Author Archives: Anke Geertsma

On Failure

In her post, Sarah questions Scott Berkun’s assertion that the anxieties surrounding failure are uniquely American. I don’t think I can answer that questions of course, but I have been thinking about such issues as I’ve been getting to know this culture and especially its educational system over the past few years. And, like Sarah, I am a perfectionist who finds that this trait is very hard to shake, so these texts certainly resonate with me. As a teacher, one of my goals is to get students to let go of the fear to fail, and, if at all possible, to let go of their focus on and anxiety about grades. But truth is that for them so much depends on their final grades and GPA. Admission, financial aid, fellowships, etc.

Even though Allison Car wants to focus not so much on external evaluation and assessment, ie. failing a course, as on failure as an “affect-bearing concept”, i.e. “being a failure,” I think the need for external praise and the importance of assessment is such an integral part here, not just of the educational system but the culture as a whole, and plays a huge role in why failure and “being a failure” is such a shattering experience. And, in a way, being able to take risks and be creative as a student is a luxury, something you probably would not dare think about if your GPA and financial aid is on the line when you’re just a number in an education factory. A lot of factors play a role, and I don’t think you can pinpoint the exact differences between different ways failure plays a role in different societies, but I do know that in the Dutch school system everyone fails at some point. And that’s totally fine. Grading is different. Only 50-60 percent of students usually pass a course (in higher ed mostly, secondary and elementary school are a bit different but there’s a difference in how they’re structured too, with three different levels of high school and no public/private–happy to elaborate on that in class). So almost everyone fails once, or twice, or more. No big deal. Then there’s the question of (access to) resources of course. Here, for many students failing a course or lagging behind means an increased financial strain on the student or family. In a system with only public schools, equal access and quality of education, there’s some wiggle room to fail and try again. Life doesn’t end there. Oh, and there are no class rankings, honors rolls, etc, all a result of the way in which secondary and higher Ed is structured in The Netherlands, which I think reduces the pressure and competition among peers.

I am still thinking about the differences here, why it sometimes seems it’s either/or here–either you’re a success, or you’re a failure–and why so many people have internalized this as well as the idea that it’s to the individual’s own fault or merit. But there are two other, more concrete things that I’d like to say about today’s readings, and that’s that I fully agree with what two articles in the Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy’s Teaching Fails columns say, namely, that there’s a huge amount of student orthodoxy, and that in English/literature classes, you often find yourself spending more time navigating the technology (ie. finding the same passage on your e-reader) than on the actual text under discussion. The article’s author is waiting for a tool that makes the text more “ready to hand” than current technology. I also sometimes feel that with all these different devices students carry, the different letter sizes they use, etc, etc, it’s hard to be on the same page, literally. There are a few of us who teach the kind of massive literature surveys I teach, and I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

 

Midterm Project Proposal Sarah&Anke: Teaching Through Technology: a Website and Workshop Series

Introduction

We are two CUNY adjunct instructors who spent a lot of time researching, evaluating and designing WordPress sites for our own classrooms. We are not alone. More than half of all courses at CUNY are taught by adjunct instructors, and many of us want to use technology in our courses. CUNY encourages staff to integrate technology. In fact, its most wide-ranging cross-campus initiatives support teaching with technology: the Academic Commons and the Hybrid Initiative. And yet, we face two pressing problems. First  there is no one source that shows the pedagogical thinking underlying technological choices professors make in designing and developing effective course sites. Second, CUNY’s resources provide hidden nuggets of pedagogical wisdom and helpful tips, but you have to dig deep and few instructors have the time, resources or know-how to do so.

To address these issues, we will create Teaching Through Technology, a website and workshop series that invites CUNY instructors to come together to think through the why, what, and how of building a class site. We won’t just offer a how-to. Rather, we will start with pedagogical best practices to provide guidance, direct instructors to resources, and, doing so, strengthen communities of innovative instructors.

Teaching Through Technology has three components: a training module on the Academic Commons, workshops at CUNY campuses, and a Commons Group for participants.

1. Training Module: Hosted on the CUNY Academic Commons, this evolving site will act as a replicable workshop outline and stand-alone resource. We will collect and curate resources from across the web that explicate the pedagogical thinking behind course site design. To encourage cross-disciplinarity, we will highlight examples from the Humanities, Social, and Natural Sciences.

2. Workshops: We propose to give workshops at Baruch, John Jay, City, and Queens College because each of these colleges already has a Center for Teaching and Learning that can provide infrastructure, support, publicity, and follow-up.

3. Commons Group Site: A group site linked to the online training module will offer a platform for workshop participants to continue the conversation, share experiences, troubleshoot and expand on their practice to help further improve CUNY’s online pedagogy.

