assignment website

The website for the Introduction to Digital Environments for Learning is: here. The website will form the submitted part of my assessment. The blog is around 8000wds, so too long for that purpose. I link extensively to my blog posts, so sadly you may end up reading a lot more than 2500 wds!

analysis of results (n=2!!)

The following quotes were taken from A-M's and Ava's wiki.

AMS: 21.12.04:
Here's where I confess - I don't like blogs. I like other people's, but I don't like my own. I don't keep diaries for the same reasons. I suppose I just don't feel comfortable with airing my mental 'dirty laundry' in public! I think a lot of it has to do with the Benfield article's suggestions about sounding silly.

Ava: 21.12.04 11pm
This is very interesting. I feel quite differently. I like the 'work in progress' form that the blog has. I like developing ideas and keeping track of where they came from. I like the assimilation and processing of the new info, or the discarding of it when you recognise that it's really not needed. For example in my first few blogs I did a lot of paniced reading on RSS feeds thinking that this was crucial. Pah. Crucial schmucial. And yet this info is sitting there for me if I should want to read it again.

I love blogs but A-M doesn't. I'd like to suggest that blogs suit me because, as per my results in the learning styles questionnaire, I am a reflective and sequential learner. I like to do things on my own, in little bits at a time. The blog is perfect for me.

A-M by comparison had a rating of '1' for reflective which meant she was neutral for active/reflective pair. She did have a reasonably strong global rating of '5'.

When you think about it it is exactly as you might expect isn't it? The bloggers are the ones who like to go away and work by themselves one step at a time. Someone who likes to work with other people and prefers to work from the outside in might not feel as comfortable with blogging.

It's interesting to note that I didn't like the wiki, because I don't like working in groups where it isn't clear what each person has contributed (I have this thing about 'owndership'!). With the wiki your contributions can be deleted, edited or moved. Argghh! I don't mind working in groups if we all do our own little thing and meld it together for submission.

In this page A-M said that she liked how you can "create a totally organic structure that evolves and grows and changes over time." about wikis. Whereas on this page about blogs I said something similar about blogs: "I like the 'work in progress' form that the blog has. I like developing ideas and keeping track of where they came from." Both of us like how our favoured tool let's us add things to it and it grows and changes. I like to have control over my tool though, whereas A-M is more willing to share. [Note: I've not used a wiki collaboratively before, so I don't have experience with it to draw from.]

on 'working together'

In many ways this project was a total disaster. It started off really well though. I loved our topic, and we were both quick to set up our respective blogs, and A-M the wiki. She put up a couple of pages to get us started and I set myself up an account and tried it out and found it really easy to use. I wasn't that impressed with it, but it was easy to use, and that was significant for me.

Because I knew *nothing* about wikis prior to this, and because we were meant to compare wikis to blogs I thought I had better get my head down and do some background reading about them. I was happy to do this in the privacy of my blog. We had agreed to use the wiki as a discussion board and to keep an eye on each other's blogs. A-M was not able to post anything in her blog except the first entry, and then make a couple of contributions in the wiki.

I just kept on working away at my blog, building up a compendium of articles I'd read, and thoughts I'd had about the subjects I was researching. However given the lack of input from A-M (and not knowing when she was going to return) my research had no focus and went all over the place. I covered subjects as wide-ranging as RSS feeds, learning styles, lurking, wikis, blogs, discussion boards, online communication. They were each related to the previous post, but they did go off on a tangent. Our remit was to compare what was good about blogs with what was good about wikis. But I found myself have to define what 'good' was. And everything fed into everything else. As a result I went off on a couple of tangents that ended up being wastes of time. An example is the RSS feeds. I honestly read about 8 articles on this cos I thought it was a common element between blogs and wikis and that it was crucial that I understood it. I still don't understand it, except to know that it isn't crucial!

I was never completely certain how the wiki was to fit in, and I sort of resented doing my private thinking in my blog (which took time and effort), and then (potentially) put it up in a wiki to have the same conversation over again. However, had it worked, and had A-M been able to commit then I might well have different ideas on the subject.

I learnt a lot about myself in this project, about what works well for me, and about how I work with other people. I did also learn a lot about blogs, wikis, online communication, lurking, learning styles and various other things through my research. And I really enjoyed it.

learning styles

From the learning styles questionnaire by Soloman and Felder Index of Learning Styles Questionnaire, my (Ava's results) and A-M's (A-M's results) differed in 2 of the 4 categories.



I want to quickly get some descriptions of the learning styles. These were extracted from Felder and Soloman's: Learning styles and strategies.

