An exploration into Twitter

This is a post I wrote when I first started using Twitter but never posted, there will be another post shortly on my experiences so far with Twitter (this is now up and may be read here (Silver, 2019).

Studies have shown that educators value Twitter for its accessibility, ease of use and ability for interaction. It allows them to connect to other educators that they may not normally meet who have similar and diverse ideas. Twitter offers an alternative to personalise an educator’s PD (based on need and competence) in an atmosphere that relies on collective knowledge to learn rather than heirachies. It allows educators to exchange resources, practises and ideas (Carpenter & Krutka, 2015).

OK, I don’t know exactly what Twitter is, but it may be useful. I’ve heard of a Tweet or is that a Twitter? I’ve no idea! Will I ever get a handle on this?

This is an exploration of my venture into the use of Twitter, a totally new experience for me. As I begin I have feelings of overwhelm and despair – will I ever get the hang of this? I imagine this is somewhat how our students feel when given a new topic.

As Luca (2015) says ‘Twitter may not make sense immediately, but if you persevere, engage in the ‘give it a go’ mentality we Australians are renowned for, then you might just find a valuable professional learning tool’.

As my confidence grows I am sure I will feel more excited and curious.

For those of you who are as new to Twitter as I am here is some terminology to get started with, courtesy of Shannon McClintock Miller (2010).

Microblog: what twitter is, say what you want to say, but say it in 140 characters or less.

Tweet: when you send out a message or content (link etc).

Retweet: When you send on somebody else’s tweet to your own network, with or without a comment.

Hashtag: Using the # symbol to aggregate tweets on a given topic

Twitter stream: Constant lists of posts from people you follow.

Lurk: To hang about and view Twitters without commenting or retweeting.

As soon as I begin I feel overwhelmed by the amount of information – I must admit I do have somewhat of an attitude of ‘sufficing’ at times as I try to overcome information overload, to which one of the responses is not to look at information at all (Bawden & Robinson, 2009). This is how I feel about using Twitter – there is too much information, I don’t want to look because I can’t keep up with it. But I persevere. I decide to put the app on my mobile and having it accessible on my phone means I can quickly flick through posts and try to stay on top of my Twitter stream.

I lurk around for a while, seeing what people post and following more interesting people. I see interesting tweets I would like to save so I Google how to save a post (this is actually bookmarking a post, see how to do it here on a mobile).

Having been encouraged by seeing posts by other people I knew hadn’t used twitter before, I jump in and retweet – that wasn’t so bad.

I am starting to feel more confident in my ability to use Twitter and can see the potential it has for establishing my PLN. I have already come across some good resources for teaching and supplementing information for concepts I am studying at the moment.

Have you used Twitter or a social networking tool for communicating resources and ideas with others?



Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science, 35 (2) 180–191. doi: 10.1177/0165551508095781

Carpenter, J. & Krutka, D. (2015). Engagement through microblogging: educator professional development via Twitter. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 707-728. doi: 10.1080/19415257.2014.939294

Luca, J (2012, October 27). Personal Learning networks [online article]. Retrieved from

McClintock Miller, S. (2010). Enhance your Twitter experience. Learning & Leading with Technology, 37(8), 14-17. Retrieved from

Silver, T. (2019). Twitter – an update [blog post]. Retrieved from



“The Water Basin Project network map” by Choconancy1 is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

A knowledge of networking and networks is becoming increasingly important in our society and for education.

But what is a network? A network is a group of people joined together – today mostly by digital means (Oddone, 2017). Oddone also outlines four defining features of networks. They are:

  1. ‘Nodes – points on the network
  2. Relations – the lines in the network, connecting in one specific interaction
  3. Ties – also connectors, but reflecting the totality of relations between nodes
  4. The network itself – how the nodes, relations and ties combine to interact as networks’.

You can read more on Oddone’s post here. 

As technology becomes more readily available and information increases it is important that we know how to use networks to find information. Before beginning this course I had an understanding of networks in the traditional sense but no formal understanding of how they worked with technology. McClure (1994) and Rhinegold (2011) present two views on network literacy but they both believe it is imperative for people to understand networks and how they work in order to make the most of opportunities in their personal and professional lives. McLure defined network literacy as a set of knowledge and skills needed to have the ability to identify, access and use information from an electronic network.

