3,604 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2016
    1. Data  Transfer  or  Destruction

      This is the first line item I don't feel like we have a proper contingency for or understand exactly how we would handle it.

      It seems important to address not just due to FERPA but to contracts/collaborations like that we have with eLife:

      What if eLife decides to drop h. Would we, could we delete all data/content related to their work with h? Even outside of contract termination, would we/could we transfer all their data back to them?

      The problems for our current relationship with schools is that we don't have institutional accounts whereby we might at least technically be able to collect all related data.

      Students could be signing up for h with personal email addresses.

      They could be using their h account outside of school so that their data isn't fully in the purview of the school.

      Question: if AISD starts using h on a big scale, 1) would we delete all AISD related data if they asked--say everything related to a certain email domain? 2) would we share all that data with them if they asked?

    2. Data  cannot  be  shared  with  any  additional  parties  without  prior  written  consent  of  the  Userexcept  as  required  by  law.”

      Something like this should probably be added to our PP.

    3. Data  Collection

      I'm really pleased with how hypothes.is addresses the issues on this page in our Privacy Policy.

    4. There  is  nothing  wrong  with  a  provider  usingde-­‐identified  data  for  other  purposes;  privacy  statutes,  after  all,  govern  PII,  not  de-­‐identified  data.

      Key point.

    5. Modification  of  Terms  of  Se

      We cover this in the TOS but not the Privacy Policy.

    6. rovider  will  not  use  any  Data  to  advertise  or  market  to  students  or  their  parents.  Advertising  or  marketing  may  be  directed  to  the  [School/District]  only  if  student  information  is  properly  de-­‐identified

      This I am happy to say we seem to have covered. I think it should be higher up in the policy statement. See my annotations in the "Hypothes.is Reading" group here.

    7. Data  De-­‐Identification

      Do we do this anywhere?

    8. all  Personally  Identifiable  Information  (P

      Does this include emails?

    1. minimize the data your product collects

      Seems like this is so.

    2. It is best to assume that the student information you collect in your app is statutorily confidential, unless it is de-identified

      So, does our pseudonym policy help us here? Students needn't use their real names. Are email addresses "de-indentified" information?

    3. data security features

      What would this mean?

    4. build privacy

      Does our groups feature cover it?

    1. After a couple of pages, my fingers twitched for a keyboard

      Been there, as I would imagine, have our students.

    2. I tried reading books,
    3. calm, or spirituality. “Multitasking” was a mirage.

      This is an odd choice for link design IMO.

    4. a constant dopamine bath for the writerly ego.


    5. a constant stream of

      Thinking of Mike Caulfield's stream v garden argument here.

    6. this virtual living,

      Why virtual?

    7. My brain had never been so occupied so insistently by so many different subjects and in so public a way for so long.

      For real!

    8. stream of internet consciousness

      Nice phrase, if ultimately contradictory.

    1. This approach only delivers substantial operational benefit if we can assume that replies have the same access control restrictions as their thread root. This seems like a perfectly reasonable requirement, but it’s not how our software works right now. How would we migrate existing replies that don’t match this requirement? (e.g. private replies on public annotations).

      If I understand correctly, and having said something contradictory above if it were a choice between this somewhat handy but also highly convoluted replies-don't-need-to-have-the-same-privileges-as-their-parent-annotation thing and the ability to see the replies of a user to annotations alongside their annotations, I would choose the latter any day of the week.

    2. This would allow us to fetch an annotation and all of its replies, already in a conversation tree, using a single call to Elasticsearch. Or, to fetch a set of N annotations matching some query, and all their replies, using a single call to Elasticsearch. Updates to replies result in the reindexing of their thread root annotation.

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

    3. not indexed in their own right as separate documents.

      Makes sense to me from a discursive stand point.

    4. replies always inherit their group from the thread root

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

    5. public replies to (your own) private annotations


    6. That means that they can independently be set to either “shared” within a group (members of that group can see the reply) or not (only the reply’s author can see the reply).

      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.

