Crowdsourcing or Loudsourcing?

Monday, November 2nd 2009 by coolcatteachercloseAuthor: coolcatteacher Name:
Email: coolcatteacher@gmail.com
Site:
About: See Authors Posts (1)

Applause to my friends at ISTE for having the gumption to create a massive experiment in crowdsourcing with their ISTE 2010 keynote crowdsourcing forum.  As I’ve put in my own suggestions and thoughts and sat back to watch the forum evolve since it was posted, a few things about crowds have come to mind as well as some questions that I think we must grapple with about the whole process of “crowdsourcing” if indeed it can be called that.

As of the writing of this post, the top item is Scott McLeod’s suggestion for Effective School Leadership for the Global, Digital Era. You can see when Scott suggested his post, that he asked the readers of his amazing blog to go over and vote.  Kevin Honeycutt’s suggestion for Trends, Tools, and Tactics for 21st Century Learning is the second place suggestion, but somehow many of the people who are commenting on the post have the idea that they are voting ON Kevin Honeycutt despite Kevin’s objections otherwise. Although I put my suggestion in, it has languished at the bottom of the heap, which is certainly fine, as we’d like the best ideas to come to the top. But will they? Or will our opinions of the people suggesting them somehow influence the outcome?

(pic from flickr.com/photos/liberato)

Crowdsourcing Observation #1: Sometimes it is about the Loud in the Crowd

I find it quite interesting that two pretty popular online personalities are leading the top of this keynote suggestion. Both Scott and Kevin have a pretty significant digital footprint that allows them to reach many people in their network.  It looks like they both personally are promoting their keynote suggestions in their various venues.  For example, three days after Scott proposed his keynote suggestion, he wrote a blog post, The Gloves Are Off where Scott takes this “contest” of sorts as a personal objective:

“So the gloves are off, Kevin! I don’t know if I can pull this off, but I’m not going down without a fight. Thanks to everyone who already has voted for my topic and/or participated in the conversation. Any assistance that you can continue to lend me would be most appreciated; I need more people to vote for my suggestion and to spread the word about the contest. I’ve got an uphill battle and am going to need all of the help I can get!”

Kevin is a Plurk-er extraordinaire with a Plurk Karma of 100 (that is pretty high) and has his network there going for the keynote he has proposed.  Each man is using his network to campaign for “his topic.”  This week, Scott made his call again at My ISTE 2010 keynote topic suggestion just tipped 1,000 votes.

Now, I’m saying this not to point out Scott or Kevin to promote the merit of their  topics  but in this rumination on Crowdsourcing, you’ll notice that the top two votes are vociferous, well liked educational networkers with pretty good ideas.  (I also have to wonder if somehow this is a contest between the power of Plurk and Twitter as Kevin is pretty focused on Plurk and Scott on Twitter? In the end will the difference be the footprint between these two men or the merits of their ideas?) They are both impassioned about their idea, willing to campaign for it by spending their social capital through their networks by asking for this, and do have ideas that have good merit. But is it more?

Crowdsourcing Observation #2: Merit Has a Place

I did suggest my own topic (which perhaps was too related to a particular presenter or group of presenters) and perhaps I didn’t campaign, but that is beside the point. In this model, the best ideas typically will move upwards and I think certainly that is what has happened.  I say this to point out that it takes more than a good digital footprint, but the idea has to have merit with the crowd you’re talking to to rise to the top.  It has to be a good idea that RESONATES with the crowd and then, having links to the crowd through a big NETWORK also will help once you’ve reached that thresh hold.

Crowdsourcing Observation #3: Do Focused Minorities Rule?

Niche crowds who will benefit from something always have the opportunity to work the system. I’m not saying this is happening now (to do this, one would have to look at the voters for niche topics and determine if some people have only voted for one topic.) I will tell you that in a small sample of users on Scott’s post including fisherpd, koverholt, and others who voted for Scott’s, out of the most recent ten voters, each of them voted for only one or two topics on the forum and did not use all of their 20 votes with only one, James Yap, actually using all of his votes.

I think perhaps the inherent flaw is this. Each person has 20 votes and may spend those votes as they wish. I think that some people will vote differently – is an administrator type more likely to use all 3 votes and then not vote for anything else in order to “Make” their votes count more as Scott’s topic is perhaps the only one targeted specifically at administrators?  Could perhaps the methods being used FAVOR a niche group of people who will exclusively hit one topic versus others?

This is where many forums allow the ability to “vote something down” by using votes to go “against” a topic that would be one that you would not be interested in seeing.  Of course, no voting mechanism is perfect, but you have to wonder if niche markets are somehow favored in the current voting schema.  Again, this is just another rumination but a valid one to look at as you consider the applications of crowdsourcing and the fact that a focused minority can indeed tip the scale if they are willing to all pool their votes.

Crowdsourcing Observation #4: The Early Proposal Gets the Vote

By showing topics with the highest ranked first, it quickly has become a race between the top ranked.  There is an inherent bias when you see the ranks and see the votes to think that your three votes don’t count.  When one is participating in a crowdsourcing forum, it is vital to be early with your proposal.  I’ve been checking since this opened and with the exception of the first week, the suggestions on the first page have stayed the suggestions on the first page.  So, is there a bias to those that are early?  Does an idea from lower in the rankings truly have the opportunity to bubble up, particularly if proposed by those who are less connected than others?