Rhinegold explains that the way the internet coding protocols (ICP) were established at the creation of the net changed the way data could be sent. There is now no centralised control, although government, laws and markets influence the structure. This lack of centralised structure makes the internet available to anybody who knows ICP – it is the ‘end-to-end’ principle. Whereas McLure’s views were on information retrieval from the network Rhinegold uses many theories, including Reed’s Law to demonstrate how networks now function with the advancement of technology and the introduction of web 2.0. Now networks are based around groups and these groups interact with each other to share information and knowledge regardless of time or distance barriers.

As I progress through my learning, it becomes increasingly clear how important networks are to learning about new resources, practises and opportunities.

Network learning is also becoming increasingly important in our education systems. Network learning is ICT used to promote connections for learning. Schools are seeing an increased need to use ICT skills for teaching and learning, however, the way in which ICT is used in learning and assessments is different to how they would be used in the workplace. A lot of student’s skills are assessed in isolation without being able to use ICT knowledge and skills as they would in the workplace. Student’s are also often tested individually, rather than a mix of both individual and collaborative work as they would be expected to achieve in the workplace (Wilson, Scalise & Gochyyev, 2015).

The lack of integration between the way employers expect employees to utilise technology and collaborative skills and the way the education system teaches and assesses these skills leaves a widening gap. This leads to the question – are students taught to integrate ICT and networks into their lives in a way that will be beneficial to their future? Does the education system need to change the way it implements and assesses? How does a teacher achieve this in an institution steeped in traditional systems?



McClure, C. R. (1994). Network literacy: A role for libraries? Information Technology and Libraries, 13(2), 115-125. Retrieved from Proquest Ebook Central.

Oddone, K. (2016, September 5). Networks, networking and network literacy – Part 1 [Blogpost]. Retrieved from

Rheingold, H. (2011, February 13). Network literacy part 1 [online video]. Retrieved from

Rheingold, H. (2011, February 13). Network literacy part 2 [online video]. Retrieved from

Wilson, M., Scalise, K., & Gochyyev, P. (2015). Rethinking ICT literacy: From computer skills to social network settings. Thinking Skills and Creativity,  18, 65-80.

What is a PLN?

Photo by John Barkiple on Unsplash

These were my thoughts exactly ‘what is a PLN and what does it have to do with connected learning?’ when I first encounter the term.
The acronym PLN may stand for many terms – personal learning network, professional learning network or as Terrell (2010) likes to call it a ‘passionate learning network’. Whichever terminology you choose to use the concept is the same. A PLN at it’s most basic is a group of people (network) that you choose to engage with in order to share ideas and learn from each other (Digitalang, 2012). However, it is also more than that, it is a support group who will challenge your thinking and provide you with new ideas and act as a sounding board for your own ideas. Through PLNs more can be achieved than could be by the individual (DPG plc, 2015). As the network is usually global thanks to the advent of digital technology there may be people in your group from various backgrounds and professions that you may never meet.

To be part of a PLN you need to have qualities of being willing to learn, share, have an open mind to different opinions and ideas and contribute (Digitalang, 2012).

LaGarde & Whitehead (2012) outline 4 basic stages in using a PLN:

  1. Consume – observe and collect new ideas
  2. Connect – comment, ask questions
  3. Create – recreate ideas and apply to your own practise
  4. Contribute – share your ideas, practise and resources

But where can you find people for your PLN? – online is best. Way (2012) lists several places, which include:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Nings
  • Google+
  • Diigo

Other useful ways to connect with others are by reading blogs, listening to podcasts, attending webinars and being active on forums.

I find the idea/concept of PLNs both interesting and challenging at this stage in my connected networking path. Interesting because the potential for personal growth is huge but also the ability to use global networking in the classroom is amazing. As Tolisano (2014) demonstrates the benefits your PLN can range from crowdsourcing for authentic data (slide 66) to bringing in experts from outside the school (slide 56).
Challenging, because at the moment on the participation scale of connected learning according to Jenkins I am a lurker. I am unsure of the worthiness of my ideas and reluctant to contribute, which is quite characteristic of a lurker. As I begin to establish a PLN and reach out through the use of technology such as following twitter accounts and blogging I am becoming a more confident connected learner.

