My CLMOOC friend and colleague Kevin Hodgson (@dogtrax) recently wrote a blog post for the Connected Courses community that prompted us to think about the importance of “lurking” in a connected learning environment. For those of you who might not be familiar with the term within the context of online behavior, to “lurk” means to click here and there (and check out what content and commentary is being generated by a community) while remaining an observer more than a contributor to the unfolding conversation.
As Kevin aptly pointed out, people need time to process before entering into the fray of an open online discussion. Those who lurk also learn. I think the trick in emboldening our evolving open learning community (here’s to you #ccourses!) is to build a culture of guilt-free participation. People should know that is ok to dip in and out of the open online networked experience because it is a dynamic, ever unfolding phenomenon, and each perspective brings new energy…. it is indeed OPEN.
But how do we ensure that everyone feels the “vibe of open”, rather than racking up that sense of guilt that grips a busy soul when a bit of time marches on and one has not “weighed in”. We are all prone to that familiar fear of “losing momentum”, or (heaven-forbid) – the dreaded sense of failure that can so easily seep into our academically-wired mindscape. There is work to be done in “unlearning” the message from the hidden curriculum of lifelong schooling. As academics and educators we have been pummeled for years by evaluations, deadlines, tests, authorized outcomes. We have jumped through many hoops in order to become professionalized. One result of this is the easily-come-by guilt stemming from fear of not meeting prescribed expectations. “I should have blogged last week, I should have read that already, ….should’ve, could’ve, would’ve….”. But as co-learners in open connected learning, we must free ourselves of that guilt prone habit of mind.
As we collectively kick-off Connected Courses I officially declare this a guilt-free learning zone. What a relief to know that even though you might have missed a couple weeks of Connected Courses (or you never even heard about it until mid-October) you can still jump in and your participation is welcome. What a relief to know that you can customize and calibrate your “take-away” from this experience based on what matters to you. What a relief to know that even if you would rather lurk-to-learn, you are still a valued member of our community of co-learners.
I for one want everyone to know that their own learning pathway (whatever that may turn out to be) is perfect. Such is the particular affordance of truly open learning. In my experience, magical things happen when we let ourselves unlearn the criterion of institutionalized conventions. So let’s drop the guilt instinct, and just learn by self-design (interest-driven lurking is the foundation!). What “open” really means is that YOU are the true center of the learning.
Thanks for the shout-out and right on
So glad you sent this word out now, as things get rolling. I hope it convinces even more people to connect at their own speeds.
Thanks Susan! (Just my intention 🙂 )
Joe Dillon (along with many other great clmooc colleagues) did such important work in encouraging folks to learn at their own pace within clmooc. I think it is key to set a tone of acceptance which lays the groundwork for the “magic”.
Isn’t it more likely that those who lurk will need special help to engage? #CCourses is going to involve a lot of hands on hardware/software/self-hosting work. Is it more or less likely that folks will jump in late to that ‘situation’? I suppose it depends upon how you characterize the average lurker. Are they beginners who are reluctant to show their ignorance? Are they autodidacts who enter when they want something and leave when they have gotten it? I have always advocated the openness as a profound value, but I also see it as a bit euphemistic. How open will this course actually be for a n00b. I mean, you can put the food down where the goats can get to it, call it food for all, but that doesn’t mean it is really open. So many open questions here. Declaring it a guilt free zone is a great flourish and encouragement is one of the most important pieces of facilitation in a course like this, but access is always for the privileged. I know this is a much larger issue, one that you didn’t intend to address here, but to be open you not only need truly open initial conditions. Not sure ours are more than very partially open. I am really drawn to Ta-Nehisi Coates’ experience with learning French. Anyone can learn French, right? It is totally open for anyone. Just …do what? This video really brings home for me the burden of openness and of its dear friend, privilege: http://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/379544/the-joy-of-learning-french-part-deux/
That’s the complement part of my comment. Here’s the compliment part:
-taking back ‘lurking’ as a positive trait, like curiosity.
-driving fear from the digital space, thanks Saint Patrick Zamora
-saying out loud that lurking is valued
One more thing: I can’t prove this, but I think that lurkers are the dark matter and energy of the internet. They make up most of the invisible mass of the Internet universe and we are only beginning to know who they are. They are way more than the marginalized ancillaries of what we will do on #ccourses. We need to find more ways to connect to their nodes. I think in the end that what appears to be an important and large hub, connectedcourses.net, is really another node in the larger scheme. I think unveiling our connections to the lurkers is the future of learning. Removing fear is only part of that equation. Extending ‘philia’ in concrete ways, I would like to see more of that. And I would love to discuss further how we might go beyond putting the guilt-free buffet out as a way to transform the dark energy of the Internet.
