As I have designer priveleges in WebCT (move over Armani!) I can see some data which is not available to others. Given the problems with interpreting statistics its probably just as well. Here is an extract from the WebCT site tracking - but what does it show?

The first column of numbers shows messages which I haven't read yet, the second column of numbers shows the messages which I have read. There are four to six researchers in each set and its clear that sets 1 and 2 have been very busy sending messages.

This is an example of where one set of data tells only a small part of the story, so here's a bit more:
The brief to researchers in Ultraversity's online undergraduate degree was to form learning sets to peer review their research findings, then to decide between themselves how best to communicate. One option was to use the WebCT sets. Researchers have other software available to them.

Initially it might be assumed that sets 1 and 2 have used WebCT very effectively for their peer reviews, but the numbers don't tell us about the quality of messages or whether the other sets have decided to use an alternative to WebCT. Perhaps the only safe type of assumption is that at least one person in Set 1 has sent 97 messages since the start of the module!

Without even considering the pitfalls of interviews and questionnaires, I can analyse other data available to me in WebCT to fill out the story - but first I'd better clarify the question: is there evidence of the development of a learning community in WebCT?