It's been hitting me hard this term just how much instruction technology (and support thereof) has changed in the four point five years I've been teaching.
This is probably because to some extent I'm using old examples, giving older lectures, and I'm suddenly struck by how I had to do this the last time I did it. The last time I brought in examples for rhetorical analysis I did so on an overhead. I had a magazine cover I dragged into class. I had to burn files to a CD and then throw them into my own laptop hooked up to a cart with a projector on it (because the laptop on the cart usually didn't like me very much, for whatever reason).
My students used to write reading responses and journal entries both in class at home. Now we do that on the course blog.
Instead of burning stuff to a CD I put it on a USB key around my neck. I'd just shove the stuff in Content Collection on Blackboard, or in a hidden file on my website, but to be honest, I don't really trust that the internet in my classroom will work--it's been hinky on Monday mornings. I really need to kick the ass of whomever is futzing with it on Saturdays or Fridays and TURNING OFF THE ROUTER. *growl*
But that too is a big change. My students all have laptops available at one school (in the classroom or their own) that are locked up in the back. In the other, I have a multimedia workstation that I present from, and all my students have a computer in front of them all the time. This is a big advance from always having to check out a computer lab and sharing the space with other users...
Yet, I find myself relying on the technology less and less. Sure I study "Computers and Writing" officially, but I'm the sap who thinks that a printed off spreadsheet would be better used to schedule people in the Writing Center than a hand built database in Access (alright, so it's mostly because Access doesn't have a built in calender feature, but still). I'm mostly right too--it's not always necessary. Nice, but not necessary.
Yet, if this is how many little things have changed in four years, I find myself wondering about the next twenty. What little things will have made teaching different in a few months? years?
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
basic writers vs. Freshmen writers?
It's become apparent to me since the beginning of the term that teaching freshmen is remarkably more different than teaching higher level college students that I would have originally assumed. (And, if any of my current students are reading this, hi!, by the way.) This isn't to say that they are bad, just a very different sort of student than I'm generally used to.
The first "basic comp" course I taught was really and truly a basic comp/rhet course aimed at sophomores. I also primarily teach non-traditional students in my other position, who aren't the same age as your average freshman. Now, what the heck difference could there possibly be between freshmen and sophomores, and why does it matter anyway?
When I was one I don't know that I saw a difference. As hard as I try, I don't really remember much about my attitude towards class that year. I went to it, I studied a lot, and I participated in the smaller sections I was in when I had anything to say. In my English class that happened to be a lot, as I was endlessly arguing with this one guy that I called "Bassoon guy" till I learned that's not even how you pronounce his last name...
...but no matter. I guess I recall, to one extent or another, not having any close personal connections to my teachers at that time. But I don't know why other than blatant fear--you know? Plus, I figured as long as I was doing well I had no reason to show up to office hours or speak to them and to some extent I'm STILL like that, unless I just want to shoot the shit, and thus far I've had very little reason to do that EITHER this year.
So right, what's different about freshmen?
Well, there's been plenty written about "basic writers." MANY of my students at my second job would count as basic writers. Some even have had no instruction in writing--ever. But they DO write, and they do proofread their work to the best of their ability, and they do work pretty hard. But they're not stereotypical freshmen. The ones that are, straight out of high school, tend to do that a little less.
I wonder sometimes if the problems of teaching "first year writing" have little to do with student intrinsic ability and more to do with just who they are and where they are in personal development. It's been a bit of culture shock for me to suddenly realize that I'm the enemy sometimes--after all, that's what high school writing teachers just might have been. It's been a long time since I considered the direct emotional/attitudinal effect of high school on college classes because MOST of my students over the years have had a year to twenty between high school and walking into my class room for the first time.
It doesn't hurt that I'm occassionally of the opinion that it wouldn't hurt some people (not all, maybe not even most) to work a few years before entering college. I remember being about 20ish when all of a sudden everything clicked--concentration, memorization, etc. and I felt like I could learn just about anything. Before that time a lot of what i was doing was a struggle, but not so much anymore. Hrm.
Non-traditional students pose their own problems I suppose. They need to be convinced that things are "doable" mostly. It seems silly in retrospect though, when they're all worried that their younger counterparts are going to be running circles around them when in reality their dedication to their work means the opposite is often the case.
The first "basic comp" course I taught was really and truly a basic comp/rhet course aimed at sophomores. I also primarily teach non-traditional students in my other position, who aren't the same age as your average freshman. Now, what the heck difference could there possibly be between freshmen and sophomores, and why does it matter anyway?
When I was one I don't know that I saw a difference. As hard as I try, I don't really remember much about my attitude towards class that year. I went to it, I studied a lot, and I participated in the smaller sections I was in when I had anything to say. In my English class that happened to be a lot, as I was endlessly arguing with this one guy that I called "Bassoon guy" till I learned that's not even how you pronounce his last name...
...but no matter. I guess I recall, to one extent or another, not having any close personal connections to my teachers at that time. But I don't know why other than blatant fear--you know? Plus, I figured as long as I was doing well I had no reason to show up to office hours or speak to them and to some extent I'm STILL like that, unless I just want to shoot the shit, and thus far I've had very little reason to do that EITHER this year.
So right, what's different about freshmen?
Well, there's been plenty written about "basic writers." MANY of my students at my second job would count as basic writers. Some even have had no instruction in writing--ever. But they DO write, and they do proofread their work to the best of their ability, and they do work pretty hard. But they're not stereotypical freshmen. The ones that are, straight out of high school, tend to do that a little less.
I wonder sometimes if the problems of teaching "first year writing" have little to do with student intrinsic ability and more to do with just who they are and where they are in personal development. It's been a bit of culture shock for me to suddenly realize that I'm the enemy sometimes--after all, that's what high school writing teachers just might have been. It's been a long time since I considered the direct emotional/attitudinal effect of high school on college classes because MOST of my students over the years have had a year to twenty between high school and walking into my class room for the first time.
It doesn't hurt that I'm occassionally of the opinion that it wouldn't hurt some people (not all, maybe not even most) to work a few years before entering college. I remember being about 20ish when all of a sudden everything clicked--concentration, memorization, etc. and I felt like I could learn just about anything. Before that time a lot of what i was doing was a struggle, but not so much anymore. Hrm.
Non-traditional students pose their own problems I suppose. They need to be convinced that things are "doable" mostly. It seems silly in retrospect though, when they're all worried that their younger counterparts are going to be running circles around them when in reality their dedication to their work means the opposite is often the case.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Stuff I've been reading
You know... outside of school.
First of all, here is Auryn. That link actually posts to her "memories" (favorite entries) on Livejournal, because that would be the easiest place to start reading her stuff. She was a nurse working at Methodist hospital during Hurricane Katrina, and although I know everybody's just sick to death of hearing about Katrina, her personal stories are interesting in a way that news reports just flat out aren't going to be.
In Junkfood Science, a medical professional (nurse) regularly debunks news articles and myths such as the obesity epidemic that the media constantly harps upon. If I wasn't already pretty sure of my topic for my Media Reception project this term, I might start looking at some of those ads and nhttp://www2.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifews reports and how people respond to them... which is directly tied to .....
Hungry for Hunger, a really unique blog about increasingly common eating disorders (which was linked to Junkfood Science awhile back). This one is written by the husband of an anorexic woman who has gone inpatient. He says that he couldn't find any support sites for people like him, so he decided to make one for all the other husbands and boyfriends and girlfriends out there so they'll know what to expect and be better informed than he was.
Oh and I've been playing this.
First of all, here is Auryn. That link actually posts to her "memories" (favorite entries) on Livejournal, because that would be the easiest place to start reading her stuff. She was a nurse working at Methodist hospital during Hurricane Katrina, and although I know everybody's just sick to death of hearing about Katrina, her personal stories are interesting in a way that news reports just flat out aren't going to be.
In Junkfood Science, a medical professional (nurse) regularly debunks news articles and myths such as the obesity epidemic that the media constantly harps upon. If I wasn't already pretty sure of my topic for my Media Reception project this term, I might start looking at some of those ads and nhttp://www2.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifews reports and how people respond to them... which is directly tied to .....
Hungry for Hunger, a really unique blog about increasingly common eating disorders (which was linked to Junkfood Science awhile back). This one is written by the husband of an anorexic woman who has gone inpatient. He says that he couldn't find any support sites for people like him, so he decided to make one for all the other husbands and boyfriends and girlfriends out there so they'll know what to expect and be better informed than he was.
Oh and I've been playing this.
