I have tried to use Twitter for several months and I am still frustrated with what for me are limitations. I will probably hang on because the system appears popular with so many, but I have shifted how I use the system.
I know that other educators find value in Twitter and have attempted to explain to the rest of us what of educational value this system has to offer. My reaction to these suggestions is pretty much my reaction to those who propose that the cell phone, the old Palm, or classroom clickers are of educational value. To me, these systems are drastically under-powered and often are cumbersome to use. “Better than nothing” should not be our goal.
I do recognize that “group microblogs” offer some opportunities. The traditional blog (e.g., this one) discourages the participation of others (mostly to prevent spam and inappropriate comments) and may offer so many opportunities that some are intimidated. I think there is another factor involved. Many simply do not want to spend the time to generate lengthy posts and post after post of 140 characters or less would appear pretty anemic within a community devoted to more lengthy offerings. Short comments are the only option available within the Twitter community.
My quarrel is not so much with microblogs as it is with Twitter. A post of less than 140 characters is limiting. What can really be accomplished through short posts. A simple request and response pattern is sometimes helpful. What can you tell me about XXX? Here is what I know. Here is what I use. etc. I do understand the notion of a conversation but I react the same to Twitter as I do to the experience of attempting to run a chat with more than a couple participants – the noise to information ratio is limiting to meaningful conversation. One way around this is to limit participation. For example, Room 24 uses Twitter to carry on a conversation or at least generate an on-going record of ideas within a classroom. The key is to connect to http://twitter.com/room24 instead of http://twitter.com.
I also don’t like the focus on text. What is the value in such a minimalist approach? Rather than text-only, I prefer the tumblr approach. Tumblr attempts to differentiate itself from blogs by encouraging posts of a specific type – a text comment, an image, a link. Tumbler attempts to explain the difference as a scrapbook vs. a journal. The idea of self-defined groups (think friends or followers) combined with simple, but diverse post types make sense to me.
It is sometimes difficult to overcome inertia. Some would argue that more recent social bookmarking services offer superior features to del.icio.us. However, the value of a service extends beyond the software to the community using that software. Perhaps the same is true with Twitter. Folks are afraid to switch from an active, but limiting system to a less popular, but more powerful environment.
I have developed my own compromise. I am using an open source microblog called Chyrp (my Chyrp site). One feature that can be activated within Chyrp allows the announcement of a Chyrp post within Twitter. Others I follow on Twitter appear to take a similar approach combining some Tweets and links from another service. I am not certain how this approach will be accepted. When I first noticed this approach, I was somewhat annoyed but what appeared to be an effort to broadcast posts across several formats. After struggling with Twitter for a few months, I now have a different perspective.
