This Friday, August 1 from 12:00 – 1:00pm Eastern, Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to consider ways to enact what Kris Shaffer calls “underground teaching”. Critical pedagogy calls for our teaching to be ethical, to strengthen agency in our students, and to abdicate the authority of the podium in our classrooms. But this isn’t always easy given institutional expectations and restrictions on how we teach. As Kris says in his article, “Three Lines of Resistance: Ethics, Critical Pedagogy, and Teaching Underground”,

As a critical pedagogue, I can go along with something less effective much more easily than with something that goes against my newly pricked conscience. So when I disagree fundamentally with the direction something is headed, but am powerless to change it singlehandedly, what do I do? Do I forget about it and wash my hands of the situation? Do I leave in disgust? Do I bide my time until I can really do something? (And hope it doesn’t get worse in the mean time!) Do I try to make incremental changes, appeasing my conscience with the knowledge that I am improving things, albeit slowly?

Finding ways to implement changes that make a difference, that begin to get at a pedagogy more in line with our ideals, can be a challenge.

Read More

On, On, On

On, On, On

The following post was originally published by Kate Bowles on her blog, Music for Deckchairs. It’s an important piece about the nature of academic work and labor, and so we offer it here (with permission) as a re-publication. We also encourage you to read (and contribute to) the discussion on the original post.


Life chez Simpson was not normal, Helen now reflects, principally because a constant eye had to be kept on anything that might affect Simpson’s performance, whether he was racing or not. … “Social life [as a couple] was non-existent. I often used to think it would be really strange living a normal life, going out and having a meal with people.”

~ William Fotheringham, Put me back on my bike: in search of Tom Simpson (2002)

In the past 4 months I have kept seeing accolades to Andy’s amazing productivity – the 100+ articles, the zillions of case books, etc., and I have always told people that yes, he led a normal life, yes, he got plenty of sleep and yes, he even took plenty of naps. But that’s not really true. His life was not normal, at least not to me, and it certainly wasn’t balanced.

~ Patty Sun, “Thoughts on Work-Life ImBalance from Those Left Behind” (2014)

It’s Tour de France time again, and I’ve been reading William Fotheringham’s sensitive and ambivalent search for the story of British cyclist Tom Simpson, who died on Mont Ventoux in 1967. In the history of professional cycling, it’s one of the landmark stories of ambition, risk and terrible loss—the grainy prequel to all the doping scandals that came later. Fotheringham spoke directly to Simpson’s widow Helen, and to those who were closely involved at the time of his death, including Harry Hall, the mechanic who helped Simpson back onto his bike on the mountain, and was the last to hear him speak.

Read More

This Summer, Hybrid Pedagogy launched a new long-form publishing venture, spearheaded by Robin Wharton and Kris Shaffer: Hybrid Pedagogy Publishing (HPP). HPP began with a call for participation in The Generative Literature Project and followed with a crowdfunding campaign to build an open-source, interactive music theory textbook that is easy for instructors to use, customize, and augment with their own resources.

Thank you to everyone who supported and publicized the open, interactive music theory textbook crowdfunding campaign! (see below) It was a rousing success, exceeding our $5000 goal. We raised enough money to support Robin Wharton and myself to work on developing the platform and curating content, as well as to support two authors who will work with me to create the remaining content.

A huge thank you goes out to the folks at Trinket, who matched the first $2500 of donations and will help us develop the interactive music notation features for our textbook.

More updates (and perks for those who donated!) will be coming over the next few weeks as we build the text. Please follow the new Twitter account for Hybrid Pedagogy Publishing to keep up with our progress. Major announcements will also be posted here, on Hybrid Pedagogy, Page Two.

Financial supporters of the open, interactive music theory textbook (non-anonymous donors of $15 or more):
Adam Heidebrink, Andrew Charlton, Alex Dunn, Andre Mount, Ben Lloyd Pearson, Benjamin Zwickl, Brian Bennett, Brian Moseley, Chris Ogden, Christopher Edwards, Daniel Shanahan, Daniel Stevens, Dave Easley, David Huron, David Kulma, David MacDonald, The Marca Development Team, Jesse Stommel, Jill T. Brasky, John Moore, Jon Scott Smith, Joseph Casamento, Julia Silge, Kyle Gullings, Lindsey Sudbury, Maeve Sterbenz, Marianne Kielian-Gilbert, Mark Easley, Sr., Mark McGuire, martinlugton (screen name), Max August, Moeruze.Burning (screen name), Molly Sweet, Pandel Collaros, Paul Bond, Paul David Johnson, Peter Kaminsky, Peter Newbury, Philip Duker, pkay3 (screen name), Robert Kelley, Robert Talbert, Rolin Moe, Trevor Pittman, Trevor Rowe, University of Delaware Dept. of Academic Technology Services, University of Delaware Dept. of Music, University of Colorado Dept. of Music Theory, Wanda Terral, William O’Hara, and several anonymous donors.


[Photo, "Go for it!", by Martin Fisch, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.]

Design Pattern Name: Hybrid learning products

Problem Statement: Digital humanities students are too often subjected to an over-emphasis of critical reflection and not enough experiential learning and corresponding presentation formats. This results in a lacking sense of efficacy and agency in producing change both in- and outside of academia.

Context: Undergraduate programs in digital humanities (in a wide sense).

Solution: Introduce and experiment with hybrid genres of learning products and presentations formats (such as the stratagem, the manifesto, the instructional video etc.) as an occasional supplement to (not substitute for) traditional methods of presentation and examination

Rationale: Hybrid learning products will encourage students to think about consequences and repertoires of change and actively produse suggestions for transformation.

Read More

This Summer, Hybrid Pedagogy launched a new long-form publishing venture, spearheaded by Robin Wharton and Kris Shaffer: Hybrid Pedagogy Publishing (HPP).

Hybrid Pedagogy Publishing seeks to encourage active public discourse by publishing works that are born out of, or facilitate, community (inter)action—works that are crowdsourced or collaboratively authored, openly accessible, encourage remixing and republishing, and/or blur the lines between author and reader.

HPP began with a call for participation in The Generative Literature Project. That call reached its goal of finding 10 faculty willing to join their writing classes with this collaborative, multi-institutional, creative writing project.

Read More

On Friday, June 6, Hybrid Pedagogy held a conversation on Twitter using the hashtag #digped to discuss the present and future of books — digital, print, and even the idea of what the book is, what it represents to us, and the work it does in the world. Hybrid Pedagogy is launching a new project in long(er)-form publishing, led by Robin Wharton and Kris Shaffer. This isn’t just a technical innovation in how to make and distribute print books in digital form. We want to take the new technology at our disposal as a springboard to ask fundamental questions, like what is a book? what is the social function of a book? to whom does a book belong? what can we do in digital form that we cannot do in print (and vice versa)? and what if the book is just the user interface? In this chat, we explore some of these questions. No doubt we’ll return to many of them as Hybrid Pedagogy Publishing grows.

