I have always been a bit undecided about the whole backchannel and people surfing the web thing at conferences. In our 1:1 teacher district it is not an issue because no one brings their laptops to any professional development or meetings, and the two times I did I was asked to put them away. At our last PD the few that had them were also asked very professionally to limit our time with our laptops and the internet. I could have totally misinterpreted the message, but I closed my lid.
That last PD was on Data Teams. There was research, names, books, and of course various data shared over the course of two days. I was in a very weird situation of not having heard of almost single study, name, and book mentioned by the speaker. The speaker welcomed questions, but I didn’t know enough about what she was mentioning to question her information. I am specifically talking about questioning her facts…not questions about the facts. I suspected a trend in her presentation of one-sided narrow information. It was hard to tell since I did not have any background information on data teams or her sources. For almost all in the room, there was no reason to question what she was saying. So let it be said…so let it be done.
Afterwards I was able to go back and research her sources, and wish I knew at the meeting that her main source runs an institute that is connected with a company that makes money off him convincing schools to make data teams. I wish I knew more about what she labeled a very famous study that I had never heard of…the 90/90/90 study (come on, have you ever heard of it?)
I am still not sure of whether I support a backchannel and surfing during sessions. Would I have paid less attention if I was busy researching the other side of the story? Would I not have thrown myself into as much after school research as I did if I was able to do a bit of internet research at the workshop? Would I have closed my mind to an opinion that I don’t agree with, but was still worth me understanding?
I am not sure..I know I would have been a more active participant during the workshop and have been able to question her authority. I know I would have been able to bring another perspective into the conversation. I know that I felt naked.
I have always thought about this while sitting at a conference and watching a speaker present to a variety of laptop lids. Are they really getting anything from this speaker? Are they listening? Sometimes I feel audience members are more concerned about putting out a tweet rather than absorbing and processing what the speaker is trying to convey.
In your situation, your laptop was needed. It would have made you a more informed participant and given you background information on the person who was speaking. The big difference between a conference and your situation is that most of us know the presenters and we can simply sit back and listen, however, you needed more background on your presenter.
We made a rule at our department meetings that no laptops could be up or cell phones out. It was rather annoying since most of the meetings were pointless anyway, but I can understand the rule. I feel the same way when my students have laptops up and I am teaching. It is definitely distracting and I wonder if they are even remotely processing what I am saying. It sounds like you came away with a lot of questions during this presentation so it seems as though you were engaged, however, is that the case all the time? Probably not.
Go Phillies!
Pingback: Tweets that mention I felt naked… | Blogush -- Topsy.com
Pingback: Tweets that mention I felt naked… | Blogush -- Topsy.com
I was at SXSWi 2008 when I first observed the backchannel phenomenon. “Twitter? What the heck is that, and why are these rude people using it when they should be paying attention,” I thought.
Little did I know, they were live blogging, even conversing about what was being said. At our last school PD session, we were having some very serious issues being raised and challenges laid down. And yes, we had a backchannel conversation, but it only consisted of murmurs and whispers.
Ira Socol has an interesting point of view about our whole notion of “paying attention.” Whatever the origin, clearly technology is disruptive to traditional norms and behaviors. It will be interesting to watch as things continue to evolve.
@ Paul
Interesting post. We are in year 1 of our 1:1 with the high school students. It is interesting that one of the teachers made a statement that she is more careful in her lecturing. The kids can look up instantly any study she cites. She’s thought about even saying to the kids that there is one thing each day I will tell you that is false. If you figure it out before tomorrow you receive extra credit. Not sure if that is great pedagogy but it is an interesting response to presenting to a room full of bright kids equipped with technology.
This post surprises me. Where do you all teach? It must not be California, for even in the backwater of the San Joaquin Valley, we all have our iPhones and computers at the ready in any meeting. I have sat in many conferences watching people around me fact-checking, blogging, tweeting, and doing other online chores. I can’t imagine being told to put away my computer or phone like I am in 6th grade. Wait, I don’t think we’re even doing that in 6th grade much any more. Technology is a way of life.
We’re in conservative New England
I also find this a bit strange, though unfortunately, it is not surprising in schools. I tend to point out that in my doctoral program there has never been one class session in which we have not looked up facts or studies or just used Wikipedia or Google Maps. Not using the information tools of our time is truly not embracing learning.
What you were getting was a “textbook reading.” Someone standing up and making claims and none of you were armed with the tools of critical thinking. I’m going to guess that if faculty trainings look like this, so do most classes.
Why looking at a computer is “ruder” and “less appropriate” than looking at a notebook, your watch, or your fingernails is beyond me.
As Bill Genereaux (above) suggests, I do not think that “attention” and “gaze” have anything to do with each other.
This reminds me of a class I took many years ago that took place at an elementary school and we were placed in a classroom with very tiny chairs and tables. Those of us who taught high school just stood there and stared as all the elementary teachers sat down. We refused to do so and made them move the class to the faculty lounge that had “big people” chairs. You gotta stand up for yourself.
If the pd is not goal orientated, and not a keynote, but just a pile of supposed facts, then most people, research shows, churn 90% of the facts almost immediately, and little continuance or further thought is given beyond “is this in my job now”.
Reputation and authority are interrelated to connectivity and critical literacy, closing the lid, does not persuade the savvy thinker to adopt a new belief, simply become someone powerpointed you.
It’s a rather flimsy strategy, when dealing with adults, especially teachers. Nice post and a further insight into the torrid influence of shovelware and consulting.
Pingback: Backchanneling at Conferences | Business Communication Headline News