Well, as you might expect, the people at MIT are at it again. Take a look at this "smartboard" demo also known as The Assist Sketch Understanding System. This makes current smartboard technology seem mighty naive.

I had conversation with Bill Fitzgerald recently wherein the definition of blogs surfaced. We both agreed that the definition of blogs means different things to different people and as such the definition of blogs has essentially lost qualitative identity, i.e., that which remains true regardless of the values or variables that appear within it.

Why is this question important?

When we begin to investigate the consequences of using such a space in academic research, the conventional definition defies its practical uses.

In a conventional sense, a blog is still primarily associated with being an online personal journal. However, I know many educators who use them as a space to post assignments, provide links to various references and resources, even as a space to conduct class discussions through the commenting feature. I have seen blogs used as a space for students to do similar work, i.e., post written assignments, powerpoints, movies, mp3s, links to other resources, engage in discussions with others, etc.

In a larger sense, blogs like other forms of social software permit communication between groups and individuals. In this sense, blogs serve as a medium or channel that supports an exchange, or an ecology where people, practices, and values connect, interact, and evolve (Suter et al., 2005). Blogs also enable the aggregation and sharing of resources; they not only allow people to collect, communicate, and collaborate online, they allow data, information, and objects to be combined and consolidated, serving as a place where both ideas and people can converge.

So in an educational or academic sense, a blog can be more than a blog as it has been principally defined.

My question is, do we need a new definition of this space we have been referring to as a blog? Is it simply a matter of adding an adjective, as in this is my personal blog and this is my academic blog? Is a blog more a personal learning environment when framed in an academic setting?

When is a blog no longer a blog?

Your two cents are encouraged….

References:
Suter, V., Alexander, B., & Kaplan, P. (2005). Social software and the future of conferences—Right now. EDUCAUSE Review 40(1): 46–59. Retrieved 16 July 2006 from http://www.educause.edu/er/erm05/erm0513.asp?bhcp=1.

Diane Yendol-Hoppey, a colleague/mentor/co-conspirator, and I have been conversing lately about how weblogging and online social networks (aka the blogosphere) might be used to support teacher learning.

We began by brainstorming dimensions of the weblogging and came up with the following:



Our definition presents the idea of a weblog serving as a learning space that allows individuals to collect, communicate, collaborate, and create. Weblogs are both social and individual with a potential to explore, inform, and engage one’s self and others.

From a theoretical standpoint, I have adopted two perspectives that could possibly help inform our understanding of weblogs in terms of teaching and learning based on the work of Sharon J. Derry and Constance A. Steinkeuhler from the University of Wisconsin – Madison.

From the situativity perspective (Greeno, 1997), a weblog appears to provide a means for developing and refining a sense of self.

For example, if we say that meaning, learning, and identity evolve through enculturation, then the notion of the self, who we are, is a result of our social relationships, our physical and temporal contexts, our symbolic and material resources, and the historical change that is happening all around us (Greeno, 1997). Thus, who we are determines and is reflexively determined by our participation in various communities.


As such, weblogs have expanded our temporal boundaries and allow us to connect to others regardless of our immediate physical or temporal contexts.  Weblogs represent an extension of our physical identities and serves as a symbolic depiction of who we are. If educators use this space to collect ideas, images and articles, communicate with others, create posts, and collaborate and bond with other educators and their students (two separate but related communities of practice) then, as Derry and Steinkuehler (2003) put it, through these communities “an individual does more than merely acquire and reorganize symbolic knowledge of the world; she or he is ontologically transformed by it" (p. 803).

From a symbolic-processing or cognitive theory perspective  (Stephen will love this), the situativity perspective fails to describe the internal cognitions or cognitive processes and structures inherent in the individual. Because learning and performance can be examined separately from social and situative contexts, i.e., comprehension tests, problem-solving tests, standardized summative assessments, transfer tasks, etc., the situativity perspective provides us with only part of the picture in terms of the nature of human learning. Derry and Steinkeuhler (2003) posit that much value can be gained from adopting both perspectives. They suggest that “educational researchers may study classroom communities with varying activity and discourse structures, developing coding systems to capture these differences and statistically examining the impact of these variations on individual performance measured using standardized assessment tools” (p. 805).

As I understand it weblogs could provide an opportunity to examine cognitive growth both situatively, as well as in terms of symbolic processing, given an assessment schema that takes into consideration both epistemic categories. Cognition could be considered one unit of measure and could be analyzed by looking at how a teacher represented the mastery of certain skills via representational tools (e.g., concept maps, collaborative or photo essays, and/or analogical reasoning). Situative units of measure could include portfolio assessments, the evaluation of designed artifacts, or mentoring activities. Teacher weblogs could be assessed for symbolic processing in terms of how well an educator transmits or explains concepts for others, how well they lead discussions, challenge misconceptions or promote metacognitive reflection. From a situative perspective, educators could be evaluated on how well they provide community leadership, design community infrastructure, promote the development of social and discourse norms, provide mentoring or share problem solving.