“While the form of the ‘book’ is now going through a period of general upheaval, and while that form now appears less natural, and its history less, transparent, than ever, and while one cannot tamper with it without disturbing everything else, the book form alone can no longer settle–here for example–the case of those writing processes which, in practically questioning that form, must also dismantle it.” ~ Jacques Derrida, Dissemination, trans. Barbara Johnson

Kris Shaffer and I have been playing a game lately; it’s called “Martian codicology.” The idea behind the game is to pretend you’re an interstellar visitor to Earth. You understand books as a concept, one with resonance in your own planetary culture, but you don’t know a lot about the kinds of books we have here on this one. What would such a person think about the books we’ve made, about the socio-economic and regulatory structures that have accreted around them, about libraries?

Read More

Frederick and I are unlikely friends. We met as faculty members at Clark Atlanta University. We didn’t really know each other that well when we worked together, but after he left to take a job in Maryland and my job at Clark Atlanta started to shift, we talked more often, regularly sharing “war stories” of faculty life and administrative hassles. Then we started to talk about pedagogy, theory, and sometimes crazy ideas — like creating a huge generative digital literature project.

“What would it be like if we could have writers do project based writing, you know, having them write something that actually mattered in the ‘real world’?” I pondered aloud, pinching my phone between my shoulder and ear as I turned chicken wings on my backyard grill and refereed my kids’ latest fight.

“What are you thinking?” he said.

“I don’t know . . . something that they could create, but something fun.”

Read More

“Digital pedagogy is becoming, for me, coterminous with critical pedagogy, given the degree to which the digital can function both as a tool for and an obstacle to liberation.”
~ Jesse Stommel, “Decoding Digital Pedagogy, pt. 2: (Un)Mapping the Terrain”

Hybrid Pedagogy is not ideologically neutral. The threads of our discussions and the underlying philosophy of the journal are grounded in critical pedagogy — an approach to teaching and learning predicated on fostering agency and empowering learners (implicitly and explicitly critiquing oppressive power structures). As a digital journal, our work is further nuanced by a consideration of technologies and cultures — how the digital changes the way we work, think, and create, and how we as humans can use tools (like chalkboards and computers) to form critically engaged communities.

Pete Rorabaugh writes in “Occupy the Digital: Critical Pedagogy and New Media”: “Critical pedagogy, no matter how we define it, has a central place in the discussion of how learning is changing in the 21st century because critical pedagogy is primarily concerned with an equitable distribution of power. If students live in a culture that digitizes and educates them through a screen, they require an education that empowers them in that sphere, teaches them that language, and offers new opportunities of human connectivity.”

Read More

Net Neutrality Will Not Go Quietly

Net Neutrality Will Not Go Quietly

On May 2, 2012, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a discussion about Net Neutrality, considering the broader implications for educators and learners. You can read the original announcement here and we’ve gathered together highlights from the conversation.

Read More

Where be your gibes now? Your gambols? Your songs? Your flashes of merriment, that were wont to set the table on a roar?

As the Federal Communications Commission threatens to change the nature of the open internet, those of us who have relied on that openness are battening down the hatches, preparing for the worst case scenario: the end of the internet as we’ve known it and used it since it came wailing into the world.

Open access is a decidedly activist proposition, and always has been. On an open web, we can create, broadcast, share, communicate — all without anyone’s permission. The openness of the internet has allowed people of color, LGBTQ folk, and people of every demographic to gather, to communicate, to surge forward in important, democratic ways that the increasing corporatization of the internet will threaten. Every writer, artist, activist, student, and teacher should be concerned about ‪net neutrality.

Read More

All pedagogy is necessarily adaptive because it takes place within and regards the extant world. Digital pedagogy must be even more adaptive because it relies upon, at least in its manufacture, the whims and invention of engineers, code creatives, and a marketplace driven by the distraction of the new, the shiny, the better-than-last-year, the perpetual 2.0. Digital pedagogy is a pedagogy of machines as much as it is a pedagogy of minds and bodies — and not machines just as tools, but machines as environments, as extensions of our own learning processes, as approaches. And so, while “pedagogy is essentially a critical thinking exercise directed at learning and teaching,” digital pedagogy is a critical thinking exercise that considers our use of machines, and our lives as co-dependent with them.

In the last few years, teaching/learning and the digital have increasingly collided/colluded. The MOOC, the broadening of the LMS, the calcification of some approaches, and the response to that calcification — all have waged (mostly) friendly conversation about what it means to learn and teach and create in digital and online spaces. At the beginning of this year, Cathy N. Davidson asked, in a collaborative learning experiment, whether all our traditional approaches to education were invalidated by the encroachment of the digital into our professions. The answer was a resounding “maybe,” with exuberance for new media balanced out by a reluctance to embrace it.

Read More

CFP: Calling Adjuncts to Action

CFP: Calling Adjuncts to Action

“Our visible invisibility means universities sit in the comfortable position of never having to justify to parents the ever-increasing cost of a college tuition coupled with the reality that many of their children’s professors may be making as little as $16,000 a year.”
~ Margaret Betz, Contingent Mother: The Role Gender Plays in the Lives of Adjunct Faculty

Any movement, any effort toward greater social and economic justice, is only as strong as the voices behind it. When we speak up, when we pull back the curtain on the ways we’ve been oppressed or treated unfairly, it’s the stories we tell that make our struggle human. Social justice isn’t political, it’s personal, and the struggles happen every day in living rooms, classrooms, coffee shops, kitchens, and conference rooms. Broadcasting our voices on the internet creates a web of narrative that is as effective as any march to the capitol, any rally.

When Daniel Kovalik published “Death of an adjunct” in his column on the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last September, it opened the floodgate for the adjunct movement in the U.S. The internet came alive as it had not previously with information about the treatment of adjuncts and contingent faculty, statistics about pay and hours worked, and details about the rights afforded (or exactly not afforded) a staggering 70% of higher education’s teachers. Many had been gathering this information for years — the New Faculty Majority, for example, or the Adjunct Project — but suddenly, through the very public death of Margaret Mary Vojtko, the statistics and data became personal.

Read More

“There is more than one way not to read, the most radical of which is not to open a book at all.” ~ Pierre Bayard, How to Talk About Books You Haven’t Read

Not reading is serious scholarly business. It is a crucial part of the work of critics, students, teachers, and reviewers. Pierre Bayard writes that not reading constitutes “our primary way of relating to books. We must not forget that even a prodigious reader never has access to more than an infinitesimal fraction of the books that exist.” Stephen Ramsay writes similarly in “The Hermeneutics of Screwing Around; or What You Do with a Million Books,” “The world is vast. Art is long. What else can we do but survey the field, introduce a topic, plant a seed.”

