Over the past couple of months, I have twice been fortunate enough to hear Professor Stephen Heppell speak, once at the 25th birthday party of the eLearning Network and again last week when I chaired his session at Learning Technologies. On both occasions, the idea that most got me thinking was that 'synchronous is sovereign'. Stephen's point, based in particular on his extensive recent experience working with younger students, was that participating in some sort of live event (and not necessarily face-to-face - online will do) was valued very much more highly than viewing a recording.
I've had to work hard to buy into this idea, perhaps because I've been advising learning professionals for some time now to adopt asynchronous (self-paced) communication as their default, and to go synchronous (live) only when a strong argument can be made. My point is that live events, particularly those in the classroom, have for so long been the norm, even though getting people together at the same time is such a hassle, so inflexible for the learner, more stressful and tends to lead to too much learning in one go. I still believe that.
However, now I've had enough time to reflect on Stephen's assertion, I have shifted my viewpoint somewhat. While I would still look to provide the maximum flexibility for the learner by providing resources online and allowing collaboration to take place asynchronously (through email, forums, social networks, blogs, etc), I now understand that live events are going to add something really significant to the blend. These could be face-to-face (not just in classrooms but on the job - in fact just about anywhere), online (using tools like Skype or web conferencing) or even on the phone. Why? Because 'being there when it happens' is more exciting.
Having said that, I'm not convinced that synchronous events are all that exciting when the experience is no different from a recording. There must be an element of unpredictability, as the various players react to each other; a certain tension because the outcome is uncertain (think of how much more enjoyable it is to watch a sporting event live rather than viewing the edited highlights).
A lecture or webinar with no interaction doesn't do it - it's not taking adequate advantage of the opportunity provided by a gathering of real human beings with different experiences and perspectives. Far better to provide a video or narrated slide show.
I'm reminded of when I went to watch an old friend perform with his David Bowie tribute band. They played each Bowie song exactly like the recording. They were spot on in every detail. But that's not what you would have got if you'd been to see the real Bowie live. The emphasis would not have been on fidelity to an original but on responding to the situation with a performance that was truly unique. That's why people pay good money to go.
So, don't push the slider from all synchronous to all asynchronous - find the right balance. Incorporate live events but make sure they're exciting, memorable and different on each occasion. Don't fill them with expositions of endless facts, concepts, models and process. Use the fact that emotional engagement is high to develop the BIG IDEAS. Use the fact that every group of participants is unique to put those ideas into a meaningful context.
0 Comment to "The importance of synchronicity"
Post a Comment