Many to Many:  How Entire Communities Can Collaborate
Source: http://houseofpaper.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/here-comes-everybody.jpg
Educon 2.2 Conversation-- Jim Heynderickx
30 January 2010
www.k12converge.com
Secret Subtitles
Should Entire Communities Collaborate?
Should Online Academics be Separate from Social Networks?

Are there limits to online openness?
We're bored with Moodle.... what's next?
It's suicide to use blogs with students.
How do we figure out this
Web 2.0, Two-Way Web Thing?
Can I get fired for this?
Clay Shirky-- http://www.ramiropol.com.ar/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/ClayShirky.jpg
Five Big Ideas
and One General
Concept
Idea 2: Facebook, Twitter, Mobile Phones,
IM, Discussion Boards, Blogs, Nings, Listservs,
Flickr and related services are altering how 
inter-supportive groups form.
Idea 1: Technology is removing scarsity 
and cost in the areas of publishing, communication,
information access, and connectivity.
Idea 3: Self-organizing groups can create content and action of great value.  Examples: Flickr photo collections, Wikipedia, Publicity for causes, Social Action against repression, and micro-niche support groups.
Idea 4: Professions based on scarsity of information production and distribution will have to change in light of widespread amateurization.
Idea 5: Not all Internet-enhanced groups and causes will be "good."  Examples: teenage pro-anorexia support groups, terrorist groups, how to make homemade bombs, etc.
General Concept: The printing press wasn't good for the profession of "scribes."  The Internet isn't necessarily good for the professions of journalism, professional photographers, and other information specialists.  The change in information access, however, is good for overall society.
Schools and Web 2.0
Tools
EdTech Evolution:
Computers
Internet
Email/Main Webpage
Online Academic Content System
Two-Way Web?
Easier Networking
of Terrorist Groups
Groups that combine
to support unhealthy
or dangerous activities.
Amateurization of Information
Professions (journalism, 
photography, advertising).
Closed
Bad
Good
Open
Moodle
EPorfolios
No Online
Access
No student email
accounts allowed
Heavily filtered
Internet Access
Few online
skills
Online Research,
but no collaboration
Teacher experimentation with Web 2.0 tools
Comprehensive Online Academic Content Management System
Constructive and focused online collaboration and sharing
Regular email
use
Participation in
Web 2.0 for personal
interests
Routine Web 2.0 use 
for professional 
and social ends
Core
Concepts
Possible Path
Class-centric.  
Semester-centric.
Student-centric.  
Multi-year, if not permanent.
Moodle pages disappear at end of semester or year
Moodle pages have threaded discussions and information sharing
Only enrolled students can see Moodle pages
No Parent Access.  No Public Access.
Moodle pages for all classes, grades 6-12
Altered role of outside authorities and adult community involvement.
Altered assessment/requirements for coursework.  Acculmulating knowledge.
Profile page per student.  Shared or hidden artefacts.  Focused Porfolio pages.
Student choice of private data, sharing with teacher, classmates, division, parents, public.
Shared, multi-year discussion and information exchange by subject.
Why?
So education more closely resembles 21st Century lifelong learning.
So students see trusted adults model online citizenship. 
Potential global reach.
Because comfort with networking
skills has always been an asset.
Is this change good or bad?
Is this a fad?
As Clay Shirky notes, the new paradigm is Publish then Filter.
What if the whiteboards were never erased?
What if generations of students could collaborate?
If I choose to keep all of my school work, 
is it a type of externalized memory?
http://blogs.courant.com/rick_green/newspaper-press-thumb-283x424.jpg
The Mire
Even on online "community bulletin board" for parents can carry risks in terms of management, answering questions, providing access, and maintaining fairness.  
Even providing public access for comments on student work could be considered less complicated than parent access for comments.
Most schools have careful and professional 
communication pathways with parents. 
Public Figures?
Portland Oregon Newspaper
provides unmoderated discussion boards
for the discussion of High School Athletics.
Small but vocal sub-set of the public use forums to insult and criticize HS athletes by name after athletic events.
School and families try to request changes, but even deleting accounts from forums do not keep active members from re-registering.
Moderating the Planet
As Clay Shirky documents about Wikipedia, it does not work by the simple goodness of many people providing much content followed by free editing.
Wikipedia would be torn apart without the strong hand of the super editors, the locking of some controversial articles, and the remarkably fast "roll back" to previous versions of articles.
Even with these editors, incorrect and libelious information does appear on Wikipedia, in some cases for months before detection.
Wikipedia does not "run itself."  It involves a lot of management through its most dedicated volunteers.
Example: stuents discuss next week's Homecoming events with online discussion board.  Anonymous member of public adds bomb threat with comment feature.
Anonymous threats.
Adavanced Cyber-bullying.
Creative Cheating and Plagiarism
Easier social networking for most students, including the socially disadvantaged.
Development of Digital Citizenship
More open and life-integrated learning.
Opportunities for rewarding social participation.
An increasingly aware and engaged society.
We would all like a researcher to reveal in understandable terms the changes in communications in the last ten years.
Clay Shirky's Many to Many Concepts have struck a cord with many educators.
Shirky speaks of exciting things: civilizations changed by the Internet, many helping many, increasing social capital.
He is also realistic-- not all changes are good, and many successes could be considered a statistical fluke given the volume of failures.
There's an excitement surrounding these tools and changes that suggests a wholesale change in how we teach.
There is also concern that digital decentralization could harm how we connect with students.
Let's take a look at some core principles and realities before starting our conversation.
Should schools be like Microsoft or Linux?
Basically, schools are like Microsoft.  We are not trying to create a tiny percentage of great students through international,  collaborative iterations.  
Student's home use of social networking tools is more Linux-like.  
We need to serve all students.  We don't tolerate high rates of failure (75 to 90%) as we try new things.
Networking a broader community for involvement, even for one good idea or reference from one person, only makes sense if the moderation overhead is acceptable.
Schools don't have a "zero cost for failure" model.
They have unallocated time to invest in open source discussions and sharing and projects (like Facebook and Flickr).
Conversation Topic:  Instead of re-inventing education with Web 2.0 tools, is our responsibility to increase critical awareness of the benefits and drawbacks of participating in social networks?
Is this part of a larger discussion of what it means to be a world-wide digital citizen?
Our relationships with students are expected to be hi touch, but no personal (like friends in Facebook). Many to Many communications can often be light touch.
Coasean Ceiling
Coasean Floor
Bonding Capital
Bridging Capital
Publish, then Filter
No Cost Failure
Power Law
Distribution
This is fun, but what does it mean?
Can education be open-sourced?
Source: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue1/tremayne.image001.gif
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_09yFuGAA1P0/SQ8833-zrGI/AAAAAAAAAYI/ptJAEK-QzKc/s400/Peoplematrix.jpg