Read More

MMDU: Left Behind

MMDU: Left Behind

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly (MMDU) is a rambunctious series of discussions about the past, present, and future of higher education, focusing on topics rising directly from Cathy N. Davidson’s distributed #futureEd experiment and its various offspring.

When we call out, we must listen for an answer. Cathy N. Davidson’s (and all our) “The History and Future of (Mostly) Higher Education” pivots on the idea of a call. A call to action. A call to pay attention. A voice in the desert calling for change. We have, in the last six weeks, all become activists and advocates, each venturing out of our own comfort, each looking critically at our assumptions. A community has formed, a hashtag has flourished, and all that is under way has promise for a new “education from scratch”.

Now that we’ve rallied, we need to talk about who we’ve left behind: lurkers, introverts, the marginalized and contingent among us.

Read More

What is music theory?

What is music theory?

Music theory is making the rounds lately. It seems to have started with Ethan Hein’s post on Quora, and subsequently on Slate, “How Can Traditional Music Theory Mesh With Modern Pop Music?”. It’s not a very flattering piece about the discipline that I call my professional home. Unfortunately, Heim’s post, as Bryn Hughes points out, contains straw-man arguments, misinformation, and generalizations, but it’s received wide publicity. Of course, there are a number of things—some of them big things—that Anglo-American music theorists need to do better. However, it is clear both from Heim’s post and from the ease with which it circulated that most people simply don’t know what music theory is and what music theorists do. That, of course, is largely the fault of music theorists. On the whole, we tend to be a fairly insular bunch. Following Bryn’s lead, I hope to do my part to correct that a bit by offering as concise a summary I can of what music theory is, and (in light of Heim’s specific critiques) what college music theory courses are about.

Read More

MMDU: The Missing Manual

MMDU: The Missing Manual

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly (MMDU) is a rambunctious series of discussions about the past, present, and future of higher education, focusing on topics rising directly from Cathy N. Davidson’s distributed #futureEd experiment and its various offspring.

There is no more pedagogical an act than conscientious objection. There is no better way to teach than to smile, sit down, and refuse to do things in ordinary ways. No better way to learn than to organize a revolt. Because learning is always a process of unlearning, of letting go of previously cherished notions and ideas, every teacher must be a revolutionary, and she must inspire in her students the willingness to dismantle.

HASTAC has as its motto “Difference is our operating system.” Difference is necessary to revolution and to change. It is only in the space of the exchange of difference, the dialogues of disagreement and discernment, that we can see the frayed edges of our reason and experience and redefine our understanding. Making friends is an act of radical political resistance. And being kind, remaining open, unbiased, and disregarding the at-the-ready hierarchies of higher education is an operation of embracing difference. It is also a nuanced, careful, and meaningful form of conscientious objection.

Read More

MMDU: Unpedagogy

MMDU: Unpedagogy

Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει ~ Heraclitus

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly (MMDU) is a rambunctious series of discussions about the past, present, and future of higher education, focusing on topics rising directly from Cathy Davidson’s distributed #futureEd experiment and its various offspring.

Learning must catch us by surprise, demand of us a compromise, a suspension of disbelief. Learning reminds us that we’re always a little bit stuck, but also that we have the ability to see our way out.

Last week, I was stuck in Washington DC under the oppressive gray clouds of winter storm Pax. But rather than be shackled by the conditions, I used the opportunity to visit museums and monuments. In the “Our Lives” area of the National Museum of the American Indian, I found myself surrounded by voices. They emanated from the multiple television displays, from audio that played only in this part or that part of the exhibit. The voices seemed to come from nowhere and everywhere. Ghostly, musical, they washed over me from every direction — north, south, east, west, from above and from below — giving the impression of omnipresence, of never being alone or separated from those voices. And yet this was a presence as invisible as it was ubiquitous, as nascent as it was ancient.

Read More

MMDU: “I Would Prefer Not To.”

MMDU: “I Would Prefer Not To.”

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly (MMDU) is a rambunctious series of discussions about the past, present, and future of higher education, focusing on topics rising directly from Cathy Davidson’s distributed #futureEd experiment and its various offspring.

This week, among other topics, the #futureEd MOOC-ish course-like thing considers assessment: how we fund and accredit institutions and how we measure learning. In 2009, Cathy Davidson offered a risky and still novel post about “How to Crowdsource Grading”, in which she describes foregoing external summative assessment in favor of peer feedback and her own “feedback to the feedback.”

Assessment and standards are elephants in almost every room where discussions of education are underway. My goal here is not to demonize assessment but to dissect it — to cut right to its jugular: Where does assessment fail? What damage can it do? What can’t be assessed? Can we construct more poetic, less objective, models for assessment? In a system structured around standards and gatekeeping, when and how do we stop assessing?

Read More

Things aren’t looking very bright for the arts and humanities at the moment. In our current age of austerity, arts and humanities budgets are easy targets for spending reductions. In both the United States and Canada, politicians seem focused on cuts. During his 2012 presidential campaign, Mitt Romney identified the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts as programs that should be “eliminated.” Even after softening his tone regarding the arts and humanities, Romney continued to advocate for harsh cuts that legislators are still trying to pass.

Things are not better in Canada. In 2012 the Government of Canada cut the budget of the Social Science and Humanities Research Council by 14 million dollars. In efforts to make the most with their budgets, some Canadian universities are also restricting admission to arts and humanities program, like the University of Alberta that suspended admission to 20 humanities programs in 2013.

Read More

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly (MMDU) is a rambunctious series of discussions about the past, present, and future of higher education, focusing on topics rising directly from Cathy Davidson’s distributed #futureEd experiment and its various offspring. Our first chat focused on chaotic learning environments, vulnerability, and internet trolls. Some highlights from the conversation:

This week, we’ll shift focus a bit, as we continue to circle our prey.

Read More

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly

MOOC MOOC: Dark Underbelly

“Too many people are drinking the MOOC Kool-aid (or dumping it out hastily) when what we need to do is look closely at the Kool-aid to see what we can learn from it. At this point, MOOCs are all untapped potential, mostly misunderstood and only potentially gangrenous.”
~ Jesse Stommel, “March of the MOOCs: Monstrous Open Online Courses”

In higher education, no ideas stay dead. MOOCs were festering at the verge of irrelevance, the arguments about them bloated and tired, then along comes a MOOC worth joining. Just when you thought it was safe, the meta-MOOC returns, this time all grown up with Duke University, HASTAC, Cathy Davidson, and her students at the wheel.

Stress Points

Stress Points

We’ve opened this area of the journal — Page Two — to non-peer-reviewed articles, editorials, announcements, CFPs, cross-posted articles, and more. Page Two allows Hybrid Pedagogy room to experiment even more rambunctiously with timely and non-traditional content outside the rigorous collaborative peer review that articles from the main page of the journal receive. 


