Communication dynamics: Discussion boards, weblogs and the development of communities of inquiry in online learning environments
动态交流：讨论版、网志，以及在线学习环境式的探究社区的开发
In
General on
5/10/2004 at
6:26 amOnline learning environments (OLEs) are now critical to teaching and learning across Australian higher education. Their influence impacts on the availability of content, the design of courses and, perhaps most pedagogically significantly, the nature of communication. The discussion board is the ubiquitous communication tool within these OLEs and hence significantly shapes the kind of communication that takes place. In light of this, the degree to which a successful community of inquiry can be facilitated through the use of discussion boards is examined and compared to the possibilities afforded by weblogs in the same role. Weblogs, it is argued, offer new opportunities in the development of social, cognitive and teacher presence online and should be considered in the development of or alongside established OLEs.
在线学习环境（OLE）现在是全澳大利亚高等教育教育学习最要紧的事情。对内容可用性、课程设计，也许最具教育学意义的，交流的本质，产生了巨大的冲击。讨论版是这些在线学习环境无处不在的交流工具，并由此显著限定了所发生的交流类型。有鉴于此，探究社区可以达到的成功程度，可以通过讨论版的使用得以促进，而讨论版的使用又可以用来研究比较网志在相同任务中所承担的种种可能性。有人认为，在发展社会、认知、教师的在线业务能力方面，网志提供了新的机会，应该考虑开发网志，或者沿着既定在线学习环境方案进行。
Introduction and background: Towards social constructivism and community in online teaching and learning
介绍与背景：走向社会建构主义和在线教育学习社区
I believe that all education proceeds by the participation of the individual in the social consciousness of the race… I believe that the only true education comes through the stimulation of the child’s powers by the demands of the social situations in which he finds himself. (Dewey 1897, p. 77)
我相信，所有教育收益都由具有竞赛的社会意识的个人参与获得……我相信，唯一真正的教育，来自通过社会环境的需求对儿童能力的刺激，他们只有在社会环境中才能发现自我。（杜威，1987，第77页）
…only through communication can human life hold meaning. The teacher’s thinking is authenticated only by the authenticity of the students’ thinking. The teacher cannot think for her students, nor can she impose her thought on them. Authentic thinking, thinking that is concerned about reality, does not take place in ivory tower isolation, but only in communication. (Freire 1970)
……只有通过交流，人类生命才有意义。只有通过学生思维的真实性去验证教师的思维。教师不能代替学生思考，也不能把自己的想法强加于学生。真正的思考，认为是对现实的关注，不是发生在与世隔绝的象牙塔中，而只能发生在交流中。（弗雷勒，1970）
Both Dewey and Freire recognised and frequently highlighted in their work the critical importance of the social experience in education and the crippling effects of transmissive pedagogies and the systems that support them. Dewy (1938) argued that education that offers a pre-organised body of knowledge for transmission bred docility, receptivity, and obedience while Freire (1970) called for an end to the “banking” model of education which he saw as a process resulting in people being “filed away through the lack of creativity, transformation, and knowledge”. While their perspectives and contexts varied significantly, Dewey looking for enlightenment in Victorian England and Freire striving for freedom from the “ideology of oppression” in 1970s Brazil, these objections and their proposed solutions of social participation, through communication, have influenced generations of theorists and practitioners.
杜威和弗雷勒都认可并经常在他们工作中强调社会经验在教育中的极端重要性，以及传递式教学法及其支持体系极其有害的影响。杜威（1938）认为，提供了组织好了的知识的教育，传播的是顺从、接受、服从式教育，而弗雷勒（1970）提倡结束银行式的教育模式，这种教育被他看作导致人们因“缺乏创造力、转变和知识而被锉平”的过程。虽然他们的观点和背景相差甚大，杜威在维多利亚时代的英格兰追求启蒙，弗雷勒在一九七零年代巴西追求“压抑的意识形态”下的自由，这些反对运动及其提出的社会参与方案，通过交流，影响了几代人的理论家和实践者。
Primary among these theorist have been those who ascribe to a social constructivist perspective, defined by Prawat and Floden as “distinctive in their insistence that knowledge creation is a shared rather than an individual experience,” where “knowledge evolves through a process of negotiation within discourse communities” (1994 p 48). Particular to these, Stacey (1999) observed a number of researchers and writers concerned with teaching and learning online who have “described the potential of the medium as an interactive environment that would enable collaborative group learning and would change the nature of distance education from an autonomous, isolated experience to a potentially social constructivist environment”. In addition to this, Brook and Oliver (2003) identified several authors who have pointed to the importance of the social phenomenon of community on online learning.
这些理论家当中大部分被认为具有社会建构主义观点，这种观点被普拉瓦特和弗洛登定义为“独特之处在于他们坚持知识的创建在于分享而非个体经验”，在这里“知识通过谈话团体中的交谈过程得以演化”（1994，第48页）。针对这个，斯泰希（1999）观察到一些研究者和作家关心在线教育学习，他们“将媒体的潜力描述为交互式环境，该环境可以让协作小组学习并可能改变远距离教育的本质，从自主的、孤立的经验转变成潜在的社会建构主义环境”。除此之外，布鲁克和奥利佛（2003）肯定了几位作家的观点，这几位作家指出了在线学习社区这种社会现象的重要性。
Developing on social constructivist perspectives, in specific reference to the online environment, Garrison and Anderson in their 2003 publication E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice put forward that “a community of learners is an essential, core element of an educational experience when higher order learning is the desired learning outcome” (p 22) and that “the idealized view of higher education, as a critical community of learners, is no longer just an ideal, but has become a practical necessity in the realization of relevant, meaningful and continuous learning” (p 23). To achieve this, however, a prerequisite is effective communication as it is this which is “at the heart of all forms of educational interaction” (p. 23) and it is the degree to which effective online communication can be facilitated in order to develop a successful community of enquiry that this paper examines.
社会建构主义的发展前景中，特别提到了在线环境，加里森和安德森在其二〇〇三年出版的《二十一世纪电子学习：一套用于研究和实践的框架》中提出了“当渴望获得高层次学习时，教育体验的核心元素，学习者社区是必不可少的”（第二十二页）以及“完美的高等教育，应当是学习者的重要社区，不仅仅是想象中的，也将变成现实中实质性的、有意义的、持续不断的学习的实际需要”（第二十三页）。然而，为了实现这一目标，前提是要有效沟通，因为这“处在所有教育交互形式的核心”（第二十三页），同时它也是为了开发成功的现实探究社区而促进有效在线沟通的程度标识。
This is not to say, however, that effective communication is the sole contributor to successful teaching and learning. The social, economic and cultural context, expectations and the attitude of teachers and learners to the process play enormous roles in defining the success or otherwise of any learning experience whether it is online or face to face. Nevertheless, while a learning experience may succeed in spite of the challenges presented by one of these factors, it is almost inconceivable that it would do so without successful communication
然而，这并不是说，只有有效沟通为成功教育学习做出贡献。社会、经济、文化背景，教师和学习者对待过程的期望和态度，在实现成功的过程中和其他任何学习体验中——无论是在线还是面对面，都发挥了巨大作用。然而，虽然学习体验也许会因为战胜这些因素当中某一个带来的困难而实现目标，但如果没有高效的沟通，则几乎是不可想象的。
Facilitating effective communication online contingent on different online learning environments
实现有效在线沟通取决于不同的在线学习环境
A considerable amount has been written about strategies and approaches for practitioners designing and teaching online courses (Hilts 1998; Palloff & Pratt 1999; Collison et al. 2000; Salmon 2000, 2002; Moore & Brooks 2000). These have provided valuable guidance and insight into how online learning technologies such as discussion boards, synchronous chat environments, email and other online applications such as instant messaging can be used. It is wholly appropriate that these publications should address these issues as the nature of asynchronous and synchronous mostly text-based communication, especially if blended with traditional modes (such as tutorials or lectures), has challenged educators to reconsider their teaching approaches within these new contexts. For example, while a seminar previously would last for two or three hours on campus and not exist at all for distance learners, many are now “always on” and educators expected to facilitate discussion. However, the focus of much of this literature has been on the instructional design and facilitation strategies for teachers engaged in the development and provision of courses within these technologies and little has approached the pedagogical impacts of the systems and tools within which this design and facilitation must take place.