    1. But it should be evident from the kinds of facts that bold and dogged reporting unearths,

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

    2. But these calls should be based on the individual merits of the stories,

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

    1. The shame reflects an ugly and lethal trend in this country’s history—an ever-present impulse to ignore and minimize racism, an aversion to calling it by its name.

      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.

    2. The shame reflects an ugly and lethal trend in this country’s history—an ever-present impulse to ignore and minimize racism, an aversion to calling it by its name.

      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.

    3. white grievance, no matter how ill-founded, can never be humiliating nor disqualifying. On the contrary, it is a right to be respected at every level of American society from the beer-hall to the penthouse to the newsroom.

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

    1. University of Texas at Austin.


    2. integrated with every major LMS;


    3. FERPA compliant


    4. automatically generated "student confusion report"


    1. Moreover,to help users create annotations with appropriate semantic tags to promote reading comprehension, the proposed system provides seventypes of reading annotation scaffolds: reasoning, discrimination, linking, summary, quizzing, explanation, and other (Fig.1).

      To do

      CC @judell

    2. facilitate text review.

      More benefits: as a study tool, review

    3. how different article styles


    4. can reduce thetime spent on irrelevant discussions.

      Focuses class discussion

    5. high-level thinkin

      Critical, analytical thinking

    6. reading attitude

      Love this phrase!

    7. positive in-terest and high learning satisfaction

      More benefits.

    8. irect and explicit comprehension,inferential comprehension performance, and use of reading strategy.

      Benefits of collaborative annotation.

    9. raditional paper-based reading annotation method and face-to-facediscussions.

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

    10. However, many studies agree that screen-based reading leads toshallow reading, short attention spans, and poor comprehension.

      The problem h solves?

    1. Advance digital age learning.


    2. Take advantage of student-centered pedagogy.

      Student directed research? Any TX area students?

    3. Encourage audience participation


  2. Aug 2016
    1. For software developers,

      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?

    2. After reviewing 109 AUPs,

      Would be amazing to see these annotated!

    3. transmitting information

      Fascinating and disturbing find.

    4. her advisor uses the "intrusive advising" recommended by the Guided Pathways to Success program

      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?

    5. Because the filters between her and the Internet block access to information,

      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...

    1. volunteer

      So this is an opt-in project.

    2. NSF’s Cyberlearning and Future Learning Technologies program

    3. “With a better understanding of a learner’s state of mind, textbooks can make personalized recommendations for further study and review.”

      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.

    4. unobtrusively

      This claim certainly needs to be troubled...

    5. nonprofit, open-source

      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.

  3. www.poetryfoundation.org www.poetryfoundation.org
    1. it was nobody’s biz until you got there

      Observation and experience require a subject?

    1. Today, we have since become so habituated to public lighting that our primary association with street lights is that they deter criminal activity and make us feel safe.

      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:

    2. Designs that are unpleasant to some are put into place to make things more pleasant for others, and that latter category might just include you.

      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...

    1. Automation need not impoverish education: we welcome our new robot colleagues.

      Audrey Watters had something different to say about this idea of automation at last year's DPL Institute.

    2. Face-time is over-valued.

      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.

    1. Designing for discovery is tricky business

      Indeed, it's almost an oxymoron.

    2. Having just finished a year working at an educational technology company, I’ve also seen from that side how learners become quantities on a spreadsheet, numbers on an infographic. I worry that researching learners and learning is not the same as knowing learners and learning

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

    1. we talked about the importance of adopting practices that keep complexity in our educational processes,

      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.

    2. That’s hard to do.

      And a positively (and positive) anti-corporate logic. Witness the rhetoric of "solutions" so pervasive in at least Silicon Valley tech and edtech.

    3. we should make space for things that don’t fit into our tidy conceptions about education.

      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.

    4. but you can’t actually “increase dancing”

      I'd argue that YouTube has increased dancing, but I'm mostly just using that as an excuse to share this video:


    1. the way a sentence arises from grammatical templates/rules

      Or the way a poem/argument emerges from the form of a sonnet.

    2. work on architecture,

      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.

