New Media – Page 6 – Digital Writing, Digital Teaching

Reflections on Project WRITE’s Summer Institute

Today marked the end of our Project WRITE summer institute, and there were both smiles and tears to be found amongst the many of us who shared our writing this morning and our professional learning this afternoon. My partner, project leader Liz Webb, structured an amazing week, given all that we had to do from evaluating student work to preparing a lesson or series of lessons for the school year and sharing a piece of personal writing. Each morning began with one of her writing starts, and the teachers are working together to produce a book through lulu.com. Then, we would spend some time evaluating student work with the NWP’s analytic writing continuum, and have time for professional reading groups. Finally, I would introduce a short tech topic each afternoon (digital storytelling, Zotero, and SlideShare, respectively) and teachers had the option to continue working on the new technology, or work on their own curriculum plan.

Needless to say, this semi-structured playtime offered a number of teachers who have felt hesitant, if not a bit resistant, to technology all year the opportunity to create some amazing products. I am impressed with the scope of the lessons as well as the ways in which teachers integrated technology, in small and large ways. A few of the key lessons that came out this week:

Continuing to differentiate between a blog and a wiki, as well as the purposes for them. Some teachers were finally able to really absorb Edublogs, digging into the overall design of their site, working with widgets, and figuring out categories for organization. Others wanted to stick with wikis, which worked out well, too, to talk about the overall design and organization of a site. In each case, we talked about purpose and audience, considering who would be doing the most posting, commenting, and reading, and making decisions from there.
Digital storytelling catches like wildfire. Always. I introduced it on Monday, beleiving that it might be the straw that broke the camel’s back. Instead, a number of teachers took to it. This raised (and continues to raise) a series of questions for us about fair use, copyright law, Creative Commons, and how to invite students to build on, cite, and ethically use the work of others. We discussed how some uses may be fair within your classroom walls, but how posting to YouTube made it a whole different game. Suddenly, many teachers this week became hyper aware of this, and I think that it will be an interesting thread that continues into our fall PD.
Finally, having time, time, time. We were supposed to have this week of intro last summer. For a variety of reasons, we didn’t. And, while I don’t regret the work that we have done or the many successes that we have had, I do wonder what we might have been able to accomplish over the school year if we had been able to kick off last summer with an entire week of work like this. Ah… a lesson for a future PD experience.

All in all, we enjoyed our time together, minus the extreme heat in Brody Hall. I think that a number of the teacher grew in leaps and bounds, and we all grew in some way or another. I was very impressed with the transparency of technology today in our final read around, where a digital recorder was passed from person to person, pages were brought up on the wiki, and images were shown to complement the work being read. And, we hardly had a hiccup.

So, thanks to everyone in Project WRITE for a great week. We are looking forward to getting the data from your students plugged into our spreadsheet so we can see, statistically, if there was growth in your writers above and beyond what we would have normally expected. The professional learning was a critical part of this project, and now we need to see if we are “taking it to the kids.”

Next week, RCWP’s version of “Tech Matters.”

This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Naming and Knowledge-Making

This recent article from eSchool News caught my attention and gave me pause to think about the course I am designing for the fall, ENG 460.

Top News – Google unveils online reference tool

For better or worse, Wikipedia–the online reference site that lets anyone add to its ever-growing body of knowledge–has changed the nature of internet research. Now Google is taking the wraps off a free internet encyclopedia of its own, designed to give people a chance to show off–and profit from–their expertise on any topic.

The service, dubbed “knol” in reference to a unit of knowledge, had been limited to an invitation-only audience of contributors and readers for the past seven months.

Now anyone with a Google login will be able to submit an article and, if they choose, have ads displayed through the internet search leader’s marketing system. The contributing author and Google will share any revenue generated from the ads, which are supposed to be related to the topic covered in the knol.

