33 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2023
    1. DeRosa, Robin. Interdisciplinary Studies: A Connected Learning Approach. Rebus Communities, 2016. https://press.rebus.community/idsconnect/.

      found via <br /> Sheridan, Victoria. “A Pedagogical Endeavor.” Inside Higher Ed, August 9, 2017. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2017/08/09/robin-derosas-oer-pedagogical-endeavor.

      On first blush it looks like I've read portions of some of these chapters as blogposts on the authors' original websites. Should be interesting to see how those are linked/credited.

      Given the writing contained in the book it would be interesting to see Pressbooks and/or the Rebus Community allow support for having the lead of a project be credited as an "editor" on the front page rather than to default them as an "author".

    1. In the fall of 2015, she assigned students to write chapter introductions and translate some texts into modern English.

      continuing from https://hypothes.is/a/ddn4qs8mEe2gkq_1T7i3_Q

      Potential assignments:

      Students could be tasked with finding new material or working off of a pre-existing list.

      They could individually be responsible for indexing each individual sub-text within a corpus by: - providing a full bibliography; - identifying free areas of access for various versions (websites, Archive.org, Gutenberg, other OER corpora, etc.); Which is best, why? If not already digitized, then find a copy and create a digital version for inclusion into an appropriate repository. - summarizing the source in general and providing links to how it fits into the broader potential corpus for the class. - tagging it with relevant taxonomies to make it more easily searchable/selectable within its area of study - editing a definitive version of the text or providing better (digital/sharable) versions for archiving into OER repositories, Project Gutenberg, Archive.org, https://standardebooks.org/, etc. - identifying interesting/appropriate tangential texts which either support/refute their current text - annotating their specific text and providing links and cross references to other related texts either within their classes' choices or exterior to them for potential future uses by both students and teachers.

      Some of this is already with DeRosa's framework, but emphasis could be on building additional runway and framing for helping professors and students to do this sort of work in the future. How might we create repositories that allow one a smörgåsbord of indexed data to relatively easily/quickly allow a classroom to pick and choose texts to make up their textbook in a first meeting and be able to modify it as they go? Or perhaps a teacher could create an outline of topics to cover along with a handful of required ones and then allow students to pick and choose from options in between along the way. This might also help students have options within a course to make the class more interesting and relevant to their own interests, lives, and futures.

      Don't allow students to just "build their own major", but allow them to build their own textbooks and syllabi with some appropriate and reasonable scaffolding.

  2. Jun 2022
    1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N4LYLwa2lSq9BizDaJDimOsWY83UMFqqQc1iL2KEpfY/edit

      P.R.O.B.E. rubric participation (exceeds, meets fails), respectful, open, brave, educational

      Mentioned in the chat at Hypothes.is' SOCIAL LEARNING SUMMIT: Spotlight on Social Reading & Social Annotation

      in the session on Bringing the Margins to Center: Introduction to Social Annotation

      Looking at the idea of rubrication, I feel like I ought to build a Tampermonkey or Greasemonkey script that takes initial capitals on paragraphs and makes them large, red, or even illuminated. Or perhaps something that converts the CSS of Hypothes.is and makes it red instead of yellow?

      What if we had a collection of illuminated initials and some code that would allow for replacing capitals at the start of paragraphs? Maybe a repository like giphy or some of the meme and photo collections for reuse?

  3. Apr 2022
    1. Rating System: 0 = Painfully bad! Never worth watching. 1 = Bad. Only for the most dedicated fans. 2 = A mediocre episode, possibly worth skipping if new to Star Trek. 3 = Good! Generally enjoyable, worth watching if new to Star Trek. 4 = Great! An example of why we love Star Trek. 5 = One of the best. A classic.
  4. Sep 2021
    1. Provide specific feedback to improve perfor-mance

      This may be a possible student benefit, but it often relies upon the instructor adding those specifics. Adding too many specific criteria to rubrics makes them unwieldy and potentially overwhelming.

  5. Apr 2021
    1. {Graphics}☐ Great - ☐ Good - ☑ Simple - ☐ Bad{Gameplay}☐ Great - ☑ Good - ☐ Meh - ☐ Unplayable{Audio}☐ Great - ☑ Good - ☐ Nothing Special -☐ Bad{Audience}☑ Kids - ☑ Teens - ☑ Adults{Difficulty} ☐ Too easy -☑ Just Right - ☐ Easy to Play/Hard to Master - ☐ Too Hard{Story}☐ Great - ☐ Good -☐ Simple - ☐ Barely a Story - ☑ No Story{Game Time}☐ 100+ - ☐ 61-99 - ☐ 39-60 - ☐ 11-30 -☑ 0-10 {Overall}Very enjoyable Chess Puzzle Game that should appeal to both Chess and Puzzle Gamers.
    1. [0.5] Controls & Training & Help[0.1] Menu & Settings[0.4] Sound & Music[0.1] Graphics[0.1] Game Design[0.3] Game Story[0.1] Game Content[0] Completion time (level/game)?[0] is it Enjoyable & Fun?[0] Could it hold a spot in Favorites? (& if the Game can be repeatedly played again)[0] BONUS point: Multi-Player related[0] BONUS point: Review for VRStars received: 1.6/10
  6. Mar 2021
    1. One word for each aspect of this game. Story - N/A.Gameplay - Excellent.Graphics - Minimal.Sound - Splendid.Music - Elegant.Overall - Delightful.
  7. Feb 2021
    1. [0.4] Controls & Training & Help[0.2] Menu & Settings[0.2] Sound & Music[0.1] Graphics[0.2] Game Design[0.3] Game Story[0.2] Game Content[0.4] Time to complete feels ok? (& if the Game can be repeatedly played again)[0] is it Enjoyable & Fun?[0] Could it hold a spot in Favorites?[0] BONUS point: Multi-Player related[0] BONUS point: Review for VR
  8. Dec 2020
  9. Apr 2020
    1. Rubric | Measurements

      subjective measures and objective measures.

  10. Mar 2020
    1. Art Rubric for Assessment of the Discussion & Writing on Art History, Aesthetics and Art Criticism - an Assessment Form

      rubric for writing about art

  11. Nov 2019
  12. May 2019
  13. Dec 2018
  14. Sep 2018
  15. Aug 2017
  16. Jul 2016
    1. The Winchester manuscript contains no title, no table of contents, and no page numbering.  As you can imagine, reading such a text would be difficult without graphic assistance.  The Winchester scribes provided it in the text by setting off names of characters in red ink, a practice known as "rubrication."  The names in red also included two non-human nouns which acted as agents doing things in the text, the "Sankgreal" or Holy Grail (which healed and wounded like a knight), and the "Rounde Table," which was a concept in whose name knights might act of take oaths.  However, the scribes main ongoing assistance to readers occurs in the manuscript's  margins.
    1. It is written right-to-left in hieratic, the Egyptian cursive form of hieroglyphs, in black ink with explanatory glosses in red ink.
    1. The text of a Book of the Dead was written in both black and red ink, regardless of whether it was in hieroglyphic or hieratic script. Most of the text was in black, with red used for the titles of spells, opening and closing sections of spells, the instructions to perform spells correctly in rituals, and also for the names of dangerous creatures such as the demon Apep.[57] The black ink used was based on carbon, and the red ink on ochre, in both cases mixed with water.
  17. Jul 2015
  18. Jun 2015