As an update my PLN has helped deliver to me ideas for professional enhancement, such as :

  • Using Bloom’s taxonomy for reflective thinking
  • Preparing for future class requirements
  • Infographics summarising research on digital natives
  • Evernote
  • Pearltrees
  • Pocket
  • Curation

Where are you in your PLN path? How do you use your PLN? Have you taken PLN ideas or benefits of your PLN into your workplace?



Digitalang (2012, February 21). How to build your PLN (Personal Learning Network) [online video]. Retrieved from

DPG plc (2015, November 23). What is a Personal Learning Network and why build one? [online video]. Retrieved from

LaGarde, J. & Whitehead, T. (2012). Power up your professional learning. Knowledge Quest, 41(2), 8-13. Retrieved from

Rheingold, H., & Weeks, A. (2012). Participation power. In Net smart: How to thrive online (pp. 111-145). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Terrell, S. (2010). Shelly Terrell: Global Netweaver, Curator, Passionate Learning Network (PLN) Builder [online video]. Retrieved from:

Tolisano, S. (2014). The globally connected educator – Beyond plugging in, towards global pedagogy [online slideshow]. Retrieved from

Way, J. (2012). Developing a personal learning network for fast and free professional learning. Access, 26(1), 16-19. Retrieved from

My increasing awareness of the role of the TL

In our first blog we were asked to write about our perceptions of the role of the teacher librarian (TL). This I did, based on what I had seen other TLs do in their jobs, you can read about it here.

However, as we delve deeper into the course I am realising the role of the TL involves so much more. According to ASLA (2003) the role of the TL covers three areas – that of information specialist, information services manager and curriculum leader. Each of these areas covers an indepth knowledge and large responsibility for the TL.

Readings on the role of the TL have highlighted that the role of information specialist is becoming increasingly important as the technology continues to become more integrated in our lives. Information specialist on its own covers areas of multiliteracies in information literacy, digital literacy and networked literacy. Information literacy is the ability to find, evaluate and make use of information (Lynda, 2015) but it also incorporates the smaller parts of the whole of being able to formulate questions, search for and navigate around digital spaces, select appropriate information and use be able to use this information as well as an awareness of copyright and plagiarism. Digital literacy is the ability to use digital tools to communicate. It is assumed that many younger students know how to use digital tools because they have been exposed to digital technology all their life. However, this is not always the case, with students admitting to having difficulties using digital tools with information skills (Coombes, 2009, p.36). Networked literacy is the knowledge of networks, how they function and the social courtesies used in them.

As an information services manager the TL is responsible for developing a library collection that reflects student, staff and community information needs derived from sources such as student surveys and curriculum mapping (Herring, 2007). These resources need to be acquired and students given access to the collection (Herring, 2007) through a mix of physical and digital means.

As a curriculum leader the TL is expected to work with the principal and executives to ensure that information literacy has a whole school focus (Herring, 2007, p.31).

Ultimately the role of the TL is defined by the curriculum and the school goals. This will influence the activities the TL undertakes and collection management as an information services manager.

I am sure as my studies progress I will discover more roles and their depths for the TL.



Combes, B. (2009). Generation Y: Are they really digital natives or more like digital refugees? Synergy, 7(1), 31-40. Retrieved from;dn=178236;res=AEIPT.

Lynda. (2015). Information literacy [Video file]. Retrieved from:

Herring, J. (2007). Teacher librarians and the school library. In S. Ferguson (Ed.) Libraries in the twenty-first century : charting new directions in information (pp. 27-42). Wagga Wagga , NSW : Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University. Retrieved from

Collaboration and cooperation

I have had stages in my career as a teacher where I have worked cooperatively and collaboratively with other teachers and collaboratively is definitely better.

Cooperation may be defined as an individual contributing their knowledge in a group to achieve a common goal, whereas collaboration is the sharing of knowledge, ideas and resources to build upon each other’s contributions to solve a problem and individual contributions matter to the outcome of the group (Nussbaum-Beach & Ritter, 2011).

