Despite ANGEL’s best efforts, I did actually manage to contribute somewhat to the class’s online chat, and I would hardly term what I participated in as anything even remotely approaching “utopia.”
The main problems were lag and lack of visual cues for conversation. Lag could be fixed by using a system that actually works, instead of ANGEL, but visual cues are a little more complicated. Most instant messaging programs have a little icon that appears when the other person is typing, so you can wait for them to finish if you want. But with so many people I’m not sure if this would work. Google Wave also shows people’s messages as they type them, so you could interrupt someone more like a regular conversation, but then it’s harder to tell when they’re finished.
I don’t think I would use this sort of thing in a classroom unless those issues were resolved. And even then, I think I prefer non-face-to-face communication to be a little more “composed,” like blog posts or other responses. I prefer my synchronous conversations to be in person, not over a computer.
I am somewhat convinced that the fail had something to do with the interface. The lack of a "typing" update and the lag did make the whole thing very clunky. That being said, as I've said to others in my responses, I was a bit startled at how unwilling so many folks in class were to work within the chaos. The desire to have order imposed, but then the lack of willingness to work with that order, was strange to say the least. I find chats work best when the chaos is embraced and worked within, instead of worked against. I probably could've done something as a teacher to prepare folks, or encourage folks, for this. Yet, I've never had to do this before, and I'm not sure what happened this time around. Perhaps my lame attempt at imposing order is what truly put the nail in the coffin.
ReplyDeleteIf nothing else, this chat and the ensuing frustration from folks, intrigues the hell out of me.