Being a professor is easy, right? We have summers off, and we teach 1-2 classes per semester. When we’re not teaching, we’re lounging in our big offices and wondering about our next book contract or grant proposal. If we’re busy with writing that new book or attending a conference in some exotic location, we farm out the grading and teaching to our TAs. This low stress level is a major perk of being a professor. Or so CareerCast’s “Least Stressful Jobs of 2014” and “Least Stressful Jobs of 2013,” as well as a Forbes piece about the 2013 CareerCast study, would have it. But what about the roughly 70% of higher education faculty — the true new faculty majority — who lack the “lucrative prospects” (as the former terms it) and kinds of conditions CareerCast and Forbes seem to think most professors have? How “easy” is it for the professors who, for instance, teach at three different schools (sometimes in the same day) and still earn poverty-level wages?

The ever-increasing number contingent university faculty — over a million and rising — does not share this “low stress” lifestyle. (Neither do most tenured and tenure-track faculty, but I won’t speak for them.) Contingent faculty do not have teaching or research assistants, paid sabbatical leave, small upper-level classes in their area of expertise, or course releases to ease the teaching workload. Many are paid poverty-level wages and essentially hit the reset button at the beginning of every semester — the same short-term contract, the same pay scale, the same lack of basic faculty rights. It’s sometimes hard to feel stable in and dedicated to a school when your contract doesn’t extend past the current semester, or if you split your time and attention when you also teach at two others.

Read More

In this piece, the first cross-posted article published on Hybrid Pedagogy, Kathi Inman Berens discusses an experiment in “flipped” pedagogy. Also published at HASTAC. We’ve opened this area of the journal — Page Two — to non-peer-reviewed articles, editorials, announcements, CFPs, cross-posted articles, and more. The page represents a kind of “flip” for us, too.


Procedurally, a humanities seminar is already “flipped.” Exciting student interactivity in a “flipped” engineering class is true of an ordinary humanities seminar.

Is there an equivalently awesome pedagogical innovation that flipping might yield for humanities students?

During fall 2012, the University of Southern California’s Center for Scholarly Technology conducted an interdisciplinary pilot to discern disciplinary differences in the application of “flipped” classroom techniques. A three-week unit was “flipped” in three courses: an engineering lecture, a sociology lecture, and a gender studies seminar. Originating in STEM disciplines, “flipped” lectures are videotaped and accessed as part of the student’s homework routine. Classroom seat time is freed up for active learning exercises, such as discussion of problem sets. Faculty circulate in the classroom as “master tutors.”

Read More

Paulo Freire claims in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, that “the great humanistic and historical task of the oppressed [is] to liberate themselves and their oppressors as well.” It’s a conundrum, but an important one. For without this mandate, those waging their way out of oppression may suffer themselves to become oppressors in their own right, and then their efforts may be waged against those seeking liberation.

Hybrid Pedagogy’s editorial board is made up of three gay men, two straight women, and two additional straight men. We are all white. We are all educated. We, of course, are more than these identity categories imply, yet to one extent or another, our lives are lived with whatever modicum of privilege these things, born and earned, give us. As critical pedagogues, we are aware that our rights and privileges are not valid unless we fight for the same rights for others. And so our journal has always illuminated the struggles of the outcasts, the orphans, the contingent — those voices that go otherwise unheard by the staid and layered pages of the everyday academic journal.

Read More

#digped Storify: Assessing Assessment

#digped Storify: Assessing Assessment

The most recent #digped conversation covered questions of the value of grading. The focus was in a higher-ed environment. At times, participants challenged the very definition of ‘assessment’ and explored questions about the future of grading, grades, and assessment practices. This was a conversation intended to wrap up the year in Hybrid Pedagogy, and incite a rather controversial discussion on a topic we think about a lot: assessment. We wanted to ask ‘why’ we grade. We wanted to talk about ‘how’ people grade, and what they do to intrinsically motivate their students.

Read More

Grading the Grade: a #digped Discussion

Grading the Grade: a #digped Discussion

On Friday, December 6 from 12:00 – 1:00pm Eastern (9:00 – 10:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to discuss the process, practice, and theories of grading. The Twitter chat is Storified here, but we invite you to continue the discussion in the comments below.

In one of the first articles published in this journal, “The Tangle of Assessment,” Pete and Jesse write, “Grading and assessment are curious beasts, activities many instructors love to hate but ones that nonetheless undergird the institutions where we work.” This early article barely flirts with the topic, and now we find ourselves coming full circle, putting the question of what, how, and why we grade back out to the community.

Read More

The case of Margaret Mary Vojtko made much more public a conversation that’s been heating up in academe. Vojtko, an adjunct professor at Duquesne University, passed away at 83, shortly after the university didn’t renew her teaching contract. Although many facts and facets about the woman’s life, wages, health, and relationship with her employer have been uncovered and discussed — and opinions aren’t equal on all sides about her story — Margaret Mary has quickly become the patron saint of the discussion of fair labor practices related to adjunct and contingent workers. The plight of the adjunct is not only very real, it also serves as a marker for the kinds of employment available for those who receive an advanced degree.

Read More

On Friday, October 4, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a #digped chat to discuss the appropriate pedagogical responses to the increasing crisis of contingent labor in education. In particular, we wanted to engage a conversation about two significant, and potentially related, consequences of a neoliberalist socio-political agenda: the adjunctification of college and university instruction, and the creation of zero-opportunity employment for recent graduates. We were not only concerned with the difficulty faced by part-time and adjunct faculty, but also with how their marginalization affects the future of students looking at careers in teaching.

On Friday, October 4th from 12:00 – 1:00pm Eastern (9:00 – 10:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to discuss whether and how pedagogy should respond to neoliberal arguments that education should focus on creating a productive labor force. In particular, we want to engage a conversation about what some have argued are two significant, and potentially related, consequences of a neoliberalist socio-political agenda: the adjunctification of college and university instruction, and the creation of zero-opportunity employment for recent graduates.

Read More

On Friday, September 6, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a #digped chat to discuss the experiences of students in MOOCs and other open learning environments. The journal has always sought out a diversity of voices on matters educational, and we realized that the voices of students in MOOCs have been largely silent or ignored, and we wanted both to explore why this is so, and to give them a platform. We took to this task from a particular perspective, as stated in the announcement for the hashtag chat: “we want to think about learners — and less about the MOOC itself — especially as learners make learning a more incessant, hybrid, and lifelong experience.” We wanted to hear from learners of all sorts about where learning truly happens, and how that learning can or should be brought into more traditional structured environments. To approach this discussion, we knew we’d first have to figure out the difference between formal learning and “learning in the wild”.

