First of all, I really like the idea of the network as a sort of heuristic tool. This is not to say that it is not a "thing" as well. But its thingness seems to be systemic, always moving and changing depending on what is coming into it through what we, as part of the network, are putting out. (Minds out of the gutter, please.)

Therefore, I see the works we have read thus far functioning in part to get us to a place where we can begin to re-imagine how language, power, social structures, information, knowledge move systemically, rather than dialectically or linearly. In other words, network theory gives us a new way to think about the relationships between the things we encounter.

So we began with blogging as new means of research, a way to begin to think of how writing and the construction of arguments and researched scholarship can change because of the new technologies of the web. This is a new way to think about knowledge production, and as PhD students, that is kind of our business -- a part of our identity. Then we moved into the pedagogical implications of blogging -- again another part of our identity, but we kept circling back to the previous discussions on scholarship. So these two clusters of texts, or affiliation networks - teaching and scholarship -- begin to weave together, much like Tyra noted (And I can't find it now. It was her entry on fingers weaving together. Quite a nice image for my point here.), creating multiple identities for us that are both individual (as teachers or scholars) and collective (as teachers and scholars) both individually and collectively.

Those identities can be disciplinarily, writing, knowledge, rhetorical theory, teaching, or any number of activities and actions we commit to in our lives. The network becomes the framework through which all of our different identities, time commitments, and knowledges interact. So, when Collin began by talking about how blogging could change the rhythm of of our scholarly pursuits, I think he may have also been hoping that it would change the rhythm of our thinking -- at least where this course is concerned.

Rhythm becomes an essential part of all of this because in the network, traditional rhythms of scholarship and communication seem to become part of the larger rhythms of the network. So we have terms like sync and affiliation that incorporate our traditional ideas of linear time and community. It seems as if these concepts don't go away, but they are mediated through the network, so that they do not become the sole means of understanding our patterns of thought.

So that's my big schtick. I hope that others come in here and challenge and/or extend all of this. Thanks.