有相当数量供从业者设计、教授在线课程的书籍均提及策略及方法（Hilts 1998; Palloff & Pratt 1999; Collison et al. 2000; Salmon 2000, 2002; Moore & Brooks 2000）。这些都为洞察如何使用在线学习技术如讨论版、同步聊天环境、电子邮件和其他在线应用如即时消息，提供了宝贵的指导。很好的是，这些出版物试图处理诸如基本上基于文字的同步异步交流的本质这类问题，特别是在混合了传统模式的情况下（如辅导或讲座），都要求教育者重新考虑他们在这些新环境下的教学方法。比如，以前的讨论会至少持续两三个小时，必须在校园内举行，远程学习者是不可能有份的，而现在很多人永远在线，教育者则促进讨论。然而，这些著作的重点大部分放在教学设计和为教师利用这些技术开发课程、准备课程提供便利策略上，很少触及在这种设计和便利化背后必然发生的体制和工具的教学影响。
This is particularly important as tools and systems reflect and shape communication. Derek Powazek in Design for Community (2002) describes how different tools promote different forms of interaction on the Web and in particular how these tools are situated (for example, behind administratively controlled authentication systems or controlled through karma points) impacts dramatically on the kind of interactions that take place within them. Also, as noted by Crystal (2001) the style and kind of interaction found in email, instant messaging, SMS and traditional mail vary dramatically and this has much to do with the nature of the technology. Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that as with certain physical spaces and consequent social dynamics (for example, talking alone in a small office with someone or presenting to a large group in a lecture theatre), the spaces and arrangements of technology will, dependent on context and use, impact on the kind of communication that takes place.
尤其重要的是，工具和体制反应并塑造沟通。鲍华泽在《社区设计》（2002）中介绍了不同的工具是如何在网页上促进了不同形式的互动，特别是这些工具在那些利用它们而发生的互动当中是如何施加重大影响的（比如，处在行政管理认证系统后面，或者通过游戏中的业力点数进行管理）。此外，如克里斯托（2001）所指出的，在电子邮件、即时消息、短信和传统邮件里面找到的互动，其类型与风格相差甚远，而这与这种技术的本质很有关系。因此，很合理的假设，就一定的物理空间和随之而来的社会动态而言（比如，在校办公室与某人单独会谈，或者在演讲厅给一大群人做报告），空间和技术的安排，将会取决于环境和用途，对所发生的沟通类型会有影响。
However, as previously stated, the focus has tended to be on what can be achieved through particular technologies rather than what it is that these technologies themselves can facilitate. One possible reason for this is the burden that the past has laid on our current approaches to technology and to illustrate this Liber (2004) cites Antonio Dias de Figuereido in his presidential address to the European Commission’s PROMETEUS initiative:
然而，如前所述，往往关注通过特定技术能实现什么，而不是这些技术本身能促进什么。其中一个可能的理由是过去对我们当前使用技术的方法带来的负担。为了解释这个，赖博（2004）引用费安东在其为欧盟普罗米修斯计划做的年度轮值主席讲演：
Most current developments in the use of modern technologies in education and training are… little more than relatively naïve transpositions to new environments of the much criticised educational paradigms of the past. Driven by an invisible force that calls us to the past, we seem to keep putting emphasis mainly on the delivery of information, that is, of content, almost completely disregarding interaction and activity – the context, the completely renewed social and cultural contexts that the new technologies are pleading to offer us. (de Figuereido 1998)
大多数现代技术当今在教育和培训中的使用发展……只不过是过去为人诟病的教育范式极其幼稚的转换到新环境下而已。在无形力量的驱使下，召唤我们回到过去，我们似乎一直重点关注信息，也就是内容的传递，几乎完全无视互动与活动——环境，新技术为我们提供的全新的社会和文化环境（de Figuereido 1998）。
There are also, of course, other significant reasons, besides the development or otherwise of educational paradigms. These include a lack of experience with the technology, a possible lack of understanding of the communication dynamics of OLEs, the dominance of the discussion board model as the key tool in many OLEs, the limited availability of alternative OLEs in which experimentation can occur (Paulsen, 2002) and institutional pressures to adhere to and take up new corporate funded applications.
当然，除了发展和其他教育范式，还有其他重要原因。其中包括缺乏技术经验，可能不能理解在线学习环境的动态交流方式，讨论版在许多在线学习环境成作为关键工具的优势所在，在实验中很难出现在线学习环境的可用替代物（Paulsen, 2002），在制度压力下坚持并采用新的企业资助的应用。
Arguably, with the innovation and development of information and communications technologies over the last decade, educators have, in many cases, been left with fewer choices of teaching and learning environment than our predecessors had when desks were often welded into rows. Indeed, as online learning has now long been acknowledged to be widespread (Stephenson, 2001) and with one or more courseware management systems employed as OLEs in all of Australia’s 34 Universities (Paulsen 2002) a degree of critical reflection on not only the pedagogy that we can use with these but also the pedagogy able to be effectively facilitated through the technology which has been employed would seem appropriate and necessary.
可以说，在过去十年里信息与通讯技术的发展与革新，使得教育工作者，在许多情况下对教育学习环境只拥有更少的选择，不像我们前辈在桌靠桌年代那样多。事实上，随着在线学习早已被公认为普遍现象（Stephenson, 2001），并且澳大利亚三十四所大学都部署有一到多套课件管理系统，作为在线学习环境（Paulsen 2002），不仅对我们在这些环境下所能使用的教学法产生一定程度的批判反思，而且对似乎已经适当而必要的部署的技术能有效促进的教学法也产生一定程度的批判反思。
Judging the efficacy of OLEs for supporting social constructivism and communities of inquiry
判断支持社会建构主义和探究社区的在线学习环境的功效
To set about an examination the author has taken as a guide the framework for research and practice set out by Garrison and Anderson (2003) for achieving a successful community of inquiry composed of “teachers and students transacting with the specific purpose of facilitating, constructing and validating understanding, and of developing capabilities that will lead to further learning” (p. 23). This framework states that three key elements of any community of inquiry are cognitive presence, social presence and teacher presence, and each must be considered when evaluating an e-learning experience.