Read More

On Friday, September 6 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to discuss the experiences of students in MOOCs and other open learning environments. While MOOC innovators have rallied around their numbers, their platforms, and their approaches, the voices of students who take MOOCs have been largely unheard. Yet, it is often in the students’ participation that MOOCs survive or perish.

Read More

Inspired by Charlotte Frost‘s article “Hashtag Classroom“ last week on Hybrid Pedagogy, we hosted a #digped chat on Friday, August 2, 2013 to explore the pedagogical utility and variety of Twitter hashtag chats. As Jesse wrote in his announcement of the discussion, “Given the robust search functionality of Twitter, all of the words in a given tweet are searchable. The hashtag, though, adds another dimension . . . [It] puts one tweet alongside other tweets, drawing very intentional lines between one idea and another — and allowing those ideas to be curated together with a single left-click of a mouse or trackpad.” A collection of over 60 participants from a variety of backgrounds gathered around their screens to post questions, offer advice, and explore the nature of the “#” and its mutiform application to teaching and learning.

Read More

On Friday, August 2 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to discuss the use of Twitter hashtags in forming learning communities, doing scholarly work, and research. The often ironic, sometimes humorous hashtag can actually be used to create lasting communities of discourse among educators and students across a network.

Read More

In one of our bolder moves, Hybrid Pedagogy decided to hold a #digped discussion focused on the idea of lifelong learning. But embedded in this broad topic were many considerations, brought to the fore by recent articles from journal contributors Robin Wharton and Sean Michael Morris. In her article, “Building in the Humanities Isn’t New“, Robin discussed the idea that recent innovations in post-secondary pedagogy may indeed have roots in — or be replicative of — the pedagogies of elementary and secondary teaching. She says in that piece that, ”I see a potentially useful convergence between the long-standing and relatively well-studied use of certain pedagogical strategies in early childhood settings and the still-emergent, and relatively untested use of what appear–on the surface at least–to be similar pedagogical strategies in post-secondary education.” And perhaps more importantly, she recognizes that learning, as well as teaching, may be more continuous than our hierarchical systems of education acknowledge; that all learning is lifelong learning.

Read More

“There are better forums for discussion than online discussion forums.”
— Jesse Stommel

This is how it started: forums, we decided, don’t work. They are slow, lumbering, impersonal, and hard to follow. And yet, we wanted to create a dynamic, interesting place for people to discuss issues related to teaching, learning, digital writing, Digital Humanities, higher education — and more — on the pages of Hybrid Pedagogy. Since its inception, the journal has maintained a forum, but it was seldom visited and all but silent. As a journal devoted as much to praxis as to discourse, we were unsatisfied.
Read More

Of what use is education? Of what use are the educational institutions we’ve erected in the 20th and 21st centuries?

On Friday, June 7 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to inspect how traditional education prepares us (or does not prepare us) for a life of learning. As Sean has argued, “The learner has changed, evolving before our eyes into the autodidact, and so our institutions and pedagogies must cooperate (or at least compensate) by becoming responsive, flexible, and decentered.” Embracing pedagogies that speak to lifelong learning may be a matter of looking more intently at our goals, looking back at our earliest learning experiences, and looking out to the communities that will foster us later.

Read More

Don’t throw the past away.
You might need it some rainy day.
Dreams can come true again,
When everything old is new again.
—Peter Allen, “Everything Old Is New Again”

My oldest daughter started kindergarten this year. And when my partner and I found ourselves in the very difficult — and also very privileged — position of deciding where she would go to school, I realized I knew next-to-nothing about primary school pedagogy. The process of choosing a school and of learning about a new thread in the multi-stranded discourse of critical pedagogy provided me with a renewed perspective on my own pedagogical practice. I have a much better appreciation for how the learning spaces and experiences I create with students relate to, and have drawn upon, pedagogies first imagined by early innovators in education such as Maria Montessori, Rudolf Steiner, and Anthony Benizet. I’ve shared my thoughts on what I learned and the profound effect it has had on how I see myself as an educator in my recent article on Hybrid Pedagogy, “Building in the Humanities Isn’t New”. Now, we are asking those of you with expertise in primary and secondary school pedagogies to share your wisdom with us.
Read More

Most of us are not strangers to the concept of the forum. Forums are attached to nearly every type of community building platform that hopes to encourage continuing discussion. But what do we do with forums? If you’re anything like me, you dip your typing fingers in the forum pool about twice a year, but mostly forget they exist. In their recent article “The Discussion Forum is Dead; Long Live the Discussion Forum,” Sean Michael Morris and Jesse Stommel claim “the forum itself does not automatically promote meaningful conversation — or conversation at all.” In truth, the forum, any forum, is a metaphorically empty room when no one is in it. But it is much more than just a potential place to gather. It is a space with potential: “In the right hands, it can do wonders,” Sean and Jesse remind us.

In his chapter on “Spatial Stories” out of the book The Practice of Everyday Life, Michel deCerteau explains the difference between ‘place’ and ‘space.’ A ‘place’ defines a location — it “excludes the possibility of two things being the same location.” Place is stable, it can be marked on a map. “Space,” deCerteau tells us, “is a practiced place”: “Space is composed of intersections of mobile elements. It is in a sense actuated by the ensemble of movements deployed within it.” The forum can be marked on a digital site map, and by that delineation, it is a place. But once we inhabit it with mobile ideas — once we begin to move those ideas around within it — the forum becomes a space where we practice community building around a theme.
Read More

This #digped chat about peer-to-peer learning, or learning in the collective, was inspired by John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas’ book, A New Culture of Learning. In that book, the authors propose that the nature of and methods for learning have changed with the digital age, and that how learning happens now is not necessarily in the hands of teachers; rather, learners — and in this case, all learners are lifelong learners — are beginning to take matters of education into their own hands. They open their book with this “very simple question”:

What happens to learning when we move from the stable infrastructure of the twentieth century to the fluid infrastructure of the twenty-first century, where technology is constantly creating and responding to change?

Our discussion on May 3rd focused on ideas presented in the book’s fourth chapter, “Learning in the Collective”, where the authors looked at peer-to-peer learning, or how learners help one another learn. We wanted to investigate how this happens successfully, what happens to the role of the expert/teacher, and… ?

Read More

On Friday, May 3 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped focused on the notion of the learning collective, an idea put forward by John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas in A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change. Collectives, the authors point out, are different from communities, especially in that they “are defined by an active engagement with the process of learning.” The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

Brown and Thomas argue that technology has changed the nature of learning in collectives. In a culture now defined by the way we connect with one another, how we share, what we share, and how that sharing becomes participatory (evidenced equally by sophisticated online collaborations as much as by the ever present, banal, entirely spreadable meme), connecting and working together is no longer only a practice, it is quickly becoming a habit, a mode, a preferred behavior.
Read More

Our #digped chat about teaching composition massively (either within a MOOC, or as part of a “MOOCified” on-ground or hybrid course) was first and foremost inspired by Chris Friend’s article, “Will MOOCs Work for Writing?“, in which he proposes that the strategies employed in massive courses could be used to great benefit in smaller, on-ground courses. These ideas were further pushed by the #digped announcement, which proposed: “Writing, and the teaching of writing, is undergoing a fundamental shift; and it may be only within the massive, networked environment of a MOOC or other similar approach that we can investigate the nature of this shift.”

