The Ed Techie

The reciprocity economy

<image Reciprocal roof decking by Ziggy Fresh http://www.flickr.com/photos/smallape/2943537392/>

In my talk on digital literacies I mentioned a 'reciprocity economy', and just wanted to expand on the idea. We are accustomed to the idea of the attention economy - it's getting eyeballs that counts online. As each person develops their PLN online it seems to me that it's not attention that is significant, but establishing reciprocity.

I have come to believe that your personal learning network (it probably doesn't need the 'learning', it's just your personal network) is increasingly the most valuable asset you will have. And that's valuable as in 'adds value to your life', not economic value. It will help you with work, socialising, personal life, interests, hobbies, entertainment.

To deploy probably the most over-used analogy around, it's like a garden - you've got to sow, tend and weed it to get value from it. But it's more of a country garden, a bit organic and unplanned rather than the highly structured garden. It takes time and effort and you have to give something of yourself to it.

Think about how your PLN is constructed. It probably centres around twitter, a blog, your blog reader, delicious, Flickr, a few wikis, and maybe some other tools where you follow people (eg Slideshare). There will be different types of reciprocity in this, for example most of the people whose blogs I read also read mine.  Similarly in twitter, I tend to follow people if they follow me. This is fairly standard reciprocity - do unto others as they do unto you.

But can we extend the notion of reciprocity? Continuing with the examples of blogs and twitter, I will give you my continued readership if you give me interesting and regular updates. We can then build on this notion of reciprocal, but not identical, activity for more subtle interactions, let's call it shifted reciprocity. I can put out a lazyweb request on Twitter if I have either responded previously to such requests (standard reciprocity) OR I have given enough of myself to twitter, such that people feel well disposed towards me (shifted reciprocity).

If you're still with me and have accepted the proposal that your PLN is significant and reciprocity underpins it, then we can begin to think of an economy of reciprocity. This isn't something we make hard calculations about, it is probably what we do in most social relations all the time at a subconscious level. In this economy, the more you give online that is of value to those in your network then the more 'credit' you establish.

This allows us to see that, obviously, spamming is bad - you are not establishing a reciprocal relationship. But also if we look at, for instance, Sarah's list of following behaviour in Twitter, we can see that most of them relate to establishing reciprocity. If someone doesn't have a profile, or doesn't update then their reciprocal currency is diminished. It also helps us frame our behaviour in any new tool, for instance setting up auto-follows and direct messages in Twitter is devaluing the reciprocal nature of following - I know you'll follow me back if I follow you, but that means that decision isn't based on any assessment of my value to your network. Therefore we're unlikely to have much reciprocal value to each other.

It seems to me that what we're discovering is that like any economy (and economy doesn't have to mean money, natural selection arises because of nature's economy) establishing any 'wealth' requires effort, time or innovation. How this economy sits alongside the other, fiscal (broken) one will be a key question for social media.

Technorati - grounds for divorce

	Elbow - Grounds for Divorce
	Adblock
	Found at skreemr.com

(play song while reading)

Technorati has always had it's problems, but like in any relationship, you can overlook them for a while. However, they've been adding up lately, and I think we've reached the stage of irreconcilable differences. Here are the grounds for divorce:

1. It's broken - speaking just as this user, I know it doesn't work reliably. Exhibit A) - my authority hasn't changed for 20 days and even if I ping it manually, it still says 20 days ago. Exhibit B) - there are several people who I know have linked to me that don't show up in Technorati. As it works by calculating the linked references to your blog, this renders it pretty hopeless. Exhibit C) - my authority when it was working seemed to fluctuate randomly. There was a two months period where it dropped from around 160 to the current 79.
2. It is pre-Twitter - Technorati works on references from other blogs. The problem is that a lot of the referencing has moved on to Twitter (and Friendfeed, etc) now. A lot of that quick linking people used to do in short blog posts they now do via microblogging. And Technorati isn't picking these up (is this because of the use of shortened urls, or just that it doesn't look at Twitter accounts?). It's therefore operating with only half the information.
3. It lacks granularity - there isn't even an education channel. By lumping us all in together a small, individual blog is 'competing' with output from large companies with teams of writers. Take a look at the Technorati top 100 and you'll see that they are mostly either online magazines or professional bloggers. This is fine, but it needs a layer of categorisation over it to become meaningful.
4. It measures the wrong thing - this isn't really Technorati's fault, more an issue of the blogosphere. I would like to do, or find, research that confirms this, but my hunch is that what people link to is different, or at least not necessarily the same as, what they find interesting and valuable. People often link to funny stuff, or technical tips. Some of the posts that I have gained the most links to have been short ones that say 'I found technology Y, it looks interesting.' Others might link to this and say 'I found this (via Martin)...'. But your 2000 word discussion on Wittgenstein gets less linklove. However, it may still be useful and relevant to people. This is particularly problematic for higher education where you want to promote the Wittgenstein skits and not the tech trainspotting.
5. It's subject to gaming - all too easily really. As it measures link references the best thing to do is to engage in a real ding-dong fight with someone, preferably someone with a higher authority than you. This gets good links.

Now, you could say, 'who cares?'. Tony often chastises me for mentioning Technorati as he thinks it's all about ego (before pointing out that his rating is higher than mine ;)). But my interest has always been about whether such bottom-up metrics have a place in the world of the digital scholar, and Technorati has been the exemplar for these. If we have to consign Technorati to the tech bin then the question arises: does this mean any such approach is fundamentally flawed or do we need better metrics?

Doug Clow (who is rapidly becoming a digital scholarship guru) gave a talk recently where he concluded that we can really only rely on peer review. I don't fully agree - I think as scholars peer review will be the main component when assessing a colleague's contribution (say, for promotion), but given all the rich data we have online, surely there must be some reasonably reliable use we can make of it to at least add to the mix. I think PostRank, for example, does a better job of measuring your impact, although some of the same criticisms still apply.

So, I won't give up on metrics completely, but me and Technorati - we're through.

Couple of good educator links

I don't do enough of this just linking lark. Here are a couple of good resources that people may find useful:

Not your Grandpa's blog - Jim Groom, Alan Levine and Cole Campese did a session on academic use of blogging. I'd particularly recommend Jim's page as an overview of using blogs in education (and for a Princess Bride clip):

"What if we didn’t understand what we do in education with blogs as “blogging” but as a quick and easy way to publish online within a learning community? Or a place to feature a portfolio of students’ best work? Or a site where professors and staff track their professional and personal development? What if we understood “campus blogging initiatives” as a community publishing platform to share, learn, and integrate various resources from around the Web into a more specific community?"

OnRamp - Jennifer Jones is creating her own guide to new media and technologies for educators on her blog. It covers blogging, RSS, twitter in an accessible, easy manner. Highly recommended to anyone who wants to give introductions to academics on this stuff. It's a series of blog posts, hopefully it'll be pulled together when she's finished into a nice site too.

Year of Future Learning - an experiment

I want to try something out, so would like people's views on it. My idea is to try and get some focused activity going around the concept of the learner of the future. Think of it as either a distributed research process or adding a layer of intentionality over some of what we do in the blogosphere.

I have this feeling that between us there are often very good conversations, excellent resources, great ideas, etc but we don't always take the next step in synthesising or collecting these. 

Here is what I have in mind: A loosely coupled, distributed research 'project'. We declare 09 the 'year of future learning' (#YOFL or #FLY - take your pick). I accept that 'the year of X' is a bit naff, and comes with all sorts of anti-arguments, (what about next year?) but as a means of focusing our energies, providing opportunities for review, and giving a broad enough umbrella it provides a useful framework.

This is a means of aggregating existing resources and events by tagging them - in the Weinberger sense, we may as well put our leaves on as many branches as possible, so for instance there will be sessions at Northern Voice and Alt-C which could be made part of the YOFL simply by adding the tag.