为了开始一项调查，作者把加里森和安德森（2003）为实现成功探究社区安排的研究与实践框架当作指南，这一框架包括“教师与学生为了实现特定目标而合作，建构并验证理解，以及发展引导进一步学习的能力”（第二十三页）。这一框架规定，任何探究社区的三个关键要素，是认知存在、社会存在和教师存在，在评估任一电子学习体验时都必须加以考虑。
To apply this model to an OLE, it is necessary to consider to what degree the environment itself, and any inherent principles contained within its design, facilitates or obstructs the development of social, cognitive and teaching presence. As will be argued, the degree to which each of these can be achieved is dependent to a large degree on the communication tools within an OLE.
为了将此模型应用到在线学习环境中，有必要考虑这些问题的程度：环境本身、以及该模型设计中包含的固有原则、促进或阻碍了社会存在、认知存在与教学存在的发展。正如即将证明的，这些每一项得以实现的程度，在很大程度上取决于在线环境中使用的交流工具。
Social presence: Social presence is defined by Garrison, Anderson and Archer as “the ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project themselves socially and emotionally, as “real” people (i.e. their full personality), through the medium of communication being used” (2000 p. 94). Social presence is perhaps the most obvious of elements to be influenced by the medium through which learners communicate (in this case the OLE).
社会存在：社会存在被加里森、安德森和阿彻定义为“探究社区参与者，通过所使用的交流媒体，展现自己社交和情绪、让自己成为一个真正的人（即，张扬全部个性）的能力。”（2000，第94页）社会存在也许是学习者在交流过程中受媒体影响最明显的元素（在在线学习环境这个例子当中）。
Cognitive presence: Garrison, Anderson and Archer describe cognitive presence as “the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry” (2001 p. 11) and in essence an OLE could be seen to facilitate this in the degree to which it can support “sustained reflection and discourse” and also through any constraints or opportunities presented by the system which hinder or enable a learner in their attempts to “construct and confirm meaning”. In many ways this is the defining element of the educational experience and is impacted on most by the nature of discourse encouraged through an OLE.
认知存在：加里森、安德森和阿彻将认知存在描述为“学习者能够在何种程度上，通过持续的反思以及在批判性探究社区中的讨论，构建并确认意义”（2001第11页），从本质上讲，在线学习环境可以被视为促进在多大程度上支持“持续的反思以及讨论”，以及通过体制带来的任何限制或机会去阻碍或允许学习者意图“构建并确认意义”。在许多方面，这是教育体验的决定性因素，并且通过在线学习环境激发的讨论本性，对大多数人都有影响。
Teaching presence: Anderson et al. (2001) view teaching presence as “the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes”. In terms of OLE use, this can be assessed by the extent and degree to which the tools available empower the teacher to impact on the learner and learning environment and whether the teacher is able to design, facilitate and direct the learning experience towards “educationally worthwhile learning outcomes”.
教学存在：安德森等人（2001）将教学存在视为“为实现个人有意义、有教育价值的学习成果这一目的，而进行的认知和社会过程的设计、便利和方向。”通过在线学习环境的使用情况来看，教学存在可以通过可用工具帮助教师影响学生和学习环境的范围和程度来评估，以及教师是否能够设计、促进和引导学习体验朝向“有教育价值的学习成果”的范围和程度来评估。
The ubiquitous online learning environment: Is it the complete answer?
无处不在的在线学习环境：这就是最终的答案么？
Discussion boards in online learning environments
在线学习环境中的讨论版
There are currently over 50 OLE environments commercially and non-commercially available (Edutools 2004) and countless “in-house” developments in place. However, Paulsen (2002) points out that of these, over 95% of Australian Universities surveyed in 2002 were using either one of two major OLEs. While it is reasonable to argue that there are significant differences between these solutions (EduTools 2004), and indeed between versions and products offered by these companies, it is equally possible to point to similarities, especially in terms of communication tools. Both these major OLEs use a discussion board format as their primary communication tool and these tools are in functionality (if not in appearance) very similar. Both essentially allow users to post messages to a shared area or reply to existing messages in order to form a thread. Both are limited to their current environment and do not provide email, messaging or syndicated updates to users, and both are proprietary to the companies which use them. In addition to this facility both provide a synchronous communication tool, functionality to allow teachers to post announcements to students and an internal messaging component similar to email but significantly often unable to be forwarded to users email accounts.
目前有超过五十种在线学习环境，包括商业的和非商业的（Edutools 2004），以及不计其数的工作中内部开发的产品。然而，鲍尔森（2002）指出，在二〇〇二年一次调查中，超过百分之九十五的澳大利亚大学，都使用两种主流在线学习环境中的一种。虽然可以合理的认为，这些解决方案之间存在着显著差异（EduTools 2004），而且事实上在这些公司提供的版本和产品之间的确存在着差别，但同样可能的是，也存在着相似之处，尤其是在交流工具方面。这两种主要在线学习环境都使用讨论版形式作为他们主要的交流工具，这些工具在功能上（不是在外观上）非常相似。两者基本上都允许用户张贴信息，分享思路，按顺序回复已有信息从而形成会话。两者都限制在当前环境，不为用户提供电子邮件、短信和聚合更新，两者都属于使用它们的公司私有。除了这个功能，两者都提供同步交流工具，功能上允许教师向学生发布告示，内部消息组件类似于电子邮件，但是显然往往无法转发到用户的电子邮箱。
However, in considering the use of these tools, while a synchronous environment is important for the provision of fixed time and online-place communication such as online seminars or office hours it is of limited use when many of the students are enrolled in the course primarily because of its flexible and asynchronous nature. Also, while messaging or mailing systems are of use, and they serve to do little more than email or mailing list functionality, and especially when they have no connection to individual students email accounts (hence offering no “push” facility (Mack 1998)), they add little to the overall communication dynamics of the OLE. As a result, the primary tool of use within these environments is the discussion board and it is this which requires examination in order to understand the degree to which the OLEs used by most Australian universities are able to successfully facilitate the development of communities of inquiry.
然而，在研究这些工具的使用情况时，虽然对于提供固定时间和在线交流环境比如在线研讨会或办公时间，同步环境很重要，但是许多注册学生在课程中使用有限，还主要是因为其灵活性和异步特性而使用。此外，虽然短信和邮件系统有用，但是发挥的功能只比邮件和邮件列表多一点点，尤其是在它们不能连接到单个学生邮件帐户的时候（因此不能提供“推”技术（Mack 1998）），它们只为在线学习环境的动态交流增加一点点作用。这样一来，在这些环境中主要使用的工具是讨论版，它也是为了在何种程度上理解澳大利亚大多数大学使用的在线学习环境所必需的调查，这些大学使用这些在线学习环境能够成功地促进探究社区的发展。
Limitations of discussion boards in facilitating communities of inquiry
讨论版在促进探究社区中的局限性
Discussion boards can vary immensely in the kind of communication they can successfully facilitate. Yahoo! Groups (2004), for example, utilises discussion boards that function primarily as email groups. Many support sites and community areas use discussion boards for particular issues or questions, notifying users of responses to their queries through email or syndication, and the threaded message discussion board format is often used (with or without email or syndication) in comments functions on weblogs (e.g. Farmer, Levine), in online publications (Guarak et al. 2004) and some online popular media (e.g. Slashdot). However, as previously discussed, major OLEs use very similar discussion board tools containing particular key features and it is these features which facilitate and sometimes require a particular kind of behaviour from teachers and students alike, encouraging certain types of communication and discouraging others. Once the user has entered the discussion board environment, these communication features essentially allow users to read previous messages (by either clicking on a title or expanding a number of messages from just their title), post a new message to a discussion board and post a reply to a previous message (in this case forming or contributing to a thread).
