Consideration of whether or not technology hardware will serve educational ends as a production device as well as a consumption device has often been a flash point. Most recently, this topic has again focused on the iPad with some early tablet adopters now making the decision to move toward hardware with keyboards. It is obviously possible to write on a tablet, but the practicality of doing without a keyboard has come into question. Ease of use may encourage too much consumption and not enough production.
The promise of using technology to involve more of us as producers has existed for some time. With the introduction of more opportunities for online sharing, we knew something different was possible. This was a heady time with the promise of changes to commerce, politics, and education. It seemed worthy of a new label. Most would point to Tim O’Reilly’s term “Web 2.0”. As an alternative I liked the use of “Read/Write” web. Henry Jenkin’s “participatory web” also creates the right tone.
I think we are now backing away from this vision. The long tail is shrinking because of apathy and tools that offer content linking as a substitute for production. Content generation has given way to Facebook and Twitter linking. There are fewer bloggers and a substitution of Twitter discovery for the use of RSS. This trend has given rise to the development of Nuzzel which basically counts the number of times those you follow on Twitter link to the same address. If the individuals noting the value of a particular page in their tweets did not immediately get your attention, perhaps the Nuzzel totals will. For me, the value of Nuzzel is not the list generated from those I follow, but the lists generated by other users which tap into a different group.
I wish the educators who are big into promoting coding, but do not code themselves or who argue that generative student projects are valuable, but do not generate content themselves would think about this situation. Educators should have more to say about their practice.