Most current academic thinking dismisses the idea that genres are stable and essential categories, that we can determine what genre a work belongs to once and for all, and that doing so tells us all we need to know about the example in question. Instead, this new scholarship talks about what genres do rather than what genres are and describes the processes by which works get classified and reclassified over time.

When these categories are deployed as a system for regulating the production and distribution of culture, The publishing industry is misusing genre theory. As music critic Simon Frith notes, "genre maps change according to who they're for... A committed music fan will soon find, for example, that she's interested in sounds that fit into several categories at once and that different shops therefore shelve the same record under different labels.... It's as if a silent conversation is going on between the consumer, who knows roughly what she wants, and the shopkeeper, who is laboriously working out the pattern of shifting demands. What's certain is that I, like most other consumers, would feel quite lost to go to the store one day and find the labels gone – just a floor of CDS, arranged alphabetically."

So, for Frith, genre categories have some temporary use value in helping consumers find the music they want to hear. But those categories are also subject to recall and modification without notice and are often deployed in idiosyncratic ways, reflecting the personalities of the owners of different record shops or even the whims of the clerks who shelve particular titles. If you print the genres on the book jacket, you automatically limit their shelf life by restricting your ability to shuffle the pieces to reflect changing tastes and perceptions. The result will be as much bad business as bad art.

Of course, on the consumption side, we all adopt very idiosyncratic systems for shelving our books anyway: that's the pleasure of reading someone else's bookshelves as a map of their mind, displaying what things interest them and the perceived relationships between the parts.

You might think that this "shelving" metaphor for thinking about the cultural work of genres would break down quickly in a world where fewer and fewer books are purchased in brick-and-mortar bookshops and more and more of them are being bought online, where listings can be easily reconfigured, where the same book can be listed in an infinite number of categories.

Paradoxically, though, genres have had a tighter hold on our imagination in recent years as the range of cultural choice has broadened and audiences have fragmented. Film historian Rick Altman tells us that far from imposing rigid boundaries between genres, the old studio system depended on the idea that the same film could appeal to multiple audience segments at a time when pretty much everyone in the country went to the movies once or twice a week. Hollywood films rarely fit into some narrowly composed category: the same film had to appeal to men as well as women, the young as well as the old, by signaling different entertainment elements ("Comedy. Romance. Action. Exotic Locales. Singing. Dancing....")

Over the course of the 20th century, however, genre categories have become ever more specialized as media industries refine techniques for monitoring and targeting particular clusters of consumers. These more rigid and precise subgenres are the product of a more general tendency towards what anthropologist Grant McCracken calls "specification." Subcultures break down into smaller subcultures, niches become smaller niches in an eternal dance between our desire to differentiate ourselves from and affiliate ourselves with others who share our tastes. There are more different categories of books, records, and films than ever before; all that diversity produces an anxiety that is being met by more aggressive policing of boundaries. Using more sophisticated tools, media consumers are trying to find the "perfect choice," rather than taking for granted that a work designed for a general audience is going to contain some things we like and some things we don't.

And where the market doesn't impose such specifications, we add them ourselves. Catherine Tosenberger has argued that the best fan fiction is "unpublishable" in the sense that it operates across the genre categories, aesthetic norms, and ideological constraints that shape commercial publishing. Fans self-publish in order to step outside those filters. Yet, the fan community also imposes its own categories, which help readers find the "right story" through author's notes that tell us, for example, which "ships" (relationships between specified pairs of characters) are being explored, offer a rough sense of their sexual explicitness or emotional tone, warn us about vexing themes, and so forth. And if you read the letters of comment, there's enormous anger directed at any writer who asks a reader to read a story that doesn't deliver what was promised and, even worse, gives them something they didn't ask for.

All of this focus on using genres to classify and shelve works assumes that we know where one genre ends and another begins and that genre works stay where we put them. Genres may be optical illusions, which come and go like mirages, depending on the ways we look at the texts in question.