讨论版在其成功促进的交流种类中，形式变化极大。以雅虎群组（2004）为例，讨论版主要用到的功能是邮件小组。许多支持网站和居民小区使用讨论版解决具体问题，通过邮件或聚合通知用户对其询问的回复。会话式消息讨论版（有或无邮件和聚合）常用于网志的讨论留言功能，也用于网上出版物（Guarak et al. 2004）和一些网上流行的媒体中（如Slashdot）。然而，如前所述，主要的在线学习环境使用非常类似的讨论版工具，同时具有独有的关键特征，正是这些特征促进了，有时候也要求了教师和学生同样的具体行为种类，鼓励某些具体的交流种类而阻碍其他一些。一旦用户进入讨论版环境，这些交流特性要求用户阅读以前的消息（要么点击标题，要么从标题展开一系列消息），张贴新消息到讨论版，回复以前的消息（在这种情况下就会形成或推动一个会话话题）。
In terms of social presence this kind of discussion board could be seen to offer little opportunity for users to “project themselves socially and emotionally, as ‘real’ people” (Garrison & Anderson 2003) as the opportunity for projection is limited and when and if it is achieved, the ability of the projector to project and appear as a “real” person is also severely limited. For example, in a face-to-face context individuals are able to project themselves in many ways, primarily through verbal and physical contributions to the people present in the area. However, in a discussion board, as well as being limited to the ability to express themselves through text, users are unable to express themselves to people in the area because there may not be any people there. A contribution can be viewed and read by one person, the whole group or nobody and because how a writer understands the intended audience of their work dramatically impacts on their entire approach to the task of writing (Abdullah 2003), this uncertainty impacts considerably on the ability of the individual to project themselves. Further to this, it is worthwhile to note the increasing use of detailed signatures on discussion board postings around the Web as this is arguably due to the need, as seen by users, to project and convey themselves as real people (the signature may contain a picture, a link to a personal website, a quote or any other identifying characteristic) and in this sense demonstrates the inadequacies of the traditional discussion board model in the same ways that the emergence of emoticons has demonstrated the inadequacies of text based email.
从社会存在的角度而言，讨论版这种类型可以被看作为用户提供了一点点机会“展现自己社交和情绪、让自己成为一个真正的人。”（Garrison & Anderson 2003）由于这种展现的机会，数量和时间都有限，就算得到了，展示者展现的能力以及呈现为真正的人的效果也极其有限。比如，在面对面环境中，个体可以通过很多途径展现自我，主要通过语言和肢体向周围的人们展示。然而，在讨论版中，以及被限制只能通过文字表达自我的地方，用户不能向周围人们展示自我，因为周围没有任何人。作品可以被个人、团体甚至没有人看到并阅读，因为作者如何理解其工作的预期观众，对其写作工作的整个方法有显著影响（Abdullah 2003），这种不确定性大大影响到个体展现自我的能力。进一步说，有必要指出，在网络上讨论版帖子中增加使用详细特征，可以说是因为有这需要，如用户所见，展示、表达自我，成为真正的人（这些特征可能包含图片、指向个人网站的链接、一段引文或任何其他明显的特征），并在此意义上展示了传统讨论版模式的不适，一如表情符号的出现显示出基于文本的电子邮件的不适一样。
In establishing cognitive presence, issues associated with the lack of any definable audience do not only affect the nature of the way in which an individual writes, but also the discourse possible and in this the ability of a writer to reflect on their thoughts and “construct and confirm” meaning. In a face-to-face context a statement or question, particularly as part of a discussion or structured class environment, generally elicits a response from someone within that area. The utterance can be directed towards an individual or a group and a following utterance can be expected. This forms the basis of any discourse in which meaning can be constructed. However, in a discussion board it is not possible to know who, if anyone, will be reading an utterance, when this will occur or, unless the user is permanently logged in to the discussion board and regularly hitting the refresh key, the moment at which this occurs. This is not dissimilar to entering a room that may or may not be frequented by the people you wish to communicate with (who will, in either case, be invisible to the user), leaving a message on the table and then returning each day to see if someone has responded to the communication. Likewise, any person responding to the message would have to visit the room each day to see if the writer or anyone else has replied to it. The room may be one of many rooms (there are frequently numerous discussion boards used in a single course) and there may be little or no reason other than to check for messages or responses that a person may have to visit it. After several days of this kind of discussion it is likely in many cases that a user will visit the room less, if at all.
在建立认知存在的过程中，因缺少确切观众而带来的问题不仅影响到个体写作方式的本质，还有可能影响到他的讲述，以及作者反思想法和“构建并确认”意义的能力。在面对面环境中，一句陈述或提问，特别是一次讨论或一趟结构化课堂环境的一部分，通常会引出一起的某人的响应。言论可以针对个人或群体，接下来的言论就可以预测。这形成了所有讨论的基础，在讨论中意义是可以建构的。然而，在讨论版中不可能知道谁，如果有人的话，会阅读言论，以及什么时候阅读，除非该用户一直登录在讨论版中并不停刷新，然后刚好碰到有人阅读。这相当于进入一间房间，里面可能有你愿意交流的人（在任何情况中，用户都看不到他们），在桌子上留下便条，然后每天回来看看是否有人回应这次交流。同样，任何要回应这条信息的人都需要每天访问这间房间，看看作者或其他人有无回复。这间房间可能是许多房间中的一间（经常有大量讨论版使用同一面板），但可能很少或根本没有理由去检查是否有人访问消息和回复。经过几天的讨论，很多情况下用户会减少访问这间房间的次数，如果他还访问的话。
In developing teaching presence in a discussion board environment the teacher has no more capacity than the learner in terms of sustaining discourse or of projecting him or herself as a “real” person. While it is likely and helpful to the teacher that they will be better known to all the learners and have official contact details, in the discussion board environment the teacher is rendered unable through the technology to exert any more influence than a student and hence faces considerable challenges in designing, facilitating or directing “cognitive and social processes”. As an experienced teacher and writer in the area of online teaching and learning mentioned to the author when discussing the use of discussion boards from a teacher’s perspective, “they just bypass me and ignore me, it’s like I’m not even there!” (Farmer 2004). If considered in a face-to-face context this is not dissimilar to enforcing the teacher to not stand, not position themselves any differently to the learners and not to use a whiteboard or any form of presentation, and while this might be seen to be advantageous by some, its impact on facilitating the development of effective teacher presence is significant.
