This post: simple social media tools can be effective platforms for learning because they combine the hard work of the long text with good usability.
The first thing to say about Twitter is, like Google, it's decidedly not simple to use:
"Why are Yahoo! and MSN such complex-looking places? Because their systems are easier to use. Not because they are complex, but because they simplify the life of their users by letting them see their choices on the home page: news, alternative searches, other items of interest. . ."(There's loads of stuff written about Twitter. Here's some recent stats showing around 80% of users have fewer than 100 followers and/or followees, for instance. But this post isn't about Twitter except as an example of Social Media so I'm leaving Twitter observations to this: read The Complexity of Simplicity which got me thinking about all this and provided most of the links and quotes for this post. Every time I use the word 'Twitter', it's interchangeable with other examples of Social Media. Twitter's just my favourite.)
The value of Twitter comes from Gradual Engagement:
"An example . . . is the search experience on Google. Though often cited as an example of a simple design, Google search was actually built for expert users. According to Product VP Marissa Mayer:
“Novice users will enter ‘tell me when it will snow in NY today’ and get no valuable results. Soon thereafter, they will end up typing ‘weather new york’ and see that the results are more valuable. Voila! An expert user. The learning curve in search is steep, but quick.”
Enabling this experience, however, requires all the computational power that an engineering powerhouse like Google can muster. Not all companies have such capabilities."Twitter does - it's us (or, more likely, you). And it's this powerhouse that opens up learning possibilities through progressive disclosure.
Progressive disclosure's another usability term.
On complex websites and software it means that certain features are kept hidden from users until an opportune moment (like the advanced bits of the Google). But on Twitter this could mean a couple of things - either you follow new people or you un-ignore certain kinds of Tweets as they stream past you in the timeline (like some of the hashtagged #chat groups eg #KMers or #lrnchat). It could even mean that you begin to participate in these conversations.
We know that progressive disclosure is effective for learning how to use systems. (And learning geeks will be able to find theoretical analogues in their own domain.) And a good reason for this might be that we get our base units for learning mixed up. We're trained to think of learning objectives as units of 'content' but, for me at least, the base unit is just as likely to be time. Some things just can't be rushed.
Don't Make Me Write a Big Honking Report!
Here's Steve 'Don't Make Me Think!' Krug again, talking about the $3-8k pricetag for an expert usability review of a web site:
Note that I didn't mention a written report. I've come to the conclusion that very few of my clients actually derive much benefit from having one, and a) they take a long time to write, and b) writing is really hard work, so I try to avoid it if at all possible. If a client absolutely needs a “big honking report” so they have something to show to the person who's signing the check, I can do one, but it's likely to double the price.So how does Steve Krug report back to clients? A 'series of long conference calls'. And, if you think about it, this makes sense. Conversation's a good example of The Complexity of Simplicity. And conversation epitomises gradual engagement/progressive disclosure. Importantly, conversation's also hard work - there's little chance of burying your irreducible complexity in a "big honking report" in a conference call.
In the previous post, I gave an example of a conversation that I learned from on Twitter. That conversation has happened over a period of months. And many of the people involved had no idea they were taking part.
Somebody is discussing the thing I want to learn to do next on Twitter right now. It's a massive free-for-all conference call and it's hard work. But it's working out well for me.
Next post: I'm going to have a crack at defining what 'usability' means for hypergogues.1 Which I said I'd do this post, but ran out of space. I'd love to know how you feel about 'borrowing' ideas from UX people for learning design - are there any other areas/people/sources I should be checking out? I'd also love to know whether you found the ideas mentioned in the previous post to be credible - can learners really achieve more by reading a book than by multimedia eLearning courses?
1Yes, I know that you don't know what 'hypergogue' means - it's all the people who help people learn at work or in life (but who don't necessarily have the word 'teacher' on their passport). Think of them as teachers in schools run on a wirearchical basis.
Further reading:
I've long had an interest in what the usability people have to teach us Learning & Development types. Here are the people who influenced this post. Any ideas for others gratefully received.
Luke Wroblewski
Jakob Nielsen
David Hamill
Steve Krug
Adaptive Path
And, it's quite expensive, but I recommend Mental Models by Indi Young
Finally, here's a round-up of another useful usability concept for learning designers - Personas