[a]. Active learners (ACT): tend to retain and understand information best by doing something active with it--discussing or applying it or explaining it to others. Like group work.
[b]. Reflective learners (REF): prefer to think about it quietly first. Prefer to work alone.

[c]. Sensing learners (SEN): tend to like learning facts
[d]. Intuitive learners (INT): often prefer discovering possibilities and relationships

[e]. Visual learners (VIS): remember best what they see--pictures, diagrams, flow charts, time lines, films, and demonstrations.
[f]. Verbal learners VRB): get more out of words--written and spoken explanations. Everyone learns more when information is presented both visually and verbally.

[g]. Sequential learners (SEQ): tend to gain understanding in linear steps, with each step following logically from the previous one.
[h]. Global learners (GLO): tend to learn in large jumps, absorbing material almost randomly without seeing connections, and then suddenly "getting it."

So where A-M and I differed was that I am a very reflective learner, whilst she was neutral. And I am a sequential learner, whilst she is a global learner.

feedback & JSB

I am reading the John Seely Brown stuff, especially that which relates to lurking and learning. This quote of his appears all over the web: "The culture of the Internet allows you to link, lurk, and learn. You can move from the periphery to the centre safely asking a question—sometimes more safely virtually than physically, and then back out again. It has provided a platform for perhaps the most successful form of learning that civilization has ever seen". John Seely Brown sees non-active participation (lurking, and read-only) as having positive aspects within online learning communities. So I am trying to read a little more about the non-interactive component of online learning (to contrast it with the interactive [feedback] of discussion boards).

I also found this quote about how people learn: "Because many new technologies are interactive, it is now easier to create environments in which students can learn by doing, receive feedback, and continually refine their understanding and build new knowledge." I've lost the reference so will try to find it tomorrow. It's from the book 'How People Learn' by Bradford, but I can't find the web article that discussed it... it was interesting. I'll have another bash tomorrow.

I'd like to hover for a moment over the last part of the sentence: "...continually refine their understanding and build new knowledge" and see how it fits in with the quote the Williams paper that I looked at in my 'blogger = lurker?' post: "Discussion and sharing experience have been identified as two of the most effective means by which adults learn". The way that lurkers (and bloggers) would refine and consolidate would be *away from* the online community. This makes me wonder whether lurkers are actually getting the most from the learning experience? Is their lurking detrimental of their learning?

category of users

This is an interesting paper For Whom Should You Design Your Community? which suggests that there are 3 categories of users in an online community, each of which differs by a multiples of 10. So, for every 1000 lurkers there are 100 participants and 10 key contributors. He defines each category as follows:

1. lurkers - people who show up, but from whom you will never hear a peep
2. participants - people who show up, occasionally join a conversation, even more rarely start one
3. key contributors - people who show up, start conversations, join those in progress, help newbies, evangelize the site and their role in it and, in general, make a huge difference in the site's value to everyone else, including lurkers and participants.

He writes several paragraphs on designing communities to attract Key Contibutors (since they attract multiples of 10 and 100 to the site). I thought it would be interesting to list some of the adjectives that he uses in reference to them... as a contrast to lurkers.

Key Contributors are busy, focused, aware of the value they bring to a community; expect efficiency from a Web experience, have crowded lives; don't browse or surf, aim and drive; want to find out what's new that's of specific interest to them in your site... make their daily contribution... and get on with what's next; this isn't their life, but it is (or can be) an important part of their identity; have very low tolerance level for noise, flames, spam, and other garbage; sites which do a good job of moderating their content attract them; they may or may not expect to be rewarded or recognized, use a system of ranking, peer review and honor, or symbology.

lurking, reasons why

Here is a 42-page PDF which I may skim over the main points at a later date: Reasons why lurkers don't post:

- shy about posting
- want to remain anonymous
- posting is of no value to me
- messages or group low quality
- wrong group
- long delay getting response
- concern about aggressive responses
- fear of commitment
- new members treated poorly
- nothing to offer (22%)
- others have said it
- still learning about the group (29%)
- had no intention of posting
- no requirement to post
- just reading/browsing is enough (53%)
- not enough time
- do not know how to post
- too many messages

Below are more reasons which people may choose to lurk. It is from an interesting research project by Jacquie McDonald and colleagues (12-page MSWord).

