A recent post on ACRL Blog points out another angle to the marketing approaches being used to "overlap" social networking sites that are based on social networking and learning applications whose purpose is often quite different. The question is, does it work?
I’ve just learned a new technology term - “creepy treehouse.” I first heard the term via an article in Inside Higher Ed on Blackboard building an application so it can be accessed from Facebook.
In doing so, the company is implicitly conceding that
students are less inclined to flip through Blackboard pages to kill a
few spare minutes. “This is specifically to take advantage of the fact
that college students spend a tremendous amount of time on Facebook,”
said Karen Gage, Blackboard’s vice president of product strategy. “I
think that what we know is that socializing with your friends is more
fun than studying.”
Well, duh.
“Let’s face it,” the app’s introduction page says. “You
would live on Facebook if you could. Imagine a world where you could
manage your entire life from Facebook — it’s not that far off!”
Oh, I can’t wait. Why would I ever want to leave Facebook for even one minute?
“You have to access a different system to get your
course information and you don’t always know when something new has
been posted or assigned, so it’s difficult for you to stay on top of
your studies.” (Only if your face is so constantly stuck in Facebook
that you don’t have a life.) “We get it. That’s why Blackboard is
offering Blackboard Sync™, an application that delivers course
information and updates from Blackboard to you inside Facebook.”
Okay, maybe that actually sounds kind of helpful, being able to push
readings and assignments to a place where students can be reminded of
them. But I was mostly struck by one of the comments on the article: “This is creepy treehouse.”
A creepy treehouse is a place built by scheming adults to lure in
kids. Kids tend to sense there’s something creepy about that treehouse
and avoid it. Hence, a new definition: “Any institutionally-created,
operated, or controlled environment in which participants are lured in
either by mimicking pre-existing open or naturally formed environments,
or by force, through a system of punishments or rewards.”
It’s an interesting take on that vaguely unsettled response we
sometimes get from students when we try to be too cool, try too hard to
seem fun and playful, when we make familiar toys unpalatably
“educational.” Setting up an outpost in an attractive playspace with an
ulterior motive is just . . . creepy.
And maybe students want a different space when they’re working. On
our campus students come to the library to study. They like being
surrounded by books, they like the sense that this place is different
than their dorm room. Sure, they goof off and check their Facebook
profile and sometimes catch a few z’s. But when they’re working, they
enjoy being in a place that dignifies their work, and they like the
ambiance of seriousness, one that connects their work with a larger
purpose. They’re writing about ideas in space filled with words and
ideas, and they become connected. It’s a very different kind of social
network, one where they become part of an age-old conversation.
