I’m hoping that the participants in the “Is Blogging Dead?” panel will aggregate the links to their 3-minute position statements, so that I can add them to this record.
In the meanwhile, this Storify archive of the Computers and Writing tweets from session #e13 hints at what it was like to be on the backchannel during this lively session.
(It looks looks like the iPad/iPhone version of this page is glitchy… click the “View in Desktop” link and scrolling is much easier.)
Similar:
Sesame Street had a big plot twist in November 1986
I’ve been teaching with this handout for over 25 years, updating it regularly. I just remo...
Sorry, not sorry. I don't want such friends.
Despite its impressive output, generative AI doesn’t have a coherent understanding of the ...
I was perhaps a bit more conversational and chipper than usual during class today. A grinn...
I create five color variations of each #blender3d building I #design, and each of those ha...
Pingback: Is Blogging Dead? « Rhetorical Theory Course Blog
Pingback: The year that was 2011 | stevendkrause.com
Pingback: Bedford Bits: Ideas for Teaching Composition » Blog Archive » MOOs: Online Social Networking Before Social Networks
Pingback: » Hello, blog. Taxomania
Thanks for this great round-up, Dennis. I added it to my blog post on the Bedford site.
Thanks, Dennis. Good work! My 3 minute statement is on my blog here: http://www.curragh-labs.org/blog/?p=6119
Thanks for doing this, Dennis. I’ll try to round up all the statements and get them to you–I’m pretty sure you know where mine is.
One quibble: I’m not sure Twitter was backchannel for this panel, since the audience moved things back and forth between conversation streams. Sidechannel? Hrm
Good point. When the panelists had all blogged their position statements in advance, and about half of those in the room were interacting online, the term “backchannel” fails.
Streamchannel?
Thanks, Bradley Dilger, for posting links to most of the position statements. http://wrecking.org/cbd/2011/05/22/our-blogging-roundtable/
If we use blogging sites like Ning, we can build community. If we ask students to blog about themselves, we are not encouraging conversation. If we want conversation, students need to blog about topics of interest to others in the community and use rhetorical strategies to engage others. The problem is not the tool or platform (blogging), but rather how we use it. If for self-promotion, why should we expect conversation. Instead, use a social constructivist approach. My 2 cents for the day. Agree or disagree.
Of course, when Ning suddenly decides to start charging for content,what happens to the content provided by the community? Archiving Twitter requires nontrivial effort. I don’t see Ning offering much of value that we can’t already offer with clever use of RSS and trackbacks. Your experience with Ning may be different.
Pingback: stevendkrause.com » The conference that was #cwcon 2011
Pingback: U Michigan’s North Quad Complex: A Media Cathedral — Jerz's Literacy Weblog