Sorry Amy,

I just saw that you posted on the Mejias article.  I will post on another  article tomorrow.

Unless you are the anomaly, writing is often a tedious and exhaustively lonely process.  As graduate students, we have by this time developed coping mechanisms to deal with the writing process, like:  writing an outline first, writing your introduction last, taking long breaks, forming writing groups or taking an incomplete!  Usually, our previous experiences with writing forces us to eventually embrace the attitude of just getting it done for the sake of peace!  According to Meijas, the use of wikis in the classroom alleviates many of the anxieties inveterate to writing.  The use of wikis invokes a collaborative process that potentially engenders a sense of community among learners; this leads to actual learning. So, why do schools continue to isolate individuals and make them hate learning?  The effective use of wiki may be the unknown desideratum education.

The author describes ha two-fold wiki assignment meant to engage students with historically complex texts.  First, students are asked to strictly summarize the main ideas of the text.  He provides a rough skeleton of major themes and headings that students complete.  Students are then required to use the “Comments” function of the Wiki to post their individual comments about the text: any reactions they might have, or questions they might want to discuss in class, and so on.  Participants are forced to limit their evaluation of the text by first collectively summarizing its main ideas.  This is sound pedagogical practice because it generates understanding before critique.

I really found this article to be very insightful and transformative in terms of my own teaching practice.  I’ve always encouraged teachers to use google sites and blogs as a platform for student engagement.  I however believe that the use of these technological tools doesn’t necessarily always help students with the daunting task of comprehending opaque texts.  As educators, we always have to model our process of writing and thinking for students to emulate.  For me, I became a better writing when one professor spent ample time with me to elucidate her process of writing and thinking.

Furthermore, the authors in this week’s readings endorse the use of these tools in their technology classes.  How can student engagement become the measure of success when these students are already motivated to learn the content?  Many of us have the luck of teaching mandated courses that are filled with students who aren’t remotely interested in what we have to say despite how enthusiastically we say it!  There are of course general understandings that help us to conceptualize student engagement, but it actualizes itself differently within each class.  What then are the indicators of student engagement?  As our conceptions of schooling change, so should our assessments.

FYI, team E&E. This message was in my talk page this morning and just want to re-post here in case you are confused about where to work on our page. Click on the 2nd link to access the article.

It was moved to User:Experience and Education (book), which meant it wasn’t live, I’ve moved it to Experience and Education (book) now–Jac16888 ^Talk 14:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

So I must admit to reading the full essay on Electronic Civil Disobedience (ECD) and not just the assigned pages. Despite a certain glib revolutionary rhetoric that sometimes seems to verge on satire, I thought it was great! The argument goes something like this: capital is no longer attached to physical space, yet the traditional left is committed to revolutionary action and organizing that is deeply tied to the physical; especially a conception of civil disobedience based on the 1960s. The innovation here is to suggest that within the hacker community there is a group of people who are also committed to anti-authoritarianism, yet they are not yet politically conscious. In contrast, on the political left, there are many people who are politically conscious, yet they are engaged in a type of activism that is deeply anachronistic. As the article states, taking over symbolic spaces doesn’t have an impact on the space of flows through which real power moves.

I thought this was a particularly interesting and timely piece given the primacy of space in recent social protests. I think the notion of space as irrelevant was perhaps overblown in the essay, but I do think there is something interesting here. It takes a certain stretching of the imagination to consider how one could “occupy” the internet. And while counter-cultural forces like hackers may have an anti-authoritarian bent, is the internet not in fact more easily manipulated by those in power than physical space (e.g. in physical space, the forces of law and order must repress, whereas in a space of flows, problematic sites or actions can perhaps simply be shut down)? The question raised here, however, is whether those committed to revolutionary politics should be engaging with those engaged in anti-hierarchy/authority movements online. The authors’ answer speaks to the possibility of digital collaboration. The idea is that these two groups could come together in a sort of affinity-based organization. The authors thus call for “cellular constructions aimed at information disruption in cyberspace” (28).