Making Connections

Lonesome in a Virtual World

I can’t help but think that connectivism without the initial establishment a personal network of some sort, albeit a simple relationship between two participants, is intensely lonely for some people.

As I read the forums, I recognise a wonderful level of intellectual connecting and sharing, but often little personal support.  Certainly, where the personal support has been offered particularly in the introductions forum, it is easy to see how readily participants become involved – they seek out the names of those they recognise as their first step in becoming more widely connected. But where this personal support is not offered, I wonder if participants end up feeling isolated, not because they have nothing of interest to contribute, but because they have nobody to contribute to.

I read with interest the Daily news today, to find the following:

“Being There and Suddenly Very Lonely
Ever have the feeling of being very alone in a large crowd? Perhaps the barrier is an emotional state. Or language. Or just a sense of “not being connected” to others. Or, as Sia puts it: “It was of not any importance that I was there, I felt not seen and not heard, I had nothing to say. It was to difficult to read the chat and listen to the session-leaders at the same time. I had the feeling that all other participants knew each other very good and for a long time (know it’s not so, but I felt that way!)…I just came to the conclusion that it maybe to difficult to be busy with connected learning when you don’t have the possibility to share what you think, what you made, what you are doing.” We haven’t spent much time talking about the emotional preconditions to forming connections. They certainly can’t be overstated. Our emotional state influences our desire and capacity for learning. We can’t cover every nuance of connectivism in a 12 week course. So for now, I’ll just note this important element with a desire of returning to it in the future. Sia Vogel, , October 26, 2008 [Link] [Tags: none] [Comment]“

Surprising, because this is one of the first contributions with the potential to engage me in the conversations – it is easy to be so involved in the intellectual aspects of a conversation without considering the emotional.  This for me identifies a clear role for a facilitator, and a clear role for a structure within a course/community/group that supports the initial emotional as well as intellectual “buy-in”.

My reading has led me to a focus on the inter-woven group-community-network-group nature of an online “group” – and I believe it is in the initial stages that facilitated networking may actually lead to that ephemeral notion of community.  Possibly this facilitated networking may act to engage “lurkers” (if indeed they are peripheral, not just people with their own networking agendas).

Then my thoughts turn to Second Life.   Because my perceptions have changed over the duration of the course. I have always regarded Second Life as the solution online to individuals who feel isolated in other communication and socialisation forums.  I think, without careful facilitation, the opposite may be the case.  Through no fault of their own, the group signed up to work on CCK08 in Second Life knew each other well.  This was immediately apparent in the first synchronous meeting.  And I felt instant isolation as the conversation moved around shared experience for the first ten minutes.  By the second meeting, I was definitely a peripheral, in particular because I am a reflective learner and the pace of the chat outstripped my capacity to contribute (hmm! the dangers of synchronous communication), but also because when I contributed a couple of times, my contribution apparently went unnoticed, with no response.  I created a build (one of two apart from Fleep’s) which also went unnoticed, sitting for over a week with no comment. 

So this blog sits here unnoticed, my involvement in the Second Life cohort goes unnoticed, I am not connected, in fact quite the contrary, I am increasingly introspective and introverted. 

Don’t get me wrong, this is a marvellous thing for me, a revelation, because it has enhanced my understanding massively of how and why those few capable, competent and useful people in my groups “go missing” and withdraw, feel insecure and eventually disappear.  It certainly opens my eyes to why there was such a flurry of emails in my first community about “feeling out of place”.  The core group of participants who knew each other were keen to be involved and communicate that to all their friends, placing a personal stamp on relationships that extended into the group.  But in so doing, this was unintentionally isolating and the reason for the insecurities and lack of confidence in the other participants. 

Overall the implications (and I have not read this week’s ’stuff’) for facilitation are massive, and once I have formulated my own perspective, I  will be interested to return to the week’s transactions and see what other viewpoints can be added to my own.