So many implications (Score 1)

It seems to me that there are so many things to consider here. The NYT article addresses mostly the boring ones. Perhaps the collective consumption of information or teaching is different in some way than individual consumption. In the IM environment people can write their thoughts in real time and have dialogue with others - that may change the way the material is experienced and consumed. Also, it is a semi-public (but private) forum where people can offer up ideas to be screened (or establish the confidence to talk) before disrupting the whole class. (Akin to answering clarifying questions - but much deeper socially). In this particular event (the one in the NYT story), we had one situation where a woman wanted to ask a really good question but was not confident enought to ask it. She vet-ed it in the IM circle and then everyone said "hey great question - you should ask that out loud". She did and it was the most thought provoking question of the day. She said later she never would have asked it without the support she got from the group. The collective aspect of the dialogue is one thing. But also, the dialogue is then supported with rich media. You can provide links to data, other (perhaps opposing) views, the history of the speaker, their other work, their CV, related material. And the collective can benefit from everyone's knowledge in real time. Then you can have a transcript of all this supporting scaffolded thought to reference afterward. Used right - such dialogue can then keep the lecturer on their toes if people start asking pointed probing questions backed up by data exchanged through the IM. It seems having it there in real time is also different somehow than looking things up afterward - the experience of material changes. Sometimes writing helps clarify my thoughts (thats just me) - writing in real time might clarify in real time and so change the way I learn. Perhaps this is just like note taking - but I doubt it. Note taking is just transcription most of the time - this is more critical and communicative. But, there is also an access issue covered in the article - some don't have access and may be cut out of the experience for lack of equipment - that's probably not fair in a learning environment. Bottom line - technology is nothing until we use it. One group might collectively surf porn, another might broadcast running commentary on the latest WiFi conference to people in the room and outside of it or truely use it to enrich the learning with materials and thoughtful comments. In the case described in the article it was clearly (usually) the later. But, whatever floats your boat... ya know? nan