The following are my notes from this morning.

In class discussion this morning, Mary Hocks and Scott DeWitt both emphasized that it would be easier if we add one digital assignment to our classes rather than change them completely all at once.

Where to start with Multimodal Composing and Where to Go
Mary Hocks

During her talk, various people recommended these texts:
Writing New Media by Wysocki, Self, and Sirc.
The Non-Designer’s Design Book by Robin Williams
The Non-Designer’s Workbook by Robin Williams

When Hocks teaches visual arguments, she shows a few images and discusses the criteria for good visual arguments. Then, in class discussion and peer review, Hocks and her students view students’ visual compositions/arguments and discuss what they mean and the effectiveness of their visual arguments. For example, before the student authors say anything about their compositions, Hocks asks for other students to talk about the visual and as a group they then discuss their effectiveness.

Katie Braun led a discussion on how to revise assignments to incorporate digital elements. She will compile assignment ideas if we’ll send them to her at: braun.43 AT osu DOT edu.

Apple+shift+f4 will let you copy still images from video in powerpoint.

2nd Session this morning:
Finding the Time, Finding the Money, Finding the People
Scott DeWitt, Louie Ulman, Dickie Selfe, and Jason Palmeri

Dickie Selfe showed a visual that described the dynamic of blame that exists when instructors try different technology projects in classes. His key message: We have to continually reassess our integration of technology. People who survive constantly reassess. We can’t do everything and it would help matters if we keep in mind our various stakeholders.

Louie Ulman talked about sustainable funding. When we build something, we need to think about how we’d maintain it and keep it going over time.

Hiring staff means paying yearly increases. Buying hardware without staff to maintain and teach others how to use it doesn’t make much sense. (they found 60-65% of budget for staff).

Buying hardware and software means that in 4 years, it will need to be replaced and updated. We need to break out of the feast or famine method of funding. We need to think escrow funds.

Networks – where are we going to store work? Think in terabytes rather than gigabytes.

Scott DeWitt talked about revisioning the Computers, Writing, & Literature project to the Digital Media Project. He knew he couldn’t change things overnight and that he needed some playmates to rethink how they would change things. (85% of the classes in the DMP are taught by grad students. He has found that grad students are energetic, cutting edge, and also well read in current scholarship. In order to move beyond FYC classes, grad students at OSU have to take a 903 class, which I think is a grad level digital pedagogy class. By doing the digital pedagogy classes, grad students are going out into the curriculum and doing digital assignments in creative writing and literature classes, etc. in addition to FYC. However, over a year of teaching the course, he realized they had saturated the graduate student pool with qualified TAs to incorporate digital assignments. So now, DMAC serves as the pedagogy class and students at Ohio State participate in the institute.

Scott quoted Erin Smith: Being interdisciplinary doesn’t mean that you forget your discipline. In other words, it’s important that you keep your language to talk about the courses you want to design. For example, using language about writing and rhetoric to talk about digital composing.

Tim asked how they would suggest we get past the writing is traditional writing resistance from some. Cindy suggested that it’s important to work with those who show up and do a superb job so that others want to join you.

Jason Palmari talked about incorporating digital elements into existing courses. If he wanted to work with video, he created a video schedule, etc. He tries to do one new thing each quarter. He suggested that the best way to learn technology is to use it to do what you already need to do, but in new ways.

At OSU, it seems like the funding process is very transparent for instructional technology. When OSU needed to increase funding, students said that they would support it if $$ were set aside for instructional technology.

Scott suggested that framing digital pedagogy as a professional development opportunities because of the job market advantages. In addition to studying 18th Century Literature, grad students can also say, look at these other things that I’ve done that are valued on the job market. Also, Scott said that creative writers are becoming quite interested in digital media because it enables them to be more creative in the classroom and also to incorporate more creative arguments in FYC. Students say it is really refreshing to be able to be creative in composition classes. As compositionists, there is sometimes this fear of the word creativity, but that gap may be narrowing.

The Chair at OSU has the motto: Where Tradition and Innovation Meet. At some places, tradition and innovation compete, or collide {much laughter in the room}.

Scott suggested inventing new “service” opportunities. For example, he wanted to build an English department website so he suggested to the dean that that would count towards service for a semester or whatever. Also, serving on important, but less sexy service committees is important.

As you can see, we had lots of good discussion this morning. Now we have studio times this afternoon.

Later!