Now, the question: on what educational-related technology do I spend the $500? your thoughts?

I was really surprised that they reconsidered and clarified their postion. I didn’t expect that I would be able to say anything to achieve this result. Of course, it’s not a perfect solution for any faculty who are no longer employees, but it is enough of a clarification in policy that I am again eligible to receive award monies if I am selected as the winner in the TA category. Now if only they will forget that I was the person who wrote a “complaint,” and instead think of me as that smart grad student who has done so much with teaching with technology. Let’s hope the 13 page doc/PDF with links to supporting materials will convince them. When I’ve revised the doc to a suitable length for a web-based portfolio, I’ll post a link to it here in case anyone is interested.

I should hear the results by September 1st. Keep your fingers crossed for me!

I was going to ask you to keep your fingers crossed for me. But, not so fast…Don’t cross those fingers or even think about uncorking the champagne bottle now.

I received another email from Gunderson that was not nearly as pleasant as the first.

It seems Gunderson has learned that some finalists may no longer be employees of Missouri during Fall 2007 when the award will be given. She consulted the Faculty Advisory Board for advice and they have determined that:

# Any finalist selected as a category winner, but who is no longer employed at MU during the 2007 Fall Semester, will not be eligible to receive the award monies.
# Finalists who are leaving the university have the choice to continue in the awards process by submitting examples of work. If the departing finalist is selected as a winner, then that person will receive a plaque, but will not receive award monies.
# Finalists who are leaving MU and who decide to not continue with the award process will be acknowledged by letter for their impact in effective teaching with technology at MU.

Given this new information, my choices are to keep going, compile an extensive portfolio and possibly get a plaque, or drop out now and get a letter.

I reviewed the Teaching with Technology Awards information on the ET@MO website. The eligibility language states:

Eligibility: Any faculty member with a primary teaching appointment is eligible, including tenure track, nonregular, and clinical faculty. Support staff involved in supporting technology in teaching, as well as graduate instructors and teaching assistants, are eligible.

They are changing the rules in the middle of the process. There is no mention anywhere that the winner must be an employee of the University at the time the award is given. The award nominations are made in March, portfolios of finalists are reviewed during the summer, and the award is given in the Fall. With the award process spanning an academic year, isn’t it short-sighted of them not to have considered that graduate students would be moving on to other jobs? That is what we are expected to do. It’s our plan of study.

How can they believe that it is an acceptable practice to change the eligibility criteria in the middle of the awards process, especially since they have already notified me that I am a finalist?

I am stunned and so disappointed by this news. Several faculty went to a lot of time and trouble to nominate me for this award.

When I talked about this situation with a good friend, her question was, “why wouldn’t they want to give an alumna this award?” Good question.

What do I do? Since I won’t be an employee in Fall 2007 (btw, as a grad student instructor, was I ever an employee?), do I continue with awards process and possibly get a plaque? Or, do I just remove my application and be content with being a finalist and get a letter? Or, do I sacrifice both and call/email and complain? Would that even do any good or have any effect?

The emerging picture from such studies is that ten thousand hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert— in anything. In study after study, of composers, basketball players, fiction writers, ice skaters, concert pianists, chess players, master criminals, and what have you, this number comes up again and again.

Dan wonders what might be gained by aiming for engagement rather than mastery.

I wonder how this might connect with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s work on Flow. In Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, MC states, “Even the simplest physical act becomes enjoyable when it is transformed so as to produce flow” (97). Paraphrased steps in this process are:

1. set goal and subgoals
2. measure progress to goals
3. focus on goals and make fine-tuning adjustments
4. develop skills to match opportunities
5. adjust goals when boredom hits

Do we need to change the language we use when we write assignments? Rather than say something on the order of: For this assignment, you must write an argument that…, would we be better off to say: For this assignment, you need to set a goal and subgoals for this project…, identify the skills you will learn… Would students understand/relate/engage more with ‘goal’ language?

Next respondent as he looked at me: “Well, I don’t know about having the same handbook, but we should be able to develop a shared mission statement…”

So from that response, I guess the equation looked something like this in his mind:
rhetorical focus = choosing the same handbook

Say it with me: Jeez-O-Pete! While I’d agree with the last part of his reply, the first part of his response through me for a loop.

I will have to develop more comprehensive answers! Maybe next time I get asked this question I’ll say: I’d love it if the class had more of a rhetorical focus and we could identify the key terms and concepts that we think are important to teach in first-year writing. For example, context, audience, purpose, and maybe arrangement, re/mediation, and re-vision to start… ???

1. Find 3 sources on the Internet about how to write a summary, using a variety of search engines, and post them to our class del.icio.us account (2030pw).

