Read Web Writing final manuscript; forthcoming from U of Michigan Press
NOW AVAILABLE: The final manuscript of Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning may be freely read online or downloaded to your device at http://webwriting.trincoll.edu. This open-access scholarly book is forthcoming from the University of Michigan Press at Michigan Publishing, which will make the text available in paper (for sale) and online […]
Web Writing editorial team selects essays to advance to final manuscript
After reading and reflecting on more than a thousand comments from last fall’s open peer review, the Trinity College editorial team has selected nineteen essays to advance to the final manuscript of our open-access digital book, Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning, under contract with Michigan Publishing. This stage of […]
Web Writing reaches 1,000+ open peer review comments
Over 1,000 comments have been posted during the six-week open peer review phase of Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning, our digital book-in-progress under contract with Michigan Publishing. And more comments are still rolling in before the clock strikes midnight on October 30th, 2013. Thanks to everyone who generously contributed their […]
Counting down Web Writing open peer review – General comments welcome
We’re counting down the days remaining in the open peer review of our book-in-progress, Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning, which concludes at the end of Wednesday, October 30th, 2013. So far our readers have posted 675+ comments during the public developmental editing stage. In addition to offering page- or […]
Celebrate Open Access Week with Open Peer Review of Web Writing (675+ comments)
Open Access Week (October 21 – 27, 2013), now in its sixth year, is celebrated around the globe through events sponsored by academic institutions, research organizations, and funding agencies. Event organizers seek to promote open access to information, defined as “free, immediate online access to the results of scholarly research, and the right to use […]
THATCamp New England 2013 workshop: Open Peer Review and Publishing with CommentPress and PressBooks
Workshop abstract for THATCamp New England 2013 on October 18, 2013: This fall, over twenty authors publicly shared draft essays for a digital book-in-progress, Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning, under contract with Michigan Publishing. During the “open peer review” phase, four expert reviewers (commissioned by the press) and general readers have […]
Web Writing video conference, workshops, and 570 comments
Thanks to everyone who has participated in the open peer review of our digital book-in-progress, Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning, during the past month. Over 570 comments have been posted on the book to date, and two weeks remain until this phase ends on Oct 30th. Please email & share the […]
Web Writing: What’s the Buzz? Monday Oct 14th event at Trinity
Updated Oct 16th to add videos from the event Teaching and Learning with Web Writing: What’s the Buzz? Monday, October 14th, 2013 (Trinity Days) from 10 to 11:30am Open to the public at Gallows Hill, Trinity College, Hartford CT Join Trinity collaborators and essay contributors for a presentation and discussion of Web Writing: Why & How for Liberal Arts Teaching & […]
Web Writing on Dickinson College syllabus and Inside Higher Ed blog
While Web Writing is only a book in-progress, Professor Sarah Kersh has already assigned it to students at Dickinson College. The syllabus for her course, “Writing in and for Digital Environments,” emphasizes how “students will think about the stakes of writing in a range of digital environments — blogs, online forums, personal collections. . . as well […]
175 Comments during First Week of Web Writing Open Peer Review
While quality matters more than quantity, the combination is absolutely delightful. Last week we launched the open peer review phase of Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning, a digital book-progress under contract with Michigan Publishing. Between now and October 30th, 2013, four expert reviewers (commissioned by the publisher) and general […]
Recent Comments in this Document
March 25, 2014 at 2:33 pm
Also doesn’t permit original research…
See in context
March 25, 2014 at 2:30 pm
Academic encyclopedias are very different from Wikipedia, however, and it is crucial t make this distinction. One of Wikipedia’s core policies is that it only summarizes secondary research and does not offer original research.
See in context
March 25, 2014 at 2:26 pm
On re-reading this I’m fascinated by point 1. I agree that “Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.” As a long-time encyclopedia writer and now editor, however, I disagree with the parenthetical as applied generally to encyclopedias. Academic encyclopedias often are based on primary research; and interpretation is a form of a opinion. An informed form, but certainly a form.
See in context
March 25, 2014 at 2:24 pm
On re-reading this for my class, I can see that you definitely meant flushed. Sorry for the original misread!
See in context
March 25, 2014 at 2:19 pm
I just wanted to check in with an observation about how I am re-reading the essays that I’ve assigned in my grad seminar.