Personas

  • Edward: Young adjunct professor in Social Sciences at City College. Wants to start using a WordPress blog for his psychology 101 course but has a lot of questions and does not know where to start. He has done some research online but feels lost in the maze of information and online tutorials. Feels that much of what he finds is not relevant to his specific situation and would like to discuss questions of privacy and assessment but also just find out what themes are useful, and how he can provide access for his students and create an online community.
  • Stacey: Older full time professor in the English Department at Queens College. Does not necessarily want to use a course site for her literature classes and is not sure about the benefits of technology, but senses that times are a’changing and wants to know what’s going on. She wants to talk to younger colleagues and others who are already using sites to find out why they do so, what the pros and cons are, and what role it can possibly play in her teaching.
  • Luke: Director of Center for Teaching and Learning at a CUNY campus. Wants to increase outreach and resources to faculty at his campus to further improve the quantity but most importantly quality of course sites. Is invested in innovation and integration of technology and pedagogy and wants faculty to increase awareness and knowledge of the pedagogy behind the use of technology in teaching.

Use Case Scenario

CUNY instructors can attend the workshops at the specific colleges, access the site online and become members of its online community. The site on the Academic Commons will be public so that, even when you did not attend the workshop, you can still have access to its content and connect with colleagues. It will provide a starting point for instructors designing or already using course sites in their classrooms, offering both an introduction to the pedagogy and the practice. After visiting the workshop and/or the site they can continue their exploration by navigating the other resources we have collected and curated for them.

Full Fledged Version

Our vision for a final product is an evolving web resource for professors interested in creating course sites and an adaptable and replicable workshop available to Centers for Teaching and Learning in August and January at a number of CUNY campuses. While the site will initially host our learning module, workshop participants’ contributions will make it a lively and evolving forum for faculty from a variety of disciplines and campuses to share, discuss, and develop their pedagogical best practices in course site development.

Training Module and Group Site

We will host the training module and group site on the Academic Commons using WordPress. Before deciding exactly how to design the site (what theme, what plug-ins, etc), we need to do research into the pedagogy behind course site development (see below.) Our initial thought is to break the site into five main pages:

  • Pedagogy.  This lays out and offers citations to some of the the pedagogical frameworks grounding the thinking behind the integration and design of course sites. This page will also encourage users to add their own recommendations for resources focusing specifically on the pedagogy behind course structure and site design. (This is the group site element.)
  • Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, and Humanities. Each of these three pages offers a few models of course sites from professors who teach in this discipline. Each offers screenshots of the professor’s sites with his/her annotations about the choices this site reflects and why he/she made those choices.
  • Details, Details. This points professors to how-to resources on WordPress as well as logistical FAQ-type elements. For example, “Can I post readings as I would on blackboard?” “Can I use this course again next semester?” “How do I cite the images I use in the banner?”

Workshops

To offer the workshops, we will need buy-in, administrative help, and the use of facilities at four CUNY campuses. We already know Luke at Baruch and he seems excited about our project. Sarah teaches at John Jay and Anke teaches at City College, so we need to start building relationships with the directors of the Centers for Teaching and Learning now in order to start the process of scheduling the first workshops (at Baruch and John Jay) in January, 2016. We will plan to offer the City and Queens College workshops in August, 2016.

Minimally Viable Product

Training Module

We will host the training module on the Academic Commons using WordPress. Before deciding exactly how to design the site (what theme, what plug-ins, etc), we need to do research into the pedagogy behind course site development. The site will have three main components:

  • Pedagogy. See above.
  • Best Practices. This will offer links to a few different model sites as well as audio recordings with the professors who designed them describing their pedagogical thinking and design choices.
  • Details, Details. See above.

Timeline and Skills Acquisition

  1. Study the literature for pedagogy and best practices in course site design. (80 hours each)
  2. Identify and recruit professors who have made thoughtful (and diverse) choices in creating their sites, can articulate/annotate their process, and would be willing to invest time in sharing with us. (20 hours each)
  3. Design and build the Academic Commons site (20 hours each)
  4. Create workshops  (10 hours each)
  5. Admin Work (scheduling workshops, set-up, follow-ups) (30 hours each)

Anke’s Project Proposal #1: WordPress Framework with Commons and Annotation Tool for Literature Courses

Introduction

Effective close reading is a challenge in many literature classrooms. Before students can even start to discuss or write about a text they have to actively engage with it. But the problem is that the majority of students read texts on electronic devices, especially on their smartphones. Active reading and annotating are habits rarely seen anymore. I want to design a WordPress framework for literature courses that brings this practice back into the (online) classroom. It will include an annotation tool and student community function, so that students can annotate and comment on (parts of) class readings in an online community setting. After basic training in WordPress, instructors can fill in the existing framework with their own reading materials. This will save them a lot of time. It can also help the department streamline course design and requirements, and, most importantly, improve student performance.