Friday, January 12, 2007
personal feminism vs. academic feminism vs. sosuave.com vs. "straight gaydar"
In my Feminism and Composition course last night we were asked why we want to be there. For me, that question is hard to answer because my personal reasons for wanting that class and my professional ones are vastly different. On one hand, I feel as though I missed oppurtunities to learn from other women at my last school because I blew off the idea that this stuff was important, and now that I know that it is I don't want to be doing that again (personal). My dissertation might have something to do with empowering moderate voices, and I'd like to tie that into postmodern feminism as well (professional). And lastly, I just want to think of new ways of dealing with hinky situations that reveal far more about the misogyny of those I am in contact with in hopes of persuading them otherwise (personal, but yeah--fat chance).
This last is something I'd like to expand upon further here, despite this being an academic journal and despite this being a "personal problem."
One of my friends from my last school that had a couple classes with and worked on projects with has recently become a devotee of the stuff taught at sosuave.com. This site gives advice to men on how to pick up women, get their phone numbers, and also not ever be very attached to one women (oneitis) even in marriage. Oh yeah, and you need to touch people a lot (kino).
Now my first reaction was to call bullshit on all that. If some guy touches me in a bar he might very well end up with his own hand shoved straight up his patoot. Strangers don't get good touch/bad touch privleges, even if they are trying to get my bloody phone number. Actually, I don't go to bars or clubs to meet people, I go with existing friends, so any time I've ever been approached by anybody (and yes, some of them have used these techniques) has been somewhat disastrous for them and they walked away thinking I was a huge bitch because I don't and didn't give in.
But as he continues to write about this on his blog, and as I started to read that site (which I found by googling some language he uses, it may not ACTUALLY be where he goes, I don't know) I've found that's not my primary reaction. It's clear that these techniques do work, even if not particularly on me, and that the things said about women on these sites is destructive and sort of terrifying.
Now he claims that this is all about being more confident and being able to get what he wants by being more confident. But what does he want, and how does confidence effect that?
So... let's begin with a few quotes.
"The thought of whether she likes you should never cross your mind. It is not important BEFORE you ask for the number. The important thing is you WANTING her. Always ask yourself "Do I want this one?". And the answer should be 'Wow. Boy do I!' That is all you need to know. Real men TAKE what they want." From here. This statement, and others just like it, repeated over and over again, are something akin to the biggest promotion of rape culture I've ever read in my entire life.
And, from the same page:
""Feminism came without warning... and conquered men. It has created a generation of neurotic males. A male of this time may be one of them.
-Do you believe it is wrong to judge a woman by how she looks?
-Do you believe it is wrong to advance on a woman, sexually, with no verbal consent?
-Do you believe women have been 'discriminated' because of their gender, that males intentionally put women down?
-Do you believe that in sex, it is wrong to even consider to 'have your way with her' and become and be the sensuous animal you've always dreamed?
-Do you believe women desire, as priority, respect?
"If you believe in any of these things, even just a little, you have been affected by Modern Feminism. It is the virus that creates the effects known as Nice Guyius Patheticus!"
And this is what one of my "friends" is believing in.
This site repeats, over and over again, that women have TOO MUCH POWER and it must be taken from them at all costs.
Women should be MORE OBJECTIFIED, not less.
Furthermore, all women on the site are referred to by numbers representing their overall hotness. Hotness is based upon nothing but personal appearance, of course, because what a man WANTS on this site and what a man believes he deserves, what he is entitled to, is a woman that is far more attractive than he might be (which was something I noticed a whole heck of a lot at my last school. If you don't ever leave the front of your computer, eat nothing but ramen, and never shower, don't expect a super model boys, and just following the tips on this website to change those behaviors does NOT make you MORE DESERVING of a super model, sheesh.)
""The truth: Feminism is not declaring war on masculinity but on femininity! Feminism is a political Tower of Babylon to escape the truth of Human Nature.
"I'm in America. And I LOVE foreign chicks. They are just so feminine. Here, the chicks act masculine and get fat. They find it shameful to place their time and talents into their family and children (whereas, it should be their greatest joy).
"I think it is great honor, joy, privledge, and pleasure to be a Man. Women can trump us as they can be a Mother of Men. There is much glory in masculinity and femininity. But feminists are AGAINST both."
Yes of course, all american women are fat. But what IS fat?
Well first of all, any jiggling (even normal BMI) is fat:
"So because fat girls get by because of their "booty" (if you can find it under all the cellulite), more girls can get fat, develop a "booty" and not have to exercise.
after a short time of this, the average standard for women that men have, as well as the amount of work that women have to do to attract a man decreases even more"
You know, because girls should naturally have to work out just for men.