It’s tricky to figure out how to read when you have both the main article and the comments available, and you know there is a conversation about the essay going on in the comments. I seem to find myself reading the comments through first (including sometimes getting distracted by links embedded in them) and then going back to the essay. I’m not sure I would do it the same way if I hadn’t read the essays before. I’ve also noticed as I read the essays published in the Writing History in the Digital Age project volume that I miss the comments.
See in context
March 20, 2014 at 11:45 am
The editors invite you to revise & resubmit your essay, “Learning to Write at a Distance,” for the final draft of this volume. We agree with commenters who described your piece as a thought-provoking, playful, good read that challenged our assumptions about video games as tools for teaching writing in a liberal arts context. It’s a surprising, unconventional essay, and that’s what we like about it. Nevertheless, our readers offered many suggestions for ways to revise the next draft and to communicate your ideas more clearly with audiences who may be unfamiliar with the terrain.
First, based on your response to Amanda Seligman, we recommend that you draw out the meaning of the current title somewhere near the front of the essay, or change the title. Your second idea about “Writing Algorithmically” sounds mechanistic and doesn’t capture the spirit of “playing” that Barbara Fister described. On a related point, you may be helpful to draw out the introductory argument more clearly, based on Meredith Safran’s comment.
Second, as Jason Mittell and others suggested, tell us more about the course, what students learned, and the student project that exceeded your expectations. Paragraph 22 of the first draft disappointed our readers. Incorporating links to your syllabus and other learning materials would be an efficient way to do this within our word-count constraints.
We appreciate your responses to commenters during the open peer review, and hope that you can balance our request for further elaboration with the playful spirit of the original draft.
Oh, and can you do all of this in under 3,000 words? We bet you can.
The current draft word count is 2348 (as measured by WordPress), and the final version should not exceed 3000, so think carefully about making cuts as well as additions. The deadline for submitting your final draft is Thursday May 15th, though sooner is always better. This is a firm deadline, and if you do not meet it, we cannot guarantee that your essay will advance to the final volume. In the next few days, we will post further instructions on how to resubmit and edit your text in our PressBooks/WordPress platform.
See in context
March 20, 2014 at 10:29 am
Your essay, “How We Learned to Drop the Quiz,” has been accepted (with revisions) for the final draft of this volume. Our readers agreed that this was a strong, well-written piece that forced many of us to rethink our assumptions about the possibilities of teaching in an online asynchronous class. We also wish to highlight suggestions for revising your final draft.
First, as Jason Mittell recommended, it would be wise to clarify the argument in your introduction that multiple-choice quiz assessment did not align with your goal for historical thinking. Making this revision would avoid confusing readers who may believe that your essay argues against multiple-choice quizzes in all settings. See also comments by Meredith Safran and others.
Second, in your response to Kate Singer, you briefly described how learning also happens through digital back-channels, and it would be helpful to explain and show more of this to our readers, if relevant to your overall argument.
Third, in your response to Jason, you indicated that you may have some evidence on whether your higher-ed model is influencing how K-12 educators teach historical thinking to their students, and we encourage you to elaborate further on this, even if it is preliminary material.
Finally, several readers desired more background information about your students, how many began vs. completed this course, how much faculty time this method required, and definitions of terms that may not be familiar to all (such as asynchronous, back-channel, and iterative learning). Also, we realize that this essay relates to larger questions about online learning in higher ed, which are beyond its scope, but pointing readers to further reading would be appreciated.
The current draft word count is 3389 (as measured by WordPress), and the final version should not exceed 3500, so think carefully about making cuts as well as additions. The deadline for submitting your final draft is Thursday May 15th, though sooner is always better. This is a firm deadline, and if you do not meet it, we cannot guarantee that your essay will advance to the final volume. In the next few days, we will post further instructions on how to resubmit and edit your text in our PressBooks/WordPress platform.
See in context
March 20, 2014 at 9:49 am
Jason, as we have discussed, the editors have accepted your essay, “There Are No New Directions in Annotations” for the final volume, with the expectation that you will revise it in light of the comments received here.
The current draft word count is 2654 (as measured by WordPress), and the final version should not exceed 3000, so think carefully about making cuts as well as additions. The deadline for submitting your final draft is Thursday May 15th, though sooner is always better. This is a firm deadline, and if you do not meet it, we cannot guarantee that your essay will advance to the final volume. In the next few days, we will post further instructions on how to resubmit and edit your text in our PressBooks/WordPress platform.
See in context