the month of June

national grid has been working on our street since early May (maybe it was late April?). By “working” I mean digging up the street, dumping pounds of gravel in front of our houses, spray painting our sidewalks and lawns, drilling holes, letting their noisy trucks run all day long, asking to get into our basements, and just generally being loud and disruptive. I’m not exactly sure what they are doing, but they describe it as “upgrading the natural gas infrastructure in your neighborhood.” From what I can tell, this involves changing the gas lines in a way that gives national grid access to our gas lines outside of our houses (as opposed to inside). While there is no mention of this being “experimental,” so far we are the only street (as far as I can tell) to have this work being done. Now, mind you, our street has somewhere around twenty-five houses total. Please note that they have been here since April. How, I wonder, do they intend to do this “infrastructure upgrade” to the entire city? By what year do they expect to finish? But that, of course, is not my headache — that one is theirs. My headache has to do with the fact that I listen to this racket day in and day out as I am trying, TRYING to work. Yes, some days I leave and work elsewhere, but I don’t like being forced to leave my house simply because I can’t hear myself think. Not to mention that for about a month and half I had to be guided out of my driveway by the work crew, as on one side of the driveway was a giant hole (that a national grid truck had fallen into, creating an even bigger hole) and on the other was always an eclectic array of gravel, tractors, trucks, orange cones, and the like. Right now all of this drives me particularly crazy because I have only one hour before I have to get ready for an appointment. An hour isn’t enough time to really travel somewhere to work, but it is certainly enough time to work from home. If only…if only that jackhammer would stfu (I have no idea if that is really an acronym that anyone actually uses, but I just did).

Naturally this is the first summer ever that I’ve taken off time from teaching to write and research. Of course.

Well, it feels kinda good to write about it. I haven’t been blogging much with the exception of posting bits and pieces of research project, as I attempt to design it. Ranting through writing = good outlet.

Right now it seems that my research question is: What is my research question? It’s maddening.

I’m struggling with it, but this is what I have so far (as with all my work thus far — special shout out to my friend Kate for looking over all the first attempts, so that my web persona can be just the tiniest bit less vulnerable):

1. To what extent are faculty and students aware of the options available when choosing instructional technology and of the long-term cost considerations (fiscal, ethical, ideological, and otherwise) involved in adopting software for use in higher education?
a. What are the options and alternatives (particularly in terms of proprietary software options in contrast to open source models) available to faculty and administration when choosing instructional technology software such as course management systems (CMS), ePortfolio programs, and assessment software?
b. What are the fiscal, pedagogical, and ideological factors involved in the decision making processes on the part of faculty staff and administration when choosing software for their institution?
c. What are the ethical and political implications (if any) that influence the decisions made by faculty, staff, and administration when purchasing and utilizing proprietary software?

The first question I see as a kind of overarching question of the project. The sub-questions seem to actually be the questions that would have to come first. If that makes any sense at all. (Once again, I’m a bit too close to tell at this point). The other thing I’m stuggling with are the nuances between ideological and political and ethical (and even then, I guess, fiscal and pedagogical since those are both political and ideological…and…sigh). This part feels unruly to me right now. I’m still working it all out, but feedback is welcome. I should just make this a workshopping blog.

Here is a draft of the survey that I will give to a random selection of students enrolled in writing classes at each of the three chosen area colleges. It is similar the faculty survey that I posted the other day. Feedback is welcome!!!

SURVEY FOR STUDENTS (in writing classes)

The following survey is designed to gather information about the extent to which instructors and students are informed about the course management software (CMS) available to them as a technological aid in their courses. In gathering feedback from instructors and students regarding their knowledge about these programs and their awareness of possible alternatives, I hope to better understand the kinds of decision making processes that are involved in attaining these programs for use in higher education and in writing classes in particular.

Participation is entirely voluntary, and you may choose to leave the study at any time without consequence. All information obtained from this study is strictly confidential.

The survey is brief and should take only ten to fifteen minutes of your time. Thank you for your participation!

