Welcome to Week 7!
For this week’s Moveable Feast, we are hosting on the world of Mobile Collaboration. The nature of how we interact using mobile devices is constantly changing. This opens up several possibilities in the benefits and future of collaborative activities in learning environments, but also complicates the challenges and considerations that should be taken into account.
We address the above points and other aspects of collaboration through mobile devices in our Google Site: https://sites.google.com/view/etec523-a2mobilecollaboration
As you explore our OER, please complete the following activities:
- A collaborative Padlet activity at the bottom of our Introduction page, asking the question “what is your personal definition of mobile collaboration?”.
- Another Padlet activity near the end of the OER on our Future Trends of Mobile Collaboration asking you to respond to a question and use generative AI integrated into the platform.
After you have gone through our OER, we encourage you to engage in the blog discussion by answering one or more of the questions below:
- What are your thoughts about the element of human connection and mobile collaboration? Do you feel you “lose” anything by collaborating with mobile devices?
- Please share examples of successful strategies employed in mobile collaboration platforms to encourage user engagement and participation. Additionally, discuss any instances where you’ve encountered challenges, along with the lessons learned from those experiences.
- After completing the Padlet activity in “Future Trends of Mobile Collaboration”, what were your impressions on the integration of generative AI? Do you think it enhances the experience of collaborating through mobile devices?
Lynn & Richard
Hi folks,
Great job on your OER! It was easy to navigate, well-organized and got straight to the point on several very helpful topics around mobile collaboration. In navigating your site, I remarked that mobile collaboration is something that I just take for granted, and not something that I take much time to reflect on. Thank you for that opportunity.
My reflection on the Introduction Padlet was one of the most challenging, which surprised me a bit. I had a really hard time putting my personal definition of ML into words! I took the angle of elementary education, but it was still hard to put a point on it. The second Padlet was a fun activity and is something I could see doing with my students. “I can’t draw” is a common complaint I hear, so this would be a fun twist on that.
I also chose the second question to answer, and I will share a bit about my experiences with Google Classroom. I first began using it about 6 years ago, and it has served me fairly well. The main thing I use it for is a hub for students to use to access documents, links, and files. Students can easily share ideas, work with others, ask for feedback, and do so all while using whatever device they have access to. It was glitchy at first, but has remained on par with, or ahead of its competitors over the intervening years.
It is basically just an interface for Google Workspace tools like Docs, Slides, Sheets etc. and it has an impressive number of tools and sites fully integrated into it at this point. I used to dread assigning work to be done online (especially with young learners), because there would always be issues with files being deleted, not shared properly, or privacy being sacrificed while sharing. This is no longer an issue with a central, user-friendly collaboration platform that pulls directly from our shared Google Drives. I think that this streamlining of the frustrating sharing processes that bogged down collaboration in the “early Internet” is a key feature of having a high-quality mobile collaboration tool. This goes for adults, even more so than young students.
However, there is one major weakness that has become apparent as I have used it over the years. The need for collaboration, and the software and tools to enable it, often extends beyond a single physical classroom and Google has debuted new, improved means to do so many times over the last five years or so. The results have always been lackluster. They seem to be an attempt to tweak existing systems to allow teachers to share resources, or link together students from different classes. In my experience, these have never worked properly. I (and my colleagues) have often attempted to collaborate using these new updates, and they are often inadequate and we are forced to move back to previous tools (email, other external apps).
The updates and new features are seldom well-explained to teachers and administrators, so they end up being used incorrectly and don’t serve any real purpose. I’ve been added as a Student (not helpful) to innumerable Google Classrooms during PL sessions, never to hear from them again. I’ve been added as a collaborating teacher to “Staff Classrooms”, but wasn’t able to share or collaborate properly with anyone.
I’d love to see them figure it out someday, and a recent update to facilitate Co-Teacher collaboration indicates they may be on the right track. That being said, I don’t see it improving without a major overhaul.
Thanks so much for your hard work this week,
Sam Paterson
Hi Sam!
Glad you enjoyed the second Padlet activity! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the emerging trend of AI language translation and learning tools and their potential for mobile collaboration. It’s fascinating to hear about real-time AI-driven translation tools like Language IO as you have shared in your Padlet post. I do wonder about the risks, though, as AI translation systems learn patterns from vast amounts of text data. While they are remarkably efficient, they can often struggle to capture the nuances of human language, such as sarcasm, humor, cultural references, etc.
I haven’t used Google Classroom myself, so thanks for sharing your experiences with the platform and your observations on its evolution and functionality over the past few years. I’ve heard from many others as well that it serves as a reliable hub for students to access and share resources, and its centralization and user-friendly interface certainly seem to address many of the initial challenges of online collaboration. It’s disappointing when new features don’t live up to expectations, especially when they aren’t well-explained or integrated effectively. It’s a reminder that such added functionalities require proper implementation and user education to be successful.
Of the Google applications Google Classroom integrates with, do you have any favorites? Which ones have you found to be the most effective? I’m particularly curious about how tools like Google Slides have worked in your context.