During my work as a high school teacher I was fortunate enough to be able to work collaboratively within the faculty to create new units of work. Working collaboratively sparks creativity and gives a sense of ownership to everybody. You end up creating something wonderful that you wouldn’t have been able to achieve on your own.

On the other hand, I have also worked cooperatively, providing just materials, finding books on the subject or asked to incorporate something on a unit they are doing into library lessons. Sometimes I was not asked at all.

The Australian School Library Association (ASLA) outline that as a curriculum leader one of the key roles of the TL is to collaborate with other teachers to integrate ‘information resources and technologies into student learning’ (ASLA, n.d).

However, the level of collaboration is influenced by the school culture (Haycock, 2007, p.27) of which the principal is intregral in supporting collaboration between teachers and the TL (Haycock, 2002 cited in Haycock, 2007, p.31) and it may take years to establish the level of trust required to work collaboratively. This was definitely the case in the last school I worked in where the culture was one that the TL had little to do with collaborating with others and mostly borrowed books or provided resources (which was not often sought). Using Montiel-Overall’s model of teacher librarian collaboration (TLC) (2005, p.35) I tended to work at a model A level of coordination (low levels of teacher and TL involvement with a minimal amount of communication) or model B level of cooperation (teacher and TL cooperate but teach areas of speciality separately) with both teacher’s taxonomy of resource-based teaching and school library media specialist taxonomy ranging from levels 1-5 (Montiel-Overall, 2005, p.33-34). During my time there I tried to foster a sense of collaboration by being cooperative and suggesting resources (print and web based) that could be used in units of work. I also tried to get to know other teachers personally (which was easier with some teachers than others) through lunch conversations and extracurricular activities such as Breakfast Club. It was only towards the end the year, once relationships had started to be established that teachers started actively asking me about resources available in the library for their units of work.


Australian School Library Association. (n.d). What is a Teacher Librarian? Retrieved from

Haycock, K. (2007). Collaboration: critical success factors for student learning. School Libraries Worldwide; 13(1), 25-35. Retrieved from

Montiel-Overall, P. (2005). A theoretical understanding of teacher and librarian collaborationSchool Libraries Worldwide11(2), 24-48. Retrieved from

Nussbaum-Beach, S., & Ritter, L.R.  (2011). Defining the connected educator. In The connected educator: Learning and leading in a digital age (pp. 9-24). Retrieved from

The Principal and the Teacher Librarian (TL) – A reflection on practice.

Photo by chuttersnap on Unsplash

The principal has a big influence on how effectively a school library is run and the role of the TL based their perception of the role of the TL (Lupton, 2016, p.49) and whilst I was supported by the principal in my professional development as a teacher I didn’t feel supported in my role as a TL.

When I was employed for a full-time temporary position for a year as a relieving TL I was briefed to include more technology in library lessons and to modernise the library by the principal. However, I felt conflicted and frustrated by these expectations during the year as they were not able to be met due to lack of funding and support by the principal and the senior administration officer.

To incorporate more technology into lessons I was given 9 desk top computers in a separate room in the library (where there were the most connections) but was told by the deputy principal that students had to be supervised in this room while using computers due to past behaviour problems with computer usage. This made using the computers very impractical as I could not fit the rest of the class in the room. In second term the appointment of a new graduate to the school meant the installation of a computer classroom for them took desktops from the library and left the library with 5 computers. This was still an impractical number to incorporate technology use by the class.

Later in the year I asked the principal for Chromebooks for the library to help teach research skills and incorporate more technology and was told there was money available from surplus budgets but he preferred to spend it on things that made the school look better – like new signage around the school– so the community could see the money was being spent. I would rather like to argue that the community consists of students and parents who would surely appreciate money being spent on Chromebooks so students can keep up with advances in information literacy and digital technologies for research, learning and creation of their own digital artefacts.