    1. but scientific staff.

      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.

    2. Instagrammer

      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.

    3. employability is not directly correlated to how many likes you get on your Instagram posts.

      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.

    4. the work of careers advice gurus.

      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.

    5. Using social media to impress people that you know

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

    6. I'm a serious academic,

      Title kind of sets the tone as rather condescending.

    1. it provides an additional way for students to go wrong beside the Public or Group problem

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

    2. But for some of the summer articles (one out of three of mine) in Hypothes.is, the section one highlights is quoted in the annotation without spaces, which is ugly.

      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.

    3. I had thought that analysis and counting their contributions

      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.

    4. I have been contacted by Jeremy Dean of Hypothes.is for ways to integrate with Canvas – this might be a huge help next year.

      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.

    5. no way to limit that or point them directly to the group page

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

    1. We have partnered with Hypothes.is to enable students to highlight and take notes in the text. The discreet pop-up menu on the right enables students to create a free Hypothes.is account that will save their highlighting and note-taking and allow them to see others’ public notes and highlights. *Note: we intend to beta test this feature in the Reader for the fall and for both the Reader and the main text in the spring.*

      This is awesome news!

    1. see their surroundings in a new way

      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?

    1. 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.

  4. Jul 2016
    1. After so many years of Republican politicians refusing to even talk about factory closures,

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

    1. And then there’s Donald Trump.

      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.

    2. or jihadists or homegrown demagogues

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

    1. It occurred to me that Stack Exchange and Federated Wiki were in fact part of a broader movement in how collaboration was now happening in communities, and that it was time to bring this more general process into the OER movement.

      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...

    2. The problem, said Ward, was that wiki was a relentless consensus engine. And for certain things (e.g. encyclopedias) that might not be a bad thing, but as a way of working it had its drawbacks.

      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.

    3. own version of the page,

      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...

    4. And in the end the work that is produced is often acceptable to everyone but exciting to none.

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

    1. Teaching and learning are the core business of most higher education institutions. How much of that core business are we willing to outsource?

      Such an important question!

    2. The idea is to separate the course administrative tools & functions (like classlists and gradebooks) from the teaching and learning tools, and allow faculty to mix and match tools to fit their pedagogical needs.

      What's the role of content here?

    1. Our students are not us. If we merely teach to how we prefer to learn, we exclude a majority of our students.

      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.

    1. Melania Trump: From Small-Town Slovenia to Doorstep of White House

      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.

    1. Plato makes it clear in Phaedrus

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

    2. If education is automated.

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

    3. those of us in education – students, teachers, administrators –

      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.

    1. A recent Pew Research survey found that white evangelical Christians supported Mr. Trump, 78-17, an even larger margin than Mr. Romney’s lead at this time in 2012.

      This boggles my mind.

    1. When Little Bird, a social media data mining company, analyzed a week of Mr. Trump’s Twitter activity, it found that almost 30 percent of the accounts Mr. Trump retweeted in turn followed one or more of 50 popular self-identified white nationalist accounts.


    1. Ethan Winnett, 31, of Waukegan, Ill., said Mr. Sanders might be being “duped” or “threatened” by Mrs. Clinton and vowed never to vote for her even if she’s back by the senator. The computer engineer believes Mrs. Clinton is “more crooked than Trump” and said he felt “betrayed” by Mr. Sanders’s endorsement.


    2. a tight hug.

      Oh, there it is!

    3. yet no hug

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

    1. an unprecedented decline in bar passage rate.

      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.

    2. you are completely ignorant

      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.

    3. your view that some of those demographics matter more than others. That alienates and isolates all non-black groups.

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

    1. ungentleness

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

    2. —they only picked it up because when I went, and when I announced, that I’m running for President, I said, ‘You know, this country has a big, big problem with illegal immigration,’ and all of a sudden we started talking about it

    3. So sue me, O.K.?

      Great campaign slogan for Trump.

    1. Let me begin by thanking Harris Wofford for his contributions to this country in so many different ways.

      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.

    1. any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.

      This assumes people understand how email works.