Karen’s Visitor-Resident Typology

After watching Just the Mapping by Dave White (White, 2013), I began to consider how and why I use digital technology, at work and in life.  Using White’s outline, I developed my map with the aim of describing three criteria that detail my current digital technology use:

  1. The continuum of Visitor to Resident: tools further to the right along the horizontal continuum indicate tools where I actively participate in the conversation by adding my own content. Those closest to the left describe those where I access content, but don’t often or ever contribute.
  2. How I use the tool to participate: tools closer to the top of the vertical continuum indicate those that I use in my personal life (Personal), whereas those closer to the bottom I typically use for work (Institutional).
  3. My confidence and comfort level: larger icons indicate a greater degree of self-perceived mastery and higher levels of comfort using the tool. Smaller icons describe tools that I have used but do not feel like I’m leveraging with any purpose other than exploration.

As I began to plug in icons that represent various tools, I found it easiest to populate the Resident- Institutional quadrant. Likely because I often use these tools to communicate with and train team members, I have intentionally become comfortable and confident with their use. As I began to weigh my confidence and comfort level in other quadrants, I was reminded by an analogy proposed by White and Le Cornu, the Visitor zone is an “untidy garden shed” (White and Le Cornu, 2011).  The tools I represent with the smallest icons, all of which sit in the Visitor zone, are the tools that I do not leverage, because I lack confidence around their use. What stood out for me is that I am a creature of habit and tend to leverage tools that I am comfortable using.

Having the opportunity to develop a space that is mine is harrowing. As is clearly indicated on this map, I use the tools I know. I only venture towards the Resident side when using tools with which I am familiar and confident. Equally important is the lesson that I need to mindfully shift and reposition some of tools into different contexts. I won’t ever have the time to be an expert in all of the tools available, so I should consider leveraging some of the tools that I enjoy using in new contexts. What an interesting self-reflection!

Please follow this link to see a higher resolution image of my Visitor-Resident map: Resident Visitor Typology

White, D., & Le Cornu, A. (2011, September). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049.

White, D. (2013, September 13). Just the Mapping. [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.easybib.com/guides/citation-guides/apa-format/youtube-video/.

Shifting paradigms: highlights from the virtual symposium.

Shifting paradigms: highlights from the virtual symposium.

As I watched the various presentations during our virtual symposium week, I felt many paradigms I hold near and dear shift.  Although I knew that I would stretch the boundaries of my comfort zone in this program, I was surprised how quickly I began to think about online learning from a fresh perspective.  I’ve always been fascinated by the depth and breadth of platforms, tools and approaches in the virtual world. An enthusiastic learner, I explore as many new tools as I can and intentionally leverage these tools in life and at work. Some I use for fun, such as Facebook or YouTube, whereas others, I use for networking, such as LinkedIn or Twitter. Most I just visit periodically, mainly in an effort to keep current.

When beginning my journey using online tools, I put a lot of thought into my purpose and intended audience for each. Doing so, I thought, would help to balance my time and effort as I searched out news and opinions or developed relationships. I am grateful that I carefully considered my path from the beginning but now I wonder if I have been too narrow in my scope. What resonated with me the most during the symposium was that, it is through creation that our learning is deepened and our synapses are fueled, as broached by Vivian Forssman (Forssman, 2017) in her presentation.

At the beginning of Dave Cormier’s presentation (Cormier, 2017), symposium participants were encouraged to share a few words that could help to define what is meant by “open”. Although there were a variety of answers, the red thread that wove throughout for me encapsulated the notions of freedom, increased access and equality. I began to think about the purpose of learning environments and now question if the learning environments that I tend to design are too closed. Funnily enough, much of my professional experience and passion are steeped in developing learning interventions that are accessible to all types of learners. I am excited to embed some of this new awareness in my future learning development opportunities.

I loved when Cormier said that open gets messy (Cormier, 2017). As an avid gardener, I related easily to Cormier’s example of rhizomes (Cormier, 2017). I have experienced annoyance when grasses penetrate my carefully delineated garden beds. Through this program I will need to intentionally develop my ability to balance the importance of supporting learner outcomes with learner creativity. Dr. Roland vanOostveen explored this further through his exploration of the digital education sandbox metaphor (vanOostveen, 2017).  The sandbox is bounded, but there are tools available which support learner creativity. I am excited to embrace the shift towards interventions where the learners have more opportunities to co-create or negotiate context.

I was equally inspired by the Irish equal marriage referendum hashtag example that Catherine Cronin described (Cronin, 2017). Although I have participated in tweet-ups and used event-specific hashtags, I didn’t appreciate the power online users have in impacting and building shared culture. In a previous role I spearheaded and managed the implementation of a social media strategy where our goal was to engage current and potential clients through the use of Facebook Pages and local Twitter profiles. We began our exploration by engaging our stakeholders in focus groups and then we did a lot of work educating the teams. The major challenge we faced was encouraging users, both clients and team members, to consider the balance between openness and privacy. As I listened to Cronin use the analogy of an onion (Cronin, 2017), it became clear to me why our approach was ineffective. Instead of encouraging participants to start by using a technology tool that they were comfortable with, we mandated how three specific tools were to be used. When I consider how I would do things differently, I realize that our approach was too prescriptive. As Cronin describes, practicing openness is not easy – it is “complex, personal, contextual and continually negotiated.” (Cronin, 2017)

My next challenge will be to continue to explore how I can translate my passion to develop safe, accessible, robust learning environments to the digital world. I’m excited to continue stretching and shifting as we practice and learn.

 

 

Cormier, D. (2017, April). Intentional messiness of online communities. In Elizabeth Childs (Chair), MALAT Virtual Symposium. Symposium conducted online at Royal Road University.

Cronin, C. (2017, April). Open culture, open education, open questions. In Elizabeth Childs (Chair), MALAT Virtual Symposium. Symposium conducted online at Royal Road University.

Forssman, V. (2017, April). Virtual Symposium Presentation. In Elizabeth Childs (Chair), MALAT Virtual Symposium. Symposium conducted online at Royal Road University.

Van Oostveen, R. (2017, April). Fully Online Learning Community Model. In Elizabeth Childs (Chair), MALAT Virtual Symposium. Symposium conducted online at Royal Road University