I think we need to establish our position on process-blogging. So here's a quick breakdown. Tell me what you think.
The following areas contain their own areas of discipline:
1. Blogging
2. Process Writing
3. Collaborative Learning
One can blog without following the writing process or collaborating with someone else. One could use the writing process without a blog or collaboration. One can learn collaboratively without even knowing the existence of blogs or process writing. You see the pattern.
Process-blogging, however, combines all three disciplines: blogging, process writing, collaborative learning. To process-blog, one must collaborate with another person throughout stages of the writing process to compose a coauthored written piece.
If these guidelines are not followed, one is not process-blogging. To that end, attention must be paid to the public nature of process-blogging. Process-blogging is public because someone else--even if it's only one other partner--must read and respond to a writer's posts. Now, if a teacher or family members or other visitors post comments, well, this interaction also falls under the category of process-blogging because now the learning community's population has grown.
On the other hand, if a writer uses a blog to generate ideas and promote reflection, but does not allow other people to respond via blog-posts, then this writer is engaged in private process blogging.
One could say our study is public process blogging. But public is extraneous because process-blogging, by our definition, must involve interaction in a public forum. Process-blogging is influenced by social constructionist theory because knowledge is acquired through active participation/engagement in a collaborative learning community.
Unless you wanted to add some extra complexity to our project and change the name to public process blogging? Probably not, right?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Question for consideration as this develops - could process-blogging be used by an individual as a way to sort through the writing process. For instance, couldn't I start an individual blog where I track my thoughts and ideas as I move through the process? Would you consider this process-blogging, or not because it wouldn't have the collaborative influence? While I think this version of process-blogging that we are using is fantastic, I don't know if we need to limit it to being exclusively a collaborative exercise. Thoughts?
Well, I think you described the private process blogging I talked about (where someone blogs alone).
Our approach has mandated that process-blogging involve collaboration--it is one of its defining charateristics. Otherwise, what we are proposing doesn't fall under social constructionism.
But if you think that the present definition is too restrictive, we could have two terms: public process blogging (or collaborative process blogging) and private process blogging.
Well, I think for the purposes of what we want to do here, process-blogging is the most effective term, and it has a catchy ring, so I would like to keep it that way. Plus, if we wanted to elaborate on another type of process-blogging later, we could deal with that when the time came. So, let's move forward with the conception of process blogging as you presented it. I just like to complicate things!
Post a Comment