Weblogs appear to contain a great amount of potential for supporting teacher (or any individual’s) learning both formally and informally. Weblogs represent many things to different people depending on their context and how they are used. I often see weblogs described as a “tool” which connotes an artifact that offers a functional, practical use, as an instrument that allows a user to accomplish a specific task. Yet when we consider a tool outside of a particular use, it becomes neutered, a sterile object. In this light it is important to consider that weblogs “are not physical devices that can be extricated from contingent social values. The technology always already incorporates the social in its structure” (Feenberg, 1999, p. 210). As an educational researcher, the question consistently returns to how do we best study these activities/processes? Perhaps combining both a situative stance with a symbolic processing perspective makes the most sense.

Your thoughts are most welcome on both the question and the graphic.

References:

Derry, S. J. and C. A. Steinkuehler (2003) "Cognitive and situative theories of learning and instruction." Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science Volume, 800-805 DOI:

Feenberg, A. (1999). Questioning technology. London: Routledge.

Greeno, J. G. (1997). "On claims that answer the wrong questions." Educational Researcher 26(1): 5-17.

A news story about MySpace and teenagers’ web worlds got me thinking about concepts like tipping points, emergence, network effects, contagious behavior, fashion trends, what it means to be cool or hip, slang, diffusion models, peer pressure, branding, personal identity, and jumping on/off the bandwagon.

When I was a teenager, my goal was to be different, but not too different, if at all possible. My friends and I wanted to be cool, but it wasn’t necessarily something we could control. To be cool or hip meant that you were into behaviors or appearances that were pre-popular; you were setting the trends not following them. I never liked doing things because everybody else was doing them. And like many teens, I wanted to fit in, but I didn’t want to be shallow or flaky.

Not that times have changed too dramatically in 25 years, yet the allure of MySpace and Facebook has drawn much more attention to adolescence than I can recall.

The Post article points to a number of factors that seem to be the cause of this shift. First and foremost, there is a lot of money involved with online social networking. Teens are potential customers; they spend their (and their parents’) disposable income on cellphones, phone services, videogames, digital music players, movies, music, t.v.’s, etc. How do I know this? I listen to my own teenagers, plus just watch the banner ads on MySpace – something is sticking.

And this is what advertisers are hoping for: stickiness -- a way to package a message that makes a product irresistible and compels the consumer to some form of action. The teens exposed and exposing themselves on these spaces are seen as prime markets for selling entertainment -- amusements and diversions intended to hold the attention of an audience or its participants. During these years of identity-play, teens recognize that what they do, who they hang out with, what they watch, listen to, eat, smoke, and drink, reveals a lot about who they are to others. However, I would be curious to know how much of this identity-play goes examined by teens? I didn’t have the tools or models to engage in this type of examination until much later in life.

For advertisers, the problem is, teens are fickle. What’s “in” today becomes “out” tomorrow; it’s the law of fashion, it’s the law of trends. The undergraduates I talk to at my uni tell me MySpace is for middle and high school kids; Facebook is where they hang out and message each other. Yet, how long will this last? What do commercial social networks offer that can’t be copied and updated by someone else? How can Facebook or MySpace become the IPod of online social networks?

One area of youth culture that I always find fascinating that represents the fluid and fickle nature of the age is the practice of slang. Slang is a way subcultures have of separating themselves from the pack. Slang is a type of secret language that excludes particular people from the conversation. When moms and dads have MySpace accounts to monitor their offspring, the initial attraction to the space for adolescents becomes neutered. If mom and dad are hanging out in MySpace, how cool can it be? Time to find another hang-out.

Another fascinating facet of teen culture is the notion of “hype” and the “sell out.” Since adolescence is a time for identity-play that is riddled with hype/hyperbole (or blatant, exaggerated claims), it always strikes me when a peer or idol is labeled a sell out, i.e., compromising their integrity in exchange for money or personal notoriety. Hype and selling out are commonly associated with attempts to increase mass appeal or acceptability into mainstream society. When adolescents find that their parents and teachers are able to access “their space,” the company that permits this has obviously sold out. Don’t believe the hype?: Time to find something different.

So what do teens want in their online social network? According to the Post article, they want security and privacy. Teens want the right to “their space” and they need to be able to experiment in a non-threatening environment (see this previous post).

Perhaps it is impossible to expect a commercialized service to provide this level of support for young adults. Perhaps, as Evan Hansen, a sophomore at Falls Church High School, notes:

"Over time, people are going to get sick of talking to people on the computer," he said. "I just think people will want to spend more time with each other -- without the wall of technology."

Maybe Evan is right. Google sure isn’t banking on Evan’s sentiments; neither is News Corp. or hundreds of other businesses. Given teen cultures’ penchant for spending money, groupthink, for desiring to be cool and in the know, new services will emerge (and die) as digital technologies evolve and (e)merge.

Perhaps new technologies and new channels will arise that will permit select groups to operate without detection. (Yeah! and our current government will allow that to happen...) As long as we can access the Net for free, most anything reasonable seems possible. However, since the notion of popularity has always been an Achilles heel of teen culture, hype and fickleness will always have their way with us.

As Albert Einstein reportedly said: “With fame I become more and more stupid, which of course is a very common phenomenon.”

So what are teens to do? Use it? Refuse it? Create something new?

As always, your thoughts are encouraged.