[Scott Leslie, myself, and (photographer) Jared Stein in action. Photo by Mr Stein]

A couple of conversations at the recent WCET conference caused me to think more about a subject that I have ruminated on many times: trust and authority… particularly in a modern educational context that puts a premium on social interactions and participation.

I’m fond of sharing my belief in the idea that good teaching demands “walking the walk.” I probably lean toward the radical side in my position that teaching well (effectively and productively) with social tools, utilizing methods that require rich public performances and learning community engagement, requires that teachers have significant experience with such engagement themselves. I don’t know why that kind of experience is sometimes seen as exceptional, but whether my take prompts direct objection or I am indirectly clued-in by the expressed desire to “use X in my class,” where X might be wikis, blogs, twitter, Facebook, VoiceThreads, etc. (and the subtler indicator inherent in the question being about using blogs rather than blogging, using wikis rather than collaborating, and so on), it is a common reaction.

It’s no different to me than teaching piano performance. No matter how much a person might love the piano and regardless of the attention that he or she has lavished on piano music and pianists and the instrument itself, that person isn’t going to be very good at teaching someone how to play. Teaching performance demands that the educator understand being a performer, and the only way to do that is by performing. Everything else is a meager substitute. I’m not saying the teacher needs to be a great performer– in some ways the talent and accomplishments that make one a top-tier performer work against good teaching– but they must be a performer… or formerly have been one.

When we ask students to blog, collaborate, participate and present, we are asking them to perform. Meaningful performances demand taking risks. Is it any surprise that students doubt us– resenting and even pushing back– when we demand performances that there is no evidence we understand? I’m constantly amazed at the risks a student will take– the vulnerability and openness they will display– when their teacher takes the time and effort to create a bond of trust.

When I was in college, not that many years ago, I knew that my teachers had engaged in the same performances I had. They might not have excelled at all of them and they might not love them all equally, but I had a reasonable amount of confidence that, like me, my teachers had been buried in the library, fought with bibliographies, struggled to make group-work work, written papers long and short, taken exams, gone through the grinder of GREs and oral comps, etc. Students today have no such assurance– and proportionately less trust– unless they can see the fruits of their teachers’ engagements. Beyond the most mundane level of attempting to understand the mechanics and affordances of any technology from the outside, paying lip-service to lifelong learning and adopting open postures is meaningless without practice backing it up.

This isn’t rocket science, but it is important. When you ask your students to put themselves on the line in a blog, cooperate productively using social network services or socially enabled tools, create a Personal Learning Environment that fits their needs, or collaborate on a wiki– will they be able to see that you have done and are doing the same? Or is the interestingness of the technology and the reports of success from others luring you into the “do as I say, not as I do” approach that isn’t a far cry from the brain-dump, one-way transfer that we know can be bettered?