Apart from the principal I would suggest that the senior administration officer (SAM) also has a lot of influence on the effectiveness of the TL. Despite the directions by the principal at the start of my employment that he wished the library to be modernised, many times my requests for items were refused or just not ordered. These included signage for different areas of the library – such as junior fiction, fiction and non-fiction and shelf labelling to help students to find sections on the shelves (such as alphabet lettering for junior fiction shelving and numbering for non-fiction). I was even told by the SAM that she knew the library needed work but other areas of the school needed to be fixed up first and quite often when I asked how to order things it would be a very vague answer or a reply of ‘I don’t have time at the moment’.

If I knew then what I knew now I would have applied the ‘WIIFM’ principle to the principal (Kachel, 2017, p.50) – pointing out how Chromebooks could benefit students in information literacy. I would also point out how signage could help students to quickly and easily locate information in the library and allow them to spend more time on their learning. It would have been useful to schedule regular face-to-face meetings with the principal to discuss what they wanted to achieve in the library program (Kachel, 2017, p.51), especially in terms of what type of technology they wanted to be incorporated and how they would like to it implemented (perhaps this would have also helped in the case for the acquisition of Chromebooks).

Interview question results by Lupton (2016) showed that the principal supported the TL by making frequent visits to the library and encouraging other teachers to engage with the TL, being encouraging of TL ideas and allowing time for curriculum development between the TL and stages. I was asked to attend staff meetings with alternate stages each week which was good to get an overall view of the school landscape as I often wasn’t included in the loop of things happening in the school otherwise. However, I was not given the chance to be involved in stage planning days, having to take RFF classes instead. There was also a lack of involvement with the principal, the only time the principal came to the library was during the holidays when I had rearranged the library to open it up for more flexible learning spaces and a few times to tell me how I should have applied a discipline policy according to their school or to show parents the library on school tours. Other than that, it was as if the library didn’t exist. He didn’t even visit book fairs or encourage teachers to visit book fairs or utilise the library. I think the lack of involvement with the TL stemmed from the already established culture of the school with the previous TL and as I was new to the school (on a temporary contract) and didn’t know the systems, culture and students it was difficult to push to be involved in whole -school planning regarding curriculum and fighting for improvements to the library.

Upon reflection, perhaps I could have been more strategic in my time in the library. The majority of my time was spent on library collection management and setting up functions of the library, such as establishing Premier’s Reading Challenge sections and serial sections, weeding and disposing of long out of date material and purchasing more popular fiction books to encourage student reading and engagement with the library. This may not have been the best use of my time as Purcell (2010) suggests library collection management clerical duties should be a small part of the librarian’s role and can be outsourced so the TL can focus on inquiry research. However, funding was easily available for book purchases as I could use Scholastic rewards from bookfair and the SAM was happy to pay invoices for books. Spending my time on curriculum development and advocating for more access to technology with the principal may have been a more beneficial use of my time. I think the strategies outlined by Kachel (2017) would be beneficial in future situations, such as having face to face time with the principal focusing on what they want to happen in library, so the TL always has a strong advocate on their side.

For those of you in a TL position do you regularly engage with their principal about their goals for the school? If not, what stops you from doing so?



Kachel, D. (2017). The principal and the librarian: positioning the school library program. Teacher Librarian, 45(1), 50-52. Retrieved from

Lupton, M. (2016). Adding Value: Principals’ Perceptions of the Role of the Teacher-Librarian. School Libraries Worldwide 22(1), 49-61. doi: 10.14265.22.1.005.

Purcell, M. (2010). All librarians do is check out books, right? A look at the roles of a school library media specialist. Library Media Connection 29(3), 30-33. Retrieved from





The research rollercoaster

Photo by Matt Bowden on Unsplash

When we are asked to practise what we preach we begin to understand the pressures some of our students must face. I certainly felt the effect of too much information and experienced many emotions in completing our assignment two discussion essay.

During the essay I suffered from too much information in the form of information overload which occurs when searchers are unable to efficiently use the information, that is, there is too much information for the user to deal with (Bawden & Robinson, 2009, p.182). I also felt information anxiety, of being lost in the digital world and an urge to just satisfice, to take just the right amount of information to suit my needs, but not necessarily the best information available (Bawden & Robinson, 2009, p.185).

