Just What Is Being Reflected in Online Reflection? New Literacies for New Media Learning Practices

  • Jen RossEmail author


This chapter makes the case that new literacies are required when reflective practices in higher education move online. Online reflective writing is profoundly influenced by wider cultural understandings of blogging and personal disclosure and risk online. We can see in current blogging practices a convergence of the rise of the concept of personal branding (Peters, The brand called you. Fast Company, 1997; Lair et al., Manag Comm Quart 18(3):307–343, 2005), and what Scott describes as the “cultural tendency to seek out confessional narratives of self-disclosure” (Qual Res 4(1):91–105, 2004; p. 92). This convergence exposes a number of tensions between self-promotion and authenticity, between accusations of narcissism and pressures to confess, and between moral panics around privacy and safety and a growing sense that online invisibility equates to personal and professional negligence, and that the more presence the better. As students negotiate the management of personal, academic and sometimes also professional voices in blogs and reflective e-portfolios, they bring in to play writing approaches which are new not in their substance but in their modality. This chapter proposes a set of (often conflicting) norms and expectations widely associated with blogging. These cluster around themes of authenticity, risk, pretence, othering, narcissism and commodification. It explores how these are reflected in the assumptions and practices of students and teachers, and goes on to argue for greater attention to be given to the nature of online reflective writing, and a more explicit and critical engagement with the tensions it embodies.