Personas

  • Willy: a young parttime adjunct instructor in the English Department. Wants to teach with WordPress but does not have the time or expertise to build his own website from scratch. Has been given a mandatory reading list for a literature survey course—a requirement for the Gen Ed Curriculum. Because of this, his students will have a widely varying level of ability and interest in the subject. This framework can help him set up his course site, save him time, and give him an effective tool to work with students with varying skill sets.
  • Beatrice: a fulltime professor in the English Department. Invested in curriculum development and innovation. Currently serving on a committee to rethink the Gen Ed course offerings, reading lists, and course tools. The framework can provide a user-friendly and effective way to integrate technology into the classroom, and streamline the course offerings across the department but still offer each instructor/course the freedom to fill in the course in a way that fits their specific needs/course requirements.
  • Alex: a student. Junior, majoring in English. English is his first language and he generally does well in literature and arts classes. Likes to read. Likes to contribute to class discussions but is shy to speak up. Uses his tablet to read the texts. Online annotation would be a great addition to class participation for him and help him actively engage with the texts, and his peers, on his tablet.
  • Julia: a student. Freshman, majoring in engineering. Has to take literature to meet Gen Ed requirements. English is not her native language. Struggles with reading comprehension. Uses her smartphone to read the texts. Online annotation can help her comprehension of class readings, give her a way to show where she’s struggling with the text, and increase overall engagement in class, even when she’s working on a smartphone.

Use Case Scenario

Language and literature departments can offer this tool to their faculty. In addition, they would offer faculty an introductory workshop on how to use WordPress and this framework specifically. Instructors would then incorporate it in their course design and use it to read (parts of) the assigned readings with the students. Follow-up meetings can address issues of assessment, offer continuing support and function as a platform for new ideas and the sharing of experiences.

Students would access their course websites before class to read texts, annotate and comment on them, and comment on each others’ comments. Passages that many mark as difficult, relevant or otherwise noteworthy will receive special attention in class discussion. It helps student engage with the texts, and faculty align instruction with needs and experiences of students.

Full Version

For the framework to be able to offer a blog, annotation tool and community function to many classrooms, I would need a tablet/smartphone compatible multisite network on WordPress with an annotation tool plug-in and commons function. I have recently changed my course website (courseblogs.org) into a multisite but have not yet made any additional sites. It is already smartphone compatible, and my students already use it on their phones. A large multisite needs a strong multisite network administration. Once the site is up, this administration, plus support for faculty, would take the most time and resources.

Right now the only annotation plug-in that I know is Commentpress, which is not the most user-friendly nor easy to integrate with other functionalities such as a blog. There are other options, such as Social Reader (also from The Institute for the Future of the Book), PRISM (from the Praxis Program at U of Virginia), NowComment, and Annotate.co. I need to evaluate all the options, but in an absolute ideal situation I would be able to design the annotation tool also.

Since undergraduates cannot access the already existing CUNY commons, I want to integrate that function by installing Commons in a Box.

I think the biggest hurdle is to make such a multi-user site run smoothly and to integrate the various functionalities within framework.

Time and Skills

I have intermediate skills with WordPress but would need to learn more about these specific plug-ins. Commons in a Box has a lot of features so it takes some time to learn how to work with it effectively. I would also need to learn how to manage a multi-site and train faculty how to start using it.

As the goal is to offer a framework for various literature courses, I would have to sit down with faculty in charge of curriculum development and discuss the process of building, implementation, and support for faculty. Together we would draw up the design for the framework, so that it reflects the needs and desires of the department and/or the Gen Ed curriculum.

I think it would take 2-3 months to design and create the framework. The faculty workshops, site management and troubleshooting, and user support would be ongoing after implementation.

Minimally Viable Product

The stripped-down version would be a WordPress site with the same functionalities (blog, annotation, commons). Everything would be the same but it would not yet be a multi-site network. I can build out my website to include all the features I would like the framework site to have, and use reading material from a course I am currently teaching to give it content. This could also serve as a showcase for the extended version. I would have to familiarize myself with annotation tools and Commons in a Box and can experiment with it in my own classroom, but would not yet expand beyond my own use.

It would take me 2-3 weeks to build out my site, then a few weeks to test it in the classroom, and another 2-3 weeks to fine-tune it.

(For my other proposal I am working with Sarah so we will post that separately).

