Multilitteratus Incognitus

It feels a bit like I've had my nose close to the grind stone for the past few weeks.  I looked at my blog to see when was the last time I blogged about class, and it was close to 20 days ago.  In semester-terms I think that counts as "forever-ago".  To some extent it feels like a great weight has been lifted.  The first (of two) major papers is completed and delivered (awaiting marking and feedback), and the presentation on Discourse Analysis as a research method is done as well.  I suppose I could have waited until March (a couple of weeks later) to present, but nothing like a little pressure to gain the benefits of front-loading work, and enjoy the benefits of getting a leg up on subsequent assignments. Doing a presentation on Discourse Analysis was actually quite a lot of fun.  While I had gone through materials on DA before, I have wanted to read some of Jim Gee's work on DA (considering the one degree of separation that he has with our department)...

Recently I read an article on Your Training Edge which aims to correct misconceptions surrounding MOOCs. The title of this particular post, and I guess myth that they tried to correct, was " MOOCs Aren’t Interactive, So There’s No Real Learning Taking Place ". The basic idea in this misconception is really preposterous.  I don't know when interactive became synonymous with learning , but it is clearly a flawed concept.  Yes, interactivity can aid in learning, but just because something isn't interactive it doesn't mean that learning is taking place, and vice versa - if something is interactive it doesn't mean that learning is taking place.  I can think of a lot of cases where there isn't interactivity, but learning happens never the less. Three examples that come to mind are: self-paced eLearning, while you might have some  interactivity (matching games, clicking "next" on the player, and so on), this interactivity is really token interact...

A week or so ago I had read Terry Anderson 's blog post asking the question on whether it is worth it for aspiring academics to blog (and tweet, and generally be visible on the interwebs). It's an interesting post and I encourage everyone to read it and post their opinions on twitter, here, on Terry's post. I'd love to know what other newer academics think about this. I am new, but not new, to academia.  I've been working in academia now for 17 years (man...when did the time go by!!!), but only in the past few years where I've had an article or two published and have taught a course or two do I consider myself a part-time academic. I've been blogging since around 1998 (more like monthly "updates" than blogging - but the general concept I think carries) and I've been writing on this blog, for academic purposes, since 2008.  Is it worth it? Excluding a few curve-balls that came my way, and some hot-waters I found myself into once or twice o...

Remember this prof? This week has felt a bit like a slumber week in my research methods course.  I don't know if it's Old Man Winter and the snow he's dumping on us that's making me a little sleepier than usual, or if discussions on research ethics don't particularly float my boat.  I sure do understand the importance of ethics in research, but when it comes to internet research ethics ( despite guidance ) there seems to be an ethically gray area where depending on your Weltanschauung you might see something a bit on the lighter side of gray, or on the darker side of gray. Both this week (week 4) and next week (week 5) we are tackling issues of ethics and planning.  There is an interesting discussion brewing, so I hope that wakes me up a bit more.  It's too early for the onset of senioritis in this course (23 days into the semester, 61 left to go). That said, this afternoon, as I was wrapping up my readings for Week 5 (I prefer to be a week ahead in readi...