But I see it as much more than just another meme or tag, I also want to use it as a means of instigating some new open, distributed activities. I have in mind the following:

• A set of interesting questions generated by the community
• Connected blog posts around particular topics - blog-carnivals Tony has pointed me at
• An open, special edition journal
• Combined research results
• A workshop format that anyone can run, and share results via a wiki
• 'Live' events eg George Siemens' Elluminate sessions
• 'Flash debates' in twitter around a specific topic, which are then summarised
• Face to face sessions at various conferences
• A wiki/blog/site collecting all of this material together
• An end of year review

 I want to avoid any perceptions of elitism  so the idea is that this is open to anyone. I've emailed a few blog chums to see if they would be interested in doing some of the above, to give it some traction, but essentially it's open. If there is a topic of burning interest to you, run an activity and it'll be pulled in.

In addition, my colleague Grainne Conole also has lots of links into various communities, so we will be running a number of face to face activities also. This involves 'talking to people' - not sure what that is, probably some cool web 2.0 service.

The experiment for me is whether the online community can work this way, or whether it really does need a more directed, formal research project. At the moment I think we have good conversation. Conversations and dialogue can be spontaneous but they can also be focused, with a specific aim. Similarly, we have a loose-knit community of sorts, and communities can be around general areas of interest, but they can also have a common goal ('overthow a president', 'find Dave a date').

It is this second, more intentional layer that I was hoping we might foster this year. I like finding other people's posts and riffing off (or ripping off) ideas, but I want to explore whether the edublog community can do a bit more. Whether we can have purposeful conversations, aimed at addressing a specific problem.

To kick off I have created a wiki here for setting out the big questions.

I am go to aggregate anything with #YOFL and #FLY tags at some point. I make the solemn promise to summarise these once a month and try to put some interpretation to them, although anyone else is also free to do the same of course.

I will also set in motion a few activities, such as those listed above.

So, what do you think? Oh, here's a logo:

Blogging impacts on formal academic output

I exported my blog posts yesterday as a back up and thought I'd have a quick play around. I counted up the posts from 2006 when I started, 2007 and 2008. Then I wondered what my 'proper' academic output had been over this time, as I have the feeling it has fallen off somewhat. And yes, whereas I was averaging around 6 or 7 publications pre-blogging, since 2006 it has been about 3.

I think there are two main reasons for this:

1) The motivation to write papers has decreased - apart from getting an RAE ranking, the main reason to publish is to share ideas and fulfill a creative urge to write. Blogging meets these needs better than formal publications.

2) There is more than one way to network. I'm not a big fan of attending conferences (I've got enough bags, thanks), but I used to go to quite a few as this was the only way of getting to know those in your field. So, I used to write conference papers to achieve this aim. Now, I have a much wider and richer network through blogging and twitter, so that motivation is also reduced. I still think it's valid, and meeting people face to face adds to that network, but it doesn't have the monopoly it once did.

Here is a graph of my publishing versus blog activity (no. of blog posts is divided by 10).

Obviously this won't be the same for everyone, Grainne for instance still keeps up a formidable publication record despite taking up blogging. But I think we might see a similar pattern for many academics who get bitten by the blog bug. I think it's a good thing, but if I was an aspiring, newly qualified academic and formal publications were what counted, I guess I'd have to be wary of this effect.

Anyone else noticed a similar trend?

Blogging as occupational therapy

It is a bit incestuous to blog about blogging, but as it is still relatively new as a medium, I do find it interesting when it reveals the way in which blogging has forced itself into the interstices of your life.

As friends on Twitter may know, my wife was recently diagnosed with tongue cancer. Please don't post comments of support - I know people mean it, but it will make me feel as though I was only blogging this for sympathy. I mention it only to give the context to what follows (the long term prognosis is good by the way).

With hospital visits, surgery, nursing at home, ongoing radiotherapy, plus childcare, this has inevitably meant a disruption to work. I had to hand over SocialLearn directorship to my (much more competent) colleague, Simon Buckingham-Shum as it was entering a very intense phase and I wouldn't be able to give the mental attention it required, or be present at enough meetings.