Thanks again for your post!
Thanks for this OER, Lynn & Richard – very timely!
I chatGPT’d (is that a word yet?) the first question “What are your thoughts on human connection and mobile collaboration?” because I was curious how the content of the response would differ from my own, previously drafted thoughts. (The full ChatGPT response is below [see appendix] for any anyone interested in providing their account with the same input prompt to decipher the differences the algorithm spits back in the details of the response.) The perspectives and details provided in the ChapGPT response is commendable, but it is noticeably euphemized from harsher human criticism, perhaps due to the emotionality linked with direct human experience. This may indicate that once personal memory and cultural input is removed, as in the AI robotic, objective analysis, ChatGPT version, bias disappears. Also, I did not come up with the same points. To arrive at these same conclusions, I would have needed either a conversation from a wide array of social sources that I do not have access to or an education either from classic encyclopedia to contemporary Wikipedia to achieve these same observations. However, in my personal experiences of mobile collaborations, it did allow me to follow my own stream of thought consciousness without human interruption and with vast AI support. Further, I would have been able to draw upon personal experiences which possibly tainted my perspective and caused bias, but also possibly inciting logotherapeutically meaningful attributes drawn from specific knowledge and experiences. Continuing down this hypothetical analogy hole, had I have come up with the exact same points that ChatGPT did, by either Googling or talking, would I have organized the same information in the same manner? Would you have? There is a long history in critical discourse analysis (see: Derrida, Foucault, Said, Butler, Barthes, Kress) of how language is used to exert power in society, but Faiclough’s (1992) intertextuality may be the most relevant in the case of individuals’ personal texts in mobile collaboration environments influencing each other. When working in tandem online asynchronously with like users, an age-old void of longing for communicating and connecting is fulfilled. But is there a deeper drive to connect online? Or are people craving a more original nature experience now that we are entering wave 4.0 of the Information Revolution? What are some effective ways to connect online? I will share my thoughts in a new post responding to your next question of successful strategies to increase engagement and participation in mobile collaboration.
References
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.
Appendix: ChatGPT conversation
Prompt: what are your thoughts on human connection and mobile collaboration?
Response: Human connection and mobile collaboration represent two significant aspects of our modern, digitally interconnected world. Here are some thoughts on each:
Human Connection
1. Essential for Well-being: Human connection is fundamental to our psychological and emotional well-being. Strong interpersonal relationships contribute to happiness, reduce stress, and improve overall health.
2. Challenges in the Digital Age: The digital age has transformed how we connect. While technology allows us to maintain relationships across distances, it can also lead to superficial interactions and a sense of isolation if not managed well.
3. Quality Over Quantity: The ease of making connections online can sometimes prioritize quantity over quality. Deep, meaningful connections often require time, effort, and emotional investment, which can be overlooked in favor of quick, surface-level interactions.
4. Balancing Digital and Face-to-Face Interactions: Striking a balance between digital and in-person interactions is crucial. While digital tools can enhance and maintain connections, face-to-face interactions often provide a deeper level of emotional and psychological fulfillment.
Mobile Collaboration
1. Increased Productivity and Flexibility: Mobile collaboration tools allow people to work together seamlessly from anywhere, enhancing productivity and providing flexibility. This is especially valuable in today’s remote and hybrid work environments.
2. Real-Time Communication: These tools enable real-time communication and collaboration, which can lead to faster decision-making and more dynamic teamwork.
3. Access to Global Talent: Mobile collaboration allows organizations to tap into a global talent pool, bringing together diverse perspectives and expertise that can drive innovation and creativity.
4. Challenges with Engagement and Coordination: Despite its advantages, mobile collaboration can present challenges such as maintaining team engagement, ensuring clear communication, and coordinating across different time zones and cultural contexts.
5. Security Concerns: With the rise of mobile collaboration, data security and privacy become critical concerns. Ensuring that collaboration tools are secure and that users follow best practices for data protection is essential.
Integrating Human Connection and Mobile Collaboration
1. Humanizing Digital Interactions: To maintain human connection in a mobile collaboration environment, it’s important to humanize digital interactions. This can include regular video calls, virtual team-building activities, and creating opportunities for informal conversations.
2. Building Trust and Camaraderie: Trust and camaraderie are the foundations of effective collaboration. Teams should prioritize building these elements through open communication, empathy, and shared goals.
3. Leveraging Technology Thoughtfully: While technology facilitates collaboration, it’s important to use it thoughtfully. Tools should enhance, not replace, human connection. For example, using video calls instead of text messages for important discussions can help maintain a personal touch.
4. Promoting Work-Life Balance: Mobile collaboration should also support work-life balance. Encouraging boundaries, such as respecting personal time and setting clear work hours, helps prevent burnout and maintains the well-being of team members.
In conclusion, both human connection and mobile collaboration are vital in the modern world. By finding the right balance and integrating thoughtful practices, we can leverage technology to enhance our connections and collaborate effectively while maintaining the deep, meaningful relationships that are essential to our well-being.