Please circle the appropriate answer. If you choose other, please specify.

1. You are enrolled at a:
a. Four year state university
b. Small, private four year liberal arts college
c. County community college (part of the state system)

2. What year are you?
a. First year
b. Second year
c. Third year
d. Fourth year
e. Fifth year
f. Non-matriculated

3. Describe your relationship to technology:
a. Innovator – I program/design my own software
b. Early-adopter – I am always one of the first to have the latest gadgets, games, software, etc.
c. I have used a computer since I was very young and understand its functions quite well
d. I use a computer to go online, instant messaging, and basic word processing
e. I primarily use(d) a computer for school purposes but not at home and not for much more than basic word processing
f. Feel a lack of knowledge about technology and therefore tend not to use it

4. What course management software (CMS) have you used during your time at this college? Circle all that apply.
a. BlackBoard
b. WebCT
c. Angel
d. Moodle
e. Sakai
f. A program designed by your instructor
g. A website designed by your instructor
h. A class blog
i. A software program designed and built by your institution
j. None
k. Don’t know
l. Other_________________

5. What course management software (CMS) does this class use?
m. BlackBoard
n. WebCT
o. Angel
p. Moodle
q. Sakai
r. A program your instructor designed
s. A website designed by your instructor
t. A class blog
u. A software program designed and built by your institution
v. None
w. Don’t know
x. Other_________________

6. If you chose none AND have experience using a CMS for a different course, can you please comment on the difference(s) between a course utilizing a CMS and the one that doesn’t:

If this course is NOT using a CMS, please go to questions 11 – 13.

7. Which functions do you use most often? (number in order of use with one being the feature most frequently used; please put zero if you don’t utilize the function at all)
a. My Grades ___
b. Online text/quiz ___
c. Discussion/chat ___
d. E-mail ___
e. Accessing lecture notes ___
f. Checking course announcements ___
g. Accessing course documents ___
h. Journal/Blog ___
i. Collaboration/Wiki ___
j. Other ___________________ ___

8. If the CMS has given you technological problems, have you utilized the college’s technology support?
a. Yes
b. No
c. I have not had problems with this program
If you answered “yes,” were they able to help you with your problem?
a. Yes
b. No

9. Overall, do you consider this program to be a tool that helps you with your writing?
1 2 3 4 5
not at all very much so

10. Do you find the interface easy to use?
1 2 3 4 5
difficult easy to use very easy to use

11. Do you think you write more in a class that uses a CMS (including e-mails, chat, posting messages/discussion, etc.) than one that doesn’t? Please rate on a scale from one to five with one being much less to five being much more.
1 2 3 4 5
much less about the same much more

12. Your institution’s CMS costs approximately how much per year?
a. $3,000 – 10,000
b. $10,000 – 20,000
c. $20,000 – 40,000
d. $40,000 – $60,000
e. $60,000 – 75,000
f. more than $75,000
g. I don’t know

13. To what extent are you familiar with open source e-learning or CMS platforms (such as Moodle or Sakai)? Please rate your familiarity on a scale of one to five with one being not familiar at all to five constituting a solid understanding of open source models:

1 2 3 4 5

14. Please elaborate on any questions above that you felt were limiting:

Here is a draft of the survey I am working on to give to faculty at the three colleges I’ve chosen to focus on. Who knew that it is so freakin’ difficult to design a survey!?!? I, for one, had NO idea. Until now. So, if you’ve never actually designed a survey, please refrain from casting stones (or, for that matter, please refrain regardless of your survey-making status), but I am open to suggestions. If you could ask a question to faculty regarding their CMS use, what would you ask???

SURVEY FOR FACULTY

The following survey is designed to gather information about the extent to which instructors and students are informed about the course management software (CMS) available to them as a technological aid in their courses. In gathering feedback from instructors and students regarding their knowledge about these programs and their awareness of possible alternatives, I hope to better understand the kinds of decision making processes that are involved in attaining these programs for use in higher education and in writing classes in particular.

