Thanks for reading, John.
I appreciate you taking the time to try to explain Twitter to me, as I’m sure that from your perspective I probably read a bit naive or unlearned about what it’s all about. But I get it (and I think I say as much in the original article). I’m pretty on top of what twitter looks like for educators, having been there since August 2008. I mean, I can remember a time before chats were called chats.
I’m totally glad that you find value there. I do, too. But if you see robust doubt in your PLN, it’s different than my own experience. Similarly, I’m glad that you’ve answered those questions for yourself. That’s not really what I’m speaking to here. I’m a scientist by training, and I’m simply not comfortable taking the position that “connection” always equates to “better teaching” without something a bit more robust than my (or your) anecdotal experience in the connected educator community. I know enough about myself to know that I can’t really get an objective purchase on what those effects really are, and I know enough about systems to know that notions of wholly positive ones are much more fanciful than they are realistic.
Again, my thanks for your thoughtful comments.