Humble school teacher here, but this sounds very right to me.

Makes sense to me from a discursive stand point.

Even if I annotated as "only me" on a group annotation for a group I'm a member of?

Wah?

I see this as something key to retain depending on if it causes problems.

Use case: a prof has preannotated a text for a course--perhaps as a public group. She wants to use this every semester. She'll use groups so that each semester's students have their own conversation, but that conversation can and should include her, maybe they could just be public annotations.

test

test

There's something naive here in her conception of the mediated process of information production and dissemination.

So apply this to the above mention of Clinton's email. Does the story merit coverage? this much coverage?

To me, it's something more: it's the ability to call it by name in one sentence and then in the next completely ignore it's presence. That's the problem it would seem with TNC's colleagues at The Atlantic, one day calling out Clinton calling out Trump's racism, the next pointing out Trump's racism.

To me, it's something more: it's the ability to call it by name in one sentence and then in the next completely ignore it's presence. That's the problem it would seem with TNC's colleagues at The Atlantic, one day calling out Clinton calling out Trump's racism, the next pointing out Trump's racism.

God damn, TNC consistently hits the nail on the head when it comes to contemporary US race relations.

Huh....

Ding.

Check.

Awesome.

This study was cited in a New Yorker article on becoming a better online reader.

To do

CC @judell

More benefits: as a study tool, review

Hmmm...

Focuses class discussion

Critical, analytical thinking

Love this phrase!

More benefits.

Benefits of collaborative annotation.

Suggests the two are exclusive when they don't need to be.

The problem h solves?

test

Duh.

Student directed research? Any TX area students?

workshop?

Agree with everything above and below about interrogating the underlying pedagogies of edtech tools and software developers collaborating with teachers, etc. but are AUPs written by software developers?

Would be amazing to see these annotated!

Fascinating and disturbing find.

LOL. Looks like I annotated this article with hypothes.is a while back when I was researching a talk on surveilance in edtech.

I've long been intrigued by this type of advisory surveilance after hearing a very compelling defense of its use at a conference: the claim, by the President of Georgia State, was that these programs did indeed improve retention.

In full expectation of being bombarded by dissenting comments, I'm interested in troubling the standard opposition of surveilance as applied to technology by many critical academics. (And I say this with a long love affair with Foucault et al.)

Without going to far off topic here, is it totally fair to move from the censorship of information that is the focus here to what could be at least I'd hope a more nuanced use of data to inform?

Not to derail this great discussion, but Isn't the Internet already a filter? We need to teach students that even Google is always already filtered...

wow

So this is an opt-in project.

What's missing here is the agency of the learners. There's not reason such a tool/study can't empower (and protect) the student in this process. As described here, they do sound a bit like a rat in a maze.

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.

Observation and experience require a subject?

hi!

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...

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.

Indeed, it's almost an oxymoron.

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

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

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.

So this is a scientists POV, that's kind of interesting. I guess the social media pressure is largely (though not exclusively) around building lab brands?

Perhaps it's worth pointing out that there are many different ways to use social media, academically and otherwise. Kim Kardashian, my friend from high school, and myself all have different ways of using these tools. Some are worthy or social critique, some annoying, some fun, some empowering.

Not sure why Instagram is the go-to social media platform here. I would have gone with Twitter which, at least in the humanities, indeed does seem to serve a critical role.

At least in academia, employability is definitely not correlated to social media presence, though I would actually argue it should be: as evidence of the public scholarship of socially networked scholars.

Is this a thing? Particularly in academia? I never got any advice about careers from someone in such a role, none the less a protip about the role of social media in such a career.

This is an assumption about the role of social media and the goals of socially networked academics that is not supported.

Title kind of sets the tone as rather condescending.

What do you mean by "go wrong" here? Annotate in the wrong place?

I'd like to see an example here. I know this is a problem we need to address with how poetry line breaks are not rendered in annotation referents.

So, what you want is a dashboard of student activity? Where you can get a count of annotations but also respond? Would you want to respond directly in app or privately?

In any case, let's definitely talk further about your needs here.

In its initial state, the alpha app will simply activate h automatically on select PDFs and public webpages within the LMS.

But, we do hope to quickly build out a feature that would allow the export of a set of annotations (student A's annotations on text 1) into speedgrader. This should allow for easy check on completion as well as a way to offer substantive feedback on a student's annotation practice more broadly.

This is desperately needed. The latter is coming sooner than the former.

This is awesome news!

Do they really see something, though? It's neat that the game is sending people to parks and landmarks, but how much are they actually taking in of that real world?

It strikes me that web annotation is a kind of "augmented reading" that might be compared to augmented reality programs like Pokemon Go and interrogated/celebrated in similar ways.

Do we lose focus on our surroundings while social reading--distracted from the realities around us by the virtual? Or does social reading help us make connections, help us to see the world around us better?

Personally speaking, I've both discovered a piece of public art that I've never known about before and nearly walked into oncoming traffic as a result of playing around with the new Pokemon Go game.

Love the simplicity of this line. Hillary should pocket it for the debates.

Sounds a bit like a parent talking to a child which seems about right.

Annotate this article with images from Jacob Riis.

But haven't Democrats been doing this, like, forever?

It was here that in delivery, after the crowd booed at the first mention of the GOP nominee, that Obama ad-libbed one the best lines of the convention: "Don't boo, vote!"

Given the jeers from "Bernie or Bust" delegates over the first few days of the convention, it was hard not to read the line as a broader rebuke to those who might sit this one out.

This is a powerful line (read: burn), basically lumping together Trump--the homegrown demogogue--and terrorists.

Someone should write a book on these different knowledge making projects (Wikipedia, Genius, Reddit included) and the different interfaces they created and the philosophies and politics that underlay those interfaces and the communities that become of them...

I'm fascinated by this point.

This was/is one of the critiques of (Rap) Genius as well: hip as its authoritative voice was, it nonetheless moved toward the encyclopedia. Though the company has since pivoted to allow more individual commentary than encyclopedic exposition--I don't think they've quite worked this out in the UI yet--the original site, and the part I think that is still most compelling was the Wikipedia for rap lyrics.

But from a pedagogical perspective, that expository mode of analysis was really only one, and perhaps not even the most important, use of collaborative annotation. For my part, I allowed teachers to duplicate texts and create their own versions, instructing their students to annotate however thy wanted them to: authoritatively, discursively, inquisitively, with GIFs.

So this forking is something I've long not grasped from this wiki revival (and the whole git movement). What if the need for consensus has less to do with the need for singular, encyclopedic voice than simply a single page. That is, it's a UI problem more than a content problem.

Perhaps I need to spend more time in GitHub et al., but generally I don't want to read a bunch of separate takes on a thing. For me, the window of time in which a hashtag is useful for knowledge gathering is quite short. I feel like I would get lost among the forks.

Part of the reason that I like annotation is that the "fork" of the original content is not too distant and still very much attached to a single page. To me that trail seems cleaner and clearer than duplicating content and starting a new path...

From a literary theory POV, it's also antithetical to (post)modern thinking about how we make meaning of texts.

Such an important question!

What's the role of content here?

This is perhaps the single most important (and in retrospect most obvious) lesson I learned as a young teacher. It's not just how we "prefer to learn," though it's everything from what we bring to the learning moment, what we had for breakfast, how much we slept last night, etc.

Should be "Melania Trump: From Small-Town Illinois to Doorstep of the White House," in following Trump's plagiarism of Michelle Obama's 2008 DNC convention speech.

This fearmongering tone was continued on night one of the 2016 GOP convention.

Like how about open education tools and app stores?

This has become a go-to reference for both defending and critiquing new media. See here for example.

Who's actually making this argument in such stark terms?

This is obviously personal, but why not include folks working on education software? (I work on the software side of edtech but consider myself an educator) I realize that Watters in particular has a view of edtech as largely unaligned with the interests of practicing educators. And that criticism (and exclusion) is often warranted. But if we perpetuate the dichotomy between educators and educational software developers (broadly defined) then it would seem we don't stand much of a chance of rectifying the overall situation.

This boggles my mind.

Scary.

I'm just not so sure the two can be so easily separated...

UGH

Oh, there it is!

Heretofore known as the non-hug that elected President Donald Trump.

Can't resist: I can think of other reasons why this might be the case and they don't have to do with the fashion/opinions of the profs.

A little scary that these sweeping statements are the work of someone in graduate school for law. They sound like they're written by someone much younger.

As the professor points out below, this "invisible 'more'" (or "only") is one of the fundamental misreadings of the #BlackLivesMatter slogan and movement.

test

What a perfect, terrifying neologism for the Trump movement..

Great campaign slogan for Trump.

Wofford is a former US senator who was a surrogate for Obama during the campaign and had just introduced the candidate before the speech. He has had an uncanny presence at many important moments in US history. Here he is with JFK in 1962--the occasion was the first contingent of the Peace Corps which Wofford helped start.

This assumes people understand how email works.

What role might h play in such an ecosystem?

• facilitate communication between disparate teachers and students
• allow teacher to monitor student independent work

Very much aligns with the NGDLE movement at EDUCAUSE.

Focus on pedagogy

focus on student-centered pedagogy

Right, the whole NSA thing seems even scarier when I imagine Trump not Obama in charge. I guess that's in part the whole finger on the button argument.

They invest in tools, esp early stage.

They make direct investments in innovative tools