“Build, Launch, and Tweak, then Rinse and Repeat”: A Response to 37 Signals’ Getting Real and the rules of Agile Development

37 Signals’ Getting Real clarifies and details the praxis of Agile Development. After reading the wiki on the Agile Manifesto and its basic rules, many of which are captured in catchy phrases or abbreviations such as JBGE (Just Barely Good Enough) or Ruby on Rails’ CoC (Convention over Configuration) and DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself), this book more carefully lays out how to put into practice this philosophy of quick, lean, and flexible software development. I see how this is a world of difference if you compare it to the days of sluggish development of giants such as Microsoft (CUNYfirst and Blackboard tell us that these days aren’t over yet, unfortunately), but right now, in a time of endless lean tech startups, where small groups of freelancers let their creativity flow in co-work spaces like WeWork, Getting Real does not seem so new anymore. Even so, it is enlightening to read a how-to book like this, maybe because I have not come close to anything so driven by practical concerns and real-life constraints in a long, long time, but also because it is just really helpful to think about your approach and attitude to your project. It is easy to get lost in practical questions about the product itself and miss the importance of having a “vision” and determining the way in which to make and deliver your product.

 

So it is all about having a small, cross-functional but highly skilled team, about releasing early and often, about minimizing the work (Rule No. 10: Simplicity—the art of maximizing the amount of work not done—is essential), and about flexibility, multiple iterations, and costumer service. It is about reducing features but optimizing the essentials. Realizing that constraints can actually force creativity and that in the triangle of time-budget-scope it is the scope that should be the flexible factor can lower the threshold for a lot of aspiring developers.

 

What I want to highlight is the use of and emphasis on terms such as “passion,” “emergence,” and “liberation,” and in how in the “easy in, easy out” chapter they argue that you should let customers end their subscription with just one click and allow them to retrieve all their data. This is to create goodwill and trust with your costumer base. Obviously, it gives some relief to read this after years of signing scary binding contracts from large, monstrous corporations just to be able to watch TV or rent an apartment (though these evil empires still rule the world). Again, I associate this more compassionate attitude with the kind of hip start-up founded by passionate twenty-somethings, part of our current “maker-subculture” who, 37 Signals says, should strive for honesty in communication, openness and transparency. If you read it in this way, Agile Development is just as much a philosophy on life and mind as a manual for (tech) startups. And yes, there’s a TED talk on Agile Programming for your Family.

 

One thing I have to mention as a literature and writing instructor is the value Agile Development places on writing. They cite both Strunk and White’s Elements of Style (“omit needless words”) and Hemingway and Carver. You could say their philosophy is similar to the “show, don’t tell” mantra of fiction writing, but, unlike so many aspiring writers in this city and elsewhere, you have to let go of the anxiety to publish. Your work is never going to be ready, nor perfect. Now that’s something I should really take to heart, and with me many other PhD perfectionists.

Anke Geertsma

Apologies for the late posting, and, even though I would never accept such an excuse from my students (there are plenty of computers in the library of course), I just need to share that my macbook crashed a few days ago. It’s a devastating experience. Maybe I expect to find some sympathy here. Everything was backed up, but it’s still hard to have to give your dearest companion to a genius at a bar hoping he will be able to resuscitate it.

About myself: I was born and raised in Friesland, a small province in the north of the Netherlands, famous for its Frisian horses, black-and-white cows, open skies and lakes, islands, and for the strange language we speak, Frisian. This is now mostly a spoken language (I was never taught how to write it and can barely read it), but is one of the oldest European languages which closely resembles Old English with a bit of German and Dutch thrown in. Frisians are officially the tallest people on the planet, but I am clearly an exception.

I have a BA and MA in American Studies and am now a fourth-year PhD student in Comparative Literature, where I work in German, French, but mostly contemporary American literature. I have been teaching World Humanities Gen Ed classes for the past few years and went to the Institute of World Literature at Harvard, where I became interested in “world literature” as a field, and in questions concerning translation, circulation, and canonization in multicultural and multilingual classroom such as those I teach in at CUNY. One of my goals for this course is to come up with a way to teach literature so that student can see (literally, on a digital map of the world) how a text can change over time (different translations), and where and when it sees publication for the first time. Knowing I have to be careful not to want to do too much, I want to limit and link it to for example a Nobel Prize winning book, showing its “origin” on a map, and its reach before and after the moment it wins the Nobel Prize, with possibly links to reviews, selections of translations, and dates of publication in various parts of the world. I really don’t know if this would be at all possible, but it comes out of course I am designing on Nobel Prize novels, which is set up in such a way that student are exposed to the (politics of the) selection process and hopefully start to see a book or text not as a stable, finished product but as something that is always in the making, and always responding to the local culture in which it “lands.”