So Linkedin have attempted to move into extended writing, encouraging members to write articles (blogs in fancy clothes). Given my recent spate of writing, I thought I should give it a try. But what did I want to say, why was I saying it and who was I saying it for? For me Linkedin is a static community, it’s a network that exists when I want/need it but it’s not something I actively engage with. I’m curious to see how the articles will play out. From my perspective, I’m most interested in reading works by those working in my field. I’m interested in discussions about research and about the application of research in practice. I’m also interested in the crossovers between teaching and research. So if this is what I want to read, perhaps this is what I should write? But do I have anything worthy to say? I’m still not sure to be honest but I did post an article about teaching (you can see the re-post here) and some people did read it. It was more of a conversation piece (rant) about something that I’m passionate about and I’m not sure it really says anything interesting nor does it make a contribution to knowledge. Perhaps I’ll take it down shortly and re-think what I want my articles to say about me.
But it did get me thinking again about this blog. What does it say about me? Should I reframe it as a professional blog and have work-based posts only? Or perhaps that should be the domain of Linkedin articles? Do I need two blogs, one for work/research related posts and one for the ‘rest of my life’ posts? Would I physically be able to keep up two blogs, or would I even have enough interesting crap to fill each post?! Who knows, but I don’t have time to try. It is here that I put my stake in the ground and say ‘I’m a researcher (but I’m human too)’. I love research and I love my work. I will continue to write about the ups and downs of academia, to share the bits I think are worthy. But I will also fill the blog with the minutiae of my life, because I’m human too.