2. Find 3 sources on the Internet about how to write an analysis. (again, they had to link to a unique source and post to the del.icio.us account)

They worked in pairs on this activity (someone they hadn’t yet worked with), which I thought might help them get to know each other. Also, later in the class, they worked with this same person doing a peer review of their summary, analysis and personal response assignments. (Note: they’re not having any difficulty responding to something personally so I didn’t ask them to do any extra research on that topic).

The results were not too bad. Several students said they liked the activity and thought it was good practice. One student said that she would never have thought to go to the Internet for more information on how to complete a writing assignment; rather, she would have just tried the best she could or referred back to the handout that I had provided, so she thought it was good because it provided another way to get help. However, when I asked if this activity bordered on a cut and paste activity, another person said that finding 3 sources was too many. He suggested finding just 2 sources on each per person. I think that is very good feedback. If I did it again, which is quite likely, I’d probably only have them find one source on each topic per person.

The next day in class I asked them to review the links that everyone had posted. A couple people mentioned sites by Named Universities as being the best. However, I think the consensus was that those sites that promised “simple” and “direct” and especially “steps” to writing these types of documents were the ones that they thought the most useful.

I haven’t graded the most recent documents they’ve submitted. I’ll have to see if doing this activity will have any impact on the quality of work they submit.

technorati tag: teaching-carnival

In the post, which is a transcript of an earlier speech, August argues that everyone will be a professional writer of some kind, and, unfortunately, we don’t get to choose whether we’re a professional or an amateur because all of our public writing gets judged, from emails to blog posts, to newspaper articles. If our name is attached to a document, then it is a reflection of our professionalism, which August measures by the following five factors: presentation, accuracy, consistency, accountability, and meeting peer standards.

So not only does this post help generate discussion about these factors, but it also provides an opportunity to talk about a writer’s use of humor and the benefit of using relevant present day examples, as well as blogging as a type of professional writing.

Needless to say, I’ll use it again.

technorati tag: teaching-carnival

Joy! Joy! One student stopped to tell me that he’s taking my introduction to digital composing class next semester. It’s remarkable how pleasing the comment, “I’ll see you next semester” really makes me feel.

I started to comment over there, but then my list got long. Some of these may be more or less useful depending on the course focus. I’ve thought about this subject a lot because I’m trying to provide an introduction to some new ideas about what it means to write professionally in my own professional writing course. My students have expressed some criticisms for texts that still teaches them what an email message window is. While I haven’t really found a text that I really like, below are some ideas for topics to discuss.

Business 2.0 has some articles I’ve used to start discussions.

Also, I really like Kathy Sierra’s blog: Creating Passionate Users on writing and presentations.

Professional Blogs and their Impact on Communications. Also, there has been lots published on business and blogging and changing contexts for business communication.

Gerry McGovern on web content. Under publications he has some sample chapters of his texts.

CSR Wire – I’ve also asked students to analyze corporate social responsibility reports.

And, then I’d also consider some of the ideas that these people are writing about:

Dan Pink
Seth Godin
Tom Peters
Motto Magazine
Lawrence Lessig

ok, that’s all I have time to load up now. And, I didn’t even get to issues with Design.

So, the writing project I referred to in my last post is on digital literacies. I am trying to define what they are. Just now, I was making a quick list and one of the items on my list included Photoshoping an image (which I know the more theoretical way of saying would include the concept of Remediation). And, then I because I was already thinking about PDFs, I thought I’d add the ability to create a PDF using Adobe Acrobat, which when I wrote it down, turned out to be: PDFing.

And, that shorthand made me giggle. That F’ing PDF!!!!!

Reminder: discuss with students the shortcomings of linking PDFs on web pages, especially as it pertains to their portfolios, and re-explain the benefits of PDFs.

Hey, if any of you reading have come across some *huge* PDFs recently that are linked without any warning of its size or file type, can you send me the webpage URL where it is linked from? Also, if you know of any more elegant uses of PDFs and websites, I’d also be interested in those links.

Via del.icio.us and google, I did find the following information.
How to speed up loading of PDF with Adobe Acrobat
The Firefox PDF Extension to view PDFs as HTML, download, or open PDF.
Facts and Opinions about PDF Accessibility at A List Apart
PDF Accessibility at WebAIM
Web Usability – PDF and Accessibility August 2004
Adobe Access – Adobe has published accessibility information for each of its products.

Also, Clancy just asked about DevonThink. It reminded me that such software and search tools like Spotlight and Google Desktop enable searching of PDFs that are on your computer, which is a good thing for researchers.

If you can recommend any other recent articles on PDFs and accessibility, the Web, information management, and literacy, please leave me a comment below. Thanks!