Evaluation of the digital process

I found the process I have implemented in the research and writing of this blog to be quite different than that of previous academic efforts. The methods included in this approach led to a much broader exploration of the topic. I learned a lot of things that I wouldn't have otherwise. This also means it was harder to figure out my direction. In my case, as well as others, additional research caused me to shift my focus and question my ideas. But when I got to my conclusion I think it was much more well-informed and had greater general value. The process also yielded some secondary conclusions and other food for thought. I think with a more traditional academic paper approach, I tend to create a more focused, straightforward product. And I think the language is tighter and more professional that way. But it's somewhat limiting. I think the traditional method is better for developing good style, but the online, open-scholar approach is better for generating ideas and learning more things. It makes it possible to learn collaboratively and contribute something to others. Some of us were able to initiate dialogue on our topics with new people. In this way, this approach has the potential to fulfill more of the learning outcomes of the course and the university. Although I think for myself as a digital scholar, and for this as a program, it's a work in progress. Like the process I had to go through, it's exploring how to realize these possibilities. But from what I've learned I think many of this ideas will be relevant in the future of intellectual discourse.