DISQUS

psychemedia · 1 month ago

Isn't the best sort of marketing word-of-mouth/'viral' marketing? Something that encourages a user to send out 'invites' that give the recipient, as well as the sender, some sort of immediate reward? As well as a good strapline and remembering to 'sell the benefits'?

There's also a fine line to tread between folk associating whatever tools you suggest with the course, rather than seeing them as being more generally useful (and maybe more useful in contexts away from the course).

Maybe one way to sell the tools is to not sell them? Eg along the lines of "I don't know if this approach will be useful in this course context, but I find it useful in this other context..."

If you're trying to prove a benefit to students in the closed course context, and can't demonstrate those benefits to them, you're on to a loser?

Do you actually know that these social tools are good for supporting learning in whatever course you're teaching? Or do you know they work in another context and can see how they might provide some sort of benefit in your course context?

AJCann · 1 month ago

At the moment we're looking to simplify the rather complex mix of tools we use on this course because it's blowing many first year students away at present. Whether these tools are good for supporting learning in our course is something we'll be able to answer after we've collected the data, which sadly will have to wait another year now as I only get one bite at this a year.

amcunningham · 1 month ago

I think you are completely right. We need to have examples of staff using and understanding these tools before we start inflicting them on students. I don't mean that you don't understand them AJ, but I think we should really be open and honest about how we are ALL learning here. That means that their use should not contribute to any kind of summative assessment way.

AJCann · 1 month ago

I can understand why you say that, but I think it's a flawed argument. Use of any technology or pedagogical approach for summative assessment changes the way students interact with it. Therefore the only way we can understand it is through using it. The safeguard for students is to ensure new approaches are introduced gradually so that out the outset they only form a small part of the overall pattern of assessment, and to maintain at all times a varied pattern of assessment formats so thta no students is disadvantaged.

Jo Badge · 1 month ago

I like the idea of using FF in this way - when? for the BS1010 or BS1011? or are you looking ahead to next academic year?
However, I wonder if the object orientated nature of FF may not encourage the 'blog-like' reflection we were hopign for on Wordpress?

(and btw if I comment on the blog, but by DISQUS account is pulled into FF, where does it go in FF and will I soon disappear in an infinite loop of my own self posting destruction?)

AJCann · 1 month ago

I'm planning to roll this out next term. I'm not totally convinced Friendfeed is as object-orientated as you keep claiming ;-) The chronologically-ordered nature of status updates should be a good scaffolding for reflection. We'll need to think about assessment criteria next.

John Postill · 1 month ago

Hi Alan, thanks for referring to my blog post.

My point was not so much that Facebook and other so-called social networ(ing) sites are 'antisocial' but rather that the key organising principle on such sites is the egocentred (or personal) network, i.e. a specific type of network in which an individual (or 'ego' in the technical parlance) is at the centre. I wasn't suggesting that Facebook is antisocial - in fact, I find it to be highly social.

This kind of network is radically different from a network that is not centred on an individual, e.g. the Facebook network known as 'Sheffield' which is made up of thousands of Facebook users who are (or claim to be) connected to the English city of Sheffield. In this second case, there is no central ego; this is not Tommy Smith's or Sally Jones's network, it is what social network analysts would call a 'whole network'.

My point is that the former type of network, the egocentred network, is the predominant form.

AJCann · 1 month ago

Hi John. I take your point and agree with it. I used the word antisocial not in pejorative way but as a simple shorthand to contract the individually-motivated approach to networks (which we are hoping to harness) with the groupthink mentality which is normally presented when such sites are discussed.