在讨论版环境中开发教学存在的过程中，在维持讨论和将自己展示成一个真实的人方面，教师并不比学习者更有能力。虽然讨论版环境很有可能帮助教师更好地了解所有学习者，并且拥有正式的联系细节，在讨论版环境中教师被认为无法通过技术对学生施加任何影响，因而在设计、便利、引导“认知和社会过程”方面面临更大的挑战。正如一位在线教育和学习领域经验丰富的教师、作者，提及这位作者在从教师的角度讨论讨论版的使用时所说的，“他们仅仅绕过我，忽略我，就像我不存在一样！”（Farmer 2004）如果考虑到在面对面环境中，这相当于强迫教师不能站立，和学习者没有任何区别，不能使用白板或其他任何表现形式，这虽然也可看作某些优势，但这对于促进有效的教师存在的发展，影响显著。
It is important to note, however, that discussion boards have frequently been used successfully as communication tools in online learning environments (Rovai 2002, Bradshaw & Hinton 2004, Berner 2003) and hence it is inaccurate to argue that effective educational outcomes, in the form of communities of inquiry, cannot be achieved using these tools. However, while other online tools are available which facilitate different forms of communication, and while these are entirely unavailable in these dominant OLEs, it is important to examine how these could be used in similar contexts, especially, if as with weblogs, these technologies can appear to offer much in facilitating, through online communication, the effective development of a community of inquiry.
然而，重要的是注意到讨论版常常被成功用作在线学习环境的交流工具（Rovai 2002, Bradshaw & Hinton 2004, Berner 2003），并因此错误的认为，在这种形式的探究社区中，利用这些工具不能得到有效的教育成果。然而，虽然有其他在线工具可以用来促进不同的交流形式，虽然在线学习环境完全无法利用这些优势，但是重要的是研究他们如何被用于类似环境中的，特别是，如果在网志中，这些技术似乎可以提供很多便利，通过在线交流，探究社区得到有效发展。
Weblogs in facilitating communities of inquiry
网志在促进探究社区发展中的作用
Weblogs (or blogs) initially came into being as regularly updated websites that contained links to websites of interest to the author (Blood 2000). The name is seen by some to be reflective of their initial purpose of recording, storing for reference and sharing a writer’s journey around the web (logging the web) (Paquet 2002) and by others to be simply avoiding confusion with and building on the history of the term “server log” (Wikipedia 2004). Since its inception in or around 1996, weblogging has developed to be much more than a means of recording links to websites – although this sharing and saving remains a widespread use of the technology. A widely accepted definition of what exactly constitutes a weblog is “a website which contains periodic, reverse chronologically ordered posts on a common webpage” (Wikipedia 2004), and the functionality that allows this is generally that which allows users (who are generally single authors) to:
网志（或者说博客）最初的产生是作为定期更新的网站，里面包含指向作者感兴趣的网站链接（Blood 2000）。其名称被某些人视为对其最初记录存储参考文献、分享作者有关网络的日记（网络上的日志）这一目标的反应，同时其他人为了简单地避免与词汇“服务器日志”（Wikipedia 2004）发生混淆和历史关系。自从一九九六年出现以来，网志有了长足发展，不仅仅是记录网站链接，还意味着更多，尽管该技术的主要用途仍然是分享和保存。关于网志的确切构成，一个广泛接受的定义是“一个网站，在同一网页上包含有定期的、按时间倒序排列的一系列帖子”（Wikipedia 2004），所包含的功能一般是允许用户（通常是唯一的作者）：
- frequently add to their weblog through simple webpublishing technology
- 通过简单的网页发布技术频繁发表文章到他们网志
- publish items uniquely by time and date of publishing
- 发表的文章，发表日期和时间都是唯一的，便于检索
- attach to items the facility for comments to be added and for postings elsewhere that have linked to that item to be tracked back
- 很方便为帖子添加留言，在其他地方添加链接可以实现引用通告
- publish with each new posting a webfeed such as RSS or Atom.
- 每份新的帖子都发布一条订阅源，如RSS和Atom
Frequently add to a weblog through simple webpublishing technology
通过简单的网页发布技术频繁发表文章到他们网志
While weblogs are on the whole frequently published by a single author (Herring et al. 2004), there are many examples of collaborative weblogs where two or more authors publish a single weblog. However, these collaborative efforts are uncommon and often operated in a manner which befits their large audience, and as such are much more often tilted towards broadcast (which then sparks discussion) rather than dialogue between the author and readers.
虽然网志总是由一个作者频繁更新（Herring 等 2004），但也有许多合作网志的例子，两个或更多作者共同更新同一个网志。然而，这些合作工作并不常见，往往是因为读者太多才这样运营的，并且更倾向于广播（偶有火花一闪的讨论）而非作者与读者之间的对话。
Along with the increasing simplicity of tools allowing individuals to create weblogs, one of the reasons given for the explosion in the use of weblogs (Perseus 2003) is precisely the personal facility they provide. While extremely evident in diary style weblogs where subject matter usually related to publishers’ daily lives and networks are almost wholly social, in the academic and professional sphere the personal nature of weblogs has been instrumental in the extensive development of use as personal online research and knowledge management tools (Paquet 2002, Fiedler 2003), and as an ever-evolving e-portfolio and representation of the publisher to their context. In essence weblogs allow an individual to simply publish, organise and develop knowledge in their own online space.
随着允许个人创建网志的工具日益简便，促成网志使用大爆发（Perseus 2003）的一个理由恰恰是他们所提供的个人便利。虽然极其明显的是，日记体网志主题通常都和发表者的日常生活有关，网络几乎是完全社会化的，但是在学术界和专业领域，个人性质的网志已经被用于广泛的用途，如个人在线研究和知识管理工具（Paquet 2002, Fiedler 2003），并作为不断演进的电子档案以及发表者对其环境的表达。从本质上讲，网志允许个人在其自己的在线空间里简单发表、组织、开发知识。
Publish items uniquely by time and date of publishing
发表的文章，发表日期和时间都是唯一的，便于检索
Items published to a weblog may range from text to images to video or audio as the nature of the web environment and the ease of publishing allows for all of these. Crucially, whatever the format, when each item is published it is given an individual URL either relating to that specific item or the time period (most often the day) in which it was published. This allows for a reader (or listener or viewer) to record for themselves, or cite or refer other readers to that specific posting. This method of citing specific posts, along with the development of blogrolls (a displayed list of links to weblogs the publisher relates to in some way) is a significant aspect in the development of the blogosphere and particular blogospheres (Bloom 2003) and is made significant use of in the development of tools such as trackback as described below.
发表到网志上的东西范围很广，从文本到图像到视频音频，因为网络环境的本质和发表的便利性允许这样做。重要的是，无论什么格式，只要发表出来都会获得一个独立网址，这条网址要么跟发表的东西本身有关，要么跟它发表的时间（往往是日期）有关。这使得读者（或听众或观众）记录，或引用或参考给其他读者某一特定帖子。这种引用特定帖子的方法，以及网志目录（在某些方面相关的发表者的网志链接列表）的发展，在网志世界和专题网志世界的发展里是一个重要方面（Bloom 2003），并在如下所述的引用通告等工具的发展中，取得了重大用途。
Attach to items the facility for comments to be added and for postings elsewhere that have linked to that item to be tracked back
很方便为帖子添加留言，在其他地方添加链接可以实现引用通告
As each item is posted under a dedicated and specific URL it can have a number of different applications automatically applied to it; these have included automated searches for the subject matter on a search engine, the facility to email the item to another person and perhaps most importantly, the ability to comment on or discuss the item using a tool similar to a discussion board and trackback any other items on the web that have linked to that specific item.