Participation is entirely voluntary, and you may choose to leave the study at any time without consequence. All information obtained from this study is strictly confidential.

The survey is brief and should take only five to ten minutes of your time. Thank you for your participation!

Please circle the appropriate answer. If you choose other, please specify.

You are teaching at a:
a. Four year state university
b. Small, private four year liberal arts college
c. County community college (part of the state system)

What course(s) do you primarily teach?
a. First year writing
b. Other (than first year) writing courses
c. Literature courses
d. Other________________

What is your employment status?
a. Full-time tenured faculty
b. Full-time contract faculty
c. Part-time/adjunct faculty
d. TA/GA

Describe your relationship to technology:
a. Innovator
b. Early-adopter
c. Tend to adopt technology when it becomes the norm and have a good grasp of how to make it work for you
d. Tend to adopt technology when it becomes the norm, but skeptical of it
e. Tend to adopt technology when it becomes the norm, but unsure of how best to use it
f. Feel a lack of knowledge about technology and therefore tend not to use it
g. Do not see its role in the classroom

What Course Management Software (CMS) do you use?
a. BlackBoard
b. WebCT
c. Angel
d. Moodle
e. Sakai
f. A program you’ve designed
g. Your own website
h. A class blog
i. A software program designed and built by your institution
j. None
k. Other_________________

If you chose none, please describe your reasons for not utilizing a CMS: _______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

If you are not using a CMS, the survey is completed. Thank you for your participation. Those of you using a CMS, please move on to the following questions:

Which of the following most closely describes your reason for choosing this particular program?
a. I wasn’t aware of other options
b. This is the standard at my institution
c. My institution requires I use this program
d. My institution strongly encourages me to use this program
e. I prefer this program to others
f. Ease of use
g. Other_____________________________________________________________

If you choose to use a CMS that is not the institution’s standard version, are you given technological support if and when needed?
a. Yes
b. No

Which functions do you use most often? (number in order of use with one being the feature most frequently used; please put zero if you don’t utilize the function at all)
a. Gradebook ___
b. Online text/quiz ___
c. Discussion/chat ___
d. E-mail ___
e. Posting lecture notes ___
f. Announcements ___
g. Course documents ___
h. Journal/Blog ___
i. Collaboration/Wiki ___
j. Other ___________________ ___

Overall, do you find your pedagogical practices to be well supported by the CMS features available to you? Please rate on a scale from one to five with one indicating that the program does not enable you to enact your pedagogical practices and five indicating that the tool actually makes your pedagogy more effective:

1 2 3 4 5

If you answered with a one or a two, please describe what features or options would better enable you to enact your pedagogy:

Regardless of whether you use your institution’s standard CMS, please answer the following questions to the best of your ability:

Were you involved in deciding whether or not the school should purchase this particular software?
a. Yes, I sat on a committee
b. Yes, I was asked to vote or give input to the committee
c. No, the software was already in place when I came here
d. No

Are you aware of who ultimately made the decision on your institution’s standard CMS?
a. Yes, administration decided
b. Yes, it was the vote of a committee
c. Yes, information technology or educational technology services decided
d. No, I’m not sure

Your institution’s CMS costs approximately how much per year?
a. $3,000 – 10,000
b. $10,000 – 20,000
c. $20,000 – 40,000
d. $40,000 – $60,000
e. $60,000 – 75,000
f. more than $75,000

To what extent are you familiar with open source e-learning or CMS platforms (such as Moodle or Sakai)? Please rate your familiarity on a scale of one to five with one being not familiar at all to five constituting a solid understanding of open source models:

1 2 3 4 5

Do you use your CMS in any way as a tool to aid in student writing? If so, describe how you use this product.

