My last post talked about the shifting nature of learning in the age of network communications.   It didn’t delve into any of the conflicts that this shift is creating.  Here is an old but still instructive example:
Chris Avenir was a freshman at Ryerson College and did what any number of freshman do – he organized a study group.  What’s different is that Chris was a freshman in 2008.   So he organized his study group on Facebook.  Next thing he knew he was facing 147 charges of academic misconduct; one for starting the group – the other 146 for each student that joined his group.  After much brouhaha (including online organizing on Chris’ behalf – you can still buy your “Chris Didn’t Cheat” T-shirt), Ryerson dropped the charges.
The larger point in this story lies with the fact that our institutional policies are coming into direct conflict with the ability that new technologies give us to direct our own flow of communications.   Communication is the bedrock of any institution – how does information flow? Who speaks to whom (in the language of the institution, who “reports” to whom)?  Who gets to say what – and about what?    Facebook is just one of a dozen social technologies that explode that notion – and Big corporations and academic institutions are scratching their heads trying to figure out how to harness the benefits of increased participation, while mitigating the risks.

In many cases legal departments are acting reflexively without any deeper consideration of the intent underlying the policy – the instinctive reaction is about enforcement.    Chris’ story led me to wonder when using a calculator stopped being considered cheating.