After day 1 of BlogTalk 2.0 I’m finding more questions are I need to investigate:
The dialogue vs monologue is still a primary question – what are my students doing with their blogs – I still think they are starting as monolgues but progress to dialogue…Torill Mortensen discussed the difference and confusion of modalities that occur when we examine the blog as a written dialugue but read it as an oral dialogue.
An emergence of the communication modes…perhaps?
Is it Socratic dialogue – or do I influence that in the structured questions I use as we move through the stages of the blogging model?
Self-disclosure and the issue of fiction vs authenticity was raised – by Mark Bernstein. Is this an issue from the learning context – does the authenticity of the writing matter if the dialogue is indicated deeper levels of learning and meta-cognition?
The issue of honesty and truthfulness was raised a number of times. Elmine Wijnia presented her Masters thesis findings in the examination of blogs as a form of communication. Elmine used Habermas (J. Habermas (1985), Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society (T. McCarthy trans.), Beacon Press) and Van Djik (J.A.G.M. Van Dijk (1999), The Network Society: An Introduction to the Social Aspect of new media, Sage Publications Ltd) as models for her research. Again – honesty and truthfulness (authenticity vs fiction) was discussed. But does it really matter? I’m not sure it will from a learning journal perpsective…I will certainly review my model further from this framework..
That’s all for now – lots more to write up and lots more questions to consider!
I made a dissertation about teacher education and use weblogs in the experimental work. I think that first the dialogue is internal, because the public dimension of the blog is not understand. In a second phase, they start to dialogue (commentaries launch this). The audience enlarge.
I used Bakhtin and Vygotsky to understand this movement.
* take care my english 🙂 I’m brazilian.