发表的每份帖子都有一条专有的唯一的URL，有一些不同的应用能够自动作用于其上。这些应用包括自动搜索主题的搜索引擎，邮寄帖子给其他人的工具，可能最重要的是，帖子使用类似于讨论版的工具实现评论和展开讨论的功能，以及引用通告反向引用网络上连接到特定帖子的任何文章。
This comments facility tool allows for what has been seen by some to be more ad hoc discussion and comment on the items in a particular post. Frequently the commenter is able to subscribe to a webfeed or select that they be notified by email if another comment is added to the post. While these can develop into extensive discussions it is generally the case that if an individual wishes to comment at length or in depth on a post – or meme as these developing conversations are frequently referred to – they will post their thoughts to their weblog, including a link to the original post which will then be automatically harvested and presented as a link with accompanying text in the original weblogs trackback menu.
这种方便评论的工具允许在特定帖子上开展被某些人看作更为特殊的讨论和评论。评论者往往会订阅信息源或者如果有其他人给这份帖子添加评论时选择用邮件通知他们。虽然可以发展成更广泛的讨论，但通常情况是，如果个体想详尽的深入的评论帖子——这些不断发展中的会话会作为文化基因不断被人提及——他们会把他们的想法发表到自己的网志上，然后包含一条指向原来帖子的链接，原来帖子会自动获得，然后在原来帖子的引用通告选单栏里面带上一些引用文字，以链接的形式呈现出来。
Publish with each new posting a webfeed such as RSS or Atom
每份新的帖子都发布一条订阅源，如RSS和Atom
RSS, originally an acronym for RDF Site Summary but more commonly referred to as Really Simple Syndication, and the competing format Atom are XML webpages automatically published by weblogging applications that allow other individuals to subscribe through an aggregator or similar application to receive either full or in part any new items posted to that weblog.
RSS，最初是作为RDF站点摘要（RDF Site Summary）的缩写出现的，但通常更多的被认为是实时简单聚合（Really Simple Syndication）的意思，RSS及其竞争格式Atom，都是网志应用程序自动发布的XML网页，使得其他个人通过聚合器或简单应用程序订阅，接收发表到网志上的所有新文章的全文或部分。
This means that, for example, the author is able to monitor over 100 weblogs on a daily basis for any new items simply by opening an aggregator with no need to visit all the weblogs in question. Further to this, RSS is now used in the traditional publication media. The New York Times, The Guardian, The BBC, and on an academic front The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, all supplying RSS feeds allowing individuals to receive new content through an aggregator.
举例来说，笔者可以每天监视超过一百份网志的新发帖子，只需简单的打开一款聚合器而不需要一一访问这些网志。更进一步，RSS现在已被用于传统出版媒体。纽约时报、卫报、英国广播公司，学术前沿《开放与远程学习研究国际评论》，都支持RSS订阅源，让个人通过聚合器接收最新内容。
Weblogs facilitating communities of inquiry
网志促进探究社区
As with the discussion board, weblogs can vary dramatically. Many popular weblogs, for example, have no comments facilities as they frequently attract vigorous debate and often, especially with political subjects, a degree of abuse. Weblogs can also offer very limited RSS feeds, inefficient trackback tools or comments features that do not allow for notification of new postings through RSS or Atom feeds or email. However, on the whole and at the time of writing, the features supplied by the major weblog providers allow the user to communicate in the manner described above and hence an examination of the degree to which this medium can effectively facilitate the successful formation of a community of inquiry can be prefaced by an assumption of these fundamental capabilities.
和讨论版一样，网志形态变化非常大。比如，许多流行网志，都没有评论功能，因为他们往往会吸引大量激烈争辩，尤其是带有过多政治话题的时候。网志也可以提供非常有限的RSS订阅源，低效的引用通告工具或评论功能，不允许通过RSS或Atom订阅源和邮件提醒新帖子。然而，总的来说，在写作的时候，由主要网志提供商提供的功能允许用户以上述方式交流，并由此考察这一媒体能够在何种程度上有效促进成功的形成探究社区，而探究社区可以被看作这些基本功能的假设前提。
In terms establishing social presence it can be argued that weblogs offer a significant opportunity for users to project themselves as “real” people. Primarily the blogger is writing to their own area and context, designed to their liking (if the blogger is not a web designer there are a wide range of templates available with every provider) and developing on their previous postings from the online persona they have developed. Indeed, the fact that the blogger is also able to retain ownership of their writing, edit at will, refer to previous items and ideas, and control in its entirety the space and manner in which the weblog is published, can significantly augment their control over their expression and hence increase the opportunity to project and the motivation for doing so.
从建立社会存在的角度来说，可以说网志为用户提供了一个显著的机会去展示自我，展示成一个真正的人。首先，博客是在他们自己的领域和环境中写作，依照自己的喜好设计（如果博客不是网页设计者，每个提供商也提供广泛的模板使用），完善他们在拥有网上身份之前就已经开始的作品。事实上，博客也能够保留他们自己的写作权，随意写作，参考以前的作品和思路，决定发布网志的空间和方式，可以显著增强他们对其表达的控制力，并因此增加展示的机会和这样做的动机。
Further, while the primary tool of communication in weblogs is text, users are equally able to “photoblog”, “audioblog” or “videoblog” their entries and all of these kinds of projections are made to an audience that the blogger may well be largely aware of through currently evolving tools indicating subscribers to webfeeds as well as their hyperlinked “blogosphere”. Hence the blogger is able to express themselves through multiple media and assess, at the least, their immediate audience and, to an extent, their wider readership.
此外，虽然网志的主要交流工具是文字，但是用户同样也能够使用摄影网志、音频网志、视频网志发布他们的作品，而且所有这些类型的展示都是为观众而作，博客很可能在很大程度上意识到，通过当前不断发展的工具提醒订阅者信息源以及他们链接的网志圈。因此，博客能够通过多种媒体和评估方式来表达自身，至少，他们最接近观众，在某种程度上，最接近他们更广泛的读者群。
However, to simply be able to project oneself in online communication is not to be able to necessarily “construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry” as stipulated by Garrison et al. to be necessary for the development of effective cognitive presence. Weblogs undoubtedly support sustained discourse as evidenced by the development and spread of memes and the ever developing nature of the blogosphere (Bloom 2003), but a question asked by many engaging with the technology is the extent to which this discourse is reflective, critical and purposeful. While, for example, this kind of discourse is not apparent in the majority of weblogging systems developed largely for socialising among teenagers, the charge that this invalidates the medium is inappropriate due to the breadth of use of weblogging.
然而，能够在网上交流中展示自己，不一定能够“通过在批判性探究社区中反思和讨论，构建并确认意义”，正如加里森等人所要求的那样，成为有效认知存在的发展所必需的。网志无疑支持持续谈话，并得到文化基因的传播与发展的证明，以及网志圈子永远不断发展的本质（Bloom 2003）的证明，但是许多与该技术打交道的人问及一个问题：谈话在何种程度上算是反思的、批判的、有针对性的。比如，虽然在明显为社会化青少年开发的主流网志系统中，这类谈话并不呈现表面化，但是有人指责由于网志的过度使用，导致这一媒体的无效。
A weblog is a reflective medium (hence comparisons with and use as journals and diaries), and the nature of publishing to an audience in a manner that will be archived, can be referred to and for which the author maintains responsibility and ownership has developed a certain style of expression. Certain research (Herring et al. 2004) across the blogging spectrum has indicated that there is a possibility that weblogs encourage significantly more in-depth and extended writing than communication by email or through discussion board environments and yet less extensive than more formal modes of publication, producing in an academic sense a kind of discourse somewhere between the conversational and the article. The value of this is evidenced through numerous examples of academic weblogs taking advantage of weblogs in order to engage with their peers and students and to reflect on their own learning (e.g. PhDWeblogs, Crooked Timber).
