Thomas Edison or other mythic geniuses.
In 2017 most people (outside of students) have access to counter narratives: Edison was a patent pirate, actual geniuses like Tesla and Jobs are flawed people, academic biographies are more hagiographic than factual...
You’ll see lots of lightbulbs
Sometimes a light bulb is just a light bulb. I made these high intensity short-arc mercury-vapor lamps used to micro-photolithograph masks onto silicon wafers before depositing the metal in a vacuum, firing the metal in a glass lined furnace, chopping the wafers into "chips" and soldering the leads to make "computer chips." I worked beside the glassblower that patented these lamps at his shop in Santa Clara, California, or, if you prefer; Silicon Valley.
The Hypothes.is Canvas app enables teachers to create annotatable documents as “Assignments” within the LMS platform.
My California Community College District is switching to Canvas and this will make student collaboration much easier.
o annotate especially controversial course material; and finally, due to the sensitive nature of the course material, I worked to establish trust and community so that we could respectfully disagree upon difficult matters. I strove to mitigate the ethical dilemmas of open annotation in the curated space of my classroom, but they remain in the larger context of the web
Is there some sort of protocol that one could follow to encourage rather than discourage these kind of comments? Or is all non-curated space going to cause problems?
all student work must be submitted pri-vately and/or anonymously in order to comply with FERPA
Wow, is this right?
long works of Victorian fiction derives from their reluctance to saturate themselves in the lush, cluttered texture of Victorian prose.
It makes me wonder if certain works are more conducive to online annotation than others. Is there something about the embodied elements of reading long novels that doesn't mesh with online annotation?
enrolling 53 students
What if you have a much smaller class? Would using annotation foster better class discussion or would it be alienating?
All too often, however, students working independently drift into general statements that do not support their claims.
Anti-student statements are not helpful. Many people "drift into general statements."
course
This would be an ideal practice for Introduction to Literature courses introducing digital literacy.
the text
Moretti seems to privilege the written text over modes of communication. Why is that the case? What does imply?
side–by–side layout of Gamer Theory‘s text and comments
@afinucane Is it that this tool privileges the text-annotation relationship over the relationship among annotators?
a vibrant discussion emerged in the margins
Is there a reason that annotations are more useful than comments at the bottom of an article? To think about it another way, does annotation instead of end comments make the conversation too confusing for readers to follow?
Teachers and students would stand around the volumes and use the text as a jumping off point for an oral conversation.
So the conversation about the text supersedes the text itself.
Back
This is an annotation on the public layer.
Commentary
Very different understanding of this word from its everyday use on the Internet. Online, commentary is more typically imagined as far less authorial or editorial, problematically, but also democratically so.
DHSIcommunity!
say something
retrieves the JSON data
Step 2: Grabs the data from the URL...
generates a well-formed search URL
Step 1: Creates a URL to be looked at by another fuction/method
To enhance that process, you could add the appropriate path to the output file name in this script, and write a shell script that runs this script and then commits/pushes to GitHub, and then schedule that script to run at regular intervals from your computer/server. I'm going to look into adding that functionality to this script, but it's not ready yet.
# search for all annotations with the tag IndieEdTech and return them in json format. s = searchurl(tag = 'IndieEdTech') l = retrievelist(s) # print the title of each article annotated. for entry in l: e = Annotation(entry) print(e.title)
I don't get it. Is this all I need to put into a Jupyter Notebook?
given the annotation's API URL
Is this specific to an annotation? Yes, I guess.
Don’t we have to actually read the books, before saying what the patterns discovered in them mean?
Yes, of course. But it's ironic that this three post tirade begins with a rather distant reading of the MLA program.
But does the data point inescapably in that direction?
In the above performance of close reading, is the evidence more "inescapable"? Isn't is always in the fullness of the argumentation no matter where the data comes from?
The direction of my inferences is critical: first the interpretive hypothesis and then the formal pattern, which attains the status of noticeability only because an interpretation already in place is picking it out.
Is this really how it played/plays out? I have an idea about something that I then confirm in the facts?
The direction is the reverse in the digital humanities: first you run the numbers, and then you see if they prompt an interpretive hypothesis.
So it's close versus distant reading.
Traditionalists argue that emphasizing professional skills would betray the humanities' responsibility to honor the great monuments of culture for their own sake.
I continue to think this binary is false. Perhaps historically the liberal arts was established and viewed as an oasis. But in my experience there was always a connection between my academic work, from grade school to grad school, and the "real world." The connection might not always have been as direct and explicit to be vocational, but nonetheless is was there and it was felt.
When the going gets tough, the tough take accounting. When the job market worsens, many students figure they can’t indulge in an English or a history major. They have to study something that will lead directly to a job.
LOL. I was in the middle of a dissertation when this was published: not just an English major, but a doctoral candidate.
2) comment, engage, retort, spread the word
Annotate!
(Originally, many used CommentPress to engage in this way, but you'll notice some folks have done so using Hypothesis more recently.)
That has always been my aim, and the content of that aim — a desire for pre-eminence, authority and disciplinary power — is what blogs and the digital humanities stand against.
I'd argue that analog scholarship too stands against this aim. And after finishing the "blog post" I think it's Fish's assumptions about the nature of scholarship and knowledge production that bias him against DH--among other things.
Mark Poster draws the moral:
I actually think the moral valence of the following quote is ambiguous. I'm not certain it's a bad thing.
This emphasis on the present works at cross purposes with much long-form scholarship, which needs stability and longevity in order to make its points.”
I'd actually argue that it lays bare the process of scholarly production more immediately. What might unfold over a sequence of interconnected monographs--published every 3-5 years--might now take place in an afternoon of Twitter exchanges.
“blog” is an ugly word (as are clog, smog and slog)
Like "yawp"?
I will not be attending the Modern Language Association meeting in Seattle (Jan. 5-8), but I have read through the program to see what’s going on and what’s no longer going on in literary studies.
Isn't this a little like a movie reviewer saying, "I haven't seen this movie, but here's the problem with it"?
OCTOBER 28, 2012
The image below is rather hostile , isn't it?
