The last blog I wrote for the Preparing the Future Professoriate class last semester, “To blog or not to blog after this semester?”, actually comes full circle quite nicely to the readings for this week. The consensus seems to be, at least among the authors of the assigned readings and Godin and Peters, that blogging is awesome. I definitely raised my hand in class last week when Dr. Nelson asked, “who in here hates blogging?”. While I am not a huge fan of blogs, I do see the value in the activity. As I wrote in my previous blog entry on the topic and as the articles describe, a blog is a great place to practice writing, much in the same manner as the journal or diary of yesteryear. I certainly saw improvement in my writing over the course of mandatory blogging last semester. According to Hitchcock, blogs have great potential in academia. Many professors and scientists struggle with connecting their research to non-experts and “normal” people but often also have trouble communicating in general (I call it as I see it). Writing a blog forces authors to think through the information they want to convey in order to present a coherent argument. The benefits of this practice are two-fold: one advantage is the practice in communication, but organizing information into a digestible format also helps the authors better understand and form deeper connections with their own material. One big plus for blogs over old-school journals is the possibility for two-way dialogue with readers, which Rosenberg likens to the telephone, and what can be nearly immediate feedback. Another beauty of the digital blog is the ability to modify, update, and correct posts after publication—a “freedom to fail,” if you will. This freedom should be liberating to academics who normally must conform to rigid formatting guidelines of scholarly journals and get caught up in what reviewers might think.
One potential caveat to the blog hype is that, while blogs are ideally open forums accessible by anyone on the internet, most bloggers will not reach a broad audience but rather a small handful of followers. The readers one is able to attract are generally colleagues (if the blog is in the academic realm) and friends. That is to say, blogs do not necessarily initiate conversations with the uninformed masses and, instead, present an example of confirmation bias: the people that regularly read a particular blog largely do so because they know they will agree with the views presented by the blogger. Not that there is anything wrong with this arrangement. Opportunities for public discussion exist if readers do want to weigh in on a topic, but blogs largely serve the blogger through the action itself of synthesizing information to create a post. Blogging can still be worthwhile, even if no one besides the author ever visits the site. I just wanted to point out that the vision of blogs as an educational tool that invites discussion and collaboration with people around the world is a possibility, but also quite idealistic.
The only other hesitation I have regarding blogging is a fear of too much technology. Not to sound like grandpa or a conspiracy theorist. On the contrary, I am very much on the bandwagon that believes technology is the key to solving many problems in the world. However, I do shudder at this new expectation that we should spend an additional hour or two every week hunched over a keyboard in front of a bright screen working on our digital identity, especially when most of us in higher education already spend most of our days doing just that. I feel that there are other approaches to accomplish the blogging goals, such as writing in a journal or setting up regularly scheduled, informal meetings with peers and colleagues to discuss research. Blogs are definitely a streamlined, glitzy alternative to the traditional ways of doing business, but that does not necessarily mean that everyone should feel like they have to blog. If that sort of thing tickles you, then wonderful. But if not, I think that is also fine.
January 25, 2016 @ 8:36 pm
I think it is interesting and possibly even refreshing to hear your arguments after reading so many entirely pro-blogging articles last week. I agree that blogs may work better for some people than others, and that they do not serve to perfectly get information out to everyone. I do think that they offer a nice complement to traditional journal articles and, as you mention, a possible way for communications-challenged academics to practice their writing. I have often thought that the best way to get the message of research out to the world is to have it written about in the popular media (provided they could do a decent job), but those opportunities are probably few and far between. Blogging won’t reach nearly that many people, but it might reach more than a journal article would. But I agree that the thought of adding another obligation to our careers that involves sitting in front of a computer writing about our research is a bit depressing. Ideally, for me, blogging would replace some other writing obligations, but I don’t see academic departments encouraging professors to publish less and blog more any time soon.
January 27, 2016 @ 6:17 pm
I could also get on board with adding blogs as sort of a public outreach/connecting with the community exercise and subtracting maybe a peer-reviewed article (you know, still publishing, just not quite as much). Unfortunately, like you said, it’s doubtful that universities will change their tune about the importance of publishing and obtaining grants.
January 26, 2016 @ 12:29 am
Nice post, Carrie. Check mine out for another more skeptical take on academic blogging (http://blogs.lt.vt.edu/benaug/2016/01/25/academic-blogging/). I based it on this blog from Dynamic Ecology, that I bet you would find more nuanced and balanced that what we typically get assigned (https://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/should-you-start-a-science-blog-ask-yourself-these-questions/). I think we’re both focused on opportunity costs, which the assigned blogs don’t mention.
For the most part, I think the only science bloggers that are going to get a large audience are the professional science popularizers who blog about science broadly, rather than in a niche area. We keep getting pressured to communicate more with the public, but I think another perhaps more fruitful route is to offload this job to the science communicators who do this for a living. Of course, one problem with this approach is convincing them that what you do is interesting enough to write about to a public audience. But if it isn’t why would you waste your own time doing it?
A second area of agreement is that improving your writing skills is not necessarily a good reason to blog. As pointed out in the Dynamic Ecology post, blogging does not commit you to writing–wanting to write is what causes you to have a blog, not the other way around.
PS, I’d rather be outside, too. Wildlife PhD student here.
January 27, 2016 @ 6:19 pm
Outdoor enthusiasts unite! Good to know I am not alone!
January 26, 2016 @ 1:32 am
Everyone scatter it’s a GTA!
But seriously I agree, blogging is not for everyone. I am grateful that you acknowledge that there is merit in the act of writing and “doing a thing”. Even when confirmation bias becomes an issue, I still look at blogging as a potential method for sharing what I know with others (which you mention). I think a fun thing to do over the semester would be to tell your posts as a story. Infuse them into a narrative and captivate.
Your grandmother and your cat might be the only ones reading, but have fun with it.
January 27, 2016 @ 7:47 pm
I do appreciate the blog/webpage as an outlet for creativity that you don’t really get to do much as a scientist! Hence, my pictures of rivers.
January 26, 2016 @ 10:36 pm
As I was reading your blog I had a flashback to a conversation I had with my nephew couple of months ago:
Me: “Go outside and play! It is so beautiful!”
Nephew: “Play what?”
Me: “I don’t know go shoot hoops, throw the football around or something.”
Nephew: “Aunty you’re so old fashioned! Why would I do that when I can play Madden 16 on my X-box!”
Yes, definitely old fashioned and a skeptic when it comes to technological adaptation. My gifts always consist of books that one can actually hold and games that you have to actually sit with someone to play….it takes time for sure in the adjustment from what we are used to and what is available now as a resource for communicating, participating and learning. I am sure there is value though…pros and cons to everything, right?!
January 27, 2016 @ 6:22 pm
Definitely! Blogs (and all technology) can be both good and bad, although according to the readings (and university-wide initiatives to implement blogging everywhere) they are only absolutely wonderful…
January 27, 2016 @ 4:09 pm
I am curious, especially seeing the comment by Ben and reading his blog, how many of the Connected Learning skeptics in the class are from fields within science, especially the natural resources. I agree that blogging has its place, and seems to serve as a great filter for aligning objective research with subjective opinions and worldviews (for better or worse, I suppose). The opportunity costs of investing in such methods are clear, as you pointed out: Less time for relational community, relational learning, relational advising (obvious emphasis on “relational”).
My master’s advisory experience took place through email. Facetime with my advisor was minimal, and I don’t think he knew my last name by the time I graduated. Convenience always manages to outpace quality, and I am afraid that emphasizing technology-based outreach will continue to dwindle many of the failings in education. Our colleagues and students are losing their real-world statuses in favor of two-dimensional avatars with usernames that contain numbers.
Not to end with gloom and doom, I am happy to see healthy skepticism and look forward to having these thoughts addressed throughout the semester.
January 27, 2016 @ 7:32 pm
I guess it might be hard to get excited about increasing computer-time when you prefer playing outside? I imagine much of the appeal of blogging is that this activity fills what has become a hole for some of us–while meeting with other humans face-to-face or over telephone conferences is nearly always preferable, tight schedules, travel, and general logistics mean that these activities may not actually happen all that often, or maybe not at all. Blogs might be a way, as backwards as it sounds, to re-connect with people? Just musing, but I am glad to have other fellow skeptics out there!
January 27, 2016 @ 5:46 pm
While I am choosing posts to read, I think I have a preference to choose those that are written by skeptics… And I nod continuously while I am reading. While people might have said enough about the downside of blogs, something more digress came into my mind and I just want to share it. I am a fan of technology. A coastal engineer myself, I love engineering and science fiction. But meanwhile, I am afraid of technology, too. I am too scared by the picture of everybody sitting in front the screen 8 hours a day and thinking of the virtual identity more important than real life. While I agree that blogging helps to communicate more conveniently: you know, you don’t have to find a common time for everyone who wants to talk to sit down. But I still prefer talking to each other face to face. Another point is while the young people are growing up in a different environment than us now, is this a good thing? Preferring to play video games and chat with friends online rather than going out and playing in real world is not good. We should adapt education to the young’s habits somehow, but are all the habits good and unchangeable?
January 27, 2016 @ 7:37 pm
Technology is certainly a great thing! I know I would not be here without it! As with most things, moderation and balance are key. On the one hand, kids growing up with touch screen tablets is awesome–“look at all the educational games my toddler can play!”. It can also be kind of disturbing–example: kids that try to swipe an actual book cover to turn the page. Computers and blogs aren’t the enemy, but I do think we should be wary of overuse.
January 27, 2016 @ 6:30 pm
Well you have articulated very well to me the possible positive prospects of blogging. Perhaps we are simply too idealistic in thinking that blogging should trickle down to everyone, unlike scholarly journals. While access to a particular blog would be easy through the internet in our society, the idea to look for something in the first place — whether it be a blog or anything else — happens either by curiosity, accident or someone pointing us in that direction. I too would hope we can find alternative forms of spreading information that do not end up in front of a computer. But of course, that has already historically been done and is still pervasive: people talking with people. Let us not allow technology, blogging or otherwise, remove this important part of connecting people to information.
January 27, 2016 @ 7:46 pm
And, of course, the addition of blogs to more traditional forms of communication (talking in person, the telephone and e-mail more recently) increases the overall distribution of, and access to, information. Blogs may reach people that would not otherwise have the opportunity, for a variety of reasons, to sit down and talk with leading researchers in hydrology, for example. Alternative ways of communicating with and educating others (and ourselves) are certainly a positive! Just saying the old ways also work quite well…
January 27, 2016 @ 8:13 pm
As an English composition instructor, I can definitely see the benefits of blogging regularly in an academic setting. So often, students seem hesitant or intimidated by their own writing. They don’t want to sound stupid or they don’t know what to say. Blogging is a good way, not only to get them writing regularly, but also to get them over the hump of starting the writing process. It also provides them with a means to situate their writing, knowing they will have an audience and that their work will (potentially) be seen by “the world.” It makes them cognizant of what they write and how they sound on the web, which is an invaluable lesson to learn in college before students enter the “real world.” You even said that you saw improvement in your writing by consistently by updating your blog. This the sort of exercise that is good practice for composition students. Thank you for your enthusiasm and for taking the time to be on the web, in front of a screen for a few minutes longer. Keep it up!
January 28, 2016 @ 7:08 pm
I would also argue that any type (and different types) of writing practice are good for students. For example, low-stakes “free-writing” in a personal journal that no one ever sees, that may not even be in complete sentences, is helpful for students when they are trying to just get some ideas out. Blogging or the old-school version of writing and trading papers in class in a sort of peer-review process is another important form of writing, involving complete sentences, coherent thoughts, and easy-going feedback. More formal compositions that demand appropriate grammar, sentence structure, and organization of the central argument are also essential to practice. Which of these is more important? Or better? Hard to say, they all have their benefits. But writing can improve in many ways, such as by scribbling on the back of a napkin at a restaurant, jotting down notes in a notebook while sitting in a tree, or by typing on a computer.