It seems like whenever I entertain the idea of closing up the blog an acquaintance mentions that s/he reads it regularly and enjoys it. I had two of those yesterday, which is also a bit of a coincidence considering I go months upon months without anyone mentioning this space.
Also, I noticed there was a huge dip in February according to the site’s Webalizer stats:

I have a feeling I wrote fewer posts in February, or I simply became 20% less interesting. Either that or the stats are somehow tied to the DOW. Not sure. It could also be that I have less time to read and comment on other people’s blogs, which often results in them checking in and commenting on my blog. And when I do get 10-15 minutes to tool around, I usually check out Facebook instead.
I will say, however, that when I find out people have been reading this space it makes me cringe, since the language here is sometimes sloppy at best. Some folks say that a blog is your public image, but I say that I post with speed in mind, since I don’t want this space to be more of a time-sink than it already is.
In other narcissistic news, I realized the other day that Google now offers my name as a suggestion if you get as far as typing “trent he” into the search box. 1880 results, apparently. Surely, fortune and super stardom can’t be far behind?
![]()
As a neurotic fledgling academic fearing that I will never land a tenure-track job, I’m always seeking out fertile areas for academic publishing and research that still meet my interests. After being in school for the better part of three years, I’m also learning that I’m not a stellar literary critic. I mean I’m decent, I can hold my own, but writing publishable academic papers is tough, tough stuff—as it should be.
I’m finding that I’m much more interested in pedagogical theory and the teaching of writing in general—this idea of how do you teach well, and how do you help students add complexity and nuance to their writing. I’m also finding that the issue of incorporating computing technology into the classroom is not nearly as straightforward as it may seem, as students have an overwhelming tendency to be unthinking consumers of technology without being critical users of technology. The push of course is to incorporate computers more and more into the curriculum, an idea that many old school academics shudder at. Many academics who welcome (or at least tolerate) this change encounter a lot of difficulties: students have a wide spread of knowledge and abilities when it comes to software, and of course there’s a difference between bringing computing into the classroom and doing it well.
This isn’t a new problem but it’s one that interests me a lot and I’m trying to carve out my own little niche here, where I can address this seemingly basic question: What are the best ways to incorporate computing technology into writing-centered courses? Will the same techniques and strategies work for composition, professional writing, and creative writing?
It seems like there’s a lot of wide open space with these questions, which should mean such research would be appropriate for conference presentations and even publication. Fingers crossed.
Current Mood: Procrastinating Reading | ![]()
5 Comments
Do you ever see students’ handwriting, or is most their work for you digitized?
Most of their work is printed and turned in or sometimes posted to our course discussion board or emailed. They also do in-class writing exercises, and I’ve stipulated whether these should be handwritten or typed (class is a tech-ready room with Macbooks available at a moment’s notice–it’s cool when things actually work and a train wreck when there are authentication problems with the campus wireless service).
On the whole, my awful handwriting matches or beats any of theirs so I can’t complain. Besides, I have to say (technophile that I am) that I prefer their handwritten responses the most. Word processing invites revision, practically demands it, where pen and paper makes it much more difficult. What I find fascinating (and I mean that sincerely) is having the ability to see both what they scratch out (either words or directions they were considering and decided to go somewhere else instead) and the order in which their thoughts came to them as they puzzled out the assignment. Word processing largely obliterates these compositional choices since cut/paste covers all tracks.
A name you will likely encounter (if you haven’t already), as you research the use of computers in education, is Roger Schank. He has been one of the leading thinkers in the field of cognitive science, pretty much since the field was founded, and has applied that expertise to (a) work on artificial intelligence, and (b) the use of computers & software in the educational process.
I took an intro-level class of his at Northwestern, and while he would probably argue that lecturing is a poor method of imparting knowledge, he was one of the more engaging lecturers I’ve had the pleasure of listening to.
Here’s a sample:
http://www.edge.org/documents/ThirdCulture/q-Ch.9.html
I have my RSS feed linked to your blog, so I can see when you post. But, when I see that you are only writing about soccer, I don’t read. Mostly, I like to see what you are reading/writing. ‘Cuz I’m a stalker like that.
Thanks Charles, I’ll check that out. The name doesn’t ring a bell but with the volume I’m reading, that doesn’t surprise me.
Sarah, the soccer is the best part!