- feel generally happy with outcomes and are learning/sharing in their own ways
- wish to hoard their information
- fear (of losing face, letting their colleagues down, or misleading them)
- are in the listening and learning stages
- think it’s not polite to interrupt or to “speak and run”
- have external time constraints
- feel it meets their learning needs, their level of commitment, and schedule needs
- feel keeping relevant requires recent involvement in online dialogue, so sporadic attendance or absence leads to lurking
- some people are naturally cautious or slow to react
- feel that participation is not a priority
- feel that a genuine invitation has not been extended to allow them to participate at the core
- struggle with language
- lost and overwhelmed and don’t want to say so
- the community may feel impermeable
- the practice may be too hard for just anyone to master
- may just want to check out the community
- may have had off-putting experiences when first encountering the community
- may be cultural or personality issues at play that are not visible even to the lurker
- shy away from any responsibility
- inability to identify with the community members

blogger = lurker?

I am just going to pick up on a couple of points raised in the Williams paper.

Williams quotes two papers stating "Discussion and sharing experience have been identified as two of the most effective means by which adults learn". This got me thinking about the potential for imbalance, when this adult learning strategy is not fully engaged with by students who read-only the discussion postings and reflect privately.

Williams refers to a comment by a student who states they are participating in the course, by their lurking. "I am participating even if I am not involved in discussion." This is a valid point - the student is contributing to their learning by reading and considering the posts. However the other students are not benefiting from his assimilation of the material - the knowledge traffic is uni-directional. Indeed Williams states "...non contributors may be meeting their learning needs, but the wider group needs active participants to 'value add' for all members in order to support the long term sustainability of the community". For the learning community to thrive there needs to a shared commitment to work together, and this involves student contributions. Or in the words of Reingold "A place where everybody builds social capital individually by improving each other's knowledge capital collaboratively." and "... collaborations that return individual effort with a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts."

A weblog does not directly contribute to the learning community knowledge capital unless there is an RSS feed, or active commenting. Blogging by its nature is private and so bloggers assimilate, process and reflect in private. If these assimilations are not recited in the discussion posts or chatroom conversations of the online course then the private learning of the blogger does not benefit the learning community (in the sense that it is not contributing to its knowledge capital)*. This lack of public engagement with the learning community is analogous to the lurker. Both lurker and blogger are actively involved in learning (reading, assimilating, reflecting) but may not contribute to Reingold's "knowledge capital" of the learning community.

*[Note: I acknowledge that I am focusing on the process rather than the outcome. Different learning styles involve differing degrees of interaction. The learning outcomes do not reflect the learning process].

I wonder whether the type of learner who lurks is also the one who is attracted to blogging? It might be interesting to note here that I *loved* blogging, whereas A-M wasn't so enthused. You can see from our learning type profiles: Ava's results (MSWord) and A-M's results (PDF) that we are different learning types. I'll look into that in a little more detail later.

A-M's contribution

Until yesterday A-M hasn't been able to contribute to this assignment. So we decided that since I've put so much effort into it we should work separately, and submit separately. A-M has read my blog and been inspired by some of my findings, and will pick those up and combine with her own research. She intends to follow my blog, and er... forgive me if I misquote as I don't have her email to hand... possibly pick up more inspiration(?). I don't have the time or the desire to follow A-M's blog, but I will dip into the wiki - both for the experience of using it (since I haven't used one before), and to share ideas with A-M.

time to reflect

Continuing with Greg Benfield's article. This is also posted in the wiki.

Benfield comments that it can be more satisfying to read a student's posting after they've had time to consider and engage with the learning material, than it is to hear a spontaneous response in a face-to-face tutorial. He recogises that "One of the great advantages of the threaded discussion is the time it allows for reflection, and the possibility for editing/refinement of one’s remarks.". Yet there is clearly a conflict in students because they recognise that the quality of what is produced 'should' be greater than that of spoken word - and this produces anxiety. Students may need the opportunity in the learning environment to explore the learning material and take guesses at what might be happening. Face-to-face comms evidently support spontaneous exploratory statements, whereas some (most? many?) students feel that message board postings are less forgiving of their 'mistakes' - and these mistakes are there for all to see, for perpetuity. This supports the assertion that tutors should reinforce the message that it is OK to make mistakes in the learning environment... and it is better to make your mistakes in public message boards (and be corrected) than alone in private blog and have them consolidated by silence [see: "it's OK to make mistakes"].

it's OK to make mistakes

I know that I haven't yet read or commented on the second paper, but I want to spend a little time thinking about some of the things mentioned in the Benfield article.

"As in face-to-face teaching, the online teacher needs to reassure students that this is a learning environment, in which you are allowed, even expected, to make mistakes."

Whilst it may not appear as such to the student the making of mistakes in the public arena of an online discussion can be regarded as an advantage. You make mistakes, and your peers and tutors notice them... hence you can be corrected or directed to the right information.

