Saw my supervisor and found out my extremely long and mouthful and earful title has been shortened. It was written in the letter which I ignored when I received. With the ignored attitude, I just took a fleeting glimpse of the content not knowing this happen.
Now the extremely short and simple and “smart” title is
PERSONALISED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT THROUGH WEB-BLOGGING AMONG TEACHER TRAINEES.
The missing items are STUDENTS ENGAGEMENT, and HIGHER ORDER THINKING. It seems that omiting students engagement might actually save me but taking out HOT is putting me in a fix. Supervisor mentioned that HOT can still be the thing we are looking at. Sorry. But if this is the thing (one of the major things) I am looking at, shouldn’t be it not in the title. Again, the title mirrors the content.
Apparently, my title was reviewed twice by non-related to my major committee. The previous title was too limited ( I prefer to look at it as specific) while the new title encourages more room for adding things. To me, that’s not good news. Sigh! Here I am all this time thinking specific is better. Oh well, I got to make do what is given as I have a new commitment now.
By the way, here is something non-related to the content, I like the new wordpress design. Super cool.
Ok back to the issue. After a long 2 hours discussion (not finished yet as the discussion was interrupted by a ^#*#&*@# phone call), there are many things I need to clean and get it clear. No academic definition on PL. I agree here. Somehow my definition is very loose.  Interview questions need to be cleared and show where the direction I am heading.  List down the interview questions. Write as many possible to prevent brain stuck on the interview itself.  Everything, I mean every micro thing needs justification.  Bring a mp3 recorder every single time you see your supervisor.
–abba, beatles, bee gees, buble, carpenters, johnny cash-