This Friday, April 5 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to consider the place of composition and writing curricula within massive open online courses. MOOCs do not just offer an opportunity to reexamine the way we teach writing, and the way writing is learned, they may well ambush us into doing so. The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

Always when we talk about massively-scaled learning, we must first face the gargoyle of our resistance. Despite their inexorable march, and subsequently proliferating PR, MOOCs have not been embraced by the majority of educators. In fact, MOOCs are seen as an experiment rife with poorly executed pedagogies, troubling colonial overtures, and corporate origins that threaten to prey upon traditional higher education. And yet, MOOCs are upon us and resistance may well prove futile. Perhaps instead of erecting an ed-tech Berlin Wall, with MOOC adopters on one side and holdouts against this massive technology on the other, we should consider ways of making these MOOCs work for us, not against us.
Read More

In the original prompt for this discussion, Sean Michael Morris writes, “Issues of ownership, intellectual property, and plagiarism are as old as the academy itself. But new media, and the permeability of text and image within them, create dilemmas not previously faced in our classrooms, research, and professional disciplines.” This isn’t to say that there haven’t been other dilemmas, or even other similar dilemmas, but the nature of our work and the modes of its dissemination are changing at an incredible rate. And our discussions of the ethical and legal implications do not always keep pace.

Read More

This Friday, March 1 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped focusing on the issue of ownership and plagiarism in the digital age, when reusing, remixing, and repurposing are common practices —  even creative ones. The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

Issues of ownership, intellectual property, and plagiarism are as old as the academy itself. But new media, and the permeability of text and image within them, create dilemmas not previously faced in our classrooms, research, and professional disciplines. Today, reuse, repurposing, even outright copying can serve artistic and creative purposes; but how these practices affect the original creators of content, how they can or should be viewed by the law, and how we — as producers and consumers of content — make determinations of ethical behavior are active questions in intellectual and pedagogical arenas.
Read More

This Friday, February 1 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to discuss student involvement in teaching, learning, and pedagogy. If you’re an educator, please invite your students to participate.


The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

The Bill of Rights and Principles for Learning in the Digital Age was published on January 22, 2013. The document, a collaboration between twelve educators, proposes on its surface 9 rights and 10 principles that affect students and their work in any learning environment, with an eye toward those which are hybrid or online. The document has generated a great deal of discussion about its context, but little about its implication: namely, students are so integral to the process of education that how we conceive the institution and the practice must evolve. As educators, our work is not to better understand and defend our own positions, but to abdicate those positions in meaningful, thoughtful ways.
Read More

In his article, Online Learning: a User’s Guide to Forking Education, among other arguments, Jesse Stommel foresees a need to break or rebuild the idea of the course. “We need to devise learning activities that take organic (and less arbitrary) shapes in space and time. We need to recognize that the best learning happens not inside courses, but between them.” As part of his larger discussion of “forking” education in order to bring learning more effectively into the digital medium, Jesse suggests that the course is only one of a set of components that needs to be taken apart, scrutinized with care and with playfulness, and then rebuilt. The inspection of education and educative methods needs to be so complete that no assumptions are left unexamined. During our January 11th #digped discussion, we took a close look at what a course is, and what happens when we consider altering — or entirely abandoning — this format for learning.

This Friday, January 11 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped centered on the notion of “breaking” the course. The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

In his article, Online Learning: a User’s Guide to Forking Education, among other arguments, Jesse Stommel foresees a need to break or rebuild the idea of the course. “We need to devise learning activities that take organic (and less arbitrary) shapes in space and time. We need to recognize that the best learning happens not inside courses, but between them.” As part of his larger discussion of “forking” education in order to bring learning more effectively into the digital medium, Jesse suggests that the course is only one of a set of components that needs to be taken apart, scrutinized with care and with playfulness, and then rebuilt. The inspection of education and educative methods needs to be so complete that no assumptions are left unexamined.
Read More

Over the last twelve months, Hybrid Pedagogy has published 74 articles by 16 authors. It’s no surprise for us to report that the articles we’ve published about MOOCs have been some of our most-read articles of the year. The MOOC is not a bandwagon, though, but something needing careful interrogation with “discernment but not judgment.” I argue in “Online Learning: a Manifesto,” that “to get lost entirely in the stories being told about MOOCs is to miss the forest for the trees, so to speak.” There is a deeper discussion underlying our anxieties (and excitement) about MOOCs — a discussion about the efficacy of open education, online learning, and digital pedagogies. A discussion about the future of education. On December 7, we focused our#digped discussion on issues large and small, loud and quiet, the questions we keep circling around and also the harder ones, the ones that unnerve us.

This Friday, December 7 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific),Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to consider the future of higher education. The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

Over the last twelve months, Hybrid Pedagogy has published 74 articles by 16 authors. It’s no surprise for us to report that the articles we’ve published about MOOCs have been some of our most-read articles of the year. The MOOC is not a bandwagon, though, but something needing careful interrogation with “discernment but not judgment.” Jesse argues in “Online Learning: a Manifesto,” that “to get lost entirely in the stories being told about MOOCs is to miss the forest for the trees, so to speak.” There is a deeper discussion underlying our anxieties (and excitement) about MOOCs — a discussion about the efficacy of open education, online learning, and digital pedagogies. A discussion about the future of education.

Read More

In “Notes towards a Deformed Humanities,” Mark Sample writes, “I want to propose a theory and practice of a Deformed Humanities. A humanities born of broken, twisted things. And what is broken and twisted is also beautiful, and a bearer of knowledge. The Deformed Humanities is an origami crane—a piece of paper contorted into an object of startling insight and beauty.” Citation practices on the web have begun to contort and twist like the origami crane Sample describes here. For many, this leads to a certain despair, but I find myself reveling in a moment, a threshold, across which our scholarly practices now teeter. Citation is becoming less about name-dropping and positioning and more about generosity and collaboration.

The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

This Friday, November 2 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific),Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to question whether current systems of academic citation are appropriate for new media environments. During a recent exchange on Twitter, Mark Sample andJoshua Eyler remarked on a recurrent problem presented by traditional citation styles and conventions for those of us who work with new media:

Read More

The most recent #digped conversation covered questions of the value of publishing in a new media environment. At times, participants challenged the very definition of ‘to publish’ and explored questions about the future of academic publishing and classroom practices.
Introduced by Valerie’s #digped announcement After #twittergate, the conversation began with a question about thoughts and perceptions regarding the dangers of using social media.