Please elaborate on any questions above that you felt were limiting:

In her (now outdated, but interestingly not really so much…) essay , “Ideology, Technology, and the Future of Writing Instruction,” Nancy Kaplan points to some gaps in research around pedaogical tools such as textbooks and technology. On pgs. 13-14 Kaplan notes that no empirical studies “assess the textbook as pedagogic delivery system, let alone analyze its ideological implications” (emphasis mine), and studies of computer writing tools have tended to focus on effects of the computer or word processing program on the cognitive processes of the writer as opposed to focusing on the ideological nature of the technology itself. My project is less interested in the effects and effectiveness (or not) of electronic writing tools and more interested in the process by which we come to decide on particular versions of software. I might touch upon the effectiveness (or not) of these pedagogical tools — especially if and when I might make a case for alternatives — but overall I am more interested in getting at the considerations, awareness, conversations (or lack thereof) that go on around what is at stake (and for me this means what is at stakes in terms of corporate capitalism and its hold on higher education) when we make these choices.

It’s like this: Wal*mart is an option for purchasing my daily needs. The price is right. The location is right. They carry what I need. They have a large selection. They have friendly people at the door waiting to give me my cart. Okay, so maybe these are the qualities I’m looking for when I choose where to shop. But, in terms of long (and short) term economic effects on me (as a citizen and taxpayer), on the workers (few of whom even have insurance), on society as a whole, I might not want to shop at Wal*mart — even if it does have everything I’m looking for.

“When a technology is as pervasive and profoundly shaping as print has been, it is often difficult to perceive the full extent of its entitlements and exclusions. Its formations and empowerments seem simply natural and right. When a new tool emerges, however, the conflict it engendered by its emergence can illuminate previously obscured relations” (14-15). Kaplan explains that the conventions of a book have not only shaped the text itself, but also the world. She uses indexing as an example. Indexing has become the “natural” way by which we shape, organize, categorize knowledge, and she goes on to point out that there are digital equivalents that “are rewriting the world, restructuring what is knowable, by whom, and for what purposes” (15). The Michael Wesch video, “The Machine is Us/ing Us” — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE — is an example of just that. We now organize knowledge in the form of tags, social bookmarking, etc. Ultimately the point here is simply that the tool is not just a means to an end, the tool itself shapes and structures the world. And ultimately, I want to ask, What kind of a means is it? What are the factors that shaped the technology that is then shaping us and our students? (Is it Wal*mart? Or some other lesser evil?)

In his 1985 College English article, Richard Ohmann asserts that technology cannot inherently create new ways of thinking as if “‘the technology somehow came before someone’s intention…’”, reminding us that “‘technology…is itself a social process, saturated with the power relations around it, continually reshaped according to some people’s intentions’ (681)” (qtd. in Kaplan 23). From this perspective, Ohmann sees capitalism at work and technology giving a hand to those with power, money, and need to maintain the(ir) status quo. He accuses the “computer revolution” of expanding the reach of the elite, “meanwhile facilitating the degradation of labor and the stratification of the workforce that have been the hallmarks of monopology capitalism from the onset” (Ohmann 683). Andrew Sledd’s 1988 article, “Readin’ not riotin’: The Politics of Literacy”raises similar questions about the alleged empowering effect of technology. He argues that “the plan is to produce a few experts in the service of established power who will refine and program the technology, often for surveillance, plunder and massacre” (499). In the scope of my project I believe I’ll be making some similar claims, but I’m also hoping to achieve a less grim outlook (than Ohmann and Sledd). While I would never make the rhetorical choice of “massacre” and “plunder.” I do see the creepy surveillance function of many of these programs, but I don’t view all electronic/digital tools as functioning in quite this way (one of the arguments in favor of an open source model as it puts firm dent in that surveillance feel). Kaplan is also more forgiving, willing to look at these technological tools as “enabling pioneering efforts, helping us to actualize for all what the few now possess” (25). Still, she cautions, “electronic texts don’t simply materialize out of thin air; they must be created, housed, and displayed by means of systems–hardware and soft. Those structures and interfaces affect users’ expectations and aspirations, shape our values and our sense of our own potential” (25). Limitations and exclusions we come across in terms of these programs might very well be “grounded in the political and economic arrangements within which systems are designed, developed, and disseminated” (26). System designers, programmers, technology managers have decided what is and is not possible in the scope of these programs. They have determined the structure of the electronic environment for all of us.

