And/or learning by means other than we have designed/planned/expected happens?

and so "design" is never finished, or it is not "complete" until students participate in creating dynamics/experience aesthetics....

I am interested in how, to some degree, every semester of course I teach regularly is an ongoing play-test. (And how, in Creative Writing, the work we do with writing exercises might also be considered a kind of play-testing......of genre, technique, etc.?)

I think this author has created a pro sports team/league metaphor for a certain kind of "competitive world of doing research," not so much for "academia" or higher ed.

Health insurance and livable wage = the BEST mandatory wellness programs!

I guess I don't know that A follows B here.

I'm not sure the military makes a better institutional metaphor than the (professional) athletics team/league.

Especially a huge problem if you don't have the option to seek treatment due to lack of health insurance.

Definitely the major focus of this article (as opposed to the teaching/advising/service environment)

Again, my particular experience in/of academia is just not about "academic research," pretty much at ALL. (Not disagreeing with the claim of dangerous, problematic, un-dealt-with stress here AT ALL though!)

I agree with all of this -- and also -- the emphasis on research and papers and that kind of productivity is so utterly unlike my personal experience of "academia." I'm trying to think about it in sports metaphors, too -- but then I start to get stuck in hierarchies. (like, is my regional public university the bush leagues? the semi-pro? Not sure if that line of thinking is helpful here....) I will say my particular experience of academia causes me to notice the absence of teaching from this description of what is challenging/"productive" about academia.

Play better = (is this piece/metaphor primarily focused on scholarly/research "productivity" or is it inclusive of teaching as a central piece of labor/"productivity?") Win more games = Ticket sales went way up = more grant funding? more students? higher retention? graduation rates? (I tried to just highlight/annotate the last few sentences, sorry)

Is it a team or a league?

Professional sports leagues are motivated by some different stuff than academia as a whole, yes? Am thinking of for-profit/not-for-profit and public/private dynamics here. Also the nature of the "crowd," the audience/"customer"/fan. And of competition. And of "owners."

Thinking of levels of sports -- recreational, competitive, non-competitive, professional, collegiate, etc. Hm.

In what way is this compatible with the mandate of a "neutral" testing environment???

I'm sorry, I just can't let this go -- there is no such thing as a "neutral" "TESTING ENVIRONMENT!" Neutral how and to whom? Taking a test under any conditions, but especially these, seems to preclude "neutrality."

What makes a living room or dining room a "neutral area?!" Also -- assumptions about how many rooms someone has available.

I definitely always wanted to be an "exam administrator" when I grew up.

They are AGENTS. Detection agents. Detectives. POLICE.

The empty rhetoric/jargon here is SO THICK and, again, strangely un-personed. What are the nouns/things in this sentence? Expectations (whose?), integrity, authorship, outcomes, success, retention. Blergh.

This is so creepy. As a writer/academic/faculty member I have never had to sign a "pledge of originality." ALSO -- what do they mean by "originality?" What is the "value" (and to whom) of "originality?"

A gauntlet. A guard. A gatekeeping. GROSS.

Proctorio employs tools to avoid -- they don't even bother suggesting that writers/learners are being offered tools connected with learning. Proctorio does the employing and the avoiding. #AnnotateEdTech

This is really striking me. "Protect" the "value" of "degrees" and "programs." Where are the "students," where is the "learning," etc. The (not very)sub-text here is that the "value" of degrees/certification-products/programs (curricula?) is seen as housed in the institution and its conventions/traditions, not in the learner/learning, not in wider publics, etc. #AnnotateEdTech

just want to gently notice how the language of "reaching full potential" can be weaponized (like "completion" and "grit" and so on)

But...who's "not traumatized?" The numbers starting out this reading seem pretty clear that "individuals who are not traumatized" (somehow) are the significant minority. Maybe I am misunderstanding what "counts" as traumatized.

And, I'll say again, data seem to suggest that educators are survivors of trauma ourselves. Like, not having to do with the students' trauma -- our OWN trauma.

This seems important -- what is baked into our language and policy at program/catalog level that undermines interpersonal (teachrer/advisor-student) efforts at trauma-informed practices in classrooms, offices, etc?

this is such a great idea

This seems SO important -- that the "maladaptive" behaviors are strategies for SURVIVAL that actually often WORK.

or "safer" learning spaces. I guess I'm wondering whether trauma-informed pedagogy might want to be very careful around the label of "safe," safety often being so relative and context-informed.

This goes against the very ways many of us were "trained" (hazed) into academia. And the work of cultural humility described here does not always seem to be modeled or encouraged in academia, generally.

