnamurthy, Phillipa & Martin, 2008)

The intent of this research is not to evaluate the success of the keynote, rather it is to explore the efficacy of foregrounding Twitter and using ANT to engage in a more recursive & dialogic conference experience. It would be nearly impossible to determine the actual intentions of the speaker or participants as they would be reflecting on these with the benefit of hindsight and review of the tweetstream.
limitations
Problem: Barbara Ganley should have been the moderator for the keynote, but wasn't. She invited this form of digital interaction for a brief example and then ignored the backchannel for the rest of her presentation. Ganley missed an opportunity. 
The performative aspect is critical not only to ANT, but also in better understanding Twitter’s role in establishing social networks. Although many Twitter users follow a large number of people, they interact with a relatively small number of them (Huberman, Romero & Wu 2009). Despite the appearance of density, the social network is actually sparse. This bears out Latour’s cautions that an actor must be performing — actively engaged — in the network or it generates no trace and provides no interesting information (2005, p. 31). 
Some in the audience believed she missed the mark in the tone she utilized. The Twitter backchannel offered the chance to see this gap and remediate the disconnect. (This could have been beneficial even if she had deliberately chosen to adopt a "scolding" tone and play the provacateur.)
findings
We have the opportunity to utilize a different model in conference presentations.
many to many
one to many to one
"The definition of the term backchannel varies with context and usage. To some it suggests an intangible, clandestine community. To others, it suggests an empowering toolkit for participation, collaboration, and interaction. The central function of the backchannel is its use as a secondary or background complement to an existing frontchannel, which may consist of a professor, teacher, speaker, or lecturer. It offers a unique communication medium, a novel toolkit through which students can create, identify, and filter new modes of learning."
Yardi, 2006 p.852
Should a speaker capitalize on digital backchannel?
What speaking contexts are most conducive to use of digital backchannel?
How can presenters prepare to effectively capitalize on the digital backchannel?
What should a good backchannel be?
key questions
Old Dominion University
varhodes@gmail.com
@varhodes (Twitter)
Write or Tweet
about your experience
with ecotones
Speaker
responds
to feedback
Tweeters
Audience
computers
mobile devices
Twitter
#cw09
#cw09ecotone
personal notes
Observations
about Presentation
Audience
Tweeters
computers
mobile
devices
Twitter
Question &
Answer Period
Keynote Address #2
Bill Cope
Cope's
Presentation
241 tweets are generated during the Ganley keynote (out of just over 1,600 for #cw09 hashtag). 47 of a total 130 tweeters participate during the keynote (including 7 non-attending tweeters). 287 people attended #cw09.

Speaker hides TweetDeck and maximizes presentation. TweetDeck notifications periodically appear with alerts on new tweets, but the speaker is not attending to them and the full audience cannot see them because they are no longer projected on the main screen.

Tweetstream conatins many "on-topic" tweets, but backchannel conversation regarding the "tone" of the presentation develops.
Remainder
of C&W09
conference
sessions
postconference
new hashtag:
#cw09happening
blog entries
Actors:
@mday666 (initiates conversation, 7 tweets)
@carl_whithaus  (weighs in & references tweetstream during Q&A, 17 tweets)

Moderators:
@KarlStolley (fuels crticism, 18 tweets)
@lesliemb (defends @bgblogging, 17 tweets)
NOTE: Tweeting to #cw09 continues throughout the conference. Other keynotes & panel discussions are better received. Some speakers integrate Twitter more fully into their presentations attending to tweetstream and responding in real time.
from itunes.ucdavis.edu
from itunes.ucdavis.edu
@carl_whithaus
NOTE: For bulk of presentation, the speaker uses the  one-to-many model of communication. There are "audience participation" moments built into presentation, but few instances of direct feedback from audience to speaker until the traditional Q&A period at the end of the keynote.
references Twitter backchannel in question to speaker.
TechRhet
List-Serv
Please feel free to tweet
your thoughts on this topic using the #backchannel hashtag
Political Context
In the political context, backchannel offers a connotation of being unofficial, unwanted or illicit
(Kellogg et al, 2006, p. 451; McCarthy, boyd, Churchill, Griswold, Lawley & Zaner 2004, p.550)
Linguistic Context
(Kellogg, Erickson, Wolf, Levy, Christensen, Sussman & Bennett, 2006, p. 451; Wikipedia 2009)
In the linguistic sense, backchannel communications are utterances or non-verbal signals that indicate a listener is listening to a speaker
Detractors of digital backchannel cite a number of negative consequences: 
distractions
posting of disrespectful comments
creation of in-group/out-group conflict
uneven participation among those engaged and those not engaged in the digital backchannel
adverse impacts on participation in frontchannel activities 
(Kellogg et al, 2006; McCarthy & boyd, 2005; McCarthy et al, 2004)