As an example of the relationship between a tool and its pedagogical uses, Kaplan uses the blackboard. While the blackboard has a range of potential uses, it limits the writing process in terms of favoring certain transformations and discouraging others: “for example, the blackboard is best at word-for-word subsitutions…worst at a complete reordering that would require erasing everything and starting over” (27). The amount of text the blackboard can actually hold also limits what we can and can do with it as a writing tool. Interestingly, the monolithic CMS, BlackBoard, takes its name from this centuries old pedagogical tool, creating a sense of convergence between old technology and new. Also, the e-learning version of BlackBoard, like its namesake, affects and shapes the writing that takes place there. All the elements of both BlackBoard and the blackboard shape how we use them. As Kaplan puts it, the technologies themselves “shape users’ perceptions of what texts are and can become: who can write them, read them, distribute them and to whom” (28). And one of my problems with BB is that it creates a (too) limited and closed sense of each of these things. The fact that only students from the same class can read and write the documents contained therein merely replicates the same type of thinking about purpose and audience that the students are already doing when they create a print text for class.

I know it sounds crazy (or maybe it doesn’t; it does sound crazy to me — even though I’m the one doing it). I met with my committee (well the two local members) on Friday and proposed my new plan to study proprietary software programs — those utilized as writing “tools” — as emblematic of the corporate University. Right now it’s all just starting to come together. I’m focusing on three schools:

• a community college
• a small, private four-year liberal arts college
• a state research university.

I’m focusing on the following products:

• Blackboard/WebCT = CMS
• Angel ePortfolio2 = ePortfolio
• ETS customizable essay scoring services – turnkey and Engine only = assessment tool for writing
• ETS Criterion = assessment tool for writing

I will possibly look to add more ePortfolio programs to my list. I’m open to suggestions.

I will essentially be doing a reading of these products (and in doing so a reading of education as commodity) utilizing the “circuit of culture” presented by Stuart Hall (et al). Because the circuit focuses on different moments or processes and the interaction between them, the project will not only include a rhetorical analysis of the marketing of these products but will also look at the people involved in deciding on the purchase of these programs as well as those who end up utilizing or consuming these products. I’m interested in what specifically is involved in the decision-making processes that go on when institutions are debating over or deciding on these programs. And more specifically I want to know the extent of awareness that exists around these decisions as choices that are feeding the problematic relationship between higher education and corporations. I want to know how much awareness admin and faculty have of freeware and/or open source models that do the same thing that these programs do. This information will be attained primarily through interview and survey. I will also look at usage — how the consumers (primarily teachers and students, but also administration) use these “tools” — differently than or similar to their intended usage.

That’s my “new” project in a nutshell. It’s not as drastically different from the original as I’m making it seem here, but it does present a whole lot of new research and reading that I did not do for my exams.

Blogging, like exercise or anything else that takes/is work, becomes more and more difficult to get back to the longer you’ve been away from it.

I’ve been away from both blogging and other related academic work for a couple of weeks now, and it has been rough getting back into them.

This morning I reread Paula Mathieu and James Sosnoki’s essay “Enacting Cultures: The Practice of Comparative Cultural Studies” from Robert Yagelski and Leonard Scott’s edited collection, The Relevance of English. And rather than (re)invigorating my own project, it only served to deflate me/it.

In this essay Sosnoski and Mathieu address a particular complaint against cultural studies and its alleged lack of pedagogical success: “its reliance on ‘cultural critique’ as a pedagogical technique” (325). By this they mean the way that cultural critique is imposed upon students and viewed by them as a “moral imperative” (326). In this way, they argue, ‘cultural critique’ is not rhetorically an effective technique. They point to advocates of cultural studies, such as Libby Miles, who complain that this technique ends up being “formulaic and flat” (qtd. in Sosnoski and Mathieu 327).

