5 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2017
    1. These distinctions are helpful to me. Understanding that Goog & FB are no longer direct competitors gives this scenario of the 'trinet" a lot of credibility.

  2. Aug 2016
    1. There is something insidious about the way we talk about learning. Something insidious in the keynote format. Something pretty horrendous happens when we assume all ears are the same ears. And that all ears are trained to listen in the same way to the person at the podium. When we do that, we’re silencing voices that might speak.

      There is something here that kind of breaks my heart, that bursts my bubble. The assumptions we make about who should speak and be listened to, and what that listening will look like, which patterns of hierarchy will be reinforced. Because part of me also wants to give that keynote. Be that speaker. She who shall be heard. There are other avenues, and I appreciate the pointer to what is packaged in a particular format.

  3. Mar 2016
    1. and I must always let that stirring call me to critical practice in my teaching.

      Being stirred, being called - these require being open, permeable and thus, vulnerable. This is where we lay aside our armor of credibility and create space for the unknown, unanticipated to enter. This is emotional work and for many of us, scary work. There are many reasons for academia to cloak itself in layer upon layer of credibility, rigor and firm hierarchies. To suggest that love inspires you to be in fact more critical in your practice, defies the logic of the academy. This is part of what I find so compelling here: turning established assumptions on their heads. I have more to say about callings but will save for another space & occasion. (But Gregg Levoy, Callings. 1999.)

    2. Love in pedagogical work is an orientation. It’s a commitment to the personhood of learners, to their intersectionality, to their deep emotional backgrounds, to the authenticity of their lives. It is a decision to commit first to the community of learners and second to the material we’ve come to teach.

      "Orientation" is a powerful concept here. At a seminar for Gestalt Coaching, participants were asked "How do you orient?" It's not only a question of how we get our bearings but also where they come from. I used to think I was oriented towards people and during that seminar I realized that it wasn't people, per se, it was relationships. Relationships both stimulated my most active curiosity and my deepest anxieties. So "Love" as an orientation speaks deeply to me. My content area (physical education) is my vehicle for building learning relationships with my students. Without the relationship, there is no learning.

    3. But the rough disorientation of the love I’ve felt for the people here has altered me.

      "rough disorientation" stands out for me. We know that love can do this to us but to the rational, academic mind - a meeting of scholars & learners is hardly the context. And, as you make plain, indeed it certainly is, can be and should be more often. Giving love a platform in our academic communities is among the most radical ideas out there. Love is a danger. We may experience disorientation, among other things.