CCCC panel–Web 2.0 Wavelengths: Examining Spaces Created Within Electronic Discourse

5 Apr 2009 by Kim, No Comments »

Missed the first speaker–my stupid business center could not print my slides…. 😛

2 Jennifer Buckner spoke about using Pownce in her class.  She analyzed her own interactions with students and in particular the way she teetered between speaking personally and speaking as teacher.  I notice again how little Comp. and and Internet Research are not talking, because so many of the questions raised have been raised and explored already–which is not to discredit what she said, but rather to wish the larger conversation were more coherent and integrated.

I also wonder if she has read earlier research on networked writing classes–must find citations for those.

3 Deanya Lattimore now presenting “How I killed the Weblog.”  She uses overheads in a really clever way to introduce her talk, which has changed from when she first proposed it.  She used a multi-user WordPress blog–how does one choose that?  It allows students to choose there own themes, but doesn’t encourage the kind of organization I can achieve with the magzine type theme I’ve used in my classes.  –hypersuasion–

problems: no outward links, only internal.  No comments.

Is it true that a paper-based essay wouldn’t allow the personal tone that a student uses in the blog’s “about me” page?

Seems Deanya emphasized too much what form an essay must take–not too much hyperlinking, for example.  She also thinks this focus stifled comments and prevented the “working through ideas” characteristic of many blogs.  In the end, she seems to have decided that it would have been better to not try controlling what students wrote, or how they wrote it.  –That jibes with most work on fostering student engagement; students will feel more invested if they have more control.

Next time–the blog as portfolio, not essay.

And let the academic essay rest in peace.

4 Todd Finley –Microblogging as prof. development.  Cites Alfred Wallace–developed theory of evolution in a fever dream, at the same time as Darwin, but was just a little too slow publishing.

How we socialized each other in that space–example of how the word “fuck” in is used in the space. How this community of teachers developed–mish mash of experiences.  Rather messy auto-ethnography. Anxiety is ok–related to productivity, depression is not; you’re a slug.  But bragginess isn’t ok either.  Also depends whether you are positioned as a novice or experienced scholar.

No one talks about sex, no talk about spouses–no outside intimacies discussed in this group. Alliances are not discussed–who is closer who is less close.  Academic debates are ok, but conflicts involving emotions are not discussed.  No religion. So how much trust is there really?  Sadly have to leave before discussion because it runs long and I speak in the next session!

Refer him to Jonathan Marshall and Shanyang Zhao about the body breaking out, emotional intimacy and co-presence.  And I wonder if the speaker had permission from the other group members to discuss this at Cs.

Again, a lot of reinvention going on–confirms what I said at MLA about how fragmented research is right now,  Deanya’s talk was the best and most useful-real analysis going on there, by someone who was NOT just cutting her teeth on social software.

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

Follow Me!

Follow Me! Follow Me! Follow Me! Follow Me!