When I’m not trying to figure out how to resolve my technorati update issues (my feed isn’t updating, despite a number of pings), I’ve spent some time reviewing the standard literature about blogging. It all makes sense – create a niche market, blog about what you know, keep to regular posting and you’ll slowly develop a readership. After all, no one wants to spend time formulating a post and publishing it if no one is reading.

I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis that do just as the “experts” advise. I find myself gravitating towards blogs with a purpose – politics; military; eLearning; learning and development; and the occasional off-the-wall personal journal are all daily staples.

Unfortunately, I’m full of excuses as to why I can’t pick a topic and stick with it.

I’m a news junkie and devour as much as I can from a variety of political spectrums, but there are already many amazing current events and Canadian politics related blogs. Besides, I don’t have the patience to devote my little grey cells to the intricacies of Canadian politics on a daily basis. I’d quickly drive myself mad.

I’m a military spouse and have lived on bases all over the country. When it comes to the military I can be opinionated, defensive and exasperating. Writing about this aspect of my life would have me searching for the nearest exit within a week – never mind what it might do to anyone who reads these posts.

I travel with work and for pleasure all over the globe. I keep travel journals and photo galleries chronicling some of the experiences. Sometimes there are months between the trips, it would make for a boring blog (or one that’s not often updated) if I dedicated it to travel alone.

I don’t have enough confidence in my own abilities to handle a blog dedicated to exploring eLearning or instructional system design (ISD). I’m still struggling to understand my own philosophy of learning and how my existing mental models influence my opinions relating to preferred methodology. I may dabble in an occasional post, but I’m not ready to jump into the deep end of the pool just yet.

At the moment, the one thing that’s been taking up a large portion of my time, brain power, and spirit that could fit the bill is a topic I just can’t bring myself to write about. I’m sure it would fulfill a niche market and might even be cathartic. I’m avoiding the topic for many reasons, not the least of which is that I just don’t have the emotional strength to write about home care for a palliative cancer patient. I struggle sending email updates to family members. I can’t imagine allowing the public in to read about our daily struggles and losses.

I guess I’ll just continue along the current path, posting willy-nilly about whichever topic strikes my fancy. Enjoy.

Technorati Tags: technorati, blog topics

I adore Stephen’s Web. I’m addicted to his OL Daily newsletter. It feeds me things to chew on. I’m well nourished thanks to his dilligence.

Today, Stephen included a reference and link to Charles Nelson’s blog post Plagiarism: Another Perspective. This led me to another of Charles’ posts titled Plagiarism: Perspective and Context.

I’ve always found the topic of plagiarism fascinating. Since participating in ethics discussions at U of A, the topic has garnered more and more of my attention. However, I think a lot of my interest in plagiarism and it’s changing faces has to do with a lack of understanding about just what is and isn’t considered plagiarism. I know when I first attended university (over 12 years ago), there were no formal discussions in class about what it was, how to avoid it (proper citation methods) and where you could review the written university policy. In fact, it just didn’t seem talked about at all.

Fast forward to 2004 and I had returned to university. The field of study was different the second time round, so I was instructed to shift from MLA to APA citation styles in papers. Despite this shift in writing style, there was still no explaination of what plagiarism is, etc. There was, however, a huge emphasis on whether or not you got the capitalization correct in the references list at the end of the paper. *bangs head against wall* You can imagine the confusion that ensued when I asked how to go about referencing a conclusion made in an earlier paper (my a-ha moment if you will) in another paper later in the year.

So, what’s all of this got to do with Charles’ posts? In Plagiarism: Perspective and Context, Charles’ writes:

If university folks can disagree on the nature of plagiarism, then it seems likely that our students with their digital background will find the notion foreign — not incomprehensible, just foreign.

He’s referencing on-line plagiarism in his statement, but I think it could just as easily cover any form of it both inside and outside of the classroom. With the current state of confusion surrounding what is and is not considered plagiarism, and the varying shades of grey associated with the determination, it’s no wonder that I and many others struggle with the topic and are drawn to it moths to a flame.

If plagiarism could be clearly defined, outlined, taught from a young age and the definition made readily available to all, perhaps it would become less common rather than a seemily daily event. If nothing else, it may help reduce the amount of unintentional plagiarism – which in an academic world can be just as damaging to a person’s reputation and further study as intentional plagiarism – occurring today.

Side note: If anyone is aware of the proper method of citing your own unpublished work in papers please let me know. I ended up citing it as if it were a published article/paper but never did get clear direction at the time of writing. I’m still very fuzzy on the rules for avoiding self-plagiarism. Also, I’ve always wanted to know how something can be considered self-plagiarism if the content has never been published (though it has been reviewed and assigned a grade) and I’m still the copyright holder?

h/t Stephen’s Web

Technorati Tags: plagiarism, citation

Harold Jarche, who has a habit of making me think and debate myself, commented on yesterday’s rant. His comment was, as always, well thought out and engaging. Thus I’m using a part of it to springboard into today’s post:

However, it is up to the Canadian public to continue to engage our elected officials in a real debate about where we should use military force (not just because it’s UN-sanctioned) and what size and type of a force we need to maintain.Neither blindly supporting our troops nor blindly waving the peacekeeping flag will help us or our soldiers in the long run. Soldiers and civilians must clearly understand what we are fighting for and how it is in our national interest. There’s a lot of learning left to do.