But during this period (I've been on annual leave for most of it) I still wanted to feel intellectually active (no jokes about why change now). In addition I didn't want to disappear off the organisational or professional radar. Blogging has proved the ideal solution. I can fit it in around my newly disrupted life, it offers feedback, and it can be broken down into convenient chunks. It is flexible, and at the same time rewarding.

And more than that, freed from some of the everyday constraints of an ongoing project, I have had time to look at tools, read blogs (and even the odd journal article), and just do some thinking. The blog has been the framework for this.

Given that during most people's working life they will have periods such as this, the blog can be a useful means of lessening their impact. One of the big issues the individual and the organisation face is that the individual becomes distanced from what is happening at work, and so when they start back in earnest there is a considerable barrier to overcome. I feel that blogging and of course, twitter, may help reduce this barrier. This is probably only true if the individual is already active in these areas, this wouldn't be the time to start them.

It would make an interesting research project to investigate whether social media use in your professional capacity reduces the work impact of life events. Come on, someone must have a PhD student looking for a subject? (I'm not volunteering to supervise it by the way).

PostRank as course content filter

I've been playing with PostRank. They use an algorithm to analyse which posts have got the most 'engagement' from a particular RSS source. The good thing about this is that it gets over some of my reservations in previous posts about the use of metrics to measure your blog value. These are often relative to everyone else, so as with Technorati, you'll get lumped in with professional blogs. PostRank tells you about the engagement relative to your own posts. This is potentially useful, as it tells you, and more importantly, the reader which posts have generated feedback. They measure engagement not just by back links, as Technorati does, but by a range of interactions eg. by delicious links, comments and Twitter links. This gives you a much better idea of the type of interaction posts are generating. My top posts are shown in the widget over on the left.

You can then filter the results by a key word, eg Twitter will show you my posts relating to a certain micro-blogging tool, ranked through PostRank. This double layer of filtering (term plus engagement ranking), has some potential to act as course content I feel.

Let's take an example: You create an aggregated feed of many RSS sources, eg using RSSmixer I created this one of UK edubloggers. You could then get PostRank to analyse this (although there seems to be a problem with doing this at the moment, the PostRank team are looking into it). Or, you use PostRank and in Feed Details you add in each source. You then need to add a tag eg edublog and click Create New. This adds it into your Channels in PostRank. As you add each feed in, you can set it to analyse 'Great', 'Good', 'Best' or 'All'. You can then export this as an OPML file to display. Here are the 'Best' posts from some UK edublogs in Grazr:

This is all a bit fiddly though. What I want to be able to do is for me (as educator) to set up a range of channels for a course (eg UK edubloggers, global edubloggers, media blogs, library feeds, etc). The student can then use these as the basis for their course content. For example, say I ask them to discuss the Research Assessment Exercise they can filter by RAE in the UK blogs.

The point of this, over just using Google say, is that allows educators to have some input by selecting the best RSS resources, and these are then filtered. A course then becomes a sequence of activities that relies on these sources, but does not need to generate the content itself. So, any chance PostRank team that we can do this?

Blogging isn't about fame

I think I was rather muddled in my last post, as all three comments interpreted it as saying 'I want to be more famous'. This wasn't my intention, so let me clarify what I meant.

Firstly, let's place my blog in its role to me as an academic. One of the joys of blogging is that there are no restrictions - blog posts can be long or short, text or multimedia, blogs can be about a subject or an individual, they can be serious or fun. If I was a research student, say, then the role of my blog would perhaps be much more as a tool of self-reflection. As a Professor of Ed Tech at a distance education university, who has a kind of new technology remit, my blog is central both to my academic output and my identity. As such I need to be a little harder on myself about it, than say, a leisure blog about films. I regard my blog as equally important as academic publications, research, teaching, university projects (actually, probably more so, but don't tell the bosses).

Therefore, as a professional it's only right to be reflective on your performance. That's what my last post was meant to be, although in a humourous fashion (okay, not that humourous I confess).