I experienced a mix of feelings of curiosity, anxiety, overwhelm, frustration, despair, elation and relief. Curiosity about the assignment, anxiety that I could not find the resources I needed, overwhelm at the level of information, reading and decoding required. Frustration at not being able to remember where I had read information, despair in feeling I had not answered the question or written it well enough, elation of beginning to pull it all together and finally relief in submitting the assignment. Many of these feelings that I experienced are outlined in the Information Search Process (ISP) model. The ISP model depicts the feelings, thoughts and actions of students across seven stages when searching for and using information. As they transition through the stages students may experience feelings of uncertainty, optimism, confusion, clarity, disappointment and satisfaction (Todd, Kuhlthau & Heinstrom, 2005).

Helping students with information skills including providing lessons on how to use search options such as databases and library catalogues allow students to effectively search for and retrieve information. Helping students in breaking down the terminology used in the question and possible search criteria is also essential in fine tuning their information skills.  I believe TLs also need to help with organisational skills that support information skills including time management, organised note taking and citation knowledge. The use of the ISP model allows TLs to offer assistance and guidance during each of the ISP stages via the ‘zone of intervention’ which occurs when a student cannot achieve the task or can only achieve it with great difficulty. The only time a  (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2012, p.20). This sentence from Kuhlthau et al. (2012, p.22) was a lightbulb moment about the level of assistance TLs should give during the guided inquiry approach ‘In Guided Inquiry, the only “going it alone” is for each student to think about what is personally important and interesting about the inquiry.’

As I reflect on the processes, I realise this is exactly what Judy and Lori modelled to us in the lead up to our assignment. They were leading us through the process that we will need to lead our own students on and most of us probably experienced feelings our own students will experience. Thank you, ladies, for showing the way without me even realising it until now!


Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science, 35(2), 180–191, doi:

Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K., & Caspari, A. K. (2012). Guided inquiry design : A framework for inquiry in your school. Retrieved from

Todd, R. ,Kuhlthau, C. & Heinstrom, J. (2005). School Library Impact Measure (SLIM). A Toolkit and Handbook For Tracking and Assessing Student Learning Outcomes Of Guided Inquiry Through The School Library. Retrieved from

Tolisano’s four big ideas around connected learning

Photo by John Schnobrich on Unsplash

Tolisano (2014a) lists four ideas to become a connected educator. They are:

  1. Local isolation – knowing the isolation of teaching and becoming connected to other educators around the world.
  2. Perspective – be willing to offer and accept different perspectives about ideas.
  3. Crowdsource – the power of networking for ideas, content, services, data and approaches to learning/situations.
  4. Model – model network literacy by a. having a basic understanding of network technology by creating your own network, understanding network intelligences and  network capabilities.

How essential is each element? – well very, as they all work together to create a globally connected educator. The educator needs to be willing to move from their local area to a global area, be willing to share, be able to accept different perspective, have built connections and know how to use connections for learning and knowledge. I think that the benefits to students in connecting to the real world for their learning are enormous.

I would present the concept of a globally connected educator to my colleagues in a staff meeting as it would be able to reach a vast majority of people at one time (plus the meetings are compulsory and therefore have a captive audience). I would start by explaining the four ideas and show examples of how it is being used, such as in Tolisano’s (2014b) slideshow ‘The Globally Connected Educator’. I would expect the reactions of colleagues to be varied.  Some people would be excited, some (particularly those at the beginning end of the connected educator spectrum like me) may be curious but think it’s too overwhelming and some couldn’t be bothered (thinking they already have too much work to do and this would just add to it).

If I had produced any work where the students had participated in global networking, I would show that at the meeting as well to show what is possible at a more ‘local’ level.



Tolisano, S. (2014, September 28a). 4 big ideas around the connected educator [Blog post]. Retrieved from

Tolisano, S. (2014b). The globally connected educator – Beyond plugging in, towards global pedagogy [slideshare]. Retrieved from



Globally connected educators

Photo by Artem Bali on Unsplash

Nussbaum-Beach and Hall outline their image of a globally connected educator, who works collaboratively with others to build on shared knowledge (2011, p.20). Whilst I agree with their perspectives on a globally connected educator my personal reality is vastly different. I am still very much in the cooperation stage, where the contributions I make are individual, contributing to a whole. I am only just beginning a collaborative practise with establishing my professional learning network (PLN). At this stage I am a lurker in Jenkin’s participatory culture (cited in Nussbaum-Beach & Hall, 2011, p. 11). I am investigating and navigating tools to use to enable a collaborative practise as 21st century learners now have to be able to use digital tools to connect over a wider geographical area with an increasingly diversity of people Nussbaum-Beach & Hall, 2011, p. 4).

