3,575 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2017
    1. When you run a technology company, not surprisingly, the answer to everything, including the things you know nothing about, is more technology.

      This is a fair point, though I don't think the portfolios of the major funders in education are all ed-techy, though they likely lean that way.

    2. That’s a tall order for two young people with no background in child development or education

      Does the author imagine that Mark and Priscilla are the only employees at the foundation? Or that the foundation is doing this work directly and not through funding organizations that whose mission is more directly related to education.

      Here for example, is the bio for the president of education at CZI:

      James “Jim” Shelton is the President of the Chan Zuckerberg Education Initiative and was most recently President & Chief Impact Officer of 2U, Inc. Previously, the Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education and the Program Director for Education at the Gates Foundation, he has held a broad range of management, policy, and programmatic roles, which have made a meaningful social impact. Jim holds a bachelor's degree in computer science from Morehouse College as well as master’s degrees in both business administration and education from Stanford. He resides in Washington, D.C., with his wife Sonia and their two sons.

    3. both have embarked on massive projects to impose their ideological visions of education on schoolchildren across the country.

      Not saying that there's no influence from the top to the bottom, but this is not even close to how CZI or any philanthropic foundation operates.

    4. None of that qualifies her to even teach in a public school, but her massive wealth apparently makes her an expert in the history and curriculum of public education, as well as child development and pedagogy.

      There are some reasonable points made in this article, but the argument that the endower of a philanthropic foundation needs to be a trained expert in a field they fund research in is not one of them. Do we really imagine that it's just Priscilla and Mark sitting there asking themselves what they think would be best for public education in America? No, these are organizations that are heavily staffed with people that are indeed trained and experienced in the respective verticals they work in.

    1. Economics tends to ignore three things: culture’s effect on decision making, the usefulness of stories in explaining people’s actions, and ethical considerations.

      Yikes!

    2. STEM-only mindset is all wrong. The main problem is that it encourages students to approach their education vocationally—to think just in terms of the jobs they’re preparing for.

      But why is vocational a bad thing?

    3. we need to think critically about their human context—something humanities graduates happen to be well trained to do.

      In your face, sciences and math!

    1. Now that many of the biggest tech companies operate like media businesses, trafficking in information, they’re in a race to create new products to charm and track consumers.

      I want to explore this whole tech companies acting like media companies thing...

    1. Trump has made the negation of Obama’s legacy the foundation of his own. And this too is whiteness.

      Again, the application of critical race theories of whiteness explains much that might seem absurd about Trump's reign.

    2. But that is the point of white supremacy—to ensure that that which all others achieve with maximal effort, white people (particularly white men) achieve with minimal qualification.

      I have yet to hear a better explanation for Trump's success...

    3. whiteness—that bloody heirloom which cannot ensure mastery of all events but can conjure a tailwind for most of them

      What a brilliant definition of "whiteness" hidden in this sentence. Whiteness never fully controls but always benefits.

    1. removing barriers to online learning, and

      Even the barriers of the workshop itself by including the entire OLC community both on site and unable to attend...

    1. Tools that redefine the spaces and places where learning occurs (virtual reality, augmented reality, holograms)

      Annotation is a different redefining of space: working within and beyond the LMS, for and beyond a single classroom, even university, and the very space of the web itself.

  2. Aug 2017
    1. our current practice and policy was on par with what universities needed. It then became an issue of specifically having a legally binding agreement that protected the universities, professors, and students.

      I really like this. "It's in our TOS but we're happy to sign something more/something legally binding."

    1. This article, published in The Times but based on a book on an alt-right conspiracy book, did a lot to tarnish Clinton's reputation among conservatives leading up to the 2016 election.

      Margaret Sullivan, Public Editor of the paper at the time, eventually had to publish this uncomfortable defense of the article.

    1. “I come from a blue-collar, Irish Catholic, pro-Kennedy, pro-union family of Democrats,” says Bannon,

      It's hard for me to reconcile at least the myth of this demographic with the reality of the alt-right.

    2. stream of Seinfeld royalties,

      Wah?

    3. the insouciant African predator of YouTube fame
    4. Jeff Spicoli

    5. he wants to take down both Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush.

      One year after this article was published he did just that.

    1. Embracing a culture of sharing that breaks down silos while maintaining ethical and privacy standards will be paramount.