My interest here is in trying to figure out what value “naming” the author of a “knol” has in comparison to the “anonymous collaborators” that compose Wikipedia entries. I am not so much interested in talking about the authority question, as the one knol that I read on toilet training (a topic of conversation in my house right now!) seemed to be authoritative — and it cited sources — but I couldn’t figure out anything about the author. Also, the main author can open up a knol to collaborators, but not just anyone can chime in. It seems like you retain copyright, too. Finally, one of the stated purposes of the project is to get different people posting knols on the same topic, so having the one, authoritative knol is not necessarily going to happen.

Oh, and it looks like you will eventually be able to serve Google ads on your knol to, I assume, make money.

So, I wonder what this new form of knowledge production will do to the idea of open content. People are free to spend their time and energy wherever they want, be it Wikipedia, Knol, or some other online community. But, I wonder what this idea of sharing one’s knowledge by authoring a knol will do for authors, readers, scholars, and others. By “naming” the author, and being able to verify their credentials, will we feel better about the information presented? Or, does the process that a Wikipedia article goes through still provide more of a peer review process that checks facts and clarifies ideas?

It will be interesting to see how Knol unfolds in the next few months. I may make it part of my students’ final project — post a knol on your topic of independent study. We’ll see how they react to that idea…

CMU Podcast Interview on Technology Literacy

Earlier this month, one of my students, Lynette Seitz, and I were interviewed by Heather Smith, CMU’s Assistant Director of Media Relations about technology literacy and our work in ENG 315 this semester.

I appreciate her invitation to record this podcast and it was wonderful to have Lynette’s voice in there, too, as a pre-service teacher who is thinking about incorporating digital writing into her classroom.

You can get the podcast through CMU’s channel in iTunes.

Brown Bag Presentation: Multiliteracies in Composition

Last Friday, I was invited to lead a “brown bag” session for my English department’s composition program. Titled “Multiliteracies in Composition,” we focused our pre-reading on an article about a second-year college composition course developed at Michigan Tech called “Revisions.” Details can be found in the following article:

Lynch, Dennis A., and Anne Frances Wysocki. “From First-Year Composition to Second-Year Multiliteracies: Integrating Instruction in Oral, Written, and Visual Communication at a Technological University.” WPA: Writing Program Administration 26.3 (2003): 149-171.

We began by watching the Richard Miller’s presentation: The Future is Now. This presented us with a variety of challenging questions about how we might pursue such a vision of the “new humanities” at CMU, including discussions about professional development, our beliefs about the changing nature of literacy, and how, if at all, a shift in our curriculum would happen in the time frame that Lynch and Wysocki describe from their context.

We then continued in small groups with a jig saw reading, where groups posted 2-3 responses or question in their own page on my wiki. After a watching Wikis in Plain English, they understood the basics of posting and were able to see how using a wiki could allow for multiple groups to post their work and then quickly share it with the class. The conversation continued in a large group discussion, including some emerging questions:

What do students need in terms of literacy in a changing world?
How do multiliteracies relate to technology and communications?
What does the multi-disciplinary approach do for departments? What about specialization?
If everyone talks the same language, do we have our own specialties?
What does this mean for us in terms of the course? Content? Writing?
Faculty-only vs. Graduate Assistants–How is this possible or feasible at our University?
What does this look like across the curriculum? Is it sustainable?
What about assessment? Individual? Groups? Programmatic?
Is there still a need for traditional comp courses? Don’t you still need a first year comp?
How does the continuing focus in professional organizations on 21st century lliteracies contribute to this discussion (last week’s NCTE statement on the future of composition), both for college and life?
What would the writing center need to/be expected to do?
Does this perpetuate a two-tiered society, a Gutenberg in reverse?
How do we support faculty in these collaborations?
Is the resistance about learning to do old things with new technologies or really coming to understand a new paradigm that the new technologies allow?

We ended with Michael Wesch and his students’: A Vision of Students Today, and just in time for a sunny mid-winter drive home. All told, it was a timely and lively discussion for our department, and I appreciated having the opportunity to facilitate the session. Given the release of the 2008 Horizon Report, it seems as though we are constantly reminded that things continue to change. I hope that this session serves as a spark that continues into further conversations about multiliteracies in composition later this semester.

