Pingback in #CCK11
Jaap has referred to pingback in his latest post (which also touches on many other interesting points), and I would like to see further discussion of the extent to which pingback (and trackback) meet the needs for support of a distributed networked conversation.
While it seems to me that the basic structure provided by pingback/trackback tools is exactly what Stephen is calling for, there are problems with take-up and implementation which are preventing them from really doing the job.
With regard to take-up, not everyone implements them and so we can’t just take it for granted that a blog post in response to another will actually show up as part of the conversation. And with regard to implementation, when pingback and/or trackback are used the excerpt that shows up as a comment in the original post is often not illuminating. Is there any way to ensure that all participants implement these tools and that the excerpts are sufficient to allow the reader to decide whether or not to click through for more detail?
March 23rd, 2011 at 7:01 am
Alan,
Thanks for this thoughts on pingback. Makes me think.
In a MOOC (with regard for the M of Massive) pingback would be an interesting feature if the feature is used by many participants. The amount of participants in a MOOC would make connections in wide directions possible. But in CCK11 most persons who did sign up do not participate. The existing network in this MOOC (as I can see it on the internet) is about 50 participants. The M for Massive is really important for a MOOC to work. A comment in a blog or website (or on Facebook) is a means to connect to the network, and that is more and different from taking part in a conversation.
Regards Jaap
March 23rd, 2011 at 8:27 am
[…] In a MOOC (with emphasis on the M of Massive) pingback would be an interesting feature if the feature is used by many participants. The amount of participants in a MOOC would make connections in wide directions possible. But in CCK11 most persons who did sign up do not participate as members of the network. The existing network in this MOOC (as I can see it on the internet) is about 50 actively engaged participants. The M for Massive is really important for a MOOC to work. A comment in a blog or website (or on Facebook) is a means to connect to the network, and that is more and different from taking part in a conversation. (comment on blog of Alan Cooper) […]
March 23rd, 2011 at 12:44 pm
Massive participation, desirable perhaps, but important even necessary?How can we know one way or another without specific examples (preferably a “sufficient sampling”) of massive participation to point to?
March 23rd, 2011 at 1:49 pm
I just figured out what trackbacks and pingbacks do, having never done a blog before this course. So I think those would work well as a way to make firmer connections. That I didn’t discover what it was until Jaap pingbacked to me, about halfway through the course, suggests to me that maybe some Hints and Tips about distributed learning would be appropriate. For instance, gRSShopper picks up posts, but it doesn’t pick up connections. Nor do the discussion threads there pick up comments and discussions on the blogs aggregated.
With WordPress it seems to be quite easy to enable pingbacks/trackbacks, but I think that the Facebook end of things is always going to be in its own little box. As far as I can see, Facebook sort of operates like the world’s most closed LMS, so because I won’t sign up again, I cannot take part in the discussions there or even read what’s going on.
Thanks, y’all. 🙂
March 23rd, 2011 at 8:53 pm
With regard to the ‘Massive’ question, I will follow the discussion on Jaap’s site before making up my mind. But I lean a bit towards Vanessa’s position – even just with regard to how the learning possibilities depend on the size of the network. And with regard to pingback in particular, I think what is important is the percentage of participating blogs that use it rather than the absolute number. (ie a small network may be less powerful than a big one but its effectiveness may still be increased by effective mutual referencing – which would be enhanced by having everyone use pingback).
March 23rd, 2011 at 9:03 pm
One of the practical challenges with pingback is the lack of a very visible clear indication of whether or not it is working. With a comment we get immediate feedback even if it is being held in moderation but I do not get the same with a ping. And waiting to see if the ping shows up requires checking back later, which may easily be forgotten when the moment of inspiration has passed. So, for example both Jaap and I have used both pinging references and identical comments just to be sure. Perhaps there are some minor changes in the way pingbacks and trackbacks work (and in how blogs indicate their being activated) which would improve things – and which might then be worth recommending to blog software developers.
May 31st, 2012 at 6:12 pm
[…] own preference (expressed in CCK11) is for people to use open searchable/feedable channels for public or semi-public […]