I’ll admit, I am going to tend to side with the “blindly supporting our troops” when the government sends them somewhere because I’ve got a personal connection with those we’re sending overseas. I’m a military spouse and come packaged with all the bias that entails. However, that doesn’t mean that we don’t discuss why we’re there, what it appears we’re trying to do, and whether or not we think it’ll make any difference on a global scale in the long run at our dinner table and around our backyard fire pit.

I guess my concern comes from the fact that people don’t really seem to be debating. Those I’m exposed to (face-to-face) seem to just be randomly stating that troops should be removed – no ifs, ands or buts about it – or that we need to switch focus to peacekeeping because “it’s what we’re known for“. It’s been my experience that if I attempt a debate or any form of f2f discussion on this topic, no one seems to have formulated any alternative suggestions to deal with the situation in the middle east (or anywhere else we’re involved for that matter).

Sure, we need to engage politicians (elected and not) in debate about the current state and future plans of the CF. I just don’t see the calls for troop withdrawls or a switch to peacekeeping as a debate. Perhaps I’m blinded by my close connection to the CF, but it’s not a debate if the argument is made up of “because I said so” or “because that’s what we’re good at” statements. Those calling for change need to be able to articulate an argument as much as those who support the current actions in Afghanistan are expected to.

Debate is a necessity. We need to be questioning why we’re there and where we see ourselves going. We also need to delve deeper into our understanding and definitions of ourselves (individually and as citizens in a global sphere) and how these mental models are impacted by both what we say and do. If we’re not questioning things, then we’re not doing anyone any use.

Technorati Tags: peacekeeping, canadian forces, debate

Earlier today, I came across a Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute article titled “Deprogramming the cult of peace” and written by Mark Entwistle. While I’d encourage everyone to read the complete article, I think particular attention needs to be paid to the following paragraph:

The idea of peace is dangerous because it is an enabler. It allows us to underestimate the hard work required to earn success in confronting conflict, and a safe haven to hide from reality. It is a distraction because it leads us to false conclusions on the basis of something that does not exist. While we wait for peace, conflict steeps. The greatest threat to any chance of managing our way out of conflict is the idea that peace just happens by willing it.

As I wrote previously, anytime a member of the CF dies in Afghanistan lately, someone – often a politician – is given media time and attention where they decry the combat role of our troops. While I suspect that combat isn’t exactly what Mr. Entwistle has in mind when he writes of the need for conflict management on a global scale, I don’t think the increasing calls for pulling out of the current mission in Afghanistan or a shift to the traditional peacekeeping activities (as understood by members of the general public) is in the best interests of Canada.

Which makes me wonder why questions aren’t being asked of those clamouring for a return to the glory days of Canadian peacekeeping or the removal of troops from Afghanistan? Why isn’t anyone focusing on how these recent calls for peace, peacekeeping or removal of Canadian troops from theatre have not been accompanied by any sort of suggestion or roadmap for obtaining this elusive “peace”? Who in these groups have an outline for how one can possibly mount a successful peacekeeping mission in the midst of an armed conflict?

If they’ve got a better plan, I’d love to see it. If it’s logical, I’d likely support it. However, if we don’t have any plans in place and jump willy-nilly onto the “Canadian soldiers are peacekeepers” bandwagon, we’re back to deluding ourselves.

I’ll admit I do tend to rant a bit about the fact that some Canadians seem to be willing to don their rose coloured glasses and chant the mantra of “Canada, the dedicated peacekeeper and referee on a world stage”. People seem to bandy statements of this nature around in newspapers and opinion pieces, but in recent years this has been a far cry from an accurate representation of the facts. Even worse, Canadians have been known to sit back on a high horse and judge other countries and cultures harshly without being willing to look closely at ourselves. It’s time to remind ourselves that those sitting in glass houses shouldn’t be throwing stones…

It’s time to reconsider Canada’s place in the world stage and our impression of ourselves. Many citizens of recent generations are – to borrow a phrase from Top Gun – writing cheques we can’t cash on bank accounts started by Canadian soldiers in the first and second world wars. If we’re not willing to support the current mission in Afghanistan, maybe it’s time for Canada and our “peace loving citizens” to take a step forward and finally (publically) acknowledge our growing lack of relevance and moral superiority on the world stage.

h/t owed to Darcy over at Dust My Broom for pointing out Marc Entwistle’s article.

Technorati Tags: peacekeeping, canadian forces

A few days back I was ranting about the need to support our troops, the PRT (provincial reconstruction team) and the Afghanistan mission in general. Today over at rants of a former guttergirl, there’s a beautiful post (titled Red Fridays – sorry, I can’t find a perma-link to it) containing a description of Cdn Forces members leaving Trenton, On.

Peacekeeping Day is commemorated tomorrow, August 9th. You can access the .pdf host kit and learn more about it.

Technorati Tags: canadian forces, peacekeeping, support our troops