I've also read on this site that belly fat is okay, not NOTHING on the legs or butt is, because legs and butt are what attracts men. Nevermind that belly fat is more dangerous to women's health (even a little).
If a man admits to finding something other than the "feminine ideal" super skinny attractive, he'll be called gay: "man are you homosexual? That woman in the tan pants has a nice booty? If you like men, I have nothing against that though." In fact, ANY femininity in men is seen as gay on this site.
See more quotes:
"A woman’s sexual past is a key element on how she will be subservient in her role as a wife and your chances of a marriage without overbearing strife – hors are much more haughty and stubborn than virgins!! They lie about their past sexual relationships because they know that a slut/hor (non-virgin) is an unnatural condition for a woman (future wife) and they wish to deceive you (especially if they are seeking ltr/husband material) because intelligent men know that her sexual past is directly tied to her mindset, and her devotion in her role as a wife and to her duties as a mother!" From here.
"I have only one thing to say about women's sexual past: Get in early as you can. "
"I for one will not take any woman serious who has had slept around or had flings. Its OK, if the girl has had sex when she was in love, but if she is a hor, it tells me she has no control over her sexual urges, which also means she has no control over her morals, dignity and picks Orgasms over self-respect..."
These guys want to know why feminism is still necessary since the movement "won" what it wanted.
They're the freaking reason that feminism is still important.
Lastly, I guess I just want to study more about women's studies in hopes of being able to respond and get more than a "you're stupid" answer from my friend. A mutual friend who commented to him got a brush off answer.
Ever since I found out he thinks this way now, I wonder how many times in class he was also thinking "oh her? She's just a 5" or you know, whatever. I don't like to think that whatever interactions I've had with this person involved me being a NUMBER and utterly worthless because I was a happily taken classmate and not a sexual object.
Really lastly, the blatant homophobia on that site (though they claim they aren't homophobic) ties into this conversation a bit. A lot of people that I knew at school that also knew this guy knew that he dated girls, but a lot of them thought he might be gay. I'm not sure what the difference is between "slightly feminine most likely straight guy" is in "straight gaydar" or "slightly feminine most likely gay gay" is, but there is one to most people.
Now, this fellow claims to have had lots of women problems, although he's dated (and many of my friends hadn't even gotten that far). Nobody ever wanted to tell them "Well, girls might think you're gay." It's rude, it's disrespectful of real uncloseted gay people, and it's not right to just assume something about somebody else's sexuality. Is there a place for straight gaydar at all? (that's one question... sometimes I think there is, for example one of my acquaintences who was "out" turned around and married for the sake of his religion, the girl still doens't know as far as I know, and well... in that situation and ANY like it why should either party be unhappy? As long as people aren't comfortable being out, or are told that they are intrinsically "wrong," hrm...)
But for these guys with mistaken sexual identity, a place like sosuave might seem to be the place to learn to conquer those women that they HATE because women won't date them. It's no answer, it just makes all the problems we have worse. Living in a woman's body doesn't make me want to work less, doesn't make me want to raise a family more (my SO is far more interested in that than I am at this point in time), and doesn't make me stupider dammit. Oh yeah, it also doesn't make me automatically a "hor."
This last is something I'd like to expand upon further here, despite this being an academic journal and despite this being a "personal problem."
One of my friends from my last school that had a couple classes with and worked on projects with has recently become a devotee of the stuff taught at sosuave.com. This site gives advice to men on how to pick up women, get their phone numbers, and also not ever be very attached to one women (oneitis) even in marriage. Oh yeah, and you need to touch people a lot (kino).
Now my first reaction was to call bullshit on all that. If some guy touches me in a bar he might very well end up with his own hand shoved straight up his patoot. Strangers don't get good touch/bad touch privleges, even if they are trying to get my bloody phone number. Actually, I don't go to bars or clubs to meet people, I go with existing friends, so any time I've ever been approached by anybody (and yes, some of them have used these techniques) has been somewhat disastrous for them and they walked away thinking I was a huge bitch because I don't and didn't give in.
But as he continues to write about this on his blog, and as I started to read that site (which I found by googling some language he uses, it may not ACTUALLY be where he goes, I don't know) I've found that's not my primary reaction. It's clear that these techniques do work, even if not particularly on me, and that the things said about women on these sites is destructive and sort of terrifying.
