photo: Suzanne Ahearne

The conundrum of communicating at a distance

The literacy community has struggled with this. Not with the technology—we are amazingly adept at adapting to new mechanisms—but with the quality of the experience. Our favourite way to network is to get together in the same room at the same time to talk and listen and reflect and create. Those rare opportunities are so rich and inspiring that at-a-distance options often seem to be pale approximations. Whether we choose to communicate synchronously by teleconference, web chat, web conference or asynchronously on web boards, listservs or blogs, the conversation can feel stilted and creaky. There is no consensus on which approximation is best. Different people like different mediums and express very good reasons for their preferences. So, what to do?

After each web forum we evaluate the experience. We look at the feedback from participants. We look at the number of people who joined us and the number of posts they made. Sometimes we conclude that we should try a new technology. Sometimes we conclude that we should focus our energy on face-to-face networking. But then time passes and we start to reflect less on quantities and critical feedback and look more to the quality of what happened and how these conversations shape and enhance the way we think about Literacies and literacy work.

Synchronous communication allows us to be dynamic and spontaneous—sparks fly. Asynchronous communication allows us to set our own pace and research and reflect before responding—embers glow. And they glow with such promise. We carry them around in our pockets and warm our hands on them. They become our worry beads. And then one day, when the moment is right, when the stars have aligned, we toss that ember onto the table and—sparks fly.

• spring 2005: numeracy
• fall 2004: health
• spring 2004: assessment
• fall 2003: IALS