Reflective Practice Literacy Practice Moral Panic Personal Brand Reflective Writing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Barrett, H., & Carney, J. (2005). Conflicting paradigms and competing purposes in electronic portfolio development. Retrieved 22 September, 2011, from:
  2. Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanič, R. (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Bayne, S. (2005). Deceit, desire and control: The identities of learners and teachers in cyberspace. In Land R. & Bayne, S. (Eds.), Education in Cyberspace. London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  4. Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2011). ‘Digital Native’ and ‘Digital Immigrant’ Discourses: A Critique. In R. Land, & S. Bayne (Eds.), Digital difference: perspectives on online learning (pp. 159–170). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  5. Bortree, D. (2005). Presentation of self on the Web: An ethnographic study of teenage girls’ Weblogs. Education, Communication & Information, 5(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  7. boyd, D. (2001). Faceted Id/entity: Managing representation in a digital world. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  8. boyd, D. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 119–142). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  9. Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (1998). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bruns, A., & Jacobs, J. (2007). Uses of blogs. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  11. Buffardi, L., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking web sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(10), 1303–1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Butler, P. (2006). A review of the literature on portfolios and electronic portfolios. Palmerston North: Massey University College of Education. Retrieved 22 September, 2011, from:
  13. Carpenter, R. (2009). Boundary negotiations: Electronic environments as interface. Computers and Composition, 26, 138–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carrington, V. (2007). ‘I’m Dylan and I’m not going to say my last name’: Some thoughts on childhood, text and new technologies. British Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Castells, M. (1999). Critical education in the new information age. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  16. Clegg, S., Hudson, A., & Steel, J. (2003). The emperor’s new clothes: Globalisation and e-learning in higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(1), 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Creme, P. (2005). Should student learning journals be assessed? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(3), 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Curtain, T. (2004). Promiscuous fictions. In Gurak, L. J. Antonijevic, S., Johnson, L., Ratliff, C., & Reyman, J. (Eds.), Into the blogosphere: Rhetoric, community, and culture of weblogs. Retrieved 22 September, 2001, from:
  19. Devas, A. (2004). Reflection as confession: Discipline and docility in/on the student body. Art Design and Communication in Higher Education, 3(1), 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Doctorow, C. (2006). Disney exec: Piracy is just a business model. Boing Boing. Retrieved 22 September, 2001, from:
  21. Duffy, P., & Bruns, A. (2006). The use of blogs, wikis and RSS in education: A conversation of possibilities. Presented at the Online Learning and Teaching Conference 2006, Brisbane.Google Scholar
  22. Dutta, S. (2010). Managing yourself: What’s your personal social media strategy? Harvard Business Review, 2010, 1–5.Google Scholar
  23. Dyson, E. (1998). Release 2.1: A design for living in the digital age. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  24. Efimova, L., & Grudin, J. (2007). Crossing boundaries: A case study of employee blogging. Proceedings of the Fortieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-40). Los Alamitos: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  25. Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2). Retrieved 22 September, 2001, from:
  26. E-Quality Network (2002). E-quality in e-learning manifesto. Presented at the Networked Learning 2002 Conference, Sheffield. Retrieved 22 September, 2001, from:
  27. Freidrich, B. (2007). Fictional blogs: How digital narratives are changing the way we read and write. Cedar Rapids, IA: Coe College.Google Scholar
  28. Goodfellow, R., & Lea, M. (2007). Challenging E-learning in the university: A literacies approach. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (2004). Advances in research on networked learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  30. Guadagno, R., Okdie, B., & Eno, C. (2008). Who blogs? Personality predictors of blogging. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1993–2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hargreaves, J. (2004). So how do you feel about that? Assessing reflective practice. Nurse Education Today, 24, 196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Holbrook, D. (2006). Theorizing the diary weblog. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  33. Holquist, M. (2002). Dialogism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Hope, A. (2008). Internet pollution discourses, exclusionary practices and the ‘culture of overblocking’ within UK schools. Technology, Pedagagy and Education, 17(2), 102–113.Google Scholar
  35. Hughes, J., & Purnell, E. (2008). Blogging for beginners? Using blogs and eportfolios in teacher education. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Learning. Lancaster: Lancaster University. Google Scholar
  36. Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  37. Jacobs, J. (2003). Communication over exposure: The rise of blogs as a product of cyber-voyeurism. Paper presented at ANZCA03 Conference, Brisbane.Google Scholar
  38. Jones, C., & Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2009). Analysing networked learning practices. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, C. Jones, & B. Lindström (Eds.), Analysing networked learning practices in higher education and continuing professional development. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  39. Kimball, M. (2005). Database e-portfolio systems: A critical appraisal. Computers and Composition, 22, 434–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lair, D. J., Sullivan, K., & Cheney, G. (2005). Marketization and the recasting of the professional self. Management Communication Quarterly, 18(3), 307–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lanham, R. (2007). The economics of attention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  42. Lea, M., & Street, B. (2009). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. In F. Fletcher-Campbell, G. Reid, & J. Soler (Eds.), Approaching difficulties in literacy development: Assessment, pedagogy and programmes. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Lillis, T. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation, desire. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing as ‘Academic Literacies’: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design. Language and Education, 17(3), 192–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Macfarlane, B., & Gourlay, L. (2009). The reflection game: Enacting the penitent self. Studies in Higher Education, 14, 455–459.Google Scholar
  46. Mallan, K. (2009). Look at me! Look at me! Self-representation and self-exposure through online networks. Digital Culture and Education, 1(1), 51–66.Google Scholar
  47. McKenna, C. (2005). Words, bridges and dialogue: Issues of audience and addressivity in online communication. In R. Land & S. Bayne (Eds.), Education in cyberspace (pp. 91–104). London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  48. Moon, J. (1999). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Nardi, B., Schiano, D., & Gumbrecht, M. (2004). Blogging as social activity, or, would you let 900 million people read your diary? Computer Supported Cooperative Work ’04, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  50. Peters, T. (1997). The brand called you. Fast Company, 10. Retrieved 22 September, 2001, from:
  51. Poster, M. (2006). Information please: Culture and politics in the age of digital machines. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Reed, A. (2005). ‘My blog is me’: Texts and persons in UK online journal culture (and anthropology). Ethnos, 70(2), 220–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rein, I., Kotler, P., Hamlin, M., & Stoller, M. (2005). High visibility: Transforming your personal and professional brand. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  54. Ross, J. (2011). Traces of self: Online reflective practices and performances in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(1), 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Russell, D., Lea, M., Parker, J., Street, B., & Donahue, T. (2009). Exploring notions of genre in ‘academic literacies’ and ‘writing across the curriculum’: Approaches across countries and contexts. In C. Bazerman, A. Bonini, & D. Figueiredo (Eds.), Genre in a changing world. Perspectives on writing (pp. 459–491). Colorado: WAC Clearinghouse/Parlor Press.Google Scholar
  56. Scott, S. (2004). Researching shyness: A contradiction in terms? Qualitative Research, 4(1), 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simon, B. (2005). The return of panopticism: Supervision, subjection and the new surveillance. Surveillance and Society, 3(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
  58. Stefani, L., Mason, R., & Pegler, C. (2007). The educational potential of e-portfolios: Supporting personal development and reflective learning. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Walker Rettberg, J. (2008). Blogs, literacies and the collapse of private and public. Leonardo Electronic Almanac, 16(2–3), 1–10. Retrieved 22 September, 2001, from:

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Education, Community and Society, University of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations