Correct me if I'm wrong, but we should always be doing this. Every class I have taken at UNBC emphasizes that you should write all your papers as though the person reading them has no prior knowledge of the field, and your intro or abstract should have the hook and explain the importance of the research, no?

I feel like this is the ideal that we strive for when we talk about "engaging critically with the material." When you are actively contributing to the work that you are studying.

This is extremely relatable even still, and one of the main things I think is cool about programs like hypothes.is. I know we have 2 English Profs auditing this class, but as much as I love literature, one of the main reasons I switched out of the English program was because I felt like unless I became an author of original content myself, I would just be wasting time re-hashing the same theories that hundreds of others have had before me about the same handful of classic works that everybody had studied and that I would thus never create or contribute anything to the world. This stuff seems like the path away from that inevitability.

I love seeing an old method, program, or way of doing things stand the test of time and remain unbeaten through years of innovation. It's just really cool to see something make such a lasting mark, as well as often seeing people decades or centuries later (though not in computer context) go back to traditional/basic methods because they just work better.

I mean I have always known that the authorship of many influential works, both fictional and otherwise are/were hotly contested, and that many took it upon themselves to discover once and for all the given authors identity, but I did not realize that even that far back, it was done so scientifically! With computers and statistical analysis, when I would have pictured the earliest debates on these topics to be mainly "who is most likely?" "who stands to gain/lose the most?" "who shares these opinions?"

If you are interested in tracking the origins of scientific concepts, and aren't completely sick of hearing about covid-19, I highly recommend giving this article a read, it details the origin of a major mistake that we based a LOT of the early covid-19 safety protocols off of!

This idea is really cool to me, both for the increased understanding it can offer us into battles of the past, as well as for the implications it could have on the future. This is not to say that I hope we utilize these programs to give ourselves the best advantage in war, because ideally, we shouldn't be in any. Moreso (and i imagine it is already in use) it can aid us with city planning, running algorithms and 'what-if' scenarios regarding natural disasters for instance, in order to better prepare before we begin a project. What comes to mind first is development of earthquake-resistant foundations for buildings. I think digital mapping allows us to make changes and walk through such physical scenarios with much greater ease than any previous method.

Week 1 end: A marker to indicate that Week 1 of the Engelbart Framework Project ends above here - we are focusing on Section A and B of the introduction (but feel free to annotate anywhere)

Week 1 start: A marker to indicate that Week 1 of the Engelbart Framework Project starts here and includes Section A and B of the introduction.

Week 1 Teaching Notes:

Creating THE Syllabus: a thought project

Queer Mainstreams and the Queer Cannon

Creating an OPEN syllabus -- a way to think about this course more broadly

"If it can't be shared, it can't be taught" : Free/Queer/CUNY

Turning principles into projects: shared labor

So our TO-Do list includes: finding resources, using technology, knowing our context, sharing the labor

Assignment for Week 2:

1. Subscribe to CUNY Commons and enroll in our site

2. Begin identifying and evaluating OER for an undergrad queer studies course (of some kind)

3. Begin researching the CUNY contexts for that course as one way of evaluating the OER.

4. Begin posting your findings to our Free Queer CUNY Commons site. Tag your name and keywords

Questions for Class Thursday, Feb. 15

–why call it the CUNY ”Commons”? What does that word tap into in terms of intellectual communities? –what are the guiding principles and practices of the Commons? When it works best, what do you see it doing? –how does the Commons enable us to work across CUNY? Here, you might even just step us through parts of the Commons, linking functionality to the needs of academic organization.

–What is Wordpress? What’s the bigger Wordpress picture? –When you see Wordpress working well for instructors, what does that look like? –How does Wordpress connect to the uses of open educational resources and the idea of shared academic labor?

Working in a school district that is moving forward each year with the use of technology, it is interesting to see how different teachers react to the introduction of new resources available. When we were introduced to Google classroom, there was a large pushback from some in our elementary building due to the belief students would have no need for it. Fast forward three years, and it is now used through our entire building, K-2. When new ideas and resources are presented, it's crucial to keep an open mind to explore what is available to you.

This is interesting to me, as I use Twitter and see up to the minute updates from various stories. While reporters and writers have to go through these steps, I don't believe every member of the media complies with the technology readily available at the moment a story happens.