Perhaps if there was to be less bias, there would be a suggestion phase of about a week and then a voting phase would open.

Crowdsourcing Observation #5: What if the crowd stays home?

And then as I watched this happen, wondering the outcome, I came across Miguel Guhlin’s post:  Need for a Radical Reboot: Dismissing the ISTE Keynote where Miguel says:

“This will sound a bit curmudgeony, but so what? I’m not going to be attending ISTE 2010 since, to be blunt, I feel like attending too many conferences puts you on the “conference circuit.” (it’s also out of state during a tough economy).

Once you’re on that train, you’re focused on discussions that capture people’s attention, engage folks, but DON’T MAKE A DARN DIFFERENCE when people get back to their schools and classrooms. Yes, I’m saying, all this talk about leadership and research is too doggone confusing for the majority of K-12 teachers. . .yes, yes, I know YOU are different. I’m talking about trying to make a steak while juggling eggs, washing dishes, taking care of two toddlers at the same time that you just throw up your hands and let the dishes pile up until later, put the eggs down, and focus on cooking and ensuring your toddlers don’t over-run you. There’s only so much multi-tasking possible, isn’t there?!?”

Miguel goes on to outline what he’d like to see in a keynote, but he doesn’t seem to feel comfortable going over to the forum and proposing one himself and then adds an update a little later that says:

“Update 12:07 PM: And, if you must vote for something, try Brian Crosby’s suggestion.”

So, not only is Miguel staying home but for some reason, he seems to to be disengaging – to exclude himself from the crowd?  Why do people say, “I’m not voting?”  “I’m not participating?” “I don’t want to be a part?”

Those who look to crowdsourcing to sometimes have the perfect answer need to understand this:  NOT EVERYONE IN THE CROWD PARTICIPATES.

What you can hope for at best is a semi-democratic, somewhat loud-in-the-crowd influenced idea that will be a pretty good one that you still may have to tweak to appeal to everyone.

Crowdsourcing Observation #6: Crowdsourcing isn’t Crowdsourcing… Yet

I applaud ISTE, I really do!  If we didn’t have this going on, we couldn’t ask these questions. We couldn’t experience this sort of thing first hand!  We couldn’t grapple with the strengths, weaknesses, likes and dislikes.  We couldn’t even start.

By pushing us to participate in this crowdsourced keynote, we truly become an experiment in ourselves.  This is pushing us to understand crowdsourcing and dare I say it… perhaps refine the issues and look at actually doing some massive STUDENTSOURCING of ideas.  (Dare we consider it?)

It is like a rocket which cannot be guided until the rocket has been launched.  We cannot work with something that has not been launched and they have launched in a gutsy, all out there kind of way that is bound to have good results no matter what.  Truthfully, all of the ideas on the front page that I’ve read would make a great keynote and a lot will depend on the speaker but they are good starts.  Hey, at least people will attend to hear what the ruckus is about!

Crowdsourcing Observation #7: Crowdsourcing isn’t Crowdsourcing without YOU.

If I could give any message to you, the reader, it is to go vote, take part, be heard.

Sure, the process is not perfect but it will never be perfect if you just talk about it and do not act upon it!  We can use the Internet to harness the opinions and preferences of massive numbers of people to improve things.

Crowdsourcing Observation #8: The Lone Leader

When I see my students tomorrow and they are planning their Digital Citizenship project for this semester’s Digiteen project, I will give them a talk that will go something like this:

“You can make a difference.  Each of you have a circle of influence that includes people I cannot reach.  Each of you have people who look up to you who will change their lives for the better because you suggested it.  When we agree together on the ways that we want to improve the digital world and behaviors that surround us, we can make a difference.  When you reach out and do something, though, understand this… the only people who do not receive criticism are those who do NOTHING who say NOTHING who think NOTHING.  But those people are also those who have NOTHING as a purpose or as a passion.  As you come to the cusp of change and leadership you will find that criticism may increase but so does the rewards of making a difference. (The kids saw this last year with their Google Lively protest.) You make a difference because you educate yourself, research, draw your conclusions and then add to that what you THINK SHOULD HAPPEN to improve the situation.  And then, the most important step is, you don’t just talk about it, but we will take steps to ACT UPON IT.”

Thomas Cahill has a phenomenal series of books about the “Hinges of History.”  Truly we are at a hinge of history at this moment as our society globalizes, shifts, and struggles with economic upheaval.  History’s most challenging moments have caused such great leaders as Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill to emerge to lead the crowds to overcome the adversity and struggle before them. These men were very alone in their vision, their struggle, and yet, they were able to harness the crowds of their day.

There is always a place for wise, visionary men and women of character and in this day of crowdsourcing we cannot ever overlook the power and need for individuals among us to use their talents to lead and inspire us.

Vicki Davis is a teacher, blogger at the Cool Cat Teacher Blog, and co-founder of the award winning Flat Classroom projects. Twitter: @coolcatteacher