Starting From Shared Definitions

I was reading a report recently that talked about online learning. As I made my way through, it became clear that the report was conflating (or ignoring differences between) many different "types" of online learning (online learning for distance education, online learning for lifelong learning, online learning for matriculated students on campus, completely online programs, online learning as part of a blended course, etc.). In my mind, the distinctions between different types are not trivial, and have ramifications for how one might proceed. 

We (usually) know what we mean when we use a phrase or example, but that doesn't ensure that the reader or listener will approach the material with the same background or assumptions. If I use a term like "meaningful educational experiences" to mean wrestling with philosophical questions such as the defining a good life and you take it to mean job training, we are probably setting ourselves up for miscommunication.  

The nuance of adjectives can change over time (Is "a reasonably fast internet connection" circa 2006 the same speed as "a reasonably fast internet connection" in 2018?). I recall trying to find some suggestions for dealing with "small" sample sizes in experimental research, and was shocked to come across papers that categorized anything below 100 as "small." 

Obviously we can't spend all of our time defining each and every term and adjective that we will use -- that would lead to infinite regress. (Communication relies on at least some shared expectations and understandings.) But making sure "everyone is on the same page" in terms of important terms at the outset of a report or discussion is not a tired business cliche, it is actually good advice.