Resources for New Teachers

In preparing to discuss digital pedagogy with grad students and early-service English instructors at Emory, I prepared these resources of personal and Hybrid Pedagogy-related content. I also recommend that critical/digital teachers become familiar with ongoing work at HASTAC, DML Central, ProfHacker, Hack Education, and TECHStyle (at Georgia Tech), among other places.

Critical/digital tools
Hybrid Pedagogy’s digital tool Concordance
“Theorizing Google Docs: 10 Tips for Navigating Online Collaboration”
“How To Storify. Why to Storify”
“The Twitter Essay”
Introduction to Twitter for #gsuhybridize

Critical/digital activities
“Experiments in Mass Collaboration”

“Organic Writing and Digital Media: Seeds and Organs”
Video: “Hybridity and New Media Literacy”
Video: “Extension and Perforation: Twitter in the Classroom”
Petra Dierkes-Thrun’s “Public Literary Twitter Role-Play”

Critical/digital events and plans
Twitter vs. Zombies
Video: “Digital Pedagogy, Play, and Mass Collaboration” at Duke (presentation notes here)
ENGL1101/New Media Literacy Pilot at Georgia State University
Syllabus: ENGL1101/New Media Literacy (fall 2012)
Syllabus: ENGL3120/Occupy Class (spring 2012)
Occupy Class 


Re-Defining Hybridity for Higher Education

Online presentation to SAE curriculum directors
November 16, 2012

Traditional definitions of “hybridity”
Reasons for a new definition
Lessons from our work

Resources for the conversation:
“Hybridity” on Hybrid Pedagogy
Pt. 1: Virtuality and Empiricism; Pt. 2: What is Hybrid Pedagogy?; Pt. 3: What Does Hybrid Pedagogy Do?
Hybrid Pedagogy’s MOOCMOOC
Video: What is a MOOC? by David Cormier
Video: “Changing Education Paradigms” by Sir Ken Robinson
Presentation: “Digital Pedagogy, Play, and Mass Collaboration” by Pete and Jesse

Digital Peer Review on #literacies chat

This evening, as a guest of Anna Smith and Emily Pendergrass, I will be helping to host the #literacies chat from 7:00pm-8:00pm EST. We’ll be talking about the theories behind and the opportunities of digital peer review  — plenty relevant for anyone beginning DigiWriMo, AcWriMo, or NaNoWriMo today! I’ve opened  a Google Document (#literacies/Digital Peer Review) for use before, during, and after the chat, especially for anyone who is interested but cannot attend.

For about three years I have been developing a process of peer review using two distinct but compatible metaphors: the organic writing and digital collaboration. It involves leading students through a generative writing process that uses vigorous peer review facilitated through online tools. I divide the composition process into three phases. We talk about writing as seeds (thesis)  and organs (brainstorming) in the first phase as writers are generating ideas and researching. Our second phase involves the organization of a composition, comparable to bones and skeletons. The final phase — which most people call editing — becomes the skin of the composition, the outer surface on which it’s often (sometimes unfairly) judged. We use open web applications throughout the process (lately I’ve used Crocodoc) to peer review each phase. I demonstrate the feedback that is appropriate for each specific phase, and we look at the text of a peer review together to shape subsequent sessions. I published an article on the the first part of this process (Organic Writing and Digital Media: Seeds and Organs) this summer on Hybrid Pedagogy. I am in the middle of writing its complement.

Any teacher who values writing in the classroom knows that peer review is tricky. We wonder how to best prepare our students for reviewing each other’s work and how to manage all of peer interactions that can happen outside our pedagogical reach. We look for ways to make peer review efficient and keep it from being an experience of surfaces. I suggest that use of peer review must be integrated as step into that process and that the connectivity of the web permits new, previously unavailable opportunities. My questions for tonight are:

  1. How is “peer review” a kind of compositional literacy?
  2. What useful adaptations have you found for teaching the skill of “peer review”?
  3. How have you used digital tools to revise “peer review” in the writing classroom?
  4. Would you like to try a digital “peer review” experiment with your #literacies peers?