Sosnoski and Mathieu study the complexities of the problems with this common form (cultural critique) of cultural studies pedagogy. One problem is based on students entering the classroom determined “to resist or refuse any teaching they find ‘political,’ ‘feminist,’ or promoting what often gets misnamed ‘reverse racism’” (327). Sosnoski and Mathieu argue that this resistance isn’t necessarily due to an inherent conservatism, but rather is driven by the dominant culture — corporate controlled media — that “constructs a conversation that labels pedagogies that ask students to be critical of social and cultural practices as merely code words of the plotting advocates of critical correctness” (328).

Sosnoski and Mathieu argue that students view ‘critique’ as requiring that they renounce their daily lives and associated cultural practices, and through an understanding of this student perspective we can begin to understand how this pedagogical approach can be viewed as a “moral imperative.” Sosnoski and Mathieu seek to “introduce students to a form of cultural criticism that makes productive use of students’ everyday experiences and critical abilities rather than merely inspiring their ire” (328).

Nothing here so far is particularly “new” or “different.” Sosnoski and Mathieu are addressing, and even tentatively aligning themselves with, common arguments against a cultural studies approach/pedagogy. And, on the other hand, Cultural studies, which is itself often conflated with or misconstrued as critical pedagogy, does also share some similarities with critical pedagogy and these types of pedagogical approaches are often put under the canopy of radical, emancipatory, or liberatory pedaogy. Critical pedagogy has its roots in Freire who would indeed find Sosnoski and Mathieu’s goal of making use of or starting from the everday lives and already in place critical abilities of their students as an admirable goal and one inherent to critical pedagogy. The question of course is how does one do this while simultaneously avoiding the pitfall of the “moral imperative” that Sosnoski and Mathieu are so concerned with.

The proposed “answer” (according to this essay) comes in the form of a cultural studies-oriented first-year writing course created by Mathieu and Jennifer Cohen. In order to escape the primarily negative function/outcome of critique, the pilot composition course, “Reading, Writing, and Enacting Cultures,” asked students to examine current university culture (in this case focusing on its electronic presence by comparing the web page of their university and its coverage of a topic of the student’s choice to that of another university).

Asking students to perform this concrete comparison allowed them to begin criticism as a place of their own interest and choosing. Also, rather than asking them to ‘critique’ by using an existing theoretical model, their criticism was derived from comparing one cultural site to another. Rhetorically, comparison allows students to look critically at a practice without forcing them into an impossibly negative space, which often results in resistance or cynicism. (333-334)

Comparative criticism (as opposed to other existing theoretical models) is not restricted to current conditions; it can also address possibility — i.e. the future. By asking students to “imagine better ways to teach and learn” through the ‘imaginative’ essay on an ideal university, Mathieu and Cohen claim to have escaped “the purely negative space of critique” (334). They believe that “helping students articulate desires for a better world and to initiate discussion about different views of the ideal is a worthwhile political and pedagogical goal” (336).

In the essay’s final section, “Don’t Stop at Criticism: Enacting Culture,” Sosnoski and Mathieu address the idea that writing pedagogies that have emerged from a cultural studies perspective tend to cast students as merely ananlysts. They point to Alan France as an example of a scholar who has critiqued textbooks that solely ask students to “analyze the culture around them as a sort of cultural critic by closely examining and picking apart texts,” leaving students in an analytical but passive position (337). Mathieu illustrates ways in which the course she and Cohen created urged students to take action by making Web pages to publish their views. Some of these writings now exist as actual links on their University’s official Web page.

Here is an example of a cultural studies based writing class that is critiquing campus culture. It is essentially doing what my own project argues a cultural studies based writing course should consider doing. This is how I ended up deflated. How is my argument different? How do I distinguish my argument from arguments already being made?

1) It seems that the choice of studying and analyzing campus culture was a somewhat arbitrary choice for Mathieu and Cohen (although I don’t know that this is the case, as they don’t detail their exact decision making process); whereas I tend to argue that it should be not just one choice among many, but the very starting point for a cultural studies based writing classroom.

