A “Revisited” blog post indicates that I reread the original and used AI-assisted tools (e.g., Grammarly) to improve grammar and word choice.
When I was Carroll’s Director of Institutional Research, I recall being amazed and amused that the format and substance of many institutional reports were dictated by 1) to what degree the secretary could fit the information on a page and 2) how she had done it in the past—rather than by using the latest technology and the latest thinking about how best to present the most informative data. I have continued to be hesitant to use Twitter extensively out of a resistance to trying to force my thoughts, ideas, and communication into 140 characters or less (thought bytes) and to my trying to decrease and slow down my communication and information acquisition activities (leaving me time to reflect, to read, to assimilate, and to create). Though I’ve graduated from a rotary phone, I still refuse to use my cell phone except for emergency calls!
However, Jane Hart’s recent thoughtful, reasoned exposition of how to use Twitter has caused me to consider seriously adding Twitter to my armamentarium of communication/learning/teaching tools. It also motivated me to revisit her list of 100 learning professionals she suggests that one might wish to follow.
But do I need that medium to keep up to date? I think not- I do reasonably well with the learning tools I use without overloading. Do I want or need to follow others—or to be followed? Though I admire what these learning professionals are doing, I don’t want my energies or focus drowned or diluted by the deluge of additional information they provide.
“To Twit or not to Twit?” is not the question. Instead, the questions for me are:
Under what circumstances might Twitter be helpful to me for successful teaching?
Does Twitter add to my ability to find answers to questions I am investigating?
What are the costs to me (time away from other things; wheat to chaff ratio) of using Twitter?
.Time to curl up with a novel.