网志是一种反思媒介（因此可以与期刊和日记作比较，也可替代使用），以及一发布到观众那里在某种意义上就被归档的本质，可以被称作，也是为了作者主张的责任和所有权，已经制定了一种确切的表达方式。某些研究（Herring 等 2004）通过网志系列分析，表明有一种可能性，即网志明显鼓励更深入更广泛的写作而不是通过电子邮件交流或者通过讨论版环境交流，但是远小于更为正式的出版模式，会谈和文章之间某处产生的学术意义上的谈话。其价值就是通过很多学术网志的例子得到证明，这些网志为了与其同事和学生打交道以及反思自己的学生，而运用网志的优势（如，PhDWeblogs, Crooked Timber）。
It could be argued that in terms of facilitating effective teacher presence, weblogs are even less potent than discussion boards in their ability to empower the teacher to design, facilitate or direct cognitive and social processes towards valuable educational outcomes. This argument can be based on the premise that a teachers weblog is essentially entirely separate to a learners weblog and the learner under no compulsion to read the teachers weblog. However, Clay Shirky observed in his essay “Power Laws, Weblogs and Inequality” (2003) that invariably, weblogs fall into a “balance of inequality” in the same way that any system does if allowed “the very act of choosing” which “spread widely enough and freely enough, creates a power law distribution”. Effective use of a weblog by a teacher arguably places them as an organic central node to the class, and given the simplicity with which students would be able to aggregate their webfeed and the selective “push” nature of this kind of aggregation – where webfeeds are, despite being “pulled” by the users aggregator, apparent to the end user as a pushed form of communication in much the same way as email – it is far more likely that the teacher will be able to facilitate and direct cognitive and social processes.
可以认为，就促进有效教师存在而言，在让教师能够设计、协助或引导认知和社会过程朝向有价值的教育成果方面，网志甚至比讨论版更没有效果。这一论点建立的前提是，教师网志基本上完全隔离于学习者网志，并且没有强制学生阅读教师网志。然而，佘磊在其论文《冥律、网志和不平等》（2003）中观察到，无一例外的，网志陷入了“不平等的平衡”，任何只要允许“非常的选择行为”的系统都会陷入的境地。“非常选择行为”，“传播足够广泛和自由的话，就会产生冥律分布”。教师对网志的有效使用，可以说是将其当作课堂的有机中央节点，并且尽可能简单的提供给学生，让学生能够聚合他们的订阅源，利用这类聚合的推送特性——尽管在订阅源那边是用户阅读器在“拉取”，显然，对于终端用户推送形式的交流更类似于电子邮件——更有可能的是教师将能够促进和引导认知和社会过程。
In terms of design, however, it appears in a basic sense that there is little in weblogs that can be controlled in order to reach this outcome. While discussion boards can be placed alongside content in packaged courses and with limited opportunities to use the technology in ways unforseen by the designer, a weblog is essentially free-form and there is little, besides providing templates, guidelines and facilitating the group as a whole that the teacher can do to actively impact on the technical structure of their experience. However, to introduce the metaphor of the traditional classroom, it is reasonable to ask to what extent cognitive and social processes can be impacted on and to what degree this is desirable within any context. For example, if a class is rigidly structured so that activities take place at fixed and inflexible times, contains set subject matter and students are assessed through standard matrixes, the teacher takes little consideration of the benefits of learner-driven experiences, and the vastly different requirements and approaches of individual students as stressed by Gardner (1989). Naturally this is not to say that an anarchistic structure is appropriate but rather to suggest that one of the key attributes of weblogs is that they have within them “incorporated subversion” (Squires 1999) which allows learners to express themselves and explore their context in ways independent of the original designers intentions:
然而，为了达致这一成果，从根本上说，设计似乎对网志没有什么控制力。虽然在包装好的课程中，讨论版可以和内容放置在一起，以设计师预料之外的方式使用技术的机会有限，但是网志本质上是一种自由形态，并且提供模板、指南，并促进教师群体作为一个整体对其所体验的技术结构做出积极影响。不过，为了介绍传统课堂的隐喻，要求认知和社会过程可以影响到某种程度，以及在任何情况下达到多大程度的满意，是很合理的。比如，如果一个堂课是严格组织管理的，其中的活动都有固定的不灵活的次数，包含设定好的主题，要求学生通过标准化环境的评估，教师几乎不考虑加德纳所强调的（1989）：学习者驱动体验的益处、学生个体截然不同的需求和方法。当然，这并不是说，需要一个无政府主义结构，而是要表明，网志的关键属性之一，是他们包含“内在的颠覆”（Squires 1999），这可以让学习者表达自己，在不受原初设计者的意图约束的情况下探究他们的环境：
Rather than design with constraint in mind, design with freedom and flexibility in mind … this emphasises the active and purposeful role of learners in configuring learning environments to resonate with their own needs, echoing the notions of learning with technology through “mindful engagement” (Squires 1999 p. 1)
与其在头脑中带着约束去设计，不如在头脑中自由灵活的设计……在为引起学习者自身需求共鸣、呼应通过“全心投入”（Squires 1999 p. 1）运用技术进行学习的观念而配置学习环境时，强调积极而有目的的学习者角色。
Consequently, to introduce another physical and familiar metaphor, it is not to the town-planners’ city that one might look when designing the communication tools of an OLE but rather to the “natural” city, evolving as it has done to meet the needs and actions of the individuals within it. Writing in 1965, Christopher Alexander compared the tree-like structure of the modern, designed city to the semilattice of natural cities and concluded that:
因此，为了介绍另一个现实的熟悉的隐喻，在设计在线学习环境的交流工具时，看上去它不是城市规划者设计出来的城市，而是一座“自然形成的”城市，随着满足其中个体的行为和需求而不断发展。克里斯托弗·亚历山大在其一九六五年的著作中比较了现代树状结构设计下的城市和自然发展出来的城市的半格状态，并得出结论：
For the human mind, the tree is the easiest vehicle for complex thoughts. But the city is not, cannot and must not be a tree. The city is a receptacle for life. If the receptacle severs the overlap of the strands of life within it, because it is a tree, it will be like a bowl full of razor blades on edge, ready to cut up whatever is entrusted to it. In such a receptacle life will be cut to pieces. If we make cities which are trees, they will cut our life within to pieces. (Alexander, 1965)
对于人的心灵，树是复杂思想的最简单载体。但城市不是，也不能是，必须不是一棵树。城市是生命的容器。如果这一容器切断了其中生命链的联系，由于它是一棵树，就会像一只边缘锋利如刀片的盘子，随时准备切开而不管里面装的是什么。在这样的容器里，生命将被切成碎片。如果我们按照树的结构建造城市，他们将令我们的生活支离破碎。（Alexander, 1965）
And as our teaching and learning environments increasingly move online, it is precisely this opportunity of operating as a “receptacle for life” which weblogs provide, as opposed to the delineated structure of a discussion board. This allows a teacher to implement designs, critically incorporating subversion, which can be argued to give a learner an opportunity to realistically develop “personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes”.