Secondly, when I mentioned technorati ratings, links, comments and number of subscribers, it wasn't because I was interested in these as an end point. Rather that, as in any professional practice, one seeks feedback. If I am teaching I want to know that a) students are learning, b) I'm doing a decent job and c) what I'm saying is interesting. The same goes for publishing an academic article - you want someone to read it and find it useful. So, as part of the reflective practice, you seek external verification that you are communicating effectively, and do not rely solely on your own judgement.

In the blogosphere therefore comments, links, technorati ratings and subscribers act as a very rough proxy that you are communicating effectively and what you are saying is interesting. They are far from perfect, but for the way I perceive my blog, they have some role.

Thirdly, it's not about fame and ego - it's about feedback and conversation. It's nice to know if what you are saying is of any interest, but much more importantly it becomes much more interesting, motivating, deeper and better informed when it becomes part of a wider conversation.

So, that's what I was getting at. My conclusion was that I was doing okay as a blogger, but I could be better. The reason I chose the example of other actors (De Niro etc) wasn't because they were more famous than Affleck, but because they had produced better work (if we ignore late De Niro and Hoffman anyway). I think it's important to take stock and seek to improve. For instance, reflection has led me to conclude that my practice of linking has slipped, usually because I'm rushing to get a post out. The reason I don't link enough is because I don't read as many blogs as I used to. So, my first resolution (blogolution?) is to read, and respond, more.

It's all gone a bit Affleck

I was reflecting on this blogging lark the other day. It is something I enjoy doing, but in terms of academic return it's been hit and miss. The big hit is that it has connected with a global network of peers, who I wouldn't be able to engage with if I didn't have a blog. It's like being able to talk the same language.

The miss part is that I feel occasionally like I am shouting into the void, or typing eruditely into the void more likely. I write what I think are interesting, well crafted posts - not a link, not a comment. I write a mindless, quick review and it gets link-love. I don't get it, and maybe that doesn't matter. It is like a child - you can have all these great ideas about what you can do and how they should react, but they remain their own person, and that unpredictability is the joy.

There's a bit of fragile ego in here I suspect, when I set out I probably had in mind being an edu-blog heavyweight. I've done okay, I get a reasonable number of subscribers, my Technorati (if it wasn't so broken) authority is okay, I get a decent range of comments, etc. But I feel my blogging career hasn't quite panned out as I'd hoped. If Downes is the De Niro of edublogging, Warlick the Hoffman and Ewan McIntosh the Di Caprio, then I've gone a bit Ben Affleck: I've done okay, my output is popular enough, but you know, it's not quite what I had in mind when I was started out full of artistic dreams and lofty ambitions.

So, maybe this year is the time to push on and reclaim those ambitions. Or should I just be happy with my Affleck status? It could be worse after all, I could be the Ewan McGregor...

You are your (tag) cloud

My tag cloud for this blog is a bit rubbish, I don't create enough categories, and when I think of adding a new one, I've already blogged about it a few times and so I face the dilemma, do I now go back and republish those posts with a more appropriate tag, or do I carry on with a more general one?

Anyway, most of the blogs I read make a better job at tagging than I do, often using delicious as the means by which they categorise both their own, and others posts. It seems to me that your tag cloud becomes a sort of shorthand for your online identity. In the future we won't swap business cards (even cool Moo ones), but rather tag clouds. Perhaps dating, and recruitment services will be run by matching the compatibility between tag clouds?

So here is a quick Christmas game to test my theory. Below are the tag clouds taken from the following people:

• Tony Hirst,
• Scott Leslie
• AJ Cann
• Jim Groom
• Grainne Conole
• George Siemens
• Brian Lamb

See, if you can match the tag cloud to the blogger:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

Had a go yet?

Here are the answers, how did you do?

1) - Scott Leslie
2) - AJ Cann
3) - George Siemens
4) - Jim Groom
5) - Tony Hirst
6) - Grainne Conole
7) - Brian Lamb