Detractors argue that the attempt to multi-task during a presentation really amounts to a state of continuous partial inattention (McCarthy & boyd 2005; Yardi 2006; Crawford, 2004).
Proponents of digital backchannel contend that these virtual spaces provide an opportunity for participants to:
ask questions
get or give help
provide relevant information and references without disrupting the main channel 
(Kellogg et al, 2006; McCarthy & boyd, 2005; McCarthy et al, 2004).  

Proponents consider the possibilities for constructivist learning. “Students are creating their own knowledge by having the freedom to direct backchannel discussion in ways that are relevant, contextual, and instructional for their learning purposes…. Peer-to-peer interactions support flexible, learner-centered designs in which learning is active and organic rather than static” (Yardi, 2006, p. 854).
Detractors
Proponents
backchannel
actor network theory
"ANT suggests that we examine human and non-human actors equally, giving neither priority [7]. Thus people and technology are regarded as equal agents of action. According to ANT, actors are constantly in motion, creating and leaving networks and associations with other actors. Rather than pigeonhole these associations, ANT seeks to observe these traces and let the actors instruct the designer as to what the connections might mean."
Potts, 2008
Although Latour backs away from the claim non-human actors have equal agency to humans, in this context ANT is an especially appropriate analytical tool because non-human actors (technologies such as Twitter and the conference hashtag) play such a critical role in the formation of a temporary social network. Potts (2009) proposes that mapping these networks provides a greater understanding of how information flows and knowledge is constructed.
one to many
The Current Model
The
Fear
The Possibility
Backchannel. (2009, March 31). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved August 13, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Backchannel&oldid=280876998
Crawford, W. (2004, July/August). May I have your attention, please [Electronic version]. EContent. 42-43.
Ganley, B. (2009a, June 19) Ecotones and Crossroads: Re-imagining the spaces of learning in an in-between time [Video recording of keynote address]. In Computers & Writing 2009 (Davis, CA, June 18-21, 2009). Retrieved July 5, 2009 from http://itunes.ucdavis.edu/
Ganley, B. (2009b, June 19) Ecotones and Crossroads: Re-imagining the spaces of learning in an in-between time: An interactive keynote for Computers & Writing 2009, UC Davis, June 19, 2009 [Presentation materials]. Retrieved July 5, 2009 from http://prezi.com/108186/
Hine, C. (2005). Research relationships and online relationships: Introduction. In Christine Hine (Ed.), Virtual Methods: Issues in social research on the Internet (17-20). Oxford: Berg.
Honeycutt, C. & Herring, S. (2009) Beyond microblogging: Conversation and collaboration on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press. 1-10.
Huberman, B.A., Romero, D.M. & Wu, F. (2009 January) Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope. First Monday 14, 1-10.
Java, A., Finin, T., Song, X. & Tseng, B. (2007). Why we Twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities. In Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD Workshop (San Jose, CA, August 12, 2007). 
Kellog, W., Erickson, T., Wolf, T.V., Levy, S., Christensen, J., Sussman, J., & Bennett, W. (2006). Leveraging digital backchannels to enhance user experience in electronically mediated communication. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Computer Supported Work (Banff, Alberta, Canada, 2006). 451-454.
Krishnamurthy, B., Phillipa, G. & Martin, A. (2009). A few chirps about Twitter. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Online Social Networks (Seattle, WA, August 18, 2008).