(I hope I haven’t posted this twice.)
Isn’t it more likely that those who lurk will need special help to engage? #CCourses is going to involve a lot of hands on hardware/software/self-hosting work. Is it more or less likely that folks will jump in late to that ‘situation’? I suppose it depends upon how you characterize the average lurker. Are they beginners who are reluctant to show their ignorance? Are they autodidacts who enter when they want something and leave when they have gotten it? I have always advocated the openness as a profound value, but I also see it as a bit euphemistic. How open will this course actually be for a n00b. I mean, you can put the food down where the goats can get to it, call it food for all, but that doesn’t mean it is really open. So many open questions here. Declaring it a guilt free zone is a great flourish and encouragement is one of the most important pieces of facilitation in a course like this, but access is always for the privileged. I know this is a much larger issue, one that you didn’t intend to address here, but to be open you not only need truly open initial conditions. Not sure ours are more than very partially open. I am really drawn to Ta-Nehisi Coates’ experience with learning French. Anyone can learn French, right? It is totally open for anyone. Just …do what? This video really brings home for me the burden of openness and of its dear friend, privilege: http://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/379544/the-joy-of-learning-french-part-deux/
That’s the complement part of my comment. Here’s the compliment part:
-taking back ‘lurking’ as a positive trait, like curiosity.
-driving fear from the digital space, thanks Saint Patrick Zamora
-saying out loud that lurking is valued
One more thing: I can’t prove this, but I think that lurkers are the dark matter and energy of the internet. They make up most of the invisible mass of the Internet universe and we are only beginning to know who they are. They are way more than the marginalized ancillaries of what we will do on #ccourses. We need to find more ways to connect to their nodes. I think in the end that what appears to be an important and large hub, connectedcourses.net, is really another node in the larger scheme. I think unveiling our connections to the lurkers is the future of learning. Removing fear is only part of that equation. Extending ‘philia’ in concrete ways, I would like to see more of that. And I would love to discuss further how we might go beyond putting the guilt-free buffet out as a way to transform the dark energy of the Internet.
(I apologize for the multiple comments if you have moderation on.)
Terry,
Your thoughts always dive deep and lead us to the important stuff. Access is the key issue, one that I worry about as I am cognizant that I cannot reach though the web (regardless of my efforts at reassurance) to make everyone connect and grow in democratic fashion. I truly believe our collective work in digital literacy and the extension of such skills to our students (which is what #ccourses is about to some extent) is so crucial to society. In Net Smart, Howard pointed out that today’s digital literacies can make the difference between being empowered or manipulated. Young people can grow up in this culture as serene and mindful or distracted and frenetic. To me this work (digital literacy) is key to our collective future, so I do my best to try to get this particular audience (of relative privilege) to take in the possibilities from their own stance. From there, they will lead others, and so on and so on. Yes, just as you say it…..transformation (of the dark energy of the internet) is what I have in mind. I do my my best as one small node.
What a wonderfully encouraging post for anyone new to MOOCs–particularly connectivist MOOCs. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve been frustrated by colleagues in tweet chats when they make comments disparaging those who lurk instead of overtly contributing through posts–as if participation didn’t occur at different levels for different learners. And, while we’re at it, let’s do all we can to move new MOOC learners past the idea that “completing a MOOC” means doing every assignment and taking on the impossible task of reading every post: one of the positive aspects of this sort of MOOC is that we participate at levels that make sense of us and we “complete” the course by learning what we set out to learn rather than letting others define our learning goals for us. Looking forward to participating in the Connected Courses MOOC with you, Kevin Hodgson (who initiated a conversation via a posting on my own blog) and others attracted by what this MOOC is already offering.
Thanks for comments Paul. I think every cMOOC (and every MOOC for that matter) has it’s own kind of chemistry. I guess that it is similar to our real life classes. You remember them like you remember people, each has a personality of their own, no? The class chemistry is the composite of the individuals gathered, and how they bounce thinking and ideas off each other. You never know what your going to get until you enter the room and start the journey together. Anyway, I think it is important to think about it a bit as we set off. If we strive for a culture of acceptance and inclusion, the chemistry is most likely to be more effervescent and I think we will collectively percolate lots of good stuff.
Yay for this post! To me, if anyone takes away anything from this course, they have benefitted. Maybe next time we run the course, they will delve more deeply. Maybe they don’t blog, but they tweet. Maybe they don’t blog or tweet, but they tell a friend about what they’ve learned.