In one formulation, genre classifications offer reading hypothesis: we start a book with the assumption that it will follow a certain path; we read it "as" a mystery or as a romance or as a fantasy, and as we do so, we look for those elements that match our expectations: depending on our starting point, we may notice some things or ignore them, make certain predictions or avoid them, value or reject certain elements, form or dismiss certain interpretations. Start from a different hypothesis and you will have a different experience.

Some critics are rereading familiar texts through alternative logics: so, for example, queer cultural critic Alex Doty has made the case for The Wizard of Oz as a power struggle between butch and femme lesbians, Jason Mittell has read the HBO series The Wire as a video game, and Linda Williams reads pornography in relation to Hollywood musicals. Might we see such essays as interstitial criticism?

For some readers, there is a certain pleasure in playing a game where all the parts match our templates (much as a sparrow feels more like a bird than an ostrich does). For other readers, there may be a pleasure in the unanticipated or the indeterminate. Let's hear it for the duck-billed platypus!

Tzvetan Todorov has talked about the "fantastic" as playing with this uncertainty about classification. For instance, most ghost stories create a special pleasure from our uncertainty about whether we are supposed to believe there really are ghosts or whether we are to come up with a natural, logical, real-world explanation for the events. The pleasure, he says, is in toggling between multiple interpretations, not knowing what kind of story we are reading: there was a ghost; the narrator was crazy; or in the Scooby-Doo version, it was all a scheme by the guy who runs the old amusement park.

Even when we kinda knew where the ghost story was going, the process of hiding and unveiling can be as much darn fun as a good old fashion striptease. What if we were to imagine the interstitial as another kind of indeterminacy, one that flits between genres in the same way that the fantastic flickers between levels of reality. Maybe this is what Heinz Insu Fenkel is getting at when he writes, "Interstitial works make the reader (or listener, or viewer) more perceptive and more attentive; in doing so, they make the reader's world larger, more interesting, more meaningful, and perhaps even more comprehensible. The reader, who has been seeing black-and-white, suddenly begins not only to see color, but to learn how to see other colors."

Just as there are systems of cultural production where audiences express confusion if a work straddles genres, there are others where artists thrive upon and audiences anticipate mixing and matching genre elements. Take for example the so-called "masala films" that come out of the Bollywood film industry in India and are popular across Asia, Africa, and increasingly the west. The same film might move between historical and contemporary settings, might mix comedy and melodrama, might follow an intense (and disturbing) action sequence with a musical number, might mix the most sudsy romance with social uplift and political reform, and might acknowledge both Hindu and Islamic traditions. The descriptor "masala" refers to a mixture of spices used in Indian cooking. Just as one would be disappointed if an Indian dish only contained one spice, the Bollywood spectator would be disappointed if a Hindi film contained only one genre.

We are seeing greater cultural churn as more and more works move across national borders, get picked up by new artists and audiences, get combined in new ways, paving the way for nouvelle culture in the same way that the global availability of spices and ingredients has led many of our best chiefs to experiment with radical departures from and reinventions of traditional cuisines. The anthropologist Renato Rosaldo has contrasted a classic understanding of cultures as so many exhibits in an ethnographic museum with a more contemporary notion of cultures as garage sales, where people push, pull, and paw over other people's used stuff before taking it home, trying it on for size, and altering it to suit their needs.

Many young American consumers are using the web in search of Korean dramas, Japanese anime, Latin American telenovelas, or Bollywood films, anything that takes them outside the parochialism of their own culture. The result really does defy any classification: look at something like Tears of the Black Tiger which starts as a classic Thai novel, throws in a little opera, adds a much more intense color palette, and tells the man's story as a western and the woman's story as a '50s style melodrama to suggest that the two protagonists are living in different worlds.

Globalization is simply one of a number of forces which are breaking down the tyranny of genre classifications and paving the way for experimentation within popular storytelling. In his book Everything Bad is Good For You, Steven Johnson makes the argument that the most popular forms of entertainment today are popular because they make demands on our attention and cognition. For example, a television show like Lost, one of the top ratings successes of the past decade, demonstrates a level of complexity that would have been unimaginable on American television a few decades ago; with its large scale ensemble casts of characters, its flashes