2) I would like to call more attention to the ways in which corporate influence in education is not so obvious, more transparent — for example, in the form of proprietary software, academic labor, writing practices that contribute to the creation of a labor force under capitalism. So that the exploration doesn’t begin and end with what is lacking, missing, underdeveloped from one University website to another, but how decisions being made — corporate ones — are directly and indirectly affecting the campus that students inhabit both part-time and full-time.

3) My project is based, in part, on a gap identified by Richard Ohmann in his Afterword to Left Margins — the pedagogical project that Ohmann noted missing from the cultural studies collection in 1995 was a critique of campus culture. Mathieu and Cohen’s class helps to fill such a gap, but it is only one example. Where are the others? Are there others? These are questions I might also grapple with. One example alone can’t necessarily fill a gap.

I am almost too good at “doing” nothing — to the point where the guilt feelings that accompany it are a bit overwhelming. I was raised in house where it wasn’t unusual to “do” nothing. My mother always jokes that she is going to open a business that involves teaching people how to sit around in their pajamas, drinking tea, and not doing much of anything at all. We were all very good at just “hanging out.” I was never bored on summer vacations. I never yearned to get back to school simply so that I could get out of the house. I loved the idea of endless days of nothingness.

Of course it is different now. I am an adult and do in fact have many things that I must *do*. However, so far this week I have never made it out of my PJs before noon, and I’m always starting my second cup of tea around 10:30 or 11. It is with that second cup of tea that I sit down and write, so that I am at least doing “something.”

After I hit “publish,” I’ll probably head back to my oversized, comfy chair in the living room and continue on with nothing in particular.

My mother would be proud!

Yesterday I turned in my grades (finally!) shortly after noon. At about 4:30 I was abruptly hit with a terrible sore throat and runny nose. My body has been so wound up with stress that the minute I let my shoulders move away from my ears a bit — bang — I’m overcome with a summer cold. I’m pretty bummed about that as it really delays the start of my summer plans, which involve a lot of intense physical activity (including cleaning) and moving around. So I didn’t get to tackle my overhaul/spring cleaning of the our front enclosed porch today, but here is what I did do:

This morning I read Convergence Culture until lunch.

After lunch I went out in the yard and planted the last few annuals that I had not yet put into the ground. It was exquisite out. And I forgot for moment how miserable I feel — except for the fact that my nose kept running.

I came in and flipped through the latest REI catalog, allowing myself to daydream about summer adventures on bikes and in the woods, on the trails, etc.

Went back outdoors with Cheyanne, set up a lawn chair, and sat down with Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim, which I’ve never read before and is one of my summer fun books. I got about three pages into it, and it began to rain. Got up, put the lawn chair in the garage with my cell phone now folded into the cup holder.

Not too bad for the first day of summer “vacation.” I’m trying to really recover quickly here and not let this cold take over my life. I have Ultimate frisbee scheduled for tomorrow night and a big gym workout planned for Thursday…and maybe a yoga class on Thursday morning, so I really can’t be sick for too long.

Tomorrow I have plans to help stuff envelopes for Pride at the local gay and lesbian community center. Seems like a worthwhile, yet somewhat mindless task to take on immediately following the end-of-semester mayhem.

I have definite intentions to get back to blogging this summer, as I’ll be starting to write the chapters of my dissertation, but for the next week or so, I’ll be taking it easy. Any blogging I do will be about my attempt to gorge myself on pop culture, as I ease myself back into my diss work.

I have no idea where I got this quote and citation from:

“The computer classroom has often been hailed as…a social-democratic space, helping to promote a liberatory pedagogy by fostering student resistance, empowering students by decentering the classroom” (Walker 119).

I can’t remember anything about reading this, where I got it from, who “Walker” is (jill? Henry?). If anybody recognizes the article? essay? book? this might be from, please contact me.

—
Update:
Walker, Janice R. “Resisting Resistance: Power and Control in the
Technologized Classroom.” In _Insurrection: Approaches to Resistance in
Composition Studies_. Ed. Andrea Greenbaum. Albany: SUNY, 2001. 119-32.

Thanks to all those who came to the rescue!