In blogs by comparison errors or misinterpretations may go unnoticed, and uncorrected - and may even be consolidated and reinforced by successive misinformation whilst the blogger pursues a tangent. Furthermore the visitor to the blog does not have a sense of responsiblity for the content, and hence though they may notice error/s they may not feel obligated to notify the blogger. If however a message with an error appears in a discussion board to which I belong I do feel an obligation (altruistic or not) to point it out in a subsequent post.

Hence it may be better for learning to make a mistake in a discussion board and be corrected, that keep the misinformation in your head, or write it in your blog.

communication is critical

From the Benfield article: "It was most important to first define your own expectations about communication, lay it out for students from the outset and then stick to it. If your expectations are not being fulfilled you have to follow up with e-mails or phone calls. Communication is critical. The rule is, actively avoid isolation."

I am not sure if it is right to assume that bloggers are self-motivated and don't need someone to chase them up if they don't make regular posts. But for simplicity I'll relate the above Benfield quote to online discussions. Discussions require engagement and contributions and clearly if students are not responding to posts or initiating conversations then the learning value of the board is diminished. If students are not communicating (online) then it seems reasonable that a tutor does the same as they would if the class were silent face-to-face i.e. prompt them for interaction.

online silence paper points

Some interesting excerpts from the Benfield paper to perhaps discuss later (in the wiki perhaps, if A-M is around, otherwise here).

- The social, nonacademic aspects of teaching take on a heightened importance online. Teachers have to work hard to develop a sense of community in their online groups.

- It can be far more satisfying to read the reflections of a student after a period of engagement with your learning material, than listening to their spontaneous response to your question in a tutorial or workshop

- In order to know what a student thinks or feels it’s necessary for the student to actively communicate. The teacher in this scenario is at the behest of her students' actions (or lack of them). **The centre of control has moved markedly away from the teacher, to the students.

- It was most important to first define your own expectations about communication, lay it out for students from the outset and then stick to it. If your expectations are not being fulfilled you have to follow up with e-mails or phone calls. Communication is critical. The rule is, actively avoid isolation.

- As in face-to-face teaching, the online teacher needs to reassure students that this is a learning environment, in which you are allowed, even expected, to make mistakes.

** This observation has relevence to my exploration of the solo-discussion. Though the solo-discussion-poster is doing all the work the balance of power lies with the non-contributors by their withholding of posts/comments. Until others interact with his thoughts (posts) his learning will be confined to his own interpretation of the problem and its solution. His thoughts are sterile they are fertilised with the comments and contributions (ideas) of other people.

online silence

Some thoughts on bits of the Benfield paper

Benfield reminds us that the pace of online discussions are significantly different to that of face-to-face and may span hours or days. Something you posted up which has not been responded to may not be being ignored, but instead has not yet been read if students are only accessing the course a couple of times a week. Student online silence is difficult to interpret, and reasons have to be actively sought. In face-to-face discussions it is common for a delay between asking the question and receiving a response - students need time for a variety of reasons. Likewise there will be a delay online whilst a student considers the question, the information they have to answer the question, and formulating an answer. Or a student may elect to not answer the question. I found this comment relevant:
"In fact, from the students' point of view, at least or until they are fully engaged with their learning material, the easiest thing for them to do with regard to online communication is ... nothing. Why boot up, log on, collect your thoughts, compose a message, revise and edit it, then post it? The investment in such an exercise is much larger than, say, making a remark twenty seconds long in a tutorial that no one will remember afterwards anyway."
So, from the student perspective the investment in online discussion is greater than making a quick comment in a face-to-face environment. The written word hence has more weight than the spoken word, perhaps because it is (temporarily at least) indelible.

The above is supported by Benfield's observations on the genuine anxiety that some students experience when making message board postings - students may have anxiety about the permanence of the postings. "Because online comments are written, they tend to be invested with a gravity greater than is the case with normal speech. If you 'say' something 'silly' online, it will stay there, for all to see, for everyone to reflect on. And you are reminded of it every time you visit that discussion area." However "one of the great advantages of the threaded discussion is the time it allows for reflection, and the possibility for editing/refinement of one’s remarks. For teacher and student, this can be either liberating or intimidating, or both, depending upon who you are and the context of your discussion." So, you have 2 attributes which could be seen as conflicting: one which allows you to take your time and compose your posts, and one which regards what you post in the public arena as more important than the spoken word. I wonder if students think that because the discussion tool affords the luxury of reflection that an ill-thought comment is interpreted as 'the best you were able to come up with'?

Important point: "This may mean that, for some students anyway, threaded discussions are not conducive to thinking out loud, to tossing out ideas for testing, to speculation. Students may be initially more inclined to weigh what they say, to be more 'guarded', than perhaps they would in ordinary conversation. Others may find that the time they get to reflect and compose their comments invests them with a power they don't ordinarily feel in face-to-face communication."