并且，随着我们的教育和学习环境日益迁移到网上，正是这种操作机会作为网志提供的“生命的容器”，作为讨论版划定的结构的对立面出现。这允许教师实施设计、批判性的从内部瓦解，这可以说给了学习者一个机会，去切实发展“有个人意义的和教育意义的学习成果”。
Conclusion
结论
The OLE market in Australia is dominated by two systems and as the provision online of whole courses and components of courses grows for both distance learners and those on campus, the impact of these systems on teaching and learning in our institutions grows similarly. As a result it is critical that these systems provide online communication tools that are able to best facilitate the development of communities of inquiry online. As this paper has demonstrated, if the discussion board tool, which forms the basis of asynchronous online communication in both systems, is examined as to the degree to which it is able to facilitate the development of effective social, cognitive and teacher presence, serious doubts are raised about its suitability. Under similar examination, weblog technology can be theoretically seen to more effectively meet the needs of educators seeking to establish a community inquiry online. Consequently, while discussion boards may have a role to play in the shaping of future OLEs it is arguable that this role should be complemented by the implementation, within or alongside these systems, of weblogging functionality.
澳大利亚在线学习环境市场由两套系统所统治，为远程学习者和在校学生提供所有课程和课程组件上网的数量日益增多，这些系统对于我们教育机构里的教学和学习的影响也同样增长。因此，至关重要的是，这些系统提供在线交流工具，能够最有效地促进在线探究社区的发展。正如本文已经证明的，如果讨论版工具——它形成了这两套系统的异步在线交流的基础，被验证在某种程度上促进有效社会、认知和教师存在的发展，就会引起对其适用性的严重怀疑。根据类似的检查，网志技术可以在理论上看到更有效地满足教育者寻求建立在线探究社区的这些需求。因此，虽然讨论版可能在塑造未来在线学习环境中发挥作用，但这种作用是值得商榷的，这种作用应该辅以在这些系统内部或附近执行网志功能。
References
参考文献
Abdullah, M. H. (2003) The Impact of Electronic Communication on Writing. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading English and Communication, Bloomington IN. [viewed 19 July]
Alexander, C. (1965) A City is Not a Tree [viewed 19 July]
Berner, R. T. The Benefits of Discussion board Discussion in a Literature of Journalism Course. (2003) The Technology Source [viewed 19 July]
Blood, R. (2000) Weblogs: a history and perspective [viewed 10 July]
Bloom, D. J. (2003) The Blogosphere: How a Once-Humble Medium Came to Drive Elite Media Discourse and Influence Public Policy and Elections [viewed 19 July]
Brabazon, T. (2003) Digital Hemlock: Internet Education and the Poisoning of Teaching. University of New South Wales Press
Bradshaw, J. Hinton, L. (2004) Benefits of An Online Discussion List in A Traditional Distance Education Course. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education [viewed 19 July]
Brook, C. and Oliver, R. (2003). Online learning communities: Investigating a design framework. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(2), 139-160. [viewed 19 July]
Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S. & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating Online Learning. Madison: Atwood Publishing.
Crooked Timber [viewed 19 July]
Crystal, D. (2001) Language and the Internet. Cambridge University Press
De Figueiredo, A.D. (1998) [viewed 19 July].
Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan Company
Dewey, J. (1897) My Pedagogic Creed The School Journal, 54(3), 77-80 [viewed 18 July]
Edutools [viewed 19 July]
Farmer, J. (2004) Autonomy in Online (Teaching &) Learning Environments [viewed 19 July]
Farmer, J. incorporated subversion [viewed 19 July]
Fiedler, S. (2003). Personal Webpublishing as a reflective conversational tool for self-organized learning. In Burg, T. N. (Ed) Blogtalks.(pp.190-216) Wien: Libri. http://seblogging.cognitivearchitects.com/stories/storyReader$963 draft [viewed 19 July]
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum Publishing Company [viewed 18 July]
Gardner, H. & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-9.
Garrison, R. & Anderson, T. (2003). E-Learning in the 21st Century: A framework for research and practice. Routledge
Guarak, L. et al (Eds.) (2004) Into the Blogosphere [viewed 10 July 2004]
Havalain, A. (2004) Scholarati [viewed 19 July]
Herring, S.C. Scheidt, L. A. Bonus, S. Wright, W. (2004) Bridging the Gap: A Genre Analysis of Weblogs. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences [viewed 19 July]
Hiltz, S. R. (1998). Collaborative learning in asynchronous learning environments: Building learning communities. Paper presented at the WebNet 98 World Conference of the WWW, Internet and Intranet Proceedings, Orlando, Florida.
Lawley, L. (2004) Blog Research Issues [viewed 19 July]
Levine, A. cogdogblog. [viewed 19 July]
Liber, O. (2004) Cybernetics, e-learning and the education system International Journal for Learning Technology 1(1) [viewed 19 July]
Mack, N. (1998) Push technology: “must-have” or “ho-hum?” Nets technologies [viewed 19 July]
Moore, A. B. & Brooks, R. (2000). Learning communities and community development: Describing the process. Learning Communities: International Journal of Adult and Vocational Learning, Issue No.1(Nov), 1-15 [viewed 18 July]
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace. San Francisco: Josey-Bass Publishers
Paquet, S. (2002) Personal knowledge publishing and its uses in research. [viewed 18 July].
Paulsen, M. F. Online Education Systems in Scandinavian and Australian Universities: A Comparative Study [viewed 18 July]
PhD Weblogs [viewed 19 July]
Powazek, D. (2002) Design for Community: The Art of Connecting Real People in Virtual Places. New Riders
Prawat, R. S. & Floden, R. E. (1994). Philosophical Perspectives on Constructivist Views of Learning. Educational Psychologist. 29(1), 37-48
Rovai, P. A. Building Sense of Community at a Distance, (2002) International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning
Salmon, G. 2000. E-Moderation: The key teaching and learning online, Kogan Page, London
Salmon, G. 2002. E-Tivities: The key to active online learning, Kogan Page, London
Shirky, C. (2003) Power Laws, Weblogs and Inequality [viewed 19 July]
Slashdot (2004) [viewed 19 July]
Squires, D. (1999) Educational Software and Learning: Subversive use and Volatile Design. [viewed 19 July]
Stacey, E. (1999) Collaborative Learning in an Online Environment, Journal of Distance Education, Volume 14.2 [viewed 18 July]
Stephenson, J. (Ed) (2001). Teaching and learning online: Pedagogies for new technologies. Kogan Page, London.
Perseus Inc. The Blogging Iceberg. (2003) [viewed 19 July]
Wikipedia (2004) [viewed 19 July]
Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! Groups. (2004). [viewed 19 July]
http://incsub.org/blog/2004/communication-dynamics-discussion-boards-weblogs-and-the-development-of-communities-of-inquiry-in-online-learning-environments
