Dennis Howlett’s response to my post on the meaning of Social Software was this:

“Social media is a silver bullet? It’s the answer to falling literacy? Can I have some of that dope you’re smoking please?“

I can’t have done a very good job, so in response Dennis, here is I hope a clearer picture.

Most institutions today are Zombies. What do I mean by this? I mean that they have bodies. They have thoughts. Superficially, they look human. They can move around, talk and eat you but they are not alive. They have no feedback mechanisms. They are closed systems. They have exceptionally limited ability to sense what is going on inside and outside. Like all closed systems, they tend towards entropy. They are not human. They are a chimera.

The potential for social software is to create the conditions for organizations that are truly alive. By alive I mean that they can be acutely sensitive and responsive to what is going on both inside and outside the organization. Above all such organizations can learn and respond effectively to the world.
Let’s look at a few examples. The US military is really struggling in Iraq and Afghanistan. In spite of all the satellites and the huge staffs, the troops are operating blind most of the time. Why? Because, the leadership insist on being Zombies. The US Military is doing its best to shut down all effective use of social software. The paramount need of a Zombie organization is to maintain control. The excuse that the Military gives is that if soldiers blog, they will use up too much bandwidth and tell the other guys what we are doing. Worst of all, they fear that the troops will tell their families and friends. The result is that learning is very slow – too slow. Imagine instead if every vehicle had a camera and convoys could match road conditions to what was there yesterday? Imagine if new IED’s could be filmed and discussed? Imagine as one unit took over a sector, that they could go through the play book of who is who in the neighborhood? Instead all intel goes up the line where it is slowly processed and stays at HQ. Too slow and too inefficient but it meets the main criteria for a Zombie organization – control.

So what do the other guys do? The other guys (OG) use Social Software brilliantly. There are learning networks on every topic from IED design to tactics. US troop movements are followed. Recruits are won over. Masses of propaganda news and film is well circulated. Social Software is today at the heart of any successful guerrilla strategy.

The OG can and do learn faster and better. War is also today entirely political. They are winning that aspect hands down. So the US military that has more money than all other militaries in the world put together is in trouble because it chooses to be a closed system.
But I digress. Dennis wanted to know what the hell Social Software had to do with literacy. Is not school one of the most Zombie organizations of all? Has not school today become all about control? Do the kids have a voice or a choice? Are not many schools simply terrified of social software? Is school not unlike the US Military?

School was not always so controlled – maybe that is why in 1900 literacy rates were so high. So what then was school like and how might social siftware bring back conditions for better learning?

Here is the kind of school where it was possible to have high literacy rates. Note that this is not set up in rows all facing the teacher. See how she has a small group where she can give them her full attention. See the small conversations going on around the room. See how the seating is close to a circle with lots of eye contact. See the differences in ages – many of the younger kids are being taught by the older kids. This is a Cluetrain setting – markets are just conversations – so is learning. This is a model of a high functioning learning environment. Direct use of power is low. Oneness is high. This is the kind of interaction that a school could have with Social Software. But like the Army, those who run them are terrified of losing control.

The good news is that evangelists like Will Richardson, an ex teacher and Superintendent, are getting traction as they show teachers the value of opening up their system to social software. He of course not only wants to see the kids get involved but also the teachers – for how else can they learn about this? It’s all about how we learn better with a more human connection that does not use power over.

But, here’s the thing. By and large, most of the questions that come up during the workshop or the presentation run along the lines of “how do we keep our kids safe with this stuff?” or “if I want to put up my homework for my kids is it better to use a blog or a wiki?” or “so parents could subscribe to these RSS feeds, right?” All good, useful, legitimate questions. But very far removed from the personal learning focus I’ve been trying to articulate. In fact, when I stand by these teachers and hear their questions, when I look at them directly and say “well, that’s a great question, but I really want you to focus on your own practice here, your own learning,” more often than not what I get is a scrunched up face, a biting of the lower lip, a feeling that their brains are saying “AAARRRGGGHHH.”

Beyond social software, how do we make schools more responsive to the human needs of their kids? Dr Doug Willms of UNB is working on that.

On PEI we are going to try an experiment to open up the closed system and give our kids a real say in how the school affects them. Called “Tell Them from Me” this is a new way of surveying. Traditionally school or organizational surveys are too ponderous. We all have to fill out a large form and the about a year later we get a very abstract report that is not actionable. They offer the illusion of feedback. “Tell them from me” uses a small sample of students every week – over the year everyone gets a say. The questions are about actionable things and they are sent to the Principal every week.

The student survey provides data on 20 separate indicators in three domains or Composite Measures: student engagement, student health and wellness, and school and classroom climate. These Composite Measures and their indicators can be used in a school, district or province-wide monitoring system alongside academic achievement to provide a comprehensive assessment of schooling outcomes and processes.

Note that the areas of concern are all about finding the best culture for learning. For the key to learning and hence literacy, Dennis is engagement. Power over shuts it down.

If you are a student, you now have some power. For you know that your voice will mean something. The Principal will see it, the school will see and so will the rest of the school system. For the first time, the Superintendent can see dynamic movement in climate by school and by system.

The social software issues in schools and in the military are not technical. It matters not a hoot what tool or what features are used. What matters is that the prevailing mindset of the two systems are captured by the need for control at all costs. Even if control means losing a war and wasting the lives of 80% of the students.