The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

This Friday, October 5 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the #digped hashtag to explore how our writing in online, multimodal, and social media environments might inform our definitions of “scholarship.” The old models of writing are changing and new models are emerging in the online environment. In “Show Not Tell: The Value of New Media Scholarship” Cheryl Ball writes, “most authors who do publish online in scholarly, peer-reviewed journals publish texts that do not break print-bound conventions and rarely travel into an apparent experimental realm of scholarship.” Most people have not been trained to view online forums as scholarly. We are encouraged to read and write, in any and every way, but “new media scholarship may be dismissed as having an unnecessarily fussy ‘advertising aesthetic’… making it unworthy as a scholarly text in the eyes of the reader.” Increasingly though, we are collaborating on sites like Twitter, Facebook, and Tumblr, and asking how communication in these forums fit into the bigger picture of scholarly writing.

This is not to say all digital publication is worthy of the title ‘scholarship’ just because scholars produce it. Amidst all the discussion about what social media and online journals (like this one) can do for us, it is increasingly important to think critically about the potential dangers. If we are going to embrace the composing pedagogues, students, and scholars who are going online without any goading, how do we decide the value of texts produced in non-traditional platforms? Can a series of Tumblr posts create an argument as valuable as a traditional print-style journal article?

Read More

Prompted by some of the initial responses to Robin’s #digped announcement, “Blurring Lines, Breaking Rules,” the discussion began with consideration of working definitions for and distinctions between “Open Source” and “Open Access.”
Then, as a number of participants observed, the distinctions between open access and open source approaches to intellectual property sharing stem from how we define “open,” and the discussion quickly turned to existing and potential paradigms of “openness.”

This Friday, September 14 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped to consider the promises and pitfalls of open source and open access learning resources. The work of students and pedagogues alike depends upon our ability to access, use, remix, and transform the texts and technologies we study. In her recent post, “Doing DH versus Doing Digital,” Lee Bessette writes, “I might not know much about coding (and only slightly more about encoding and mark-up languages) but I am getting tired of being at the mercy of the software that I use (she says while typing this in her least-favorite program ever, Word).” Bessette continues by observing how she is drawn to Digital Humanities as a discipline because it offers us “the possibility we might create interfaces and software that give us environments that critically engage with and produce what we want, rather than limit ourselves to what we’re told we can do.”

Read More

The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

This Friday, August 31 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under hashtag #digped to explore the changing political economies of higher education. The practicality and future of the university has fallen under scrutiny. “There is talk about the poor educational outcomes apparent in our graduates, the out-of-control tuitions and crippling student loan debt,” Debra Leigh Scott writes in “How the American University was Killed in Five Easy Steps”. Few who have pursued life in higher education can deny an affection for the college campus. From the quad to the cafeteria, from the library to the biology lab, universities are sites of charm, intellectual industry, and perpetual nostalgia. However, “Attention is finally being paid to the enormous salaries for presidents and sports coaches, and the migrant worker status of the low-wage majority faculty.” The nostalgia is wearing off, and many are proclaiming the end of higher education as we’ve known it.

We certainly recognize the dangers of the increasing corporatization at many institutions of higher learning, a move couched in the rhetoric of efficiency, shrinking budgets, and a “culture of scarcity”. However, as long as there are students eager to learn, teachers and learning institutions have a responsibility to them first and foremost. The question, then, is how do we address our concerns about the shape of higher education within a pedagogical framework? Can we make education more widely available (and more economically viable) without sacrificing good pedagogy?

Read More

This is the second installment of the Storify of the Hybrid Pedagogy #digped Twitter discussion for Friday, August 3, 2012: “Broadcast Learning.” This installment covers our discussion of MOOCs and the changing economies in higher education.
In his article, “Broadcast Education: A Response to Coursera,” Sean asks us to consider, “If online education has made so much progress, why isn’t it more obvious? Why are the good folks at Coursera (who are actually just now catching up to those of us who’ve been doing this for a decade) getting all the attention, while also not putting the best face of online education forward?” He ends the piece with a call for pedagogues “to innovate, to experiment, to play and be played with,” and cautions against oversimplification of online learning and MOOCs, of both the forms they take and the issues at stake when we are debating their merits and demerits. In an effort to engage some of the more productive discursive strands weaving in and out of the recent media “MOOCopalypse”, we decided to focus last week’s #digped discussion on the broader question of broadcast learning, which is the model (as Sean points out, sometimes erroneously) most frequently associated with MOOCs and other, more traditional (did I just write that?) online courses.  Read More

The conversation curated and archived in two parts via Storify: Pt. 1: We Interrupt This Broadcast… and Pt. 2: A Backchannel in the Backchannel.

This Friday, August 3 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under hashtag #digped centered on the difference between content-delivery and learning in online education. We’ll use as focal point for the discussion the problems and advantages of, and future potential for, the video lecture as utilized in flipped classrooms, MOOCs, hybrid courses, and more. In “Broadcast Education: A Response to Coursera”, we suggested that video lectures used to create large-scale, “auditorium”-style learning environments may not be the very best application of technology. Our discussion on Friday will inspect how this technology is being used and abused, and how it might be used better.

Read More

This past Friday, July 20th, the Hybrid Pedagogy #digped discussion on Twitter extended the conversation we began with our crowdsourced article Digital Humanities Made Me a Better Pedagogue. In that article, we explain why we’re organizing a THATCamp Hybrid Pedagogy in order to “tap the disruptive, deformed, insubordinate energy” we see infusing the collaborative praxis of digital pedagogy and the digital humanities. The #digped discussion “Collaborative Teaching, Shared Pedagogies” was motivated by our desire to include the wider Hybrid Pedagogy collective in a conversation about some of the scholarly work informing that piece.

The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

This Friday, July 20 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion under the hashtag #digped focused on collaborative teaching and shared pedagogies. In “Digital Humanities Made Me a Better Pedagogue: a Crowdsourced Article,” we assembled ideas on the subject from a team of authors, who surveyed the thinking of a much larger group via hyperlinks, crowdsourcing on Twitter, and workshopping at several THATCampun-conferences.

The article begins with the assertion: “Pedagogy is inherently collaborative. Our work as teachers doesn’t (or shouldn’t) happen in a vacuum.” While this might not seem like such an audacious claim, collaborative teaching is rarely institutionalized at an administrative level. It is still customary to have only one instructor of record assigned to each class. This practice obscures — and discourages — the collaborative work of colleagues, teaching assistants, and often the students themselves. We have previously argued for the importance of an increased focus on “participant pedagogy,” and we should remain equally attentive to the fact that our pedagogies are (and must be) developed in concert with fellow teachers.