Now he claims that this is all about being more confident and being able to get what he wants by being more confident. But what does he want, and how does confidence effect that?
So... let's begin with a few quotes.
"The thought of whether she likes you should never cross your mind. It is not important BEFORE you ask for the number. The important thing is you WANTING her. Always ask yourself "Do I want this one?". And the answer should be 'Wow. Boy do I!' That is all you need to know. Real men TAKE what they want." From here. This statement, and others just like it, repeated over and over again, are something akin to the biggest promotion of rape culture I've ever read in my entire life.
And, from the same page:
""Feminism came without warning... and conquered men. It has created a generation of neurotic males. A male of this time may be one of them.
-Do you believe it is wrong to judge a woman by how she looks?
-Do you believe it is wrong to advance on a woman, sexually, with no verbal consent?
-Do you believe women have been 'discriminated' because of their gender, that males intentionally put women down?
-Do you believe that in sex, it is wrong to even consider to 'have your way with her' and become and be the sensuous animal you've always dreamed?
-Do you believe women desire, as priority, respect?
"If you believe in any of these things, even just a little, you have been affected by Modern Feminism. It is the virus that creates the effects known as Nice Guyius Patheticus!"
And this is what one of my "friends" is believing in.
This site repeats, over and over again, that women have TOO MUCH POWER and it must be taken from them at all costs.
Women should be MORE OBJECTIFIED, not less.
Furthermore, all women on the site are referred to by numbers representing their overall hotness. Hotness is based upon nothing but personal appearance, of course, because what a man WANTS on this site and what a man believes he deserves, what he is entitled to, is a woman that is far more attractive than he might be (which was something I noticed a whole heck of a lot at my last school. If you don't ever leave the front of your computer, eat nothing but ramen, and never shower, don't expect a super model boys, and just following the tips on this website to change those behaviors does NOT make you MORE DESERVING of a super model, sheesh.)
""The truth: Feminism is not declaring war on masculinity but on femininity! Feminism is a political Tower of Babylon to escape the truth of Human Nature.
"I'm in America. And I LOVE foreign chicks. They are just so feminine. Here, the chicks act masculine and get fat. They find it shameful to place their time and talents into their family and children (whereas, it should be their greatest joy).
"I think it is great honor, joy, privledge, and pleasure to be a Man. Women can trump us as they can be a Mother of Men. There is much glory in masculinity and femininity. But feminists are AGAINST both."
Yes of course, all american women are fat. But what IS fat?
Well first of all, any jiggling (even normal BMI) is fat:
"So because fat girls get by because of their "booty" (if you can find it under all the cellulite), more girls can get fat, develop a "booty" and not have to exercise.
after a short time of this, the average standard for women that men have, as well as the amount of work that women have to do to attract a man decreases even more"
You know, because girls should naturally have to work out just for men.
I've also read on this site that belly fat is okay, not NOTHING on the legs or butt is, because legs and butt are what attracts men. Nevermind that belly fat is more dangerous to women's health (even a little).
If a man admits to finding something other than the "feminine ideal" super skinny attractive, he'll be called gay: "man are you homosexual? That woman in the tan pants has a nice booty? If you like men, I have nothing against that though." In fact, ANY femininity in men is seen as gay on this site.
See more quotes:
"A woman’s sexual past is a key element on how she will be subservient in her role as a wife and your chances of a marriage without overbearing strife – hors are much more haughty and stubborn than virgins!! They lie about their past sexual relationships because they know that a slut/hor (non-virgin) is an unnatural condition for a woman (future wife) and they wish to deceive you (especially if they are seeking ltr/husband material) because intelligent men know that her sexual past is directly tied to her mindset, and her devotion in her role as a wife and to her duties as a mother!" From here.
"I have only one thing to say about women's sexual past: Get in early as you can. "
"I for one will not take any woman serious who has had slept around or had flings. Its OK, if the girl has had sex when she was in love, but if she is a hor, it tells me she has no control over her sexual urges, which also means she has no control over her morals, dignity and picks Orgasms over self-respect..."
These guys want to know why feminism is still necessary since the movement "won" what it wanted.
They're the freaking reason that feminism is still important.
Lastly, I guess I just want to study more about women's studies in hopes of being able to respond and get more than a "you're stupid" answer from my friend. A mutual friend who commented to him got a brush off answer.