Hi Kirsten,
Thanks for posting the interesting conversation from ChatGPT. The portion that stood out to me in the response were the points listed in mobile collaboration. The response of access to global talent, real-time communication, and increased productivity and flexibility may come up in a list if I’m thinking about in a specific context, like benefits in a working environment, but in an open-ended question I would expect something slightly different when listing the connections between human connection and mobile collaboration. These points would be an indication to me that this was AI generated. My impression is that this question could elicit a response with emotion or drawing upon personal experience, and I would tie this into an earlier part of your post. Rather than saying your personal experiences taint your perspective I would think they inform your perspective because to some degree, human connection is subjective, and I think that subjectivity enriches the discussion in this context.
Thanks for the OER Lynn and Richard!
First of all, I REALLY LIKE mobile collaboration. Should it replace face-to-face interaction? No, it should not. But can it enhance and work with face-to-face collaborators and provide opportunities for collaboration when face-to-face is not feasible? Absolutely! So in my own experience, speaking just for me, I haven’t lost anything with mobile collaboration, rather I have found my collaborations enhanced by the experience. Whether working on a communication network, sharing a Google doc, using Google Classroom, or collaborating on a blog site, an opportunity to engage with those who are not in my presence is incredibly made possible. It doesn’t have to be in real-time, it doesn’t have to be at an awkward set time necessarily, and it provides the opportunity for individuals to think through their contributions and submit them as they are ready.
Challenges? Well certainly some people may ghost, and the timelines waiting for others may be uncomfortable. It requires patience and adherence to agreed-upon timelines. If it is in the form of a meeting, there is somewhat of a social contract that participants will be in place and devote attention to each other when required.
Mobile collaboration has allowed the MET program to be successful and beneficial for me. I’ve maintained WhatsApp groups and more over the course of the program, and the collaboration that would otherwise not be possible has been enormously beneficial.
Thanks again,
Steve
Hi Steve,
Enhancement is the word I would use as well. I’ve also used Google Docs, websites, and WhatsApp groups much like you have throughout the MET program and have found them to be immensely helpful in managing my time and, as you say, taking the time I need to meaningfully contribute to discussions.
The social contract or a mutual understanding of social rules is also an important topic to raise. Certainly, in learning environments like the classroom or a program such as this, that understanding that others will devote their time and effort into collaborating regardless of the medium is present because we have a vested interest in our learning path. The ghosting piece is trickier to navigate and more frequent in social situations in my experience, but can come up even when there is a vested interest. In those situations I find myself using communication as an intervention, whether it’s to a colleague, instructor or friend depending on the situation, about what steps to take next.
Hi Lynn and Richard,
Nice work on the OER. Mobile collaboration initially seemed counterintuitive to me, in the sense that the constant distraction of mobile devices takes many people away from collaboration with people in their immediate vicinity. But putting aside cynicism, you point out some of positive aspects and tools for the trend.
Regarding your first discussion question: What are your thoughts about the element of human connection and mobile collaboration?
I think mobile collaboration tends towards high frequency, low intensity connections, compared to face to face interactions. Essentially, we are able to reach out with questions, ideas and thoughts at any time, even when the other person is not available. The flip side is that we may wait hours (or in vain) for a reply, and the medium will tend to be less intimate than a discussion in person.
That may sound negative, but I don’t mean it as such. In personal relationships, it may be the best available alternative; even if I would like to see friends and family in real life, when situations prevent that, many small chat messages are a better alternative than a long silence.
The other aspect is that in work or school contexts, a less intense communication channel may be preferable. It’s an extension of the classic corporate complaint, a “meeting that should have been an email.” Face to face collaboration may be distracting, logistically challenging to arrange, or simply not ideal. Especially when focusing on a major task, sending off messages occasionally could balance out the need to prioritize while still keeping secondary projects moving.
Finally, I think there are matters of preference. When I was teaching in an International Baccalaureate school, I needed to get training courses for each new course I would teach. These were offered either as a six week online, asynchronous class, or a three day in person session. Some people definitely prefer the in person alternative, as they find the discussions and conversation the highlight. Personally, I chose the online version, as I could ponder ideas and keep working with them in the back of my mind. The discussions were valuable, but I found jumping into online discussions just as effective for what I needed.
This is another area with technology where I think the question is not either/or (as it is easy to get caught into thinking) but more when does each mode work best.
Devon
Hi Devon,
Thanks for the thoughtful response to the first question. I found myself nodding along to much of what you’ve described, and I do often think about the importance of selecting the appropriate communication medium for the environment that sets the expectation for what connection will look like.
I really appreciate the point about high frequency, low intensity connections via mobile collaboration and I would expand on the point a bit more. In education, I often think that even for in-person classes or training sessions that I facilitate, mobile devices mesh well with ice breakers or introductory activities that align with these activities because they elicit a response that isn’t in very in depth but participants feel they can contribute more to, and in certain cases where anonymity is possible, that contributes to more participation. I would agree that the absence of intimacy in mobile collaboration spaces does have its drawbacks, but I think it represents a different side to connection that sometimes we don’t often see, especially in new or unknown situations.