The document summarizes a public discussion that took place on weblogs about the use of new technologies in education. Key points of consensus from the discussion include: access to technology is often not the real issue but treated as one; many innovative tools like blogs are free; and educators still need to study emerging technologies that are shaping culture, whether adopted or not. The discussion is compared to traditional peer review processes, noting differences like public comments, open participation, and consensus building in peer-to-peer review versus private reviews and gatekeeping in traditional models. Questions are raised about using peer-to-peer review in scholarly journals and classrooms.

1. Coalition-Building on Weblogs: Negotiating Innovation and Access Clancy Ratliff, University of Minnesota CCCC 2006 [email_address]

6. Identities of everyone are usually known Blind review Comments public for the benefit of all Comments intended for the author only Open participation, benefit of both expert and nonexpert perspectives Designated reviewers Knowledge making and consensus building Gatekeeping Multi-way feedback process One-way accept/reject/ revise and resubmit P2P Review Traditional Scholarly Peer Review