I was most convinced of the need for further research on the students’ identity development in online spaces. Greenhow, Robelia, and Hughes (2009) pointed out that “Today’s youth experiment with different identities online through fan-fiction writing, multimedia representations of ideas, uses of different digital communication tools, role-plays, and immersion in virtual worlds” (p. 251). It seems clear that youth are open to exploring identities through online spaces. On the other hand, Crook (2012) found that students were reluctant to publish material online if it was in a school-related context because they felt that school contexts did not allow them to exercise control over their identities. The disconnect between out-of-school identity development and in-school identity development is problematic given that academic identities play a role in motivation to engage in school-related activity; for example, the theory of identity-based motivation says that students who have a positive academic identity will be more likely to persist in the face of academic-related difficulty (Oyserman & Destin, 2010). Better understanding of how students develop positive identities online, and how we can leverage those processes in academic contexts, is an important avenue for future research.
I am less convinced of Greenhow, Robelia, and Hughes’s (2009) call for design-based research (DBR) focused on the development of Web 2.0-infused environments. My worry with such pursuits is that if new environments are developed, rather than the multitude of currently existing environments being used (e.g., Facebook), the new environments will only serve to exacerbate the separation between school and non-school identity development.
Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2010). Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(7), 1001-1043.
Hi Katie,
Yes, formal learning spaces, (especially as we go higher up in the academia from primary to higher education!) seem incongruent to ideas like online identities, social media, social scholarship, etc. I think it should change and the change may be harder for higher education in particular. At times I wonder if it’s more of a problem of bridging formal and informal learning in general (Eshach, 2007). I noticed that some studies have attempted this, but I guess this problem is not specific to digital spaces (but somehow seems more pronounced in digital spaces, as we saw from Crook (2012)) I wonder if you think there’s more work to be done to bridge “informal” and “formal” in digital contexts than just analog contexts or do you think there’s no difference?
—
Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of science education and technology, 16(2), 171-190.
Hi Sukanya,
Interesting question. I do think the questions of incongruence between identities is particularly exacerbated in online spaces. One reason for this might be that online spaces allow for the development and exercise of many different identities (Greenhow, Robelia, & Hughes, 2009). Due to this increase in flexibility, I think people tend to create more varied identities that are more intimately connected to specific contexts. I know that, sometimes, when I am interacting with different groups or audiences, I don’t always think about potential incompatibilities in the way I see and present myself. I don’t deal with any potential conflicts because they simply don’t occur to me. The more different, nonoverlapping groups I interact with, the more potential it seems there will be for unexamined incongruences.
Hi Katie! You mention you’re less convinced by the call for design-based research. I interpreted the passage in Greenhow, Robelia, and Hughes (2009) as meaning they want to investigate cases in which Web 2.0 is used for educational purposes as a way of answering a question they present earlier (“What is the educative value of learners’ participation and creative practices?”). In other words, I did not take it to mean that they wanted to develop completely new environments, but rather merge the two existing environments by studying how Web 2.0 is used in educational settings. (Although, I suppose one could argue that a merge would result in a new environment). Do you think studying classroom that employ Web 2.0 for educational purposes would be beneficial?
Hi Katie, the importance of developing an academic identity is critical for engaging in school-related activities and outcomes. In the Greenhow, Robelia, and Hughes (2009) pape, the most compelling examples of merging informal and formal identities/activities were social scholarship and fanfiction communities. In these examples, I see that Web 2.0 affords a new space for the expression of a positive academic identity (PhD students using Twitter to establish professional networks); learners who express their writer identities on fanfiction communities. It seems to be me that the engagement in these activities/spaces emerges out of an established identity. Perhaps a good starting point would be to support the development of positive academic identities.
Hi, Katie. You make an interesting argument about the need for more research about students’ identity work in online settings. Have you read Ito et al. (2009)? It is very carefully researched, yet it is so easy to read. The book employs many elements of narrative nonfiction writing — story development, characters, dialogue — to talk about identity development online. I think you would enjoy it, if you haven’t read it yet.
Also, your post reminded me of some interesting recent research on teachers’ online identity development: Robson, (2017).
I understand your hesitancy about creating more new online environments for student interaction. Yet, I wonder whether we — or some commercial developer — could move people towards a new social media platform that was designed with more forgiveness in mind. I don’t expect Facebook and the other platforms that are currently popular to last forever. We can point to their weaknesses. Bowler, Knobel and Mattern (2015) collects some very interesting ideas from teens about what features the next generation of social media should have.
Bowler, L., Knobel, C., & Mattern, E. (2015). From cyberbullying to well‐being: A narrative‐based participatory approach to values‐oriented design for social media. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(6), 1274-1293.
Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., Cody, R., Stephenson, B. H., Horst, H. A., … & Perkel, D. (2009). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. MIT press.
Robson, J. (2017). Performance, structure and ideal identity: Reconceptualising teachers’ engagement in online social spaces. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Administrators:
Christine Greenhow
Diana
Rand
cainwil1
Ming
Top Posters:
galvins1: 51
richkat3: 50
albertsk: 43
moudgal1: 43
schellma: 41
liraamal: 39
Emilia: 35
zhumengd: 34
Forum Stats:
Groups: 6
Forums: 19
Topics: 97
Posts: 339
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 77
Moderators: 0
Admins: 5
Most Users Ever Online: 58
Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)