This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

News from Teachers College: EdTV

This promises to be an interesting new twist on the scholarship of teaching. I’ll be watching:

TCRecord: Article
Children and Puppets and Rats, Oh My TCR Welcomes After Ed TV

by Gary Natriello ? January 18, 2008

A new short-form web video channel joins the TCR home page

For 2008 the Teachers College Record is beginning a bit of an experiment by welcoming to its home page After Ed TV, a new web video channel produced at the EdLab at Teachers College. The mission of After Ed is to bring new thinking in the education sector to a wide audience through engaging short-form video. The channel syndicates its content using a video player that can be deployed on any webpage just like it appears on the TCR home page. Complete details on After Ed, including instructions for adding it to any webpage, are available at the main website at http://aftered.tv. There you will find the complete directory of current and past After Ed shows along with a blog in which producers of individual shows discuss the production process. The After Ed player at TCR will present a new video lineup every Friday.

After Ed takes it name from the notion that the rapid pace of change in the post-industrial era has the potential to move the education sector into a decidedly different stage than that which dominated the 20th century. The contours of this new or “after” stage are not entirely clear, but After Ed takes seriously its goal of highlighting the stresses and strains on existing educational systems as well as the growing number of clues about the future of learning.

Open Access to MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning

An email from Leigh alerted me to this great set of resources. Check them out:

John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning – Series – The MIT Press

The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning examines the effect of digital media tools on how people learn, network, communicate, and play, and how growing up with these tools may affect peoples sense of self, how they express themselves, and their ability to learn, exercise judgment, and think systematically.

Thanks to the generous support of the MacArthur Foundation, open access electronic versions of all the books in this series are available. Follow the links from each title description below to read these editions.

For more on the MacArthur Foundation’s digital media and learning initiative, visit http://www.digitallearning.macfound.org.

The Economist Debate Series

Along with the K12Online Conference, here is another unique opportunity for online participation in the month of October. It was sent to me by Jeff from Sparkpr on behalf of The Economist. Get in there and vote, the check out the debate!

Hi Troy – Jeff here from Sparkpr for The Economist.

I saw your blog, Digital Writing Digital Teaching, and am delighted to invite you and your readers to be part of an extraordinary first for Economist.com. The Economist Debate Series officially kicks off October 15^th and voting is underway now to determine the propositions that will be debated. The first subject being debated is education and we’d love to have you participate in the debate and link to the lively conversation.

The Economist Debate Series is an ongoing community forum where propositions about topical issues will be rigorously debated in the Oxford style by compelling Speakers. The Economist is inviting you and your readers to take part by voting on propositions, sharing views and opinions, and challenging the Speakers.

Five propositions have now been short-listed to address the most far-reaching and divisive aspects of the education debate covering: the place of foreign students in higher education; the position of corporate donors; and the role of technology in today’s classrooms. The highest ranking propositions will be debated, with the first launching on Oct 15th.

Cast your vote now at: http://www.economist.com/debate/?sa_campaign=debateseries/debate1/blog/DigitalWritingDigitalTeaching

Choose the most resonant propositions to be debated from the list below:

Education – The propositions:

1. This house believes that the continuing introduction of new technologies and new media adds little to the quality of most education.

2. This house proposes that governments and universities everywhere should be competing to attract and educate all suitably-qualified students regardless of nationality and residence.

3. This house believes that companies donate to education mainly to win public goodwill and there is nothing wrong with this.

4. This house believes that the “digital divide” is a secondary problem in the educational needs of developing countries.

5. This house believes that social networking technologies will bring large changes to educational methods, in and out of the classroom

Join the Debate

The debate schedule is as follows:

Sep 17th-Oct 12th – Vote for your favorite proposition and join the open forum to discuss topics

Oct 15th – Winning proposition is revealed and the Debate begins

Oct 18th – Rebuttals. Share your comments on issues so far and vote for your winning side

Oct 23th – Closing arguments by the Speakers. Post any additional comments you would like to share and vote for your winner

Oct 26th – The debate winner is announced.