Given the anxiety that a student may have to overcome before posting a message it is hence important for the tutor to regularly check for new messages. "Failure to respond promptly to a student request or other communication could be catastrophic. It is disarming, even alarming, to invest the time to post a message and then get no response."

learning styles questionnaire

I am also looking over some articles on learning styles. I've completed the Soloman and Felder Index of Learning Styles Questionnaire. A-M has done the same. I've posted our results up: Ava's results (MSWord) and A-M's results (PDF). I'll decide what to do with them later.

no-one to play with

[Note: I've posted this in our wiki as well.]

When comparing blogs with discussion boards (or pseudo discussion boards such as this wiki) we will need to comment on the value of a discussion board in the absence of any third party interaction. It is all well and good to seed a board with posts which you had hoped would inspire discussion amongst your peers, however if no-one responds it loses much of its value... the interaction. You could of course repeatedly post in response to your own thread, but then... hah... there will be overlap with a blog.

Blogs, by comparison, only require the input of the blogger. So if no-one reads them, or responds to them it still retains its intrinsic worth in the form of a place in cyberspace in which you can reflect. An exception might be if your blog entries were written with the express intention that they be read by viewers - then lack of response may be de-motivating for the blogger. If the blog is private (i.e. not released for general view) then this might be regarded as the purest form of interaction... interaction with the self, and interaction with the changing self through time (and the self's subsequently changing perspectives) - untainted by comment or contribution.

I suppose a solo discussion (i.e. one into which only one person posts) can be regarded as a form of blog? Likewise a public blog to which enthusiastic use has been made of the 'comments' facility could be regarded as a form of discussion? I cited an example of the latter in an earlier post: here. Ownership of the 'solo discussion' resides with the solo-discussion-poster. However ownership of the public blog does not reside with the contributors making entries in the Comments field. So it follows that by using the 'correct' technology to blog or to discuss you will have greater control over your content. [Note: blog comments cannot be edited]

Q: What do you think A-M? Does one regard a discussion post which has not been responded to as impotent? Can it have value in the learning context?

A: In answer to my own question I would say that it does have value. The formulating of a question (or a discussion topic) could be regarded as a way of cognitively organising the subject matter... a way of trying to make sense of it. By constructing questions you can determine where the gaps in your knowledge or understanding are. I acknowledge though that questions (and discussion topics too) are frequently posed not to obtain an answer but for other reasons e.g. to make a point, or to impress the reader [see: here and The Written World]. A discussion topic which is a genuine can-you-tell-me-the-answer-to-this might get a couple of responses, and then it would sink. But the more thought-provoking types of questions might be ideal for discussion topics as they inspire (often lengthy) exchanges of contemplation and debate. However in the absence of contributions from third parties these types of questions could be 'answered' by the thread author... in the form of a protracted sequence of reasoning. So yes, these too would have value.

online non-participation

I'd like to look at non-active participation (lurking and reading-only) in a little more detail. Earlier I drew an analogy between a solo-discussion and a blog. Both are technologies which allow passive interaction, but welcome contributions (comments or postings). However contributions may not eventuate indicating that visitors are satisfied with reading alone? Hence it made me wonder why only one person contributes to the instructive value of the blog/discussion whilst others despite being very involved by their reading/learning, do not. The presence of non-contributors significantly changes the dynamic because their learning needs are being met, but those of the blogger/solo-discussion-poster may not. It's also a little artificial because the blog may not be as private as it appears to the blogger, nor the discussion board as uninspiring as its number of contributions indicate.

Two articles I want to read tomorrow:

1. Participation in on-line courses – how essential is it?
2. Teaching on the Web — Exploring the Meanings of Silence

I have chosen these 2 articles because I wanted to explore whether non-active participation was an appropriate learning strategy. In an online community you would expect to find both highly participative folk who make many contributions and those who are read-only participants. If the environment is an online course then these students may consider themselves to be actively following the course and learning, despite the absence of contributions. This of course brings up questions of learning styles. It also brings up the question of whether this failure to contribute is fair to those students who do contribute, and fair to the community (online course) as a whole - because they are not adding anything to the body of knowledge? These students take, but don't contribute?

discussion board case study

I'd like to look at non-active participation (lurking and reading-only) in a little more detail. Earlier I drew an analogy between a solo-discussion and a blog. Both are technologies which allow passive interaction, but welcome contributions (comments or postings). However contributions may not eventuate indicating that visitors are satisfied with reading alone? Hence it made me wonder why only one person contributes to the instructive value of the blog/discussion whilst others despite being very involved by their reading/learning, do not. The presence of non-contributors significantly changes the dynamic because their learning needs are being met, but those of the blogger/solo-discussion-poster may not. It's also a little artificial because the blog may not be as private as it appears to the blogger, nor the discussion board as uninspiring as its number of contributions indicate.

