I spoke with someone recently who told me they had been checking this blog, actually visiting to see if I had posted. I informed them about RSS feeds and Google Reader (which I use). For those that don't know, when I open my Google Reader web page, I have all the blogs that I am interested in right there in front of me and can easily see what they've posted.
To subscribe to this blog, click the subscribe button located at the very bottom of the page (scroll down all the way).
In a Web 2.0 Learning Community meeting, hosted by the BGSU Center for Teaching and Learning Technology, I was caught off guard when one of the members thought it odd that they could not "look at themselves" (in the face) when they chatted in Second Life. Immediately I thought of my Yahoo IM profile pic that started at me when in IM chat. Meanwhile, in SL (Second Life) I was chatting with my avatar's back to me. Was this unintuitive? Was I more likely to say something different when looking at a pic of myself vs. my representation of self (or the back of my representation)?
I think that intuitive controls or modes of communication become so favored that we have a hard time adapting to new ones. This argument seems in line with the polychronic classroom for two reasons:
- Students coming from college prep or lecture heavy schools actually CAN take notes. They also may actually prefer a straight lecture.
- Students who spend much of their day IMing and typing in shorthand may not be able to take such good notes. In fact, they might not even be able to decipher what is important and what is not during a lecture. How might the intuitive nature of communication or information acquisition differ for these students? How may it be accommodated?