Ever since I found out he thinks this way now, I wonder how many times in class he was also thinking "oh her? She's just a 5" or you know, whatever. I don't like to think that whatever interactions I've had with this person involved me being a NUMBER and utterly worthless because I was a happily taken classmate and not a sexual object.
Really lastly, the blatant homophobia on that site (though they claim they aren't homophobic) ties into this conversation a bit. A lot of people that I knew at school that also knew this guy knew that he dated girls, but a lot of them thought he might be gay. I'm not sure what the difference is between "slightly feminine most likely straight guy" is in "straight gaydar" or "slightly feminine most likely gay gay" is, but there is one to most people.
Now, this fellow claims to have had lots of women problems, although he's dated (and many of my friends hadn't even gotten that far). Nobody ever wanted to tell them "Well, girls might think you're gay." It's rude, it's disrespectful of real uncloseted gay people, and it's not right to just assume something about somebody else's sexuality. Is there a place for straight gaydar at all? (that's one question... sometimes I think there is, for example one of my acquaintences who was "out" turned around and married for the sake of his religion, the girl still doens't know as far as I know, and well... in that situation and ANY like it why should either party be unhappy? As long as people aren't comfortable being out, or are told that they are intrinsically "wrong," hrm...)
But for these guys with mistaken sexual identity, a place like sosuave might seem to be the place to learn to conquer those women that they HATE because women won't date them. It's no answer, it just makes all the problems we have worse. Living in a woman's body doesn't make me want to work less, doesn't make me want to raise a family more (my SO is far more interested in that than I am at this point in time), and doesn't make me stupider dammit. Oh yeah, it also doesn't make me automatically a "hor."
what is it...
what is it about teaching that always makes me really freaking hungry in the morning? My afternoon classes don't do this to me...
Must... have ... bagel... too... lazy.... to walk to.... Einstein.
Yeah, that about sums it up.
Must... have ... bagel... too... lazy.... to walk to.... Einstein.
Yeah, that about sums it up.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
so now my grammar class has a notemesh....
I'm teaching a hybrid class this term on grammar (specifically a style guide common to a lot of offices). It meets half online, half in person, and it's really just a lot of rules.
All last term I kept on thinking that a wiki would be a nice addition to the course, but I know that using one school's resources at another is not only unethical but is probably a nice way to find one's funding revoked (or be asked to quit the second teaching gig, within guidelines set by the department or no). All these rules could be converted to an online style guide as a wiki though... and I think it would make a good project to work on during our in class weeks (where I can directly support it) to tie to offline weeks....
So I asked my system goddess Sherri, and she pointed me to Notemesh, which is a free online wiki type system for anybody with a .edu e-mail address.
Us Wayne students are lucky enough to have wiki access on our server, but if you happen to reading this out there in the big non-wiki'd world, Notemesh isn't a bad substitute. It's not as powerful, but it is a little easier for brand spanking new internet users to get the hang of (and a lot of my students in that class are pretty new to creating files).
So I'm busy getting my class set up even though I don't need it till a week from Saturday. This technology is really a good match for my course material, so I'm glad I asked about what was recommended.
All last term I kept on thinking that a wiki would be a nice addition to the course, but I know that using one school's resources at another is not only unethical but is probably a nice way to find one's funding revoked (or be asked to quit the second teaching gig, within guidelines set by the department or no). All these rules could be converted to an online style guide as a wiki though... and I think it would make a good project to work on during our in class weeks (where I can directly support it) to tie to offline weeks....
So I asked my system goddess Sherri, and she pointed me to Notemesh, which is a free online wiki type system for anybody with a .edu e-mail address.
Us Wayne students are lucky enough to have wiki access on our server, but if you happen to reading this out there in the big non-wiki'd world, Notemesh isn't a bad substitute. It's not as powerful, but it is a little easier for brand spanking new internet users to get the hang of (and a lot of my students in that class are pretty new to creating files).
So I'm busy getting my class set up even though I don't need it till a week from Saturday. This technology is really a good match for my course material, so I'm glad I asked about what was recommended.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
strappy scandals
I've this intense urge to change my name on here to "this academic loves strappy scandals" but I've absolutely no idea what a "strappy scandal" would be.
I'd say best explanation gets a cookie... but well, my cookie making abilities leave a lot to be desired.
My website is up, and is boring (but functional and expandable) here.
I'd say best explanation gets a cookie... but well, my cookie making abilities leave a lot to be desired.
My website is up, and is boring (but functional and expandable) here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