Read More

On Friday, July 6, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a discussion on Twitter focused on the idea of the digital divide. We set out to determine if this divide is real, in what ways it’s real, and how it might be related to other “divides” (e.g., social, economic, etc.). Into the heart of our discussion fell two key factors: access and relevance; that is, access to technology and information, and the relevance of that technology and information to our students. The discussion was inspired, in part, by Lee Skallerup Bassette’s article “It’s About Class: Interrogating the Digital Divide” which raised clear questions about not only how to bridge the digital divide, but also whether it’s appropriate to try.

The conversation curated and archived via Storify.

This Friday, July 6 from 1:00 – 2:00pm Eastern time (10:00 – 11:00am Pacific time), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion group under the hashtag #digped focused on the matter of the “digital divide”. Or, more to the point, what the digital divide can teach us. The discussion will circulate around ideas raised in the Hybrid Pedagogy article, “It’s About Class: Interrogating the Digital Divide”, as well as ideas posed by the articles cited below.

For at least a decade, the notion that internet access and digital literacy create a “have” and “have-not” division in American and global culture has inspired everything from outrage to activism. Is the digital divide a new site of social justice, or just a rhetoric of inequality?

Read More

On Friday, June 22, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a discussion on Twitter focused on the relationship between pedagogy and technology, and the relationship between teachers and technologists. We set out with the intention of mining the relationships for possibilities, potentials, but also for weaknesses and shortcomings. At the center of our conversation sat the LMS (Learning Management System), the bane and boon of online and hybrid teaching. For many, the LMS is an unusable educational tool, while for others it is a technology ripe for the hacking. But some technologists believe the LMS is a work in progress, and may well be the future of educational technology. We invited Jared Stein of Instructure, the makers of the Canvas LMS, and some of their customers to join our discussion. Read More

This Friday, June 22 from 1:00 – 2:00pm EST (10:00 – 11:00am PST), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion group under the hashtag #digped on the relationship between pedagogy and technology. Functionality is increasingly important in an educational world that includes hybrid classes, MOOCs, and more; but is functionality pedagogy? Is pedagogy driving functionality, or is it the other way around? The discussion will circulate around ideas raised in the Hybrid Pedagogy article, “Hacking the Screwdriver: Instructure’s Canvas and the Future of the LMS”, as well as ideas posed by the articles cited below.

Several folks from Instructure, designers of the Canvas learning management system, will join us for the discussion. As we think about the pedagogy of techology, it’s important to engage not only teachers and pedagogues, but also designers, coders, even CEOs. Read More

On Friday, June 8, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted a discussion on Twitter focused on the subject of “teaching naked” as presented in Paul Fyfe’s article “Digital Pedagogy Unplugged“. We thought it would be worthwhile to take a look at the ways in which all classrooms are necessarily both digital and analog, in-person and virtual. Inspired by the notion that we might be able to re-imagine digital pedagogy “without the potentially limiting factor of electronics,” we set out to discuss what the truly hybrid classroom was made of.

The discussion started off with a quick review of some of the participants’ favorite educational tech – from Google Docsand Weebly to smart boards and chalk boards. But the conversation quickly moved from the purely technological to the theoretical and practical. Our discussion of tools led us to explore how we use those tools for teaching. Read More

Ideas from this discussion were curated and archived via Storify here.

This Friday, June 8 from 1:00 – 2:00pm EST (10:00 – 11:00am PST), Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion group under the hashtag #digped on Paul Fyfe’s “Digital Pedagogy Unplugged,” an article which explores how technology can both support, and might prevent, teaching and learning. We encourage participants to read Fyfe’s article, but we hope to keep the discussion open enough to everyone. Read More

On Friday, May 25, Hybrid Pedagogy hosted its second pedagogically-focused discussion on Twitter, this time on the subject of participant pedagogy. Inspired by both the notion from Howard Rheingold’s book Net Smart (MIT Press) that “participation is power”, and by the well-aimed A Letter from a Hybrid Student by Teo Bishop, the discussion worked to uncover ways not only for the student / teacher gap to be bridged, but also what it means for students to become involved in pedagogy. In this Storify, we’ve brought together some of the most compelling thoughts from the discussion. Read More

Ideas from this discussion were curated and archived via Storify here.

Hybrid Pedagogy will host a Twitter discussion group about participant pedagogy this Friday, May 25 from 1:00pm – 2:00pm EST (10:00am-11:00am PST) under the hashtag #digped. While the conversation will be, in part, inspired by our previous #digped discussion about Howard Rheingold’s Net Smart, you don’t need to read the book in order to join the conversation.

Read More

Hybrid Pedagogy proposed a one-hour, pedagogically-focused discussion on the introduction to Howard Rheingold’s new book Net Smart (MIT Press). The conversation took place on May 4, 2012 and ranged from digital awareness/mindfulness to the new role of the teacher in the digitally-infused classroom. In this Storify, we’ve curated highlights from the conversation. See “How to Storify. Why to Storify.” for some thoughts on Storify and how you might use it to curate your own conversations on Twitter. Read More

Our investigation of pedagogical hybridity in this journal continually draws us out of narrow institutional discussions and into larger issues, namely whether or how to incorporate digital fluency into our classrooms. We assert that productive hybridity involves teaching the “material” while at the same time teaching our “situation” as digital citizens. Digital and critical pedagogy argues for an awareness of our students’ learning needs, of the content we teach, and of the digital culture in which we all find ourselves.

Howard Rheingold’s new book Net Smart (MIT Press) prepares us for that third layer of awareness, and the introductory chapter (available here as a PDF) introduces an exciting new “field” of study for teachers. Hybrid Pedagogy will be hosting a Twitter discussion (using the hashtag #digped) on this introduction on Friday, May 4, from 12:30pm-1:30pm EST (9:30am-10:30am PST), and we hope you’ll join us. Read More

The Twitter chat archived via Storify.

Howard Rheingold’s recent book, Net Smart: How To Thrive Online (MIT Press), feels almost custom-written for discussion on Hybrid Pedagogy. The book is not aimed exclusively for pedagogical application but addresses a method many of us are using in teaching and learning — a new digital epistemology. It “strives for a balanced approach that is neither a techno-utopian sales pitch nor a neo-Luddite moral panic.” Sounds like hybridity to us!

Hybrid Pedagogy will be hosting a Twitter discussion group on Rheingold’s book in both synchronous and asynchronous formats. Start by reading the introduction and join us on Twitter for a conversation about its implications next Friday, May 4 from 12:30pm-1:30pm EST (9:30am-10:30am PST) under the hashtag #DigPedNet Smart’s introductory chapter is free for PDF download on MIT’s site for the book; however, since we hope to continue our discussion over the next few weeks, we encourage you to get the whole book. If you aren’t able to join us at 12:30pm EST on May 4, feel free to jump into the discussion asynchronously anytime on or around that day. We will conclude by capturing the content of the discussion via Storify a few days after the event.

Read More