To receive debate updates sign up at http://www.economist.com/debate/?sa_campaign=debateseries/debate1/blog/DigitalWritingDigitalTeaching. We will then contact you to announce the winning proposition and details of the debate as it unfolds.

I look forward to you joining us and fellow Economist readers for this lively debate. In the meantime, check the site to track which proposition is winning, and to view guest participants and the announcement of key Speakers at http://www.economist.com/debate/?sa_campaign=debateseries/debate1/blog/DigitalWritingDigitalTeaching.

Notes from Kathy Yancey’s Keynote: 21st Century Literacies

Today, Kathy Yancey gave the keynote and the MCTE 2007 Fall Conference in Lansing, MI. Here are notes from the session.

Yancey began by asking us to think about what literacy is and a five minute discussion among the audience began the session.

An image of tectonic plates from the public domain with the idea of continental drift.
Themes:
- Choice of technologies depending on rhetorical situation
- Networked in a way that we have not been before
- Intrapersonal Knowledge and Reflection in order to navigate this territory
Much of what we know today began over one hundred years ago
- When my grandmother learned to write, she learned cursive first and that was a mark of personality
- Learning to read was important, but writing would empower people in ways that would cause problems
- Donald Graves didn’t know that there was writing, only handwriting
- The testing industry was focused on scales for handwriting — testing students was a part of testing teachers
- The form trumps the content, and this has continued throughout the 20th century
Now, we see literacy as an interaction of practices and technologies
- We understand these practices better now because computers have shown us what is avaialable
- There were also changes in literatur (Jane Austen — print to TV to film to DVD extended version)
- We are able to understand Pride and Prejudice in completely different ways; hypertext allows us to find things easier
- All the versions of Jane Austen are good, and we can understand her in many other ways, in print and on many screens
The history of literacy continues to change, and more and more work is available in digital forms
- With new literacies today, we think in “new circulations” (print, email, text, etc.)
- Be aware of Ed08
While computers have come in schools, we have been using technology to mimic old literacies practices
- Conversation embedded within a word document, between student and teacher
- Adaptability and assumptions are a part of how we begin to work with these literacies — we do not teach them in schools.
- This is the difference between credentials and expertise; they have the expertise in newer literacies, and I have the credentials
Texts and technologies work in different ways
- Social technologies succeed when they fit in with the social lives of those who engage with the technology
- Literacy practices continue to move online
  - Adobe now allows people to mark up what used to be solidified in a PDF file by marking it with post-it style notes and other tools
- Characters on TV are now blogging, so in addition to watching the TV show you need to stay connected that way, too
Partnership for 21st Century Skills
- Core subjects with 21st century themes
- Creativity
- Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
- Collaboration (how do we fit this into school in ways that really matter?)
Knowledge Frameworks
Ken Burns, The War
- He went directly to those inthe war rather than relying on “experts”
- Getting these personal experiences will become more of the norm
- Museum of African American History Museum is starting a virtual mueseum, inspired by MySpace
It will not be all digital, we will also be in both/and (print/digital)
- We will need new assessment practices to discuss what is working and what is not
- How does the description of a traditional essay assessment compare to that of a digital portfolio?
- Prensky’s digital natives — we are going to have to learn from one another
Production of knowledge as well as consumption of sources, too
- Digital conversion class — allowing students to only find information from blogs that they could trust
  - By looking at blogs, students were relying on the association of older literacies to find credibility in a source, but in blogs that does not work all the same way
  - Because blogs are informal, that does not mean that “average joes and joann” are prodcuing stuff; they are authored by working professional
  - This is a challenge that we need to take up as we consider 21st century literacies
- More and more information will be tailored to us and delivered in a personalized way; the incentive to discover things on your own is lessened
  - There are dangers and we need to bring this into the classroom in a critical and informed way
  - Pandora
    - Works to define language for music and selects other songs that are similar to what you are looking for
    - This is online and free, available to all our students and not just the ones who have an iPod
  - Mapping
  - Fundamental to literacies in the 21st century
    - You can see who is networked and figure out ways to help them get networked my creating maps
    - To the extent that we leave all of this outside our classrooms, we make our children more vulnerable than eve
    - We have got to start teaching some of this — evaluating information and people
- How can we think about teaching and learning in networks?
  - Policy — what policy would we need to change at all levels so this work counts?
  - Professional Development — what can we provide so that the curriculum includes the technology in their learning?
  - Assessment — yesterday’s assessments will not support or reward the new types of learning
    - UConn’s New Literacies Team
  - 21st century literacies are now