I wonder about the potentially traumatic connotations of this language, this higher ed discourse around "persisting" (when perhaps pausing is called for) and "completion," to almost a fetishizing degree.

This list suggests to me that possibly everybody has had traumatic life experiences.

Both of these questions make me kind of uncomfortable, to be honest.

To be honest, it seems like more than "one" thing!

Or, possibly, why it might not be "worth it" right now? Thinking again of the "good for you" language from above.

"predictions" makes me think also of "course outcomes" or "learning outcomes," as also maybe disrupted/more difficult to articulate and believe in right now?

WHOA.

I wonder about this dynamic at play on the re-opened campus -- and I wonder about it as a faculty member who may be the only one (or one of the few? so hard to say right now?) who are still isolating/not seeing folks/at home.

I might steal this language as a prompt for initial conversations about class community in the fall. What we can offer -- and maybe what we ask for? What we want and need from one another, from the course?

I am finding this to be the case for work generally. My attention span is shot. My focus is fragmented. Multiple loops of noise/worry seem to be playing at varying speed and volume in the back of my mind at ALL TIMES.

Or, like, three feet now? Because...reasons?

I wish I had a sense of where we are with this, institutionally.

rule of two?

This word feels different to me than "engagement." I'm not sure why. Certainly less jargony to my higher ed ears, but I think it's something else?

This word. Added to my pile of words that at once I want to cling to and simultaneously sort of no longer understand.

Does anybody else feel like May 13, 2020 is, like, seventeen months ago? Or something?

If reading this has made one thing patently clear to me it's that I need to read Fanon.

Wow. This feels so counterintuitive to me, and, yes, unsettling.

WOW. This is something.

It doesn't seem like much was being asked for! This surprises me.

like, right now, reading this in preparation for a university-based discussion about this text -- META

I remember wondering about this when I first read Pedagogy of the Oppressed as a 22-year-old first-year grad student, but feeling that asking about it would. make me look dumb.

"As if it were the sole" and "to stand in" seem key here

True in so many ways.

and whose bodies become a resource for extraction

This metaphor is compelling -- the notion of the extraction of "resources," and the "fuel" metaphor as well. A using up.

This language seems both literal and metaphorical, potentially! (I want to add "and what unsettling should be" or "what unsettling is" to the end of the sentence, kind of.

"invades" and "kills" -- whew! The idea of a metaphor is an invader (as a settler/colonizing force!)!

And -- metaphors as about entertaining (limiting? enclosing?) possible futures.

Wow -- inclusion as enclosure! And as FOREclosure!! This feels really important.

I am wondering about "antiracist" being similarly adopted/subsumed/rebranded

thinking about (public) higher ed along the line of "compulsory"

I am interested in this verb, and this idea of harmful/dangerous (or at the very least counterproductive) metaphor-making.

curiosity is authentic so authenticity in pedagogy aims to (among other things) honor/tap into that curiosity?

This makes me think of needing/having to "show my work" on math problems (like, if I can give a right answer, but can't say why/how, is that inert in some way as well? Or does it not matter so long as the problem is solved?)

I found this a helpful concept in Eyler's book

Okay, so "mere simulation" is "partly" real? (a spectrum of realness = a spectrum of authenticity?)

Oh I do love thinking about "simulations" in relation to the "real" and the "artificial" and the "authentic" and RESEMBLANCES (semblance/resemblance/resemble/assemble)

The word "resemble" here is kind of blowing my mind! :-)

"traditional lecture" versus "entire genus of 'active learning'"

What is the not-real-world? Is that what some folks mean by "artifice," as in "artificial" as in not "natural" or not "real?"

All active learning is, by its nature (genus) authentic?

I think that "practice" can include artifice. (practice can BE "an artifice?)

I think that "artificial" is not the opposite of "authentic." Not exactly. That is, I don't think "artifice" in necessarily inauthentic. I think it certainly CAN be. I am still working through this.

I'd like to think a little more about what this might mean -- is there classroom project work that would be completely "not touching" the world outside the classroom in SOME way?

I struggle with this, too -- that I have nothing new to say, or that it isn't polished enough, or that surely somebody else has already said it and said it smarter/better. The idea of "helping build connections" is definitely useful here.

I like this list very much, and am thinking about how much potential it has, not just to sort of "allow students to contribute," but to maybe make ALL of the work more mutual and multi-directional? Like, 100% "start by trusting students," and/also maybe "start by trusting each other." (inclusive of students and faculty). Or with the second item, something about "leaving gaps in our plans/expectations, spaces for unexpected learning," or to emphasize that everybody in the community has a stake in "explaining why ... work matters," and that in the sharing of that "mattering," everybody in the community is perhaps afforded opportunities to (re)think." Everybody acknowledging everybody's "whole experiences," shared metacognitive activities, etc. I am enjoying thinking about this, so thanks for the thinking, Christin!

Just a poet chiming in to comment on the language here -- the interesting combination of water (confluence -- rivers of ideas/thoughts/texts/dialogue) and fire -- provocative metaphor. Some strange and wonderful alchemy.

So amplified right now, and ME. TOO.

Would we say that for the INCAP, the project is both the main course and the dessert? Like, students bring what they have learned (in/through Gen Ed and their major programs) to the project table -- like, the very nature of the project itself may likely reflect which students/skillsets "sign up?"

I am interested in how this particular idea/activity might be especially useful to folks who are having to transition to a fully online (or mostly online? TBD?) course experience.

This language is helpful to me. Is the body the main INSTRUMENT of or CONDUIT for our "perception of the world?"

THIS LANGUAGE! Love how she describes it.

This has me thinking of the objectifying gaze, the lover/beloved construct in so much poetry, etc etc

I love this language!

!!!!

I am interested in thinking about this notion of "score" as compared with texts made of ... alphabetic language? (as opposed to...musical language of musical notation?)

Looking at etymology online, I am surprised to find that the musical use of the word is so recent. (Also -- what a word!)

https://www.etymonline.com/word/score

score (n.)

late Old English scoru "twenty," from Old Norse skor "mark, notch, incision; a rift in rock," also, in Icelandic, "twenty," from Proto-Germanic skur-, from PIE root sker- (1) "to cut."

The connecting notion probably is counting large numbers (of sheep, etc.) with a notch in a stick for each 20. That way of counting, called vigesimalism, also exists in French: In Old French, "twenty" (vint) or a multiple of it could be used as a base, as in vint et doze ("32"), dous vinz et diz ("50"). Vigesimalism was or is a feature of Welsh, Irish, Gaelic and Breton (as well as non-IE Basque), and it is speculated that the English and the French picked it up from the Celts. Compare tally (n.).

The prehistoric sense of the Germanic word, then, likely was "straight mark like a scratch, line drawn by a sharp instrument," but in English this is attested only from c. 1400, along with the sense "mark made (on a chalkboard, etc.) to keep count of a customer's drinks in a tavern." This sense was extended by 1670s to "mark made for purpose of recording a point in a game or match," and thus "aggregate of points made by contestants in certain games and matches" (1742, originally in whist).

From the tavern-keeping sense comes the meaning "amount on an innkeeper's bill" (c. 1600) and thus the figurative verbal expression settle scores (1775). Meaning "printed piece of music" first recorded 1701, said to be from the practice of connecting related staves by scores of lines. Especially "music composed for a film" (1927). Meaning "act of obtaining narcotic drugs" is by 1951.

Scoreboard is from 1826; score-keeping- from 1905; newspaper sports section score line is from 1965; baseball score-card is from 1877.

score (v.)

"to cut with incisions or notches," c. 1400; "to record by means of notches" (late 14c.); see score (n.). Meanings "to keep record of the scores in a game, etc." and "to make or add a point for one's side in a game, etc." both attested from 1742. The slang sense, in reference to men, "achieve intercourse" first recorded 1960. Meaning "to be scorekeeper, to keep the score in a game or contest" is from 1846. In the musical sense from 1839. Related: Scored; scoring.

I should ask J.S. if he has seen/played with this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unfortunates

I do have/enjoy some of these, for sure.

Here I start to bump against my own (why?) imaginative boundaries around what I consider a book and what I consider something else. Like, of these three maybe Mad Libs seem book like, and decks seem book like, but the magnetic poetry and dice seem less book like? Oh how I do like to sort.

the physicality, the physical interaction, the "tactile pleasure" all seem so important. I'm interested in the idea of the physicality of the "potential" here

This also makes me think of pop-up books for children (and adults I guess)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvelle

This language of book as landscape is interesting. This makes me think of a reader/book-user as an explorer.

Why are we not currently able to assess the outcomes of our General Education program?

I am unclear about what this means -- not enough critical mass of what? What evidence suggests that "theming" and offering certificates will help students better "see connections, context or relatedness?" What is the value of this "seeing?" What is our evidence that they don't see these things now?

unclear

What is "cluster learning?"Is it this? http://www.clusterlearning.com/

https://www.youtube.com/user/clusterlearning

I would like to have faculty from various disciplines talk about what "challenge question" means. What or whom does a "challenge question" challenge? Where does the question come from?

Can we just host content on an LMS? On our own independent blogs?

"Researchers" = students and faculty = learners?

yadda yadda