Some seem focused on the act of preservation itself as an inherent good, but in so doing, they are excluding opportunities for change and improvement that could bring about more good.
A spot-on observation. What are the perceived losses for an institution that doesn't want to think beyond preservation?
In his book The Fifth Discipline, Peter M. Senge identified the importance of considering the various components of a given system, including infrastructures, processes, and the roles of those interacting within the system.
This seems like a must read for higher ed...
Students' reactions to the push for a return to normal are complex and nuanced, suggesting that they wish colleges and universities would retain the benefits and lessons of online learning by blending new solutions in the online space with what's effective about classroom learning, not merely rejecting or adopting either in toto.Footnote
Really appreciate this point in particular.
This approach of returning to an idealized "normal" begs discussion on what is normalized, for whom it is normalized, and a host of attending ethical issues either generated or exacerbated by emergency remote teaching this past year.
YES!
They can also anticipate maintenance needs and design for them, by choosing durable materials and conducting lifecycle cost analyses and environmental impact studies.
Architects can anticipate these needs, but do they always? And who listens to the architects to ensure that these needs are met? In the context of higher ed, I'm thinking of all the ways in which ed policy experts, etc. may anticipate those needs, but stakeholders in charge may not always be responsive to them.
How can science and technology scholars build more bridges with architects, librarians, and other professionals engaged with stewardship?
I'd add so many other professions to this list: customer service reps, daycare workers, mothers...
maintenance and repair have always been shaped by the political, social, cultural, and ecological contexts of technology (and, more broadly, techne or craft).
YES. This shaping has perhaps always felt somewhat invisible too: those who maintain are often those who go unseen (I suppose that's the social/cultural dimension here).
I’m not talking about the election of new officials or the release of new technologies, but rather the everyday work of maintenance, caretaking, and repair.
Very provocative to think about "everyday work" as a starting point for conversations about modern senses of place/space.
The first,F2F meeting of students’ writing groups involves giving themselves a name.
This could be modified really well for a fully online environment too. In Zoom, students could choose their own breakout rooms and give each breakout room a name! Then, they could annotate each other's work in real time during a writing workshop (maybe not in Bb, but in Google Docs or MS Teams...)
This signifying back and forth, the long running metaphors that shape entire threads, and thenthe tricksters who keep popping up, as bad as they wanna be, reminded me of Flava Flav fromPublic Enemy back in the day (not his current antics to find minstrel-love on cable television)
I love this way of describing what can happen in online discussion threads at their most vibrant. There's definitely potential to "Flava Flav" with flexible invitations for students to do so.
Freshman writers are re-envisioned in this kind of cyberspace as constructors of andco-participants in black intellectual and rhetorical traditions...now AfroDigitized.
This "re-envisioning" reminds me a bit of Afrofuturist movements broadly speaking. Online realms can be a realm of possibility!
(1) the politics of technology,race, identity, and social/economic stratification and (2) the politics of my students’ writingand my own vernacular teaching in the classroom.
I appreciate that Dr. Kynard brings these two strands into conversation. Too often, these are seen as disconnected, but we have to put what we do in the classroom into context with the larger politics of technology, race, and identity. Teaching IS a political act.
way, we asked the panelists not simply to identify what might be impactful but to anticipate just what that impact might be.
Another super smart revision here. The questions asked within this heuristic suggest an awareness of how the culture of higher education impacts adoption and practice with new technologies and practices.
As any close observer of postsecondary teaching and learning knows, technology by itself does not yield the greatest impact on learning; it does so when it is embedded in a scaffolding of support for learners and instructors.
I appreciate this re-framing of this section insofar as it embeds technologies and practices together. The material informs what's happening in the classroom, and what's happening in the classroom can change the material conditions pursued or altered thereafter.
The constant digital connection makes online safety a notable concern for students, parents, and teachers. With that said, learning and practicing solid cybersecurity habits is crucial to a positive college experience.
Wow, this sounds really timely!
We need to find places to highlight how classrooms are spaces of inclusion and oppression, are spaces that value and actively resist diverse identities, histories, and knowledges.
I think this last point is particularly key, and I'm wondering where those places are to do that work. I realize that's the question the authors are leaving us with, and perhaps the answer here is that we each need to find our own spaces based on our own needs. But I wonder how other folks are identifying these places and doing this challenging work.
navigate the risks while holding ourselves accountable to take up the work.
I also think a risk worth noting is the job itself, especially in higher education. Not only can adjuncts and precarious faculty lose their jobs over student complaints, but these same faculty can be subject to online harassment and doxing. I feel like there's a need for teachers now to be trained not only in conversations about politics, but also to be trained to combat potential harassment online.
Bodily responses and sensations are also central in accounts of teachers’ and students’ experiences of the election and its aftermath: eyes spilling, voices quivering, limbs trembling, arms embracing, feet marching.
Wow, what a powerful summary of how the body is implicated in the work of testimony. Our lived, learning experiences require not just cognitive engagement, but an embodied sense of real trauma. This connection also seems to tie in well with the SEL argument made earlier: if we are to make a case for SEL, perhaps we embed in that case an attention to how the body itself reflects emotion, how our lived selves in an embodied classroom space cannot ever be separated from social-emotional connection.
Listening to teachers and students that day and in the weeks leading up to and following the 2016 election provided striking and poignant reminders that students of all ages carry with them into school the myriad worries, ideas, and oft-repeated phrases of indoctrination spouted on television, websites, and in neighborhoods.
It is impossible to escape the myriad cultural influences that impact all of us. Acknowledging the role of this kind of cultural indoctrination and how it impacts our work with students is critical to beginning the work of healing, I think.
empowering efforts.
This is such a fantastic paragraph for establishing why this work is important. I'm wondering about community buy-in here as well. How can we get communities themselves to see the value of what students offer?
PWR courses are fundamentally courses in rhetoric.
Wow, what is rhetoric?