I’m all for this Mia though I do not think it happens from proclamation; a guilt-free participation zone may happen via actions that reinforce against a sense of obligation.
But can we really ‘ensure that everyone feels the “vibe of open”’ — at best we can try, model, demonstrate, encourage. Not much in life is assurable. Some amount of effort needs to be on the said “n00bs”, yes with assistance.
I wish we would just stop talking about “lurkers”, to me its a useless and meanlngless term. If I read your blog post, and do not comment, but absorb your ideas– that’s like a pervert peeping in a window?? Hardly. Everyone is on a spectrum of participation they chose, change- its constantly evolving. There are many avenues of participation that do not require being loud and visible online.
To me there are no lurkers. i wish we would stop using that term.
Hi Alan. Yes, perhaps the term does more harm than good. It sort of reifies a distinction rooted in old learning conventions.
But since my f2f campus colleagues have expressed great relief hearing this sentiment proclaimed, I thought I’d offer it up online. I am quite sure that many academics are prone to the guilt of not being “the perfect student” in the traditional sense. I know I am, and I have benefitted from similar gestures from many of my #clmooc colleagues in this regard. ….Just my attempt to dismantle a bit of that hardwiring. 🙂
I like the word. I want to wrestle its ownership away from its darker connotations. There is a long tradition of doing this–the “n” word, queer, feminist. Why not use it in a way that invites, even incites. I mean what would an edupunk do?
I have noticed it is going in that direction. It seems to have a kind of hip connotation at this point. My students proudly state that they have been lurking here & there and are therefore learning this & that. Seems like it is being flipped by the people.
Zowie, well said Terry. I like that attitude. Sadly I don’t know any edupunks 😉 how do you do that wrestling? What are the moves? It’s still a meaningless term to me, relict from a time when the number if ways to participate online were few (all you could do at one time was reply on a listserv or post in a forum). Lurkers to me are in the mythical beast category if Sasquatch and Yeti.
But lurk on! I’m heading out to see if I can lurk somewhere, maybe I’ll just softly peek at your blog.
I used to say I was a “vicarious learner” when I did not engage.
Introduction to Connected Courses - Rhonda Jessen.comRhonda Jessen.com
[…] Fortunately, since it’s not my first experience in a Mooc, I know lurking is ok too. […]
Connected Courses : Active co-learning in higher education – jumping in from the secondary school sector | Brave new world
[…] the icing on the cake is that this is going to be a guilt-free learning zone, so that being busy and missing things will not be a […]
It seems interesting that 6 years on, what appeared to be a central tenet of the MOOC as originally conceived, the freedom to engage as you see fit, without requirements, has to be restated. But it does, and thankyou for that. I guess this freer territory has to be endlessly but calmly reclaimed.
The lurker is a mythical beast perhaps, like the troll. But isn’t the guilt you speak of related to the degree to which the learner (in this context/community) feels they are matching the models (implicit or explicit) of participation provided in the structure of the “course”, and perhaps even in people’s perceptions of the organisers ways of participating? There appears to be a weekly rhythm to the course, and encouraging exhortations notwithstanding, some participants may feel that if they arent matching this rhythm they aren’t full participants. There may be an implicit model of participation inherent in courses such as these, a series of options that are perceived as workable and legitimate, (the FB group, the Twitter stream, the considered blog). If someone limits their conversation, for example, to pillow talk about the myriad messages with their partner, are they fully participants (leaving the issue of “guilt” aside for a moment)?. The comments here would argue that yes they are, I guess. But is that really the case, or is it wishful thinking? Is a silent participant really part of the conversation?
Legitimate peripheral participation always seemed to me to be something built in to the notion of the MOOC (2008 style). But as the notion of the MOOC got sidetracked into a renactment of early 2000 e-learning it seems that other understandings crept in. And the idea of the lurker as freeloader, or murkier is still among them, along with notions relating to course objectives, requirements etc. While the call to guilt free LPP is welcome, it is possible that the baggage of expectations that have evolved around what is involved in online participation may be too heavy.
What could be done to articulate and support the idea of LPP as truly welcome within the practice of the course?
Nick Kearney
One way to think of participation in this course is that it can be seen as a stream that you sample as often and as deeply as you want to — and are able to — and NOT as a queue in which every item has to be ticked off.
Blackboard analytics allows you to compare participation and grades, and for the most part those who contribute most to the discussion get the higher grades. But there are always a few who lurk for the entire course, and end up with scores that prove that those who lurk also learn.
Students need to be given a real freedom to learn in their own way as Mia says, not ‘helped’ to learn in a way that suits the majority.