This just arrived at the email address associated with my blog (rather than the email address associated with my university appointment):
Category Archives: Personal
Programming note.
Observant readers will have noticed that three of my last four posts — the ones sporting the spiffy Research Blogging icon — were posts discussing peer-reviewed journal articles. This is a substantially higher proportion of writing about the details of scholarly research than I normally feature on this blog.
But I think I’ve developed a taste for it.
Recent search strings to ponder.
Our online world is searchable, but it seems likely than not all of our searches are destined to be fruitful.
Here are some searches that have recently brought people to this blog:
Archetypal classroom moments.
Why is it that it’s not until you’re right in the middle of a class discussion, one where lots of people are actively engaged, asking good questions and raising important issues, and where you know that you are working against the clock to get all the contributions in, that you discover …
Grading tip: back to the drawing board.
The semester must be in full swing, because suddenly I have an abundance of papers to grade. So I’m using a brief pause (between grading one stack of papers and grading another stack of papers) to share a grading-aid I just figured out at the end of last semester.
Typically, by the time the stacks of papers come in, I have all kinds of other pieces of work-in-progress on my desk. I could put those away (and hope that I’ll remember where I put them when I’m done with the grading), or try to keep the papers I’m grading restricted to part of the desk. This never works that well, and the feeling of being cramped makes the actual grading painful enough that it’s hard to sit down and just get through it.
Also, the chances of coffee spilling on the student papers is pretty high.
My old alternative was to stick the papers to be graded on a clipboard and work away from the desk. This still involved a sense of being cramped, as I’d have to shuffle the papers I was grading and the grading rubric — your standard clipboard, after all, is just wide enough for your standard sheet of copier paper.
Well, last December, as I was hauling final exams into my office for grading, my gaze fell upon an item I’ve had in my office for a few years:
Anonymity, real names, and dialogue.
Matthew C. Nisbet put up a post today titled The Right Room for a Dialogue: New Policy on Anonymous Comments. In it, he writes:
I’ve long questioned the value of anonymous blogging or commenting. Much of the incivility online can be attributed to anonymity. And with a rare few exceptions, if you can’t participate in a dialogue about issues without using your full name and true identity, then what you have to say is probably not that valuable.
These long standing thoughts were called to mind again after reading a post by Andrew Revkin at Dot Earth. Quoting as the subject to his post a line from Monty Python “is this the right room for an argument?,” Revkin writes:
Michael Palin asked that question nearly 40 years ago on Monty Python’s Flying Circus, and it’s as germane as ever in considering the merits and drawbacks to blogging, and particularly the comment strings following posts. Often, the commentary here and elsewhere threatens to devolve into extended volleys of retorts, particularly when anonymous contributors are involved, some of whom are so relentless that their ideological foes sometimes allege they must be getting paid to do what they’re doing.
Revkin goes on to link to a column by Columbus Dispatch editor Benjamin Marrison who discusses the negative impact of anonymous commenters on the newspaper’s Web site. As Marrison observes of people who email the Dispatch or leave comments at stories: “Is it a coincidence that all of those civil people are reachable (and somewhat accountable) through a return e-mail?”
Matt then notes that he’ll be taking steps on his blog to end anonymous commenting.
Of course, it’s Matt’s prerogative to establish whatever sort of ground rules for commenting on his blog that he likes. However, the title of his post suggests that his aim, in moving to block anonymous commenting (and presumably pseudonymous commenting, although it’s not made explicit in the post) is to foster dialogue.
Blogiversary addendum.
Earlier today, I had this conversation with my better half.
Dr. Free-Ride’s better half: (with a look of deep concern) So, I saw something in your post today.
Dr. Free-Ride: Oh? (Wondering if a heinous typo got through cursory attempts at editing)
Some reflections on my fifth blogiversary.
Five years ago today, I put up the first post on a blog that was mean to capture the overflow of discussions and ideas from my “Ethics in Science” class. Back then, I wasn’t entirely sure that I’d manage to maintain the blog through the end of the semester.
It just goes to show you that you can’t always tell which of the things you try will become sustainable practices (although maybe the ones that don’t involve exercise equipment have better odds).
On the occasion of my fifth blogiversary, I’m reflecting on a question posed by BlogHer upon BlogHer’s 5th anniversary:
What are five opportunities you’ve gotten because of blogging?
An open letter
… to the student in my “Ethics in Science” course.
Today was our second class meeting, which is essentially the first real class meeting — the one in which, instead of just focusing on the overall arc of the course, and the assignments you’ll be doing, and the mechanics of finding the information you need on the course website, there was actual content to discuss.
Last-minute weekend plans.
It’s true that I recently returned from a fairly geeky conference, but I just found out about one happening practically in my backyard. And, given that I don’t yet have any papers to grade, I figured I should check it out.
(Today is the last day to register without paying the late registration fee, in case that helps you make up your mind.)
From the web page: