Open access and open education resources are the beginnings of an interweb for the majority. Extending the infrastructure is part of an international political project to extend real democracy.

The interwebs work, most of the time. They have been colonized by capital and neoliberalism. The "commons" is growing and resisting the colonizers, but without international political support will remain at the margins.

That is the exact reason why I participate in the IL track this year!

Barron, N. G. (2007). Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures. Technical Communication Quarterly, 16(4), 483.

Serafini, F., & Gee, E. (2017). Remixing multiliteracies: Theory and practice from New London to New Times. Teachers College Press.

Gunther Kress, Theo van Leeuwen
Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication
Oxford UP, New York (2001)

Mary Hamilton “Expanding the New Literacy Studies: Using Photographs to Explore Literacy as Social Practice” David Barton, Mary Hamilton (Eds.), Situated Literacies, Routledge, London (2000)

This is an amazing text - elaborating terminology and intersections bw critical pedagogy and IL

I highlighted the html with public hypothes.is annotations

Continue with Constructing Discourse

Because this Framework envisions information literacy as extending the arc of learning throughout students’ academic careers and as converging with other academic and social learning goals, an expanded definition of information literacy is offered here to emphasize dynamism, flexibility, individual growth, and community learning:

Information literacy is the set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning.

Metaliteracy expands the scope of traditional information skills (determine, access, locate, understand, produce, and use information) to include the collaborative production and sharing of information in participatory digital environments (collaborate, produce, and share).

This approach requires an ongoing adaptation to emerging technologies and an understanding of the critical thinking and reflection required to engage in these spaces as producers, collaborators, and distributors.

Thomas P. Mackey and Trudi E. Jacobson. Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners.

The Framework is organized into six frames, each consisting of a concept central to information literacy, a set of knowledge practices, and a set of dispositions. The six concepts that anchor the frames are presented alphabetically:

1. Authority Is Constructed and Contextual
2. Information Creation as a Process
3. Information Has Value
4. Research as Inquiry
5. Scholarship as Conversation
6. Searching as Strategic Exploration

Mueller, D. (2015, February 9). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education [Text]. Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

"based on a cluster of interconnected core concepts, with flexible options for implementation, rather than on a set of standards or learning outcomes, or any prescriptive enumeration of skills. At the heart of this Framework are conceptual understandings that organize many other concepts and ideas about information, research, and scholarship into a coherent whole."

According to the American Library Association, "Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to 'recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information.'"

Further, as academic libraries, Madison College Libraries are committed to moving students toward the Association of College & Research Libraries' new 'Framework for Information Literacy', adopted in January of 2016 by the ACRL Board.

page separator

In the below diagram, you will notice that to be truly 'information literate' requires that you simultaneously develop:

• awareness of how you engage with the digital world
• how you find meaning in the information you discover
• how to articulate what kind of information you require
• how to use information ethically
• understand the role you can play in the communication in your profession and
• how you evaluate information for credibility and authority.

Image: Venn Diagram of intersecting literacies that contribute to information literacy

Coonan, E., & Jane, S. (2014, April 29). "My dolly’s bigger than your dolly”, or, Why our labels no longer matter. Retrieved April 29, 2016, from https://librariangoddess.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/my-dollys-bigger/

research since the beginning of 21st cent highlights erroneous approach to teaching with grades at the core:

1. Grades tend to diminish students’ interest in whatever they’re learning.
2. tend to reduce the quality of students' thinking.
3. create a preference for the easiest possible task

Makes me think of online education when it is meant to be inferior...not necessarily because of pedagogy but because of lack of social capital

Love this as framing (thank you Naomi)!

For the DPL19 annotators, I thought we might collectively explode the margins.

on grading...

This article was included in the curriculum for the Open Pedagogy track led by Dave Cormier in the 2019 Digital Pedagogy Lab Toronto.

In a 19 March 2019 Virtually Connecting session, Dave explained that he uses the contract in this article as a negative example — not to be adopted uncritically, but as a starting place to think about how one might generate a better assessment model.

Follow this CROWDLAAERS ("crowd layers") link to access analytics about the collaborative annotation conversation associated with the chapter "Not Enough Voices."

An urgency of teachers

There's a lot of power inherent in this and we are wise to pay attention to how that power is used. Will we observe it deployed for good? Will the exercise of these powers be intentional and self-aware? Will average users have agency in determining how technology like this impacts them? Will average users even be afforded awareness of when they are impacted?

As emergent as Information Literacy is as a concept and societal imperative, it will be a steep challenge to keep up with rapid technological evolutions like this in order to empower us as content consumers to at least possess awareness around how and why we are targeted.

I've participated in ds106, Gardner Campbell's openLearningHub.net, Networked Narratives, and Ontario Extend. extend.ecampusontario.ca. These new approaches are truly open to all.

Forcing new mods of behaviour - thats defo what I want from my degree(s).

uhhhhh this is almost a poem or a Dandy Warhol lyric right?

WTAF?

"some data is more equal than other data"

So many fallacies at work now. Don't know where to start. This is one of the saddest sentences here though for sure.

huh - I take back what I said about the author - I don't think there is any irony happening here.

And one must always side with the machines. Always with the machines.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrggghhhhh

but don't trust the STs #amirite?

because its made of people?

Starting to wonder if David Streitfeld was sub-writing this whole thing. His rhetoric is quite dark and foreboding.

bwahahahahaha

Almost sounds like soylent green right?

but did they? really?

assuming one can actually measure learning - like for real?

not scary or foreboding at all #amirite?

A way for the people to save the Web

and maybe Higher Education too.

Available as pdf - http://coady.stfx.ca/coady-library/MOD.pdf

I would add "We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on Education and Social Change: Myles Horton and Paolo Freire" Available as pdf: https://codkashacabka.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/we-make-the-road-by-walking-myles-and-paolo-freie-book.pdf

This is my only good habit :)

This reminds me of Rilke's idea that we should aspire to be perptual beginners.

I had a professor once refer to this as self-evidence assessment, that the evidence of learning is so powerful, given that it changes dispositions, forms of interaction, and that it has resonance across settings - and that this, more than a final test of project - was evidence of deep learning.

In my experience, this type of creative risk-taking requires the experience of more traditional attempts. Like the musical improvisation, it's useful to practice scales and know "the standards" before playing with a community - of musicians, of students - in new and unexpected ways.

On Wednesday, September 28th this blog was featured as the second "annotation flash mob" text associated with the Marginal Syllabus project. Thanks to all those who joined and contributed to the conversation, especially Mia Zamora!

As per usual, Sean gives us clear, effective, and evocative thoughts!

So well put. Just clear and applicable to life in general! #amirite?

I may steal this sentence for a presentation I have coming up. Or I may just steal it for general use - thanks SEAN!

Totally love this sentiment! No matter what tech you have, if you don't have people willing to experiment you will fail.

All too true most places :(

Although basic, I hope more and more people in highered start to understand this :)

Yes: last AY, all administrative control was removed from our laptops. Faculty cannot download any software without justifying it to IT first. Cannot, e.g. download Gephi or Twine, and programminghistorian.org simply says "site unavailable."

This is so very true where I work (CC), though in our system, our students and faculty can often see what they are not allowed to access: full text not available. But entire important databases are not available to our students and they don't know it, along with the missing larger JSTOR et al.

And the most insane part, to me, is that this is all sold and marketed to people as, "We're here to make your life easy."

My school district has started the adoption process for Canvas and I'm taking specific steps to make sure any creative work students do is not submitted through the LMS because of this.

This describes the current state of K12. Instead of a 25 year history to work on, K12 has really only embraced the web in the last 10 years, and even then, a highly sterilized and watered-down version in which students are "protected."

K12 culture relies on this shift as well. It isn't solely the role of higher education institutions to instill this line of thoughtfulness.

I find it interesting that Snapchat is used as the example here. The company relies on user data to continue to function. If our students are creating on these platforms, are we not asking them to, as a result, sell themselves? Or is it a non-issue because they're on the platform already? What of the content that's created?

Is this often left uncovered because there is no way to "cover" the topic in a traditional graduate school experience?

Indeed, it's almost an oxymoron.

Especially coming out of the (shared) biographical context here, I'm interested in further discussing this idea...

So this is an opt-in project.

This claim certainly needs to be troubled...

Some of us had a conversation on an inferior conversation tool called Twitter earlier. Does the non-profitness, openness of the project save it from some of the critiques leveled there? I don't think so. I especially appreciated how @JenProf complicated the idea of what open means there.

Similar to what @BMBOD has said, why must this defining be done from one side only? Why can the relationship not be negotiated with all the parties involved? If I were in a relationship where one person took it upon him/herself to define it for me, without any input on my part, I would quickly recognize there is something seriously wrong with the relationship.

But the tone of the article suggests that the only thing students can "choose" to do is to listen to the prof and follow the relationship as defined by the prof. So there is very little room here for things being "up to you [students]."

I am reminded of how I and some other faculty in my experience have reacted when we are told how things are going to be from above, without any chance at input. Depending on the context, sometimes the reaction has been very negative--why can't there be more collaboration in this power relationship? Why can't we have a say?

Why should our students feel differently?

I am surprised, as throughout the article you enforce the power hierarchy of "student and professor." Not of peers. Not of partnership.

If this doesn't speak to a one-to-many view of knowledge transmission, I don't know what does.

I particularly enjoy Twitter as an academic tool because of the ability for conversations, connections, and negotiation it affords. Not following your students back enforces that knowledge is not up for discussion (which, as an academic we know to be untrue) and that your students are not capable of having peer level conversations and content. Which I'm sure they are.

This may be the only thing in which we agree on.

As a patient with chronic illness, who sees a lot of doctors, this statement troubles me.

Many of us feel that doctors are obligated to do more than "tell us what we need to hear" and CERTAINLY are obligated to do more than they think is best. If I did not negotiate my relationship with doctors, if I did not push back and advocate for myself, I would not have any quality of life. I would be missing organs, and I would not have correct diagnoses.

My doctors are not above critique, above feedback, and above working with me to find the best solution. And neither are professors above working with their students.

If your class is interesting and engaging, the students wouldn't be paying attention to what is in fact more important to them in the moment. Perhaps they are on a back-channel conversation about the class.

Hollow words here, you don't in fact regret this based on the entire tone of this article.

If, in 31 years of college teaching, the boundaries and expectations for student-teacher relationships has not changed or evolved then I am concerned. The world does not stand still. As I would hope your pedagogy has grown and fluctuated within your time as a professor, your relationship with with students should as well.

With relationships comes negotiation. Even within power hierarchies. It seems to me that if expectations and boundaries are not clear on both sides, then you too should make adjustments.

Moreover, no two relationships are the same. Relationships are defined by the interacting objects.To make a blanket statement about the professor-student relationship simplifies the nature of relationships and those participating in them.

Just the tone of this article, then?

Good to recognize that others may disagree on this one

Given the stats for adjuncts i really don't think "most" profs "enjoy" academic freedom

There is really no reason to bash high school teachers just because they didn't know what YOU want students to do in college. There is a lot that students learn in school that is not college level not because high school teachers are bad or wrong but because that's the level kids need to know at high school! I can see the importance of saying "it's not high school anymore" but there's no reason to make it the teacher's fault.

What have students done to warrant this?

I wouldn't have known from the tone of this article!

Any other two categories and this would sound extremely racist or discriminatory. There is already a power hierarchy in place. So this is just emphasizing it. Also - I don't like how this generalizes everything coming up next as if all professors should agree with you. Other professors may wish to be friends, parent-like, etc. It is your prerogative to have a different relationship with your students. But please don't set their expectations for OTHER professors all over the world

Yes, there is a tendency to consider the US as monolithically privileged in these conversations. It is not. I live in a rural area that is extremely lucky to have any utility service at all. If it were not for the New Deal in the 1930's and the development of rural telephone and electic coops, there would be no internet in the boondocks. if we had to electrify the boondocks today, certain political elements would shrug and say, "I got mine and the devil take the hindmost." We are not all the same in the US.

Ever consider using Periscope or one of its variants for doing adhoc livestreaming from #digped? I know I am fond of laying extra work on youse guys, but perhaps we need to have a streaming jockey at conferences--and there only job is adhoc, getting the flavor of the conference, person on the street interviews.

And from the scale of the classroom to that of a school system, such practical barriers and poor understandings also manifest as political barriers and priorities - and as noted, often to the detriment of learners.

I'm eager to learn - and contribute to a conversation - about alternative ways to frame such collaborations.

I'm curious - when we work as academics, what identities, practices, and commitments do we intentionally foreground? Asked another way, what stance (such as "international-first") shapes our work?

Is it helpful to specify what critical means here? For instance, reading so far, critical might refer to:

• about critical education issues, generally?
• critical of US-centric view of ed tech?
• critical of something associated with digped?

also so much love for each other grew out of this, so difficult to capture in writing. We became virtual office mates sharing our daily lives with each other, experiencing much joy and pain and intellectual stimulation all together

Hope folks will annotate this post :)

Not quite. There are two other classes of participants: lurkers and virtual connectors. I am one of the virtual participant who is both allied to one of your inner circle of participants, @vconnecting, and as a free agent. For example, I wanted to share the keynotes via the video annotation cloud program, Vialogues.com. For some reason they are unembeddable, Your cloud tag of participants has an impermeable boundary that keeps my message from getting through. I finally did make contact with @cogdog and Alan tweeted out some support. As of now...no response. Is this because you have a pre-set mesh, is it because the IRL demands of the institute demand inner focus, or is it because designing for virtual participation was at best an afterthought?

I am drawn to the work of James C. Scott, Seeing like a State. The best summary of his idea of legibility is on V. Rao's web site Ribbonfarm. Since we can also annotate with images, the one on that site from Scott's book is dispositive.

Thanks so much for doing this Chris. For those of us who are connecting virtually these road maps help us quell the FOMO and embrace the JOMO.

My attendance as a virtual participant makes me connect with the marginalization of those who are on the outside looking into #digped. It is unconscious for the most part and mitigated by the work of folks like Virtually Connecting. I understand the distraction and pressure on organizers to satisfy the needs of those who signed up and attended. In truth, they are in the first class seating. Unless you do serious pre-planning or a separate virtual institute, well...you get what you get. It does, however, violate my own personal online ethos

Great resource and community.

Yes! And Blackboard is soooooo unattractive!

Teacher Bill Ferriter's thoughts on the label digital natives- "We've inadvertently handed over all ownership and discredited our expertise, y'all—assuming that spending our formative years with notepads instead of iPads means we've got nothing to add to conversations with our students about how technology empowers learners."

http://blog.williamferriter.com/2013/01/18/building-a-bridge-for-the-digital-natives-in-your-life/

I agree with this. This ignores the varying backgrounds of students. Just because many students come to college having had access to digital tools, smart phones, etc. that does not mean all students have. In fact, potentially rural schools or under-funded schools may not have computer labs or be able to provide students with access to digital tools.

I guess we can stop talking about it. I mean we've learned now that students raised with ipads/iphones in their hands still don't know how to use technology to learn.

Wondering the ways place is different, but important online. Is it important that one student does her assignments while at work, and another does it at the table at breakfast eating breakfast with his son?

This is such an important shift from open and closed as dichotomous ideas. It's necessary that we ask what closures come with openness

How many people think they might share this with their students this fall? I think I will.

Administrators: take note! Please!

I feel like if they are going to make this statement that they should mention the varying degrees of creative commons licenses.

Audrey Watters had something different to say about this idea of automation at last year's DPL Institute.

I'm not sure we need to say this to defend the value of digital pedagogy. I'd rather view it all as more of a continuum than a differently valenced dichotomy depending on your POV.

That course design is a process is "owned" by students rather than professors is provocative--even if, as Chris suggests, it ought to be intuitive. Allowing students to modify a course according to their unique interests and methods of learning also ensures more personal involvement and investment in the class.

This is effectively about discovering and allowing student agency. I wonder if there are students who struggle with agency, i.e. who are uncomfortable without the rules and pathways explicitly defined.

This takes work and self-reflection. It's great when students can do this.

mind exploding now

I always worry about peer pressure when using the public show of hands survey. Other ideas for how to do this without it being so public?

Fantastic tool!

good insight here.

I know i am working with a prof who is interested in their students when they tell me they don't know how they are going to teach until they have met the students. Unusual, but it does happen

Reading this for the first time, with Chris in the room...

I can see labor contingency making this a bit more scary. I also wonder how many students push back against this notion?

Do we know if there is a chapter on public health in this book (re: mobile media)? A personal interest of mine.

Dewey in Democracy and Education on a similar tip:

In their plays, they like to construct their own toys and appliances. With increasing maturity, activity which does not give back results of tangible and visible achievement loses its interest. Play then changes to fooling and if habitually indulged in is demoralizing. Observable results are necessary to enable persons to get a sense and a measure of their own powers. When make-believe is recognized to be make-believe, the device of making objects in fancy alone is too easy to stimulate intense action. One has only to observe the countenance of children really playing to note that their attitude is one of serious absorption; this attitude cannot be maintained when things cease to afford adequate stimulation.

I'll be attempting to roll out a "Reacting to the Past" role-playing game in my Early American literature course this fall. I've been considering ways to incorporate a digital aspect to the classroom performances, perhaps by way of encouraging out-of-class blog/newspaper "wars" between opposing sides.

This is the way @jessifer talks about writing in the space of a Tweet.

How to encourage creative rule "breaking" or evading?

I've also discovered that students assume more accountability and take more pride in "crafting"-type assignments like collaborative Wikis, Genius annotations, &c.

Crucial point that I find myself struggling to sufficiently explain. Often students seem reticent to write (and/or revise) drafts, and resist integrating free writing practices into the all-important "product" at the semester's end. That's not the students fault. After all, what assignments tend to make up the largest percentage of their final grade?

Our conceptions of assessment will be transformed with "play" and process at the center of learning. No more word and page counts, or "mastery" of the argument/essay.

Absolutely! Now how to be "playful" with the requirements of an academic bureaucracy? There's surely a fine line/happy medium I can't seem to toe or grasp in my own course designing efforts. Hence, my syllabuses range from hierarchically stuffy to shamelessly irreverent.

The "ordinary" as confined to the logics of commercial life and biological maintenance? Is this always true of "play"? (And isn't it a Silicon Valley ethos to introduce"play" into the ordinary life of labor--even if cynically?)

This is possibly my favorite argument of the article so far! Yes! It's soft. Why is softness something we devalue? Instead of appreciate? Doesn't everyone (in real life) prefer softness to hardness? Flexibility to rigidity? In many contexts anyway

Story of my life. Ne er felt i was in the right place in a comp sci department

Ib some ways this is MORE important - because ppl assume solving access problems is enough. It isn't

This piece reminds me that concerns about equity in making (and, broadly, the so-called "Maker Movement") have become the focus of some very sharp learning scientists. Here are a few examples: Making Through the Lens of Power and Culture

On Equity Issues in the Maker Movement, and Implications for Making and Learning

Makeology book, Vol 1 & 2

The word "coercion" has historically been a negative word to me - to be coerced is to go against one's will. Many negative examples are presented here - what are positive examples of coercion in design? I lived in Portland, OR for many years and volunteered with the City Repair project whose mission is to "place make". Here are examples of PDX intersections "repairs": http://www.cityrepair.org/intersection-repair-examples/

Is that really a false assumption? I'm totally on board with the overall argument here--big Mike Davis fan!--but feel this goes a step too far.

Austin's moon towers were supposedly a response to a late-nineteenth century serial killer), but have not prevented youth from gathering, indeed they have occasioned such gatherings:

I'm really excited to see how we turn the argument of this essay toward the design of learning technologies and courses, specifically in how we might locate tacit power relations in seemingly innocuous (sometimes "unpleasant") interfaces...

I look forward to this new frame to my design work allowing one to capture this precious moment when a design pattern reacts to itself... or perhaps it is too elusive to in fact "capture"?

I appreciate the invitation to read for emergence & discovery

Or the way a poem/argument emerges from the form of a sonnet.

Seems like architecture will be a valuable metaphor for our conversation about instructional design.

Interestingly, Alan Levine opens a recent blog on Domain of One's Own with a nice architectural metaphor for that great project:

Like a small stubborn, unique, old fashioned house surrounded by modern monolithic mega modern glass and steel structures, the Domain of Ones Own project started at the University of Mary Washington stands out as one hope amongst Educational Technology’s adoration of mega scale, management, analytics, automation, and tall tall towers of data, data, data.

Our "thoughts and prayers"...

And this all changes, now, with Orlando.

Reminds me of my experience contributing to the Civic Media Project.

Might we be edging into Dylan territory here?

This opens an interesting conversation about whose data and measures are more reliable. Given that we're in an election cycle, I've turned frequently to 538, how about others?

I appreciate reading this and wonder how other criteria might change our understanding of protest. And a question for Mark: Why were these five criteria chosen, were any discarded, and have any been added since this was published?

Chuck authors a wonderful blog.

Yes, though isn't this stance reflective of the individuals who create the source material, in this case news headlines? I'm curious about the interplay between human processes (from editorial meetings, to the creation of that which is newsworthy) and the automated - and how, to borrow from Mark, this reflects conviction.

While these may be "horrors" of another variety, I'm reminded of the recent effort by James Fallows at The Atlantic to chronicle "The Daily Trump: Filling a Time Capsule" so that readers might recall what remains so shocking about our daily political machinations.

Here's Jill Lepore's wonderful The Disruption Machine, my favorite critique of Christensen's schtick.

I'm curious why this automation matters, and how this relates to various human ambiguities - such as the nuance of meaning and interpretation - that invariably inform how we protest, why, for whom, and under what circumstances.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFc8glsWjgU

This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes, from Patricia Williams's The Alchemy of Race and Rights:

That life is complicated is a fact of great analytic importance.

And a positively (and positive) anti-corporate logic. Witness the rhetoric of "solutions" so pervasive in at least Silicon Valley tech and edtech.

Here's perhaps an interesting take on this issue form someone working on the tech side of edtech, trying to build tech for teachers and students, and help them leverage that tech for teaching and learning:

As I say above, it's obviously hard to market this kind of "untidiness." When people are "shopping" for technology for the classroom, most don't want things that half work or might work or try it and let us know what works/doesn't. That only goes so far.

Don't get me wrong, the early adopters of both products I've worked on were just the kind of people who wanted to be part of that kind of experiment and by collaborating closely with them, I believe I've been able to direct product development in both projects towards a more authentic pedagogical value. But that process doesn't, at least I don't think it can, "scale"--a term I realize has it's own problematic ideology.

But I also get frustrated with this lack of tidiness because I want to offer a good product/service/experience to my educational users. I don't want to disrupt the teaching and learning process that should be the focus of everyone's energy in a classroom by my own tool's buginess. I don't want to suggest that a tool can be invisible, but I also don't want a tool to be the focus.

Despite my hesitancy about "untidiness"--no doubt further entrenched by my own anal retentiveness--I'm really interested in how edtech, or perhaps indie edtech, might actually incorporate this kind of philosophy. As long as centers for teaching and learning, and teachers and learners themselves, are on board, I don't see why it can't work.

I'd argue that YouTube has increased dancing, but I'm mostly just using that as an excuse to share this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNEkZ7bvZw8

I am TOTALLY going to start using this phrase re: online spaces in general. Huzzah!

Yes! I love this idea of the "non-actual possible worlds" being the stuff of higher education. The multiversity.

Education should open up the possible, not constrain to the already known.

"...stretched all in attendance" - very well put. It shows that no matter what you brought to the Institute, you grew in some way. You stretched yourself into some new spaces. Well put Mark.

What could educators do to better prepare students to interact with digital media that leverages tech to go far beyond what paper and pen affords (tools, skills, etc.)?

This in itself can be a quote one uses when introducing Twitter to academics, I think

As we are talking about what we want to discuss with our students about putting their voices out in the open public, and maybe sharing cautionary tales with them, I think these four sentences are also so important to include. Let's talk more about marginalized voices as well as those who may not be acknowledging their privilege.

We're finding that V+R mapping is helping educators to visualise & reflect on their online practices, to share their perspectives on learning spaces, digital identities & openness, and to consider how these insights might inform their teaching practices. This post summarises our first V+R workshop with Donna & Dave last year - work is continuing, with both students & staff. https://catherinecronin.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/marvellous-mapping/

This is such a powerful point. Angry as we may be about the dangers of the DN narrative, we need sensitivity when working with people to deconstruct it. I'm thinking of staff who feel overwhelmed (e.g. increasing workload, info overload, pace of tech change, ruthless institutional policies) and may find in the DN narrative (always on offer, sadly) some form of comfort. The V+R process is a wonderful way of breaking through this - particularly when accompanied with humour & sensitivity (& plenty of coloured markers & coffee :) ).

Here I worry that the conversation comes back to that old argument about Techne vs Episteme. In education it seems to me that a focus on either of these is problematic and I have been considering if a focus on Phronesis could be the answer.

Yes, but I think it's less about our expertise and more about the inappropriateness of the customer-service model when applied to students. "The customer is always right" is an unfortunate approach for universities, where failing and experimenting need to be valued. If anything, the professorial expertise might be best at revealing mastery and consumerism as flawed models for critical inquiry and research.

Yes. I think of this is terms of open access to research, and the role institutions should play in supporting gold and green OA, but also in terms of the operating procedures of our public universities. As schools switch to slicker but more internal communications platforms (Slack, Yammer), I wonder if we will become even more insulated. Love the idea of public universities operating in the open: teaching, research, and administration.

reminds me of @lisaMLane 's Pedagogy First that I discovered in 2011 and finally managed to get back into and finish in 2014.

yes Pedagogy is always first, May be like an artist's idea or feeling that then can be expressed in so many different ways. ( Metaphors are tricky and never perfect but ..) :)

Technology can inspire new ways of augmenting/expanding/personalizing/connecting etc. :) pedagogy and learning.

And

It allows for the possibility of growth, change, and even failure. Opposed to - you were born this way and that is just the way it is.

This is a great reason for doing this kind of workshop but it also seems to me that there is merit in doing something like for the simple point of self-reflection.

Because it is never a good idea to limit (or celebrate) someone based on who, where, or when they were born but rather to judge them based on their character.

Let's call it what it is - It's an ageist metaphor.

This is an excellent point. I had it when I hear someone call themselves a dinosaur, and I hate it more if they do so and it's their main motivation for learning ed tech...

It's sad. something that I never really expected to happen in educational circles, not at that level.

I think it happens on blogs too sometimes that it starts looking like the political discussions I come across under some articles.

That's a pretty good way of summing it all up - should probably think of specific examples to use... should I consider mentioning these things in our Twitter workshop - value of Twitter for faculty (what about the shifting nature of Twitter - would it affect that?)

The chat will lead into a backchannel discussion of a “Disrupting DH” presentation at the 2016 Modern Language Association conference in Austin, TX.

Nice way to round out the feels here - and cool to have a space between this and the final quote. Nice work @chris_friend

Have felt odd using collaboration in open networks for some time now.

great point on common behaviours

Great Arthur Frank quote