Choosing tools

There are many Web 2.0 applications of which will be of no interest or use to higher education teachers; there will be many more which, although initially attractive, do not hold up to sustained scrutiny. The task of choosing a tool can be a complicated business. This site provides only a partial solution: winnowing out 1000s of applications to refine the list down to a good 100 or so.

Four useful questions to guide your thinking

What are the circumstances of my students that will influence the effectiveness of the tool I am choosing? (In other words, you must imagine what your students’ reactions will be based on the specific cohort you are teaching)
Is the investment of time that it will take to learn to use the application going to pay off with a greater dividend in student learning outcomes? (In other words, is the time you and the students take worth it – can you achieve a better result more easily? How does the time-cost of the innovation compare to the return?)
Is the difference in thinking going to be one that most students learn from, even if they have to struggle with the change? (So, it is not just a case of doing what is easiest – sometimes learning happens best when the process is more challenging or novel than is expected)
Can I build this tool into my teaching such that students see the value I place on it, and quickly come to agree with that decision, recognising the value it has for them? (And, of course, it is not just the tool, but what you want them to do with it: the value has to be explicit and communicated, as much by the way you use it as what you ask the students to do).

Three things to be borne in mind

Firstly, everyone who develops a Web 2.0 application or service is, in some ways, attempting to promote themselves. They either hope to monetize their application directly (normally via advertisements embedded in the service or sometimes via subscription fees) or show off their coding / website development prowess in search of employment. Mostly, however, they hope to build a viable user base for their service and then trust that it will be acquired by one of the major Internet corporations. Therefore, when looking for tools, be aware that commercial concern – in most cases – will drive the way that services are described and how they are marketed. Many tools and applications simply don’t ‘fit’ the requirements of higher education.
Secondly, the knowledge-work problem that a tool is designed to solve, or the creative work it is designed to enable, might be better done in another fashion – even when good, not all tools are as good as others, or as good as other ways of achieving the same goal. Choosing a tool should not become a choice between this or that specific possibility (for example springnote or wikispaces): it has to be, what purpose will this application achieve and, given that purpose, what are the very specific characteristics I need.

Third, there is a lot of enthusiastic commentary in favour of various Web 2.0 applications, often aimed at general ideas such as ‘blogging’ rather than about specific applications (this blogging engine or that), and their uses in education. While a useful source of general information, there is no substitute for detailed, personal investigation. While I have attempted to do some of that work for users of this site I would not expect it to be immediately useful or self-evident. Playing ‘thought experiments’ with tools is the best way to choose them: investigate, imagine and attempt to design a task or activity that will suit them in your teaching. The more you do this, the more likely you will choose the right tool and, more to the point, do something valuable with it.

Conclusion

Ultimately, choosing an application is research in action. You won’t be certain it has worked, or worked as intended, until you have selected a tool, designed its use into your teaching, and then carried out the plan and reflected on what worked and what did not. There is no sure-fire way to know in advance, though careful planning and anticipation of problems can narrow the gap between intent and outcome. Choosing Web 2.0 applications is, in effect, a process of becoming more knowledgeable about knowledge networking and, in the process, refining your tacit knowledge of the web and how it works to support education and scholarship.