D, I’m interested in the “more commenting on the learning process while in the process of posting”. We’re (UC) in the middle of a project to define standards and best practices for online course design, instruction, and learning. One obvious area we’re bumping up against is defining “learning” or even what the process of learning is.

As I think about the way 711 has changed my own concept of online learning (or facilitated online learning), I’m wondering about how students who are more comfortable (familiar, savvy, expert, etc.) with technology and online communication define “learning”. Do they measure learning in terms of quantitative results? Do the use a before-and after approach? Do the measure learning on an objective basis?

The blogging (and other social software-based networks) in some ways really complicate the question of measurement/evaluation because the traditional learning hierarchies are not readily present of known. In fact, because of structural holes and presence among and in multiple clusters, the present state of one’s knowledge can never be accurately determined. What we’re left with in the network is a representation of the most probable expectation of greatest possible knowledge transfer for a particular “type” of student in a given a cluster (a cluster which imposes certain characteristics on the student – a la homophily). I can’t think of any group of people that have network as rich in structural holes as students. Students (and I guess we all sort of fall into this characterization) know how to exercise control over their reward opportunities – opportunities defined by holes in their social structures.

Again, I’m really confusing myself to piece all of these seemingly disparate parts together, but I’m convinced there is enough cross-over here (dare I say “interdisciplinary” with Jen so near?) to make some sense of this with concepts from education and instructional design theory.

I'm willing to be in the mix with you here, Mike. If I think about assessment, I think about the fact that blogging assessment might be as much about the knowledge acquired by the students about blogging (and I'm thinking Materially, the "how to") as it is about the quality of the writing they do on the blog---Collin has said similar things about our own assessment in this class, I think? I took the CC article to be talking about learning blogs while using them, but I can't be sure, as that list of benefits to learning is not really filled in with material examples.

What your comments had me ruminating on is that one of the great gifts of shifting medium from traditional to something else, in this case blogs, is that it highlights the learning of the medium...which leads me to ask why we think students come in with knowledge of the traditional medium, you know? What blind spots do we have to students' ignorance of the medium that has become so natrualized that we don't really see it anymore? And even if we do see it (as many a CCCs article expounds on), many across the academy don't see, aren't remembering, that "school" uses certain "traditional" media that aren't natural to (some) students.