First, I came across this digital dictionary in the spring issue of Computers and Composition:
http://candcblog.org/digitaldictionary/ I think it might be a useful resource for our own (and students') developing expertise with 2.0 technologies and terminologies.
In the comments I received on my last post, both respondents addressed the question of anonymity in student comments. I guess I raised this as a question for two reasons: 1)in a more public digital zone, like the NYT, people comment on ideas and writing anonymously all the time and 2) I'm interested in how writing for the public makes students more accountable for their composing choices. It makes sense that commenters should be just as accountable in the classroom community. My hold out question on this topic is: can anonymity encourage any risk taking with writing and response that we don't get from comments with a name attached? I won't try it with the journal, but perhaps some kind of anonymous responses to readings or peer writing that are turned into the instructor would be an interesting way to explore this.
In regards to learning styles and the spectrum of introversion to extroversion, I am seeking articles and examples of reading and writing activities in the c 2.0 style that are multimodal (and thereby appeal to different learning styles). Most of what I am finding is about addressing learning styles online, but that's not quite what I'm looking for. Here is a favorite example that I think goes a step further, and could be digitized:
Here is something I want to explore more: http://bookbuilder.cast.org/ around teaching reading online. Not sure if this can work in community format yet.
And here is something I am reading about teaching reading from the same organization: http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes/chapter4_3.cfm