Two articles I want to read tomorrow:

1. Participation in on-line courses – how essential is it?
2. Teaching on the Web — Exploring the Meanings of Silence

I have chosen these 2 articles because I wanted to explore whether non-active participation was an appropriate learning strategy. In an online community you would expect to find both highly participative folk who make many contributions and those who are read-only participants. If the environment is an online course then these students may consider themselves to be actively following the course and learning, despite the absence of contributions. This of course brings up questions of learning styles. It also brings up the question of whether this failure to contribute is fair to those students who do contribute, and fair to the community (online course) as a whole - because they are not adding anything to the body of knowledge? These students take, but don't contribute?

sowing the seeds

[Note: I haven't written anything towards this assignment yet (and A-M appears to be busy at the mo) so thought I'd better make a start. If I work from the premise that blogs and discussion forums are places where people can contribute to the web... yet they accentuate different skills, writing styles and personality traits - then that should keep me busy for a while.]

Blogs and discussions can both be regarded as contributions to the web... i.e. one-way traffic which emanates from the author. Both posts are text manifestations of what the author wishes to say - and will be limited by the verbal skills and intellect/knowledge of the author. Whilst the writing styles each environment encourages may differ, the content source of the writing is the same. The content source is the author and is limited by the author. The author, we can extrapolate, will define and limit the scope of what is discussed. Stated another way: an author can only think what they are able to think... and subsequently write what he is able to think. [I am sure there is a better way of saying this, and hence I am proving my point by stumbling to describe what I want to say. I am trying to say that if the only person posting is you, then the best you can expect is the best you are capable of. You are limited by your own limitations. The ruminations of a private blog, will swirl in ever decreasing circles until you reach your conclusion. The only way this will alter is by the contributions of others.]

The environment, whether it be private or public, will impact on the impact on the post (ideas) which evolve. A private blog may enable an elegant unfolding of ideas. In the privacy of a blog ideas may evolve which would not have been possible under the glare of public discussion. Blog posts are indelible so the blogger can be secure that their train of thought will not be interrupted by being edited, moved or deleted by an outside source. The blog can provide the luxury of permanence needed to ruminate in safety. A Private blog may allow different manifestations of thought to be expressed to that of a Public blog. The source (blogger) remains the same, yet the product differs as a result of the environment.

Why? Because if you are anticipating an audience or comments in the Comments field then you will tailor and edit your posts accordingly. I can give a couple of personal examples here. I had a public blog that I contributed to for a number of months. This was in late 2002 when blogs weren't as common as now. So I didn't think anyone read it, and I made entries in the belief that it was just server space on which I could record my ideas. Then I got a hit-counter. Oh my goodness, loads of people visited it. So I went back over the whole thing and edited it - worried that I must sound like a prat. The blog was no longer a record of my ideas, but of my edited ideas. Another example is a public blog I follow which is written by a manic-depressive. Gorgeous tortured writing. He had received no coments in his comments field so I assume he likewise felt no-one read it. In despair one day he posted that he had 're-read all his posts and thought he sounded like a whingeing w*nker and was going to take it down'. Four folk posted comments saying that they valued his blog and perhaps he should take a break but 'please don't take it down'. He resumed posting but his posts are less frequent and seem less genuine (tortured) and are instead contrived and polished. So I am guessing that when he writes now (as I did after getting my hit-counter) blogging has become more Performance Art than Safe Place To Think.

The discussion board may enable different things too. It is possible that the responses posted trigger a pattern of thought and a tangent of thinking that may not have been possible without the interaction. If learning is organic then a discussion being seeded with the ideas of other thinkers may be more fertile than what is cultivated in the private blog (which as I mentioned is limited by the language, writing and cognitive skills of the author).

[Avenues to pursue: Let us consider what might happen if we start with the same post and enter it in a private blog, and subsequently in a discussion board. Let us allow the blogger to ruminate on the topic in successive blogs until a conclusion (or impasse) is reached. Likewise the discussion board posting is contributed to until the topic is exhausted.]

open publishing on the web

"Blogs and wikis are a reinvention of the open publishing philosophy of the web." is a point made in this presentation on "Building online communities of practice through web-based learning".