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Madrigal, A. (2008, March 9). Meebo users plot revolt during dull panels. Underwire. Retrieved August 13, 2009, from http://www.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/sxsw-meebo-user/
Madrigal, A. & Wortham, J. (2008, March 11). SXSW: 2008, The year the audience keynoted. Underwire. Retrieved August 13, 2009, from http://www.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/sxsw-2008-the-y/
McCarthy, J.F. & boyd, d.m. (2005). Digital backchannels in shared physical spaces: experiences at an academic conference. In CH ’05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Portland, OR, April 2-7, 2005), New York: ACM Press. 1641-1644.
McCarthy, J.F., boyd, d.m., Churchill, E.F., Griswold, G.G., Lawley, E. & Zaner, M. (2004). Digital backchannels in shared physical spaces: attention, inattention and contention. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (Chicago, IL, Nov. 6-10, 2004). New York: ACM Press. 550-553.
McNeill, T. (2009). More than just passing notes in class? Reflections on the Twitter-enabled backchannel (draft). Unpublished manuscript, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK. Retrieved August 13, 2009 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/16287533/More-than-just-passing-notes-in-class-The-Twitterenabled-backchannel
McNely, B.J. (2009). Backchannel persistence and collaborative meaning-making. Conference proposal submitted for acceptance, Ball State University, Muncie, IN. 
Meloni, J. (2009, July 8). Grab ’em: Conference tweet archives. academic sandbox // the blog. Retrieved July 8, 2009 from http://www.academicsandbox.com/blog/?p=215
Potts, L. (2008). Diagramming with actor network theory: A method for modeling holistic experience. Proceedings of the International Professional Communication Conference, 2008 IEEE.
Rutter, J. & Smith, G.W.H. (2005). Ethnographic presence in a nebulous setting. In Christine Hine (Ed.), Virtual Methods: Issues in social research on the Internet (81-92). Oxford: Berg.
Sheahan, P. (2009, August 10). Twitter induced paranoia. Future Proof (blog from the Sydney Morning Herald). Retrieved August 13, 2009, from http://blogs.smh.com.au/small-business/futureproof/2009/08/10/twitterinduced.html
Twitter.com [Site statistics]. (2009 July). Compete.com. Retrieved August 13, 2009 from http://siteanalytics.compete.com/twitter.com/
Whithaus, C. Twitter correspondence. August 10, 2009.
Yardi, S. (2006). The role of backchannel in collaborative learning environments. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of Learning Sciences. (Bloomington, IN, 2006). 852-858.
Zhao, D. & Rosson, M.B. (2009). How and why people Twitter: The role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work (Sanibel Island, FL). 243-252.
Works Cited/Referenced
What speaking contexts 
seem most conducive?
Keynote presentations (longer duration)
Expert presenting to experts
Pedagogical settings (opportunity for submitting questions)
Presentatons seeking significant audience participation/feedback
Technology available at venue
How can
presenters
prepare?
Know the conference backchannel norms
Make your expectations/intentions regarding tweets clear at the start
Understand your audience and its needs (lay v. expert, etc.)
Invite post-presentation discussion via the backchannel
If time permits, build in breaks (exercises, video clips, etc.) to allow time to check tweet stream
If possible, stick with the conference hastag (particularly for keynote)
Employ a "spotter" to monitor tweet stream & alert you to "problems" or key questions
What should a good backchannel be?
Recursive dialog/negotiation between the speaker & the audience
Valuable resource to speaker for feedback & reflection (Yardi, 2006; McCarthy et al, 2004)
Opportunity to broaden exposure to the speaker's thoughts & ideas
Vehicle for the audience to ask questions
Opportunity for audience members to engage
Opportunity for enhanced, collaborative meaning-making (McNely, 2009)
CIVIL!
Potts, 2009
Actor-Network Theory
www.DigitalCrossRhodes.com
Digital Backchannel