Yesterday afternoon I drove to the CLT airport to pick up the ever wondrous and esteemed Robin DeRosa, who will be talking and workshopping at Davidson for the next few days.
And the talk we had through the I-77 traffic confirmed all the good vibes: Foucault, Open, Access, Problematic, Deconstructed, Badges, Early American Lit, Modernism, Perspective, Empathy. More to come in a recounting of the weekend and my perpetually developing perspective.
And I’m sitting in an annotation workshop at this very moment, walking through hypothes.is with a crowd of fac/staff/and…am I the only student? Probs.
We’re beginning with this tweet and its doc:
— Robin DeRosa (@actualham) May 6, 2016
And now we’re off.
This talk shifts between “how to use hypothesis” and “the ideological implications of the open web.” Both are awesome threads. Read on.
Since I’m familiar with Hypothes.is and the concept of OPEN – I’m going to spend some of this recounting the process by which Robin introduces these concepts. Lol – actually – considering this is live notetaking, it’ll just recount her presentation with comments embedded of my own.
She encourages her courses to write entirely in public – courses using twitter – etc.
Q- When are staff responsible for what their students put online?
Introducing the continuum of open: Robin talks about being on the extreme edge of open – what does it mean to encourage students to annotate Freud’s Anal Eroticism in the open. And… if you have access – check it out. Or you could use… groups.
Groups or… Entirely private.
Private. So if you don’t want your students commenting in public, well, put folks in a group. Helps with FAFSA etc. You can also use Hypothes.is entirely in private.
What do students say about Hypothes.is?
Robin presented a student piece, recounting the experience of using hypothesis.
She introduces “factual recall.” And the way to react to folks with articles like “10000 reasons why laptops in the classroom are the devil.”
Robin’s interested in the way that community arises out of the casual nature of the web. There’s a massive return in a joke in the margins of a web page. This is an affordance.
She opens her courses with “What is the problem with using screens in class?” Asking students how to best learn… A crowdsourced policy creation by students for students at the beginning of a course. “How might we best use technology in the classroom, for learning?”
Reading and thinking online as a political act.
from hypothesis kickstarter campaign – thinking about what has been done, what is no longer being done, and what has become problematic
Hypothesis as a tool for the dissemination of knowledge, to open up the locked-down nature of individual web sites. How do we communicate where we are not supposed to communicate? How do we examine, explore, and challenge knowledge as it exists?
Comments and questions on the video
Q – What about scholarly peer review? How do we balance expert peer review with democratic peer review?
A – Not currently a way to annotate in public such that others cannot… Or ways to see that certain individuals are experts on the pages. Mentions hypothesis flash mobs – where on say, 8pm on a Thursday you could bring together a group of Climate experts to annotate an article on climate change deniers.
Q – What about hypothesis as a space for harrassment?
More thoughts on ownership of webspace. If hypothesis is a layer on your site, is that a challenge to your webspace? Who is responsible for abuse?
— Robin DeRosa (@actualham) March 28, 2016
Follow this tweet chain if you’re interested. I see it in two ways. You could envision open annotation as a way to give voice to those who cannot speak: annotations on locked-down sites – spaces without comments. OR – you could envision open annotation as a new way to abuse folks.
Q – What about the author being annotated unknowingly?
Even happened to Robin. What is the infrastructure to get the annotations to the author?
How do you make the web eternally dialogic? How do you make everything conversational? How do you encourage conversation, network, and equity on the web?
And… how do you introduce these troubles with OPEN to students? She believes you have to introduce the pedagogical implications of this work. Teaching OPEN as PROCESS is vital.
And then – what is your opt-out policy? For privacy, safety, etc.
Awesome session. Interesting tool to “oo -oo – make notes online” but also to reconsider, challenge, and reflect on the political, ideological, communal implications of OPEN. Tools have ideologies. Not neutral. The algorithm carries assumptions within its affordances.