This is a nice point and of course refers to the commonality of blogs and wikis - the fact that content of both are not overseen by administrators. The blog and wiki providers restrict themselves to service management, whilst the users of the tools are responsible for the content. Subsequently a blogger or wiki user can enter whatever content they please. Wikis can be edited by everyone (the default) - or the wiki owner can elect to restrict editing rights to only himself, or to a select group. Likewise a blog can be edited by whomever the owner of the blog elects (however users have to be added, and there is no 'world writeable' option as default). The owners of both facilities control the editing rights.

using blogs for learning

Whilst it is common to see academic staff with self-promoting blogs (example: here) I had a fair degree of difficulty locating blogs that support students, or courses. Clearly many of them will be embedded in non-public areas of the web.

Ways in which blogs are used by tutors:

1. Blogs can be used by tutors to make course-related announcements - much the same as a calendar, or regular announcements page with posts made at whatever interval desired. Content of such posts might be things such as reading, assessment, agenda.
An example can be found: here.

2. Though less common, blogs may be used by tutors for facilitating short, subject-specific discussions. Students enter their contributions in the 'comments' field. The advantage of this type of discussion is that they are very contained - the comments do not impact on the layout of the blog and are accessed solely by clicking the 'comments' link.
An example can be found: here and another example is: here

3. A tutor can set up a group blog which becomes an environment used for student-student support and tutor-student support. A lovely example is the Let's Learn Korean blog: "A group blog about learning Korean. We write about our experiences in the classroom, self-study, resources to use, advice and encouragement. Writing in English or in Korean to reflect on the difficulties and successes each of us encounters"

Ways in which blogs are used by students:

[Note: The following list has been lifted from: here. However I found the blogs to illustrate them.]

1. Each student could have their own blog (example: here)
2. Facilitator could have a blog and a class blog aggregator (example: here)
3. Students could make reflective journal entries (private) and summarise these in a weekly post (public)
- Peer review and facilitator feedback could be via the comment facility (specific feedback) or trackback (general review)
- Public posts could be notified to the class aggregator page (ping) so that only one site needed to be checked

using wikis for learning

I quite liked the idea I put in the hypothetical online course I created for the Dig Envs Blog Assignment. The idea was to use the wiki for a whole-course project of building a course FAQs page. FAQs about the course subject matter would consolidate the learning for the writer, and inform or provide insight to fellow students. The task itself encourages reflection on the course experience, and sharing of that experience with fellow students.

If the FAQ question posed is a good one, but the answer sloppy then it could prompt other students to expand or refine it. FAQs which have received group consensus can be expected to be more indicative of the course experience in its entirity than those evolved from an individual's perspective. A course FAQs page could become a useful course-based resource for student learning.

For the tutor it might be interesting to compare how each year's FAQ pages differed. The questions themselves may indicate how students had assimilated the course content, and where any areas of confusion are centred.

possible questions for wiki discussion?

Here are a few. It's late. I'm tired. They'll be tidied up and added to another day.

1. How does blog layout (software) influence the blogging experience? Contrast Dig Envs one with Blogger.

2. Blogs are unmoderated. Wikis can be edited without restraint. Contrast the two.

3. You have no control over what someone posts in their blog (apart from posting a comment). How does this feel?

why are wikis great?

Likewise, I am adding to this as ideas come up. I'm new to wikis so may not initially be so inspired. Wikis are great because:

- they are free
- easy to set up and use
- accessible from networked computer
- anyone can edit them
- settings can be altered to allow specific users to edit
- all changes are tracked**
- can format as desired (not as dull as they first appear to be)
- encourage mutual sharing of information**
- encourage contributions
- seem like they are ideal for education since most of them are used for sharing of information (FAQs, and how-to's)
- encourage collaborations (working on the same page, til you all get it right)**
- requires little or no admin
- changes page can be made into an RSS feed
- encourage 'stickiness' because content is edited by many people
- community-based**
- concept of community, knowledge-sharing and trust**
- collaborative writing tool**
- organised around topics not authors
- great for drafting ideas or documenting projects
- can create headings for other people to fill in

** These features are not found in blogs. In summary wikis differ from blogs by being community-based, by encouraging collaborations and having changes tracked.

Uses for wikis within learning environment:
- a collaborative writing space for group projects
- sharing project notes or practical class notes required by students preparing individual reports
- compiling shared resources from a course or project
- generating FAQ information

why are blogs great?

Before I answer this it might be worth noting that according to blogger.com "There are millions of blogs on the Internet — a new one is created every seven-and-a-half seconds. More than 10,000 new additions are added to the 'blogosphere' each day." So it is evident that they have wide appeal.