“YouTube Studies” vs. “College Credit for Watching YouTube”

A media professor has begun teaching a class on YouTube. Not so unusual that this would happen, given the fact that YouTube has been around for awhile now. In fact, it is kind of cool that it is finally happening.

What I have found more interesting is that as I have been catching up on my RSS reading, I see that two different sources are reporting it in slightly different, yet noticeable ways:

Jobs, News and Views for All of Higher Education – Inside Higher Ed :: YouTube Studies
“It’s a class like I’ve never taught before and a class like I’m not certain has ever been taught before,” Juhasz says during her introductory video.

You’d expect that a professor teaching a class on and about YouTube would be a huge booster of the site. But not Juhasz. She says she is “underwhelmed” and “unsatisfied” by much of the content, which she describes as spoofs of pop culture references that she just doesn’t understand.

Juhasz’s main critique of the site is its architecture. Academics strive to make connections across disciplines, she says, but YouTube makes it difficult to provide context (often in the form of links), and to carry on complex conversations beyond the small space given for comments below the video.

Still, as a professor of media studies, she says ignoring the site is impossible. Instead, she wants students to draw their own conclusions after spending a semester working entirely within the framework and constraints of YouTube. She wants them to think about cultural references, what makes a great work of art and how to define a truly democratic medium. Is YouTube the latter? Juhasz says no — in large part because of its corporate ownership.

An academic take, to be sure. But also a balanced one. Here is the take from my local paper:

YouTube goes academic: Calif. college offers class about video-sharing site
CLAREMONT, Calif. – Here’s a dream-come-true for Web addicts: college credit for watching YouTube.

Pitzer College this fall began offering what may be the first course about the video-sharing site. About 35 students meet in a classroom but work mostly online, where they view YouTube content and post their comments.

Class lessons also are posted and students are encouraged to post videos. One class member, for instance, posted a 1:36-minute video of himself juggling.

Alexandra Juhasz, a media studies professor at the liberal arts college, said she was “underwhelmed” by the content on YouTube but set up the course, “Learning from YouTube,” to explore the role of the popular site.

So, what’s better for students? “A dream come true?” Or, “working entirely within the framework and constraints of YouTube?”

The different approaches don’t surprise me, as media has always shown its biases based on the publication, the audience, and the goals the editors have in relation to the two. As I saw the two drastically different introductions to this story from the two publications, it made me doubly aware of how critical media studies can be portrayed in the popular media.

And, given Michigan’s budgetary crisis this fall, how teaching anything beyond the “basics” could be up for criticism (much like other topics such as film, gender studies, and the like have been in the past) make me wonder:

Will we be able to design courses in digital writing that aren’t seen as frivolous?
Do students see digital writing as a kind of fun add-on to (or replacement for) the types of writing that we expect in traditional academic settings?
Will composition classes be able to invite students to create digital videos as a means of argumentative writing, or will people only worry more because some students are posting clips of themselves juggling (which could have been a legitimate part of the professor’s first “getting-to-know-you and learn-how-to-post-to-YouTube type of assignment)?

This is an interesting pair of articles that I might share with my students next week, since our next assignment is a critical text analysis (and I have yet to share anything on YouTube…).

Digital Writing Wiki

Of the many great things happening at the CEE Summit, I have had many opportunities to talk to other English Educators and find out about their online lives.

As we prepare for the second panel discussion to start, I am sitting with Carl Young, editor of the CITE Journal and blogger of the SITE blog and Rick Beach, blogger and writer of a new book/wiki, Engaging Students in Digital Writing.

Lots of new ideas and RSS feeds to keep up with here!