This week we practiced and reflected on open learning through the use of Twitter as an educational tool. Not an avid user of social network, I did not participate in the conversation for this week’s Twitter course discussion, but i did listen in and observed the conversation, and reflected upon it.

This activity was an example of OER-enabled open pedagogy because students and teachers alike were all openly sharing and contributing to the knowledge base through Twitter, and it was not a one-way learning experience. While the activity was technically an “assignment’ in that it could count for grades in this course, it was not one in the traditional sense that was “disposable” (as argued by Wiley); rather, new knowledge is gained and shared by students through collaboration, and each person’s participation in the Twitter conversation added to the collective knowledge base. This is just one example of ways in which platforms like Twitter and educational activities like this week’s Twitter discussion could help learners and educators.

However, i do see some potential aspects where Twitter could harm learners in this context. Twitter is not real-name-based. This is a double-sided sword in context of learning and education, as learners and educators alike do not have to show their real identity and could hide behind a fake cyber ID, practically anonymous. Sometimes this enboldens people to more easily spread fake information or express biased, hateful opinions (like the racist remarks often seen on Twitter) without having to face real-life consequences and judgement. Without a more controlled setting, learners are more likely to be encountered with these kinds of information that could be frustrating and misleading. What is more, voices on Twitter are not equally heard across the user population. Some people of higher profile naturally get a wider audience, like celebrities and politicians. It is much easier for them to spread information which is not necessarily true or meaningful. However, simply because of their “bigger” voice and influence, what they are saying is more readily shared and/or learned by the public. Sometimes, the information may very well be favoring their own personal or political agenda, and may not be the best material to learn from.