Work in progress. I am adding to this as I think of things. To start I am just going to randomly type a few things off the top of my head that are good about blogs and blogging. I'll repeat the process for wikis. Here goes:

- written in the voice of your choosing**
- owned by the blogger
- public or private, its up to you
- easy to use and set up
- allows space to ruminate and reflect (like a traditional diary)**
- allows space to promote your ideas (like soap-box)
- can link to other blogs - create a community of learners
- unmoderated**
- can choose to accept, or not, comments
- one-sided monologue (unless comments)
- regular entries are encouraged
- accessible from any networked computer
- encourage creativity in the blogger
- encourage lurking in the reader (no need to comment)
- RSS syndication enables easy sharing, and community building
- datestamped, archived, arranged in descending chronological order**
- increases 'stickiness' because readers return regularly to read blog
- RSS allows people to have huge choice in terms of commentators / columnists
- RSS allows you to build a personalised newsfeed
- multi-author blog would allow sharing and collaboration

** Features specific to blogs and not shared with wikis. Blogs diifer from wikis by being written in a style determined by the author, they are unmoderated, datestamped and encourage rumination/reflection.

tell me about RSS

I feel I need to know a little about RSS since it seems integral to the sharing of blogs and blog posts. Also the updates page/s of the wiki can be syndicated using RSS feeds.

I am greatly encouraged by this comment:

"The strength of RSS is its simplicity. It is exceptionally easy to syndicate website content using RSS."
[Stephen Downes: An Introduction to RSS for Educational Designers]

Bullet points about RSS, and RSS feeds:

• RSS stands for 'really simple syndication'
  
• type of XML document used to share news headlines and other types of web content
  
• content developers make their RSS files available by placing them on their web server
  
• RSS aggregators are able to read the RSS files and collect data about the website
  
• aggregators place the site information into a larger database
  
• database allows for structured searches of a large number of content providers
  
• RSS is the first working example of an XML data network
  
• RSS is not centralized, it is distributed... one item at a time
  
• there is no central store, repository or library of RSS content; it is all over the internet.
  
• to access and use RSS content in a viewer or in a web page you need a simple RSS reader
  

how can blogs be shared?

The reason I am asking this question is because the 'shareability' of blogs forms an overlap with one of the features of discussion boards i.e. discussion boards are public. Sharing a blog makes it public, and depending on how it is shared offers varying degrees of interactivity to blog visitors.

For simplicity I am going to divide the reasons for having an educational (teaching and learning) blog into:
1. private - rumination and consolidation
2. public - sharing of ideas.

Since my blog is hosted by blogger.com I'll list the several ways to share blogs, or individual blog posts.

1. it will be appear in the '10 Most Recently Updated Blogs' list on fellow blogger's 'dashboard' (home) page
   
2. it will appear on the 'next blog' tab after you have published a post
   
3. a blogger can create a link to your blog within their blog
   
4. a blogger can list you in their external links menu which usually appears near the 'archives' menu. [Note to self: this template doesn't appear to have this. Must investigate].
   
5. RSS feeds. Blah, I know precious little about this other than it promotes the interoperability and reusabilty of the blogs - which is something one would think is highly desirable in the education environment.
   

NB: The first 2 only apply if you chose to make your blog public (select 'yes' to 'add blog to our listings' setting).

So, it is reasonably easy to share your blog, and make it publicly available either passively (1 & 2) or through a little effort on your or the person-who-wants-to-link-to-your-blog's part (3,4 & 5).

so, what's your topic?

So that I don't forget what I am supposed to be doing, here is the topic:

"We intend to compare the more 'private' personal communication that a blog implies, with the more public open forum that something like a discussion board encourages (in a learning context obviously!). However, we both dislike the WebCT discussion board, so we're going to try using a wiki instead. We intend to simultaneously conduct joint discussions on the relative merits of each form of communication in the wiki, and each keep a private weblog too over the course of around 3 weeks-ish. The wiki and the weblogs will make up the greater part of our assignment, but at the end of our few weeks we will get together and write a summary piece on a webpage which aims to pull all the strands together."

The wiki is: http://amandava.swiki.net/1
A-M's blog is: http://amsuniblog.blogspot.com/

huh? why this blog?

I've had various blogs over the last couple of years which track holidays, relationships, inner angst etc. However I've been using one in an eCPD course that I am taking: Digital Environments for Learning at the University of Edinburgh. Now, this blog has been quite different. Like the others it has witnessed me prattling on about what's good and what's bad - but the difference is in the way it has helped me consolidate my learning. This utilitarian feature is new to me, and I wanted to explore this further.

My colleague A-M is quite keen on wikis and suggested that we contrast the more 'private' (blog) with the 'public' (wiki). I've never used a wiki before, so come with no expectations, whereas A-M is quite enthusiastic about them. Oh, the investigation is to form part of our assessment... 2500 word essay.