According to the scoring of the different literacies required to be a 21st Century citizen (Nussbaum-Beach & Hall, 2011, p. 14) I am not multiliterate with only a basic understanding of many of the categories. In fact, I think I may be almost illiterate! Overall, I didn’t find any of the literacy categories particularly surprising as they all centre around digital knowledge and global interaction. The least challenging literacy category for me is to promote and model digital citizenship as this is an area I have some knowledge of in respect to plagiarism and referencing. The most challenging is not a category but categories – I find all the literacy types challenging as they rely on concepts and skills I myself have not mastered yet but obviously need to in order to be a good educator in the 21st Century.

Nussbaum-Beach & Hall’s ideas of a connected educator are similar to my ideas in that a connected educator engages with others, is willing to share, is open-minded and reflective, listens, questions and has a willingness to try new ideas (2011, p. 11). Concepts different to my own of a connected educator were some I had not encountered or thought of before such as engaging in difficult topics and thought-provoking qualities like being mindful (how does mindfulness help?) and using a strengths-based appreciative approach (what is a strengths-based appreciative approach?).

I now know I have a lot to learn about modern literacies and it leaves me questioning, where do people find the time to be globally connected educators in a seemingly busy world? Or does it become easier as the educator becomes more connected?



Nussbaum-Beach, S., & Hall, L.R.  (2011). Defining the connected educator. In The connected educator: Learning and leading in a digital age (pp. 9-24). Retrieved from


A new culture of learning?

Photo by Clem Onojeghuo on Unsplash

Thomas and Brown state that the new culture of learning has 3 elements – play, imagination and questioning (2011, p.18). That a growing digital network will transcend the classroom and expand our learning opportunities with access to large amounts of resources and knowledge through our interactions with others online (Thomas & Brown, 2011, p.17). These interactions may happen through a myriad of online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Google Hangouts etc.

Whilst this is proposed as the ideal, how much of this really occurs in modern day learning and teaching?

Based on my own learning experiences in the past 2 years, a limited amount. Whilst this will vary for different people most of my learning has been based on face to face learning, a mix of online and face to face meetings and attending training courses through Adobe Connect. Virtually none of it has involved play and imagination, however, most of it has involved questioning.

Like Sam in Thomas and Brown’s article (2011) the majority of my most successful learning has come from collaborative learning processes using technology. I have found I learn a lot when I can use collaborative learning to ask questions,  ‘question’ my ideas and gain new ideas and perspectives. Thomas and Brown (2011) would define this collaborative group as a ‘collective’ group – ‘a community of similarly minded people’ (p.21). An example of collaborative learning for me happens in the Yammer Librarian’s group, where I have learnt a lot about the various aspects of librarianship.

Like Allen (Thomas & Brown, 2011, p.26) another area where I have learnt a lot from with my own self-directed, informal learning is by ‘Googling’ my questions (the problem) to find a solution – particularly with computer program related problems.

I feel in INF532 we are trying to establish a culture similar to the gaming student’s example in Thomas & Brown (2011, p.25) who had formed their own community for learning, using the readings to make sense of what they were doing. We need to use our readings and share our experiences to grow our understanding of the process and tribulations of collaborative online networkers.

As an educator I tend not to use online collaborative learning (mostly due to a lack of access to computers) but have focussed on more traditional cooperative learning strategies (Nussbaum-Beach & Ritter, 2012, p.13). Also, at this stage I am unconfident in my ability to provide collaborative learning opportunities to my students but hope with the establishment of my own collaborative network this will change over time.



Nussbaum-Beach, S., & Hall, L. R. (2012). Defining the connected educator. In The connected educator: Learning and leading in a digital age (pp. 3-24). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). Arc-of-Life learning. In A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change (pp. 17-33). Lexington, KY: CreateSpace.