      This is gnarly stuff though and deserves its own deep dive/bullet point.

    2. The embedding of maker culture in K–12 education has made students active contributors to the knowledge ecosystem rather than merely participants and consumers of knowledge.

      How does this get balanced with privacy concerns? I have yet to see an argument or practice that successfully navigates this tension?

    1. My hope is that technologists also get involved in the political process — in government, in think-tanks, universities, and so on.

      Yup.

    2. Computerized systems, for example, are exempt from many normal product-liability laws. This was originally done out of the fear of stifling innovation.

      All this stuff really needs to be revisited, intellectually and legally...

    3. In general, Americans tend to mistrust government and trust corporations. Europeans tend to trust government and mistrust corporations.

      Interesting contrast. Perhaps ironic? Historically one might think it'd be the opposite.

    4. Surveillance is the business model of the internet. Everyone is under constant surveillance by many companies, ranging from social networks like Facebook to cellphone providers. This data is collected, compiled, analyzed, and used to try to sell us stuff. Personalized advertising is how these companies make money, and is why so much of the internet is free to users. We’re the product, not the customer.

      Nice succinct statement on the issue.

    1. The first world, the movie might seem to argue, works less to provide its citizens with pleasure than to shape their desire by constructing others through their pain, lack, and death. Instead of giving Texans a health care system, for example, late capitalism gives them the illegal immigrant, to hate, to fear, and to dis-identify with. Prisons do more and more of the system-maintaining work that was once done by schools and hospitals: instead of giving us something to want, they give us something to fear, hate, and kill. And so, we eat ourselves.

      Terrifying!

    2. But if you’re the kind of leftist who thinks that the means of production just need to be in better hands—Obama, for example, instead of George W. Bush, or Elizabeth Warren instead of Obama, or Bernie Sanders instead of Elizabeth Warren, and so on—then this movie buries a poison pill inside its protein bar: soylent green is people, you idiot, its kids, you’re eating kids, and you like the taste.

      But the premise then was incorrect: that it wasn't the system it was the management.

      To argue against reform in this way is to make a very strong claim: capitalism eats babies. Can we really stand by that?

    1. At more than half of schools, at least a third of seniors were unable to make a cohesive argument, assess thequality of evidence in a document or interpret data in a table, The Wall Street Journal found after reviewing thelatest results from dozens of public colleges and universities that gave the exam be

      test

    Annotators

    1. Anybody who wanders around the world saying, “Yes, I’m from Texas,” deserves whatever happens to him.

      Funny because I don't think Texas was the crazy conservative state it is today back then.

    2. I shook my head and said nothing; just stared at him for a moment, trying to look grim. “There’s going to be trouble,” I said. “My assignment is to take pictures of the riot.”

      So good, what a prankster.

    1. Perhaps we should only use open as a modifier for other pedagogies,

      I feel like this is where consensus between the parties divided above might come in. I don't know the right -ism, but aren't there many fundamental and shared pedagogical principles between open web and open resource advocates when it comes to how these things effect teaching and learning?

    2. In the United States, before 1989 no creative work was protected by copyright unless the creator opted in to protection by reigstering. Open (free + permissions) was the default. It was only in 1989, when the US joined the Berne Convention, that protection of all creative works became automatic and closed became the new default, requiring people to opt-in to sharing.

      Wow, I did not know about this historical shift.

    1. Just as the hatred came from one side only, the care did not come from “many sides.”
    2. This is not about “free speech.” It never was. There is no “free speech” if anyone brandishes firearms to intimidate those they despise. You can’t argue with the armed. The Nazis told us their intentions clearly on Saturday. This, to them, is about “blood and soil.” They are serious. So are we.

      Right fucking on.

    1. "The country is badly polarized, and people want to look at what’s happening at the universities and put it into that narrative: It’s red or its blue," she said. "But that is not what’s going on here; that’s not what happened here. What happened here is infra­red and ultraviolet; it’s beyond the spectrum of normal political discourse. Both Republican and Democratic elected leaders denounced what happened here. Seeking to normalize this as ordinary politics is the mistake." "What happened here yesterday wasn’t about ideas," she continued. "People weren’t out there arguing with each other. They were clobbering each other. That’s a very different situation. That’s violence. Violence is not free speech."
    1. African Americans do not need science-fiction, or really any fiction, to tell them that that “history is still with us.”

      I'd argue that this is the most specious claim made in this article. There's a rich history of African American fiction and specifically science fiction that deals with issues of racial prejudice in very interesting and important ways. As a genre, fantasy is a powerful and unique way to engage with politics.

    2. Or would they address themselves to other less trod areas of Civil War history in the desire to say something new, in the desire to not, yet again, produce a richly imagined and visually beguiling lie?

      Fair point. I do find this idea--and the other approaches to counter-factual storytelling about the Civil War suggested above--to be more interesting.

    3. “show us how this history is still with us in a way no strictly realistic drama ever could.” And that really is the problem.

      But this is the main point of the critique thus far...

    4. Confederate is the kind of provocative thought experiment that can be engaged in when someone else’s lived reality really is fantasy to you, when your grandmother is not in danger of losing her vote, when the terrorist attack on Charleston evokes honest sympathy, but inspires no direct fear

      Again, I'm not so sure this is true. Plenty of black authors have engaged in various counter-factual or fantastic reimaginings of American racial history.

    5. the war is over for them

      Based on what exactly? It'd be one thing if the show was tone deaf to these realities, but I'm not sure we can make that claim based on the evidence about the show we have thus far.

    6. The Confederate flag is enmeshed in the state flag of Mississippi.

      Again, to me this just signals that this very different history is all the more urgent to confront than that of Nazi Germany.

    7. Hollywood has likely done more than any other American institution to obstruct a truthful apprehension of the Civil War, and thus modern America’s very origins

      Hasn't Hollywood, again more than many other American institutions, done a lot to combat racism and stereotypes? Aren't a number of HBO shows both in their production and theme doing exactly that work?

    8. For while the Confederacy, as a political entity, was certainly defeated, and chattel slavery outlawed, the racist hierarchy which Lee and Davis sought to erect, lives on.

      I don't understand why this absolutely true point doesn't make it all the more important to have stories told about those issues?

    1. It got part of the way there

      Does this mean they didn't complete the scanning effort? The archive is incomplete?

    2. without downloading or reading them.

      This is cool but the "reading of them" is the more radical proposition.

    3. Many of the university’s holdings “were invisible to the world,” Coleman says. Google’s involvement promised to change that.

      An important point for those who might immediately dismiss anything Google-related.

    4. “It’s hard to imagine going through a day doing the work we academics do without touching something that wouldn’t be there without Google Book Search,”

      But this is a statement that would align with Somer's lament above, no?

    5. a persistent cultural challenge: how to balance copyright and fair use and keep everybody—authors, publishers, scholars, librarians—satisfied. That work still lies ahead.

      I'll be very interested to see how this gets negotiated moving forward.

    6. James Somer

      One of the most thoughtful programmers I've met, a former colleague at Genius.

    7. Image from Authors Guild

      What a wild image!

    1. The Declaration of Independence of The United States of America

      test

  3. Jul 2017
    1. The internet, indexing, and cheap storage have unwittingly conspired to make the mythical permanent record a reality.

      Love this connection between the VF song lyric and the surveillance of the modern Internet.

    1. If you are using the Services by invitation of a Customer, whether that Customer is your employer, another organization, or an individual, that Customer determines its own policies regarding storage, access, modification, deletion, sharing, and retention of Customer Data which may apply to your use of the Services.

      Does this mean individual orgs using Slack determine this stuff for their employees? Where are those terms articulated?

    1. students are entering into an asymmetrical relationship with platforms.

      This is a really powerful point.

    2. We might think about digital redlining as the process by which different schools get differential journal access

      This is a problem, but isn't a problem of institutional funding rather than a technological one?

    3. "In an age of smartphones and social media, young people don't follow the news as much as it follows them.

      Terrifying statement!

    4. As platforms and advertisers seek to perfect these strategies, colleges and universities rush to mimic those strategies in order to improve retention.4

      So the problem isn't simply monetization. Because if we replace monetization with retention--a worthy cause, right?--it's still a problem. Not sure I agree, though don't think universities should simply "mimic" web platforms in terms of privacy, agency, etc.

    1. We probably don't want to enable moderation in Canvas.

      Not in v 1, perhaps.

      But if the teacher can be mapped to a h admin with moderation ability that's be great long term.

      Teachers often ask about being able to delete inappropriate student annotations.

    2. A few buttons and links are hidden

      Might want to remove share buttons in Canvas?

    3. A few buttons and links are hidden when in third-party mode: the create new group button, the account settings link. (Actually, continuing to just hide these is probably the correct behaviour for Canvas third-party accounts as well.)

      Yup, for now at least. More important long term is for a Canvas user to see all their annotations in one place.

      I'd venture that they will never need to create groups.

    4. Canvas users won't be able to view activity pages

      I'm okay with this. But this would be possible long term?

    5. I don't think there's any easy way for us to allow existing accounts to be used or to link existing accounts to Canvas accounts. You can imagine ways that this might work but they'd involve user interaction and a lot more implementation work.

      Seems like this problem will only effect teachers who have used h before. And they'll be given a new, second account and logged in, so don't think this will effect that many people in the long term.

    6. then it can just see whether a user account with that username exists.

      Great.

    7. an account

      An Hypothesis account?

    8. per Canvas instance?

      This would be better, I think, but not sure I'm following.

    9. Can we get an email address for the user as well? If we can get this from Canvas then we should probably add it to the account as well.

      That'd be good for notification, etc.

    10. their Canvas username

      What about automatically using this and going a hybrid approach if it's taken, suggesting jeremydean1 but allowing them to change it?

    11. then it's not possible for those accounts to see the normal Hypothesis Public and private groups (or to create new groups, view activity pages, etc).

      That's fine. All they need to see is the group associated with the course h group if we can make that mapping happen.

    12. some other parts of the Canvas app that are awkward with usernames too

      Well, the key piece is making the Canvas ID and h ID stick together. So that when a student submits an assignment, the app knows to grab that user's annotations and show them in Speedgrader. Right now students have to enter the h username because it's unknown to Canvas.

    13. I also imagine there might be trouble identifying students, given that they can choose any Hypothesis username they want and this may not match their real name or Canvas username.

      Yup, it'd be great to just use their Canvas username and then add 1 or 2 if there are existing users with that name.

    14. before they can begin a Hypothesis annotation assignment.

      Right.

    1. we probably don't want to keep lists of members of groups in our database either - we'd have to get the list of all members of the course from Canvas, and keep it in sync whenever users join or leave the Canvas course.

      Why not this?

    2. How can we generate a name for the course group?

      I'm certain we can grab it through LTI and generate names like English101Fall2017.

    3. what information can we get from Canvas about that course?

      Jon should be able to answer this and in any case I'm sure the answer is discoverable. I'm guessing:

      • course name
      • course instructor(s)
      • course students
      • school
    4. For example separate publisher groups for each Canvas instance, or each installation of our Canvas app.

      KEY POINT: if we map the group to the specific course we solve two of the 3 big problems:

      1) authentication

      2) better privacy--group can no longer be compromised by sharing a URL.

      Would we be able to open h at the group if we did this? Rather than at the public layer?

    5. All Canvas users would be in one big group.

      Yeah, this isn't good.

      Even if we could map the group to the local Canvas server for a school, you wouldn't want students in two courses reading the same article, annotating the article in a common group.

      If we can, we need to map the group to the course.

    6. you would get one big public group for all of Canvas.

      You can't map the publisher group to a different domain--the local Canvas server? "canvas.utexas.edu", for example? Or to a particular course string sub-domain?

    7. Students can't begin a group-based Hypothesis annotation assignment in Canvas until they've joined the relevant Hypothesis group.

      They can still annotate the doc and still submit their annotations, but they won't appear in the right place on the doc, in h. I believe they would still show up in Speedgrader, but need Jon to confirm. I think he's pushing all annotations by a user (no matter the group) to Speedgrader.

    8. or for large courses, maybe one Hypothesis group for each section or group within the course - this isn't 100% clear to me yet).

      This isn't happening now, but the idea is that in the future a teacher could map a group to a course OR map multiple groups to sections in a course.

    1. lifts up their passions

      Not just personalized learning--data from activity directing learning process--but self-directed learning.

    2. products and practices

      Not only technical solutions.

    3. they want

      Nice emphasis!

    4. meet students where they are

      Like everyday tech they are already using? Or in terms of skill level?

    5. personalized learning

      Emphasis on "personalized learning."

    1. Diigo has a role in supplementing the conversations on Twitter.

      Interesting: social annotation as supplement to microblogging.

    2. Our goal to become a social knowledge network however has clearly been eclipsed by social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Quora.    

      I'd like to know more about the thinking behind this. Is there not room or will there never be room for a more evolved social network to eclipse these?

      Certainly from the product POV, I'd argue yes. Whether the current market of the Internet allows for projects outside these monopolies to succeed is a different question, though.

  4. Jun 2017
    1. Annotation simply refers to a reader’s contribution to a text, whether it is “marginalia in a book, or a comment on Facebook or YouTube” (Dean and Schulten, par.2).

      True! But this needs to be unpacked, and probably historicized.

    1. That life is complicated may seem a banal expression of the obvious, but it is nonetheless a profound theoretical statement. – Avery Gordon, Ghostly Matters

      This is one of my favorite books, shaped my dissertation and continues to shape me as a teacher and a human. The fuller quote that I didn't feel I could get away with as an epigraph here is about one aspect of this theoretical statemment that life is complicated, what Gordon calls "complex personhood":

      Complex persoon hood means that all people (albeit in specific forms whose specificity is sometimes everything) remember and forget, are best by contradiction, and recognize and misrecognize themselves and others. Complex personhood means that people suffer graciously and selfishly too, get stuck in symptoms of their troubles, and also transform themselves. Complex personhood means that the stories people tell about themselves, about their troubles, about their social worlds, and about their society’s problems are entangled and weave between what is immediately available as a story and what their imaginations are reaching toward…Complex personhood means that even those who haunt our dominant institutions and their systems of value are haunted too by things they sometimes have names for and sometimes do not. At the very least, complex personhood is about conferring the respect on others that comes from presuming that life and people’s lives are simultaneously straightforward and full of enormously subtle meaning

    1. Complex personhood means that the stories people tell about themselves, about their troubles, about their social worlds, and about their society’s problems are entangled and weave between what is immediately available as a story and what their imaginations are reaching toward….Complex personhood means that even those who haunt our dominant institutions and their systems of value are haunted too by things they sometimes have names for and sometimes do not. At the very least, complex personhood is about conferring the respect on others that comes from presuming that life and people’s lives are simultaneously straightforward and full of enormously subtle meaning (4-5).
    1. Instructors are required to sign an employment agreement that includes a noncompete clause that prevents them from working at other nearby schools for a year after they leave.

      WTF?!

    2. connectedness and mutually beneficial relationships

      Was community just not prioritized in Bridge schools? Was it all just top down?

    3. The impact of the bouncy castle and the waived fees,

      !?

    4. None of the founders had traditional teaching experience

      Yikes. Foreshadowing?

    1. Facebook and YouTube moderators and Uber drivers owe their jobs to technology platforms, even as they train their digital replacements by their own efforts.

      Yikes!

    2. There’s a lot in this book, including detailed analyses of the blurring boundary between work and play,

      This is a big part of the problem: for-profit companies making money of the pleasuable activity of end-users.

    3. Ed Finn, on the other hand, seeks to hold the technology industry to account: he believes we need “more readers, more critics,” posing questions about who technology serves, and to what ends.

      Amen!

    4. Hartley too readily accepts Silicon Valley’s flattering self-descriptions of its values and vision for the world. The positivity of entrepreneurship does not sit comfortably with the skeptical outlook that the liberal arts nurture, and Hartley fully embraces entrepreneurship.

      Interesting. Not critical, not liberal arts, enough.

    5. Hartley believes that liberal arts insights can right the ship: “We can pair fuzzies and techies to train our algorithms to better sift for, and mitigate, our shared human foibles.”

      I'm somewhat optimistic about this. Of it actually happens...

    6. But Upton Sinclair explained long ago why the right set of perspectives alone will not solve the problem: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

      Damn.

    7. For many of us, Silicon Valley’s “Don’t Be Evil” proclamations have lost credibility as the technology industry has grown from scrappy underdog to seemingly unaccountable colossus.

      Yup.

    8. It is not enough to say technology can help build a better world: we must ask what a better world actually looks like.

      Well said.

    1. beyond classroom

      Academia seems ambivalent on this point: at once imaginging itself as the source of innovation radiating out toward society but at the same time closing off the university to the outside world. I'm thinking particular of the paranoia about FERPA and how it pressures teachers not to have students engage in public forums.

    2. all of us

      Totally agree, but are the effects of this impoverished web felt more in the lives of the economically impoverished in any way? It'd be even more powerful for Antigonish 2.0 not to flatten that piece of the original social justice mission.

    3. This won't just spontaneously generate out there on online platforms such as Reddit or Instagram. Neither will it happen in classrooms. Or community halls. But if we can find a way to weave all three together into a functional model, maybe there's a possibility.

      I love this. And it really resonates with how I see collaborative annotation as a practice that might begin in the classroom and extend to extracurricular political engagement.

    4. privilege retweets over replies6

      Declaration over conversation.

    5. how the social media model of stream communications amplified decontextualization

      Right, and ironic, when context, interconnectedness was the original idea.

    6. The web has become media.

      Never heard it put so succinctly, but this is the central problem.

    1. it is futile to resist them.

    2. it will require whole new ways to think about pensions, health care, benefits, sick leave, disability and retirement savings.

      Right. Or avoiding thinking about/doing these things entirely.

    3. disrupting not only old industries but also the entire concept of work.

      That is, labor.

    4. a radical expansion of freedom and a liberating empowerment of individuals to supply services as they please, without government interference.

      Hmmm...

    5. The benefits that Airbnb and Uber pioneered go beyond convenience. They allow people to make human connections in an era that has become much more institutionalized in the decades since family-run bed-and-breakfasts began being replaced by standardized hotel chains.

      Interesting point...but nore sure I buy it. There's probably more human connection in renting a hotel, interacting with the staff and possibly other guests, then the often automater entry one has to an Airbnb property. Only on a couple of occasions have I had genuine interaction with my rentee.

    6. Travis’s Law,” Stone writes. “It went something like this: Our product is so superior to the status quo that if we give people the opportunity to see it or try it, in any place in the world where government has to be at least somewhat responsive to the people, they will demand it and defend its right to exist.” He was right.

      Yuck.

    7. a techno-libertarianism that was contemptuous of most government attempts to regulate disruptive innovation.

      Turns out this has been a bad look. I wonder if it'll really cost Uber, though.

    8. radical libertarian ideology and monopolistic greed of many Silicon Valley entrepreneurs helped to decimate the livelihood of musicians and is now undermining the communal idealism of the early internet.

      Truth.

    1. See, e.g., W. E. B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk (1903); J. Baldwin, The Fire Next Time (1963); T. Coates, Between the World and Me (2015).

      This has to be the most bad ass citation in Supreme Court history, a mini-syllabus on critical race studies of the past 100 plus years. Though I'd add a few black female authors, maybe Audre Lorde, bell hooks, Toni Morrison.

    1. What statements does the company make about accessibility?

      As long as these don't stand in for doing the work to actually make a tool accessible. One thing to check for is a plan for that work. As is pointed out above, tech companies know how to speak about themselves in complimentary terms and "accessibility" is a known "marketing issue."

    2. Even when a company’s ideology is sound, the execution of that ideology through the platform may be flawed.

      One thing I'll add to conversation around my blog post linked here is that the "execution" in the case of the Hypothesis Canvas app was not informed by a bottom line--it's a non-profit with a mission more aligned with the academy than with industry. The issues discussed in the blog linked here came up in conversation with a wide range of practicing teachers in diverse contexts. If we don't acknowledge the complexity of these contexts I think we do a disservice to the teachers we claim to be speaking for.

      In general, I think characterizing edtech as all corporate greed, as is done above, actually simplifies the problem we face in ways that work against the critique itself, even in the case of for-profit companies. I completely agree that the ed-tech industry needs to be viewed skeptically and its most insidious trends resisted. Oversimplifying the problem though runs the risk of oversimplifying the solution. It's more complicated both in the boardroom and the classroom.

    3. edtech CEOs

      I wouldn't limit it to CEOs, really anyone in any role at an ed-tech company should have this experience. Regularly and in many different contexts.

    1. a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right,

      Annotation can help here!

    1. deeper, active learning experiences and skills-based training

      Are these the same thing or necessarily connected somehow?

    2. they simply will not survive.

      This is a bit apocalyptic in tone.

    3. a deep understanding of digital environments

      What curricular examples are out there that model this?

    1. Advocates position Digital Humanities as a corrective to the “traditional” and outmoded approaches to literary study that supposedly plague English departments. Like much of the rhetoric surrounding Silicon Valley today, this discourse sees technological innovation as an end in itself and equates the development of disruptive business models with political progress.

      From this start, this article doesn't seem based in the same reality I've been observing.

      1) I don't see/or hear DH as a "corrective" so much as an "alternative."

      2) DH seems pretty self-conscious about Silicon Valley utopianism. In fact, I'd argue that it's voices from DH that have been most savvy about deconstructing that rhetoric.

    1. Teachers and students would stand around the volumes and use the text as a jumping off point for an oral conversation.

      So the conversation about the text supersedes the text itself.

    2. Back

      This is an annotation on the public layer.

    1. Commentary

      Very different understanding of this word from its everyday use on the Internet. Online, commentary is more typically imagined as far less authorial or editorial, problematically, but also democratically so.

    1. retrieves the JSON data

      Step 2: Grabs the data from the URL...

    2. generates a well-formed search URL

      Step 1: Creates a URL to be looked at by another fuction/method

    3. To enhance that process, you could add the appropriate path to the output file name in this script, and write a shell script that runs this script and then commits/pushes to GitHub, and then schedule that script to run at regular intervals from your computer/server. I'm going to look into adding that functionality to this script, but it's not ready yet.
    1. # search for all annotations with the tag IndieEdTech and return them in json format. s = searchurl(tag = 'IndieEdTech') l = retrievelist(s) # print the title of each article annotated. for entry in l: e = Annotation(entry) print(e.title)

      I don't get it. Is this all I need to put into a Jupyter Notebook?

    2. given the annotation's API URL

      Is this specific to an annotation? Yes, I guess.

    1. literature became data

      Doesn't this obfuscate the process? Literature became digital. Digital enables a wide range of futther activity to take place on top of literature, including, perhaps, it's datafication.

    2. OCTOBER 28, 2012

      The image below is rather hostile , isn't it?

    1. film, which is really just the dead end of linear narrative,

      Hmmm...

    2. Moreover, unlike print text, hypertext provides multiple paths between text segments, now often called "lexias" in a borrowing from the pre-hypertextual but prescient Roland Barthes.

      But this is, as signaled by the reference to the critic Barthes, merely a re-enactment of a performance that scholars and students perform on texts regularly.

    3. But true freedom from the tyranny of the line is perceived as only really possible now at last with the advent of hypertext, written and read on the computer, where the line in fact does not exist unless one invents and implants it in the text.

      Hypertext as opposite of "the line," the sentencem the novel, linear narrative.

    1. Don’t we have to actually read the books, before saying what the patterns discovered in them mean?

      Yes, of course. But it's ironic that this three post tirade begins with a rather distant reading of the MLA program.

    2. But does the data point inescapably in that direction?

      In the above performance of close reading, is the evidence more "inescapable"? Isn't is always in the fullness of the argumentation no matter where the data comes from?

    3. The direction of my inferences is critical: first the interpretive hypothesis and then the formal pattern, which attains the status of noticeability only because an interpretation already in place is picking it out.

      Is this really how it played/plays out? I have an idea about something that I then confirm in the facts?

    4. The direction is the reverse in the digital humanities: first you run the numbers, and then you see if they prompt an interpretive hypothesis.

      So it's close versus distant reading.

    1. The humanities and the arts are being cut away, in both primary/secondary and college/uni­versity education, in virtually every nation of the world.
    1. Traditionalists argue that emphasizing professional skills would betray the humanities' responsibility to honor the great monuments of culture for their own sake.

      I continue to think this binary is false. Perhaps historically the liberal arts was established and viewed as an oasis. But in my experience there was always a connection between my academic work, from grade school to grad school, and the "real world." The connection might not always have been as direct and explicit to be vocational, but nonetheless is was there and it was felt.

    1. When the going gets tough, the tough take accounting. When the job market worsens, many students figure they can’t indulge in an English or a history major. They have to study something that will lead directly to a job.

      LOL. I was in the middle of a dissertation when this was published: not just an English major, but a doctoral candidate.

    1. 2) comment, engage, retort, spread the word

      Annotate!

      (Originally, many used CommentPress to engage in this way, but you'll notice some folks have done so using Hypothesis more recently.)

    1. The vision is theological

      Only if we allow for a very limited definition of theological.

    2. That has always been my aim, and the content of that aim — a desire for pre-eminence, authority and disciplinary power — is what blogs and the digital humanities stand against.

      I'd argue that analog scholarship too stands against this aim. And after finishing the "blog post" I think it's Fish's assumptions about the nature of scholarship and knowledge production that bias him against DH--among other things.

    3. just a relay

      This seems an extreme metaphor. Isn't there an in between? A collaborator with agency isn't that hard to imagine.

    4. Mark Poster draws the moral:

      I actually think the moral valence of the following quote is ambiguous. I'm not certain it's a bad thing.

    5. This emphasis on the present works at cross purposes with much long-form scholarship, which needs stability and longevity in order to make its points.”

      I'd actually argue that it lays bare the process of scholarly production more immediately. What might unfold over a sequence of interconnected monographs--published every 3-5 years--might now take place in an afternoon of Twitter exchanges.

    6. “blog” is an ugly word (as are clog, smog and slog)

      Like "yawp"?

    1. I will not be attending the Modern Language Association meeting in Seattle (Jan. 5-8), but I have read through the program to see what’s going on and what’s no longer going on in literary studies.

      Isn't this a little like a movie reviewer saying, "I haven't seen this movie, but here's the problem with it"?

  5. May 2017
    1. fenced-off ghetto

      Gated luxury community?

    2. “Ad-driven systems can only reward attention,” Mr. Williams says. “They can’t reward the right answer. Consumer-paid systems can. They can reward value. The inevitable solution: People will have to pay for quality content.”

      Is there a third option? Or a middle path?

    3. The inevitable solution: People will have to pay for quality content.”

      And services?

    4. Now that we’ve made sharing information virtually effortless, how do we increase depth of understanding,

      ANNOTATION!

    5. because humans are humans,” he says. “There’s a lock on our office door and our homes at night. The internet was started without the expectation that we’d have to do that online.

      Sigh.

    6. One story was about a retired Army colonel named Dave Hughes who wanted to hook up all 5.5 billion brains on the planet. No farmer’s kid need ever be lonely again.

      Andreessen's life story resonates here...

    7. As news becomes more visually oriented, the site stays focused on words.

      Respect.

    8. “If I learn that every time I drive down this road I’m going to see more and more car crashes,” he says, “I’m going to take a different road.”

      Overlaying Frost here, we'd call this "the road less traveled." It's not an intuitive choice, but it's become a value we as a society embrace.

    9. The trouble with the internet, Mr. Williams says, is that it rewards extremes.

      This seems more a cultural rather than a technical challenge.

    1. they do not constitute an obstruction of justice.

      Even taken in the larger context?! Later firing the man, Confessing on national TV that his intent in doing so was partially to stop the investigation into his campaign?!...

    2. are routinely made to investigators and prosecutors.

      Trump is not a lawyer.

    3. But telling the F.B.I. director that someone is a “good guy”

      Let's focus on the second half of the statement.

    4. Indeed, when President Obama endorsed Hillary Clinton for president in June 2016 — during the height of the F.B.I.’s investigation into Secretary Clinton’s private email server

      Not really a fair comparison, a direct, private 1:1 statement versus a public indircetly related one.

    5. As the Supreme Court stated in United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California, “for bribery there must be a quid pro quo — a specific intent to give or receive something of value in exchange for an official act.”

      Like someone's job, for example, and whether they keep it or lose it?

    1. “And I don’t know why they can’t ask Google for the answer if the answer is right there.”

      Nick Carr would likely have something to say on this topic.

    2. whether the purpose of public schools is to turn out knowledgeable citizens or skilled workers.

      I'm not sure that I agree that these terms line up with those above. "Knowledgeable citizens" know math formulas rather than problem-solving?

    3. In doing so, Google is helping to drive a philosophical change in public education — prioritizing training children in skills like teamwork and problem-solving while de-emphasizing the teaching of traditional academic knowledge, like math formulas.

      This is a fascinating claim. Left uninterrogated, it sounds great to me!

    1. publicly accessible data,

      Also good.

    2. A web-based reader

      Good that it's web-based.

    Annotators