Process: Literature review outline

I received feedback on my literature review outline today. It was generally well-received and peer comments centered around 1) resequencing it and 2) restructuring based on one of two approaches.

First things first, I revised my research question to: "Are there differences between teacher reflection in blogs and threaded discussion forums in PIHnet? If so, what are the quantitative and qualitative differences?" I had organized my outline to cover the definitions of blogs, their broad range of use, their specific use in education, the pros and cons of blogs, the sociotechnical affordances of blogs (e.g. reflection), the importance of reflection in teaching practice, and a discussion of current research on educational blogging.

The first recommendation was that reflection could be the central theme rather than blogging. As one reviewer put it, I had organized the outline with "a tool in search of a function" approach. By focusing on reflection, I could restructure the outline with "a function in search of a tool" approach.

This stuck me with an interesting problem. With the first approach, I might be able to sell the research topic since blogs are hot right now. However, the second approach focuses on an instructional and learning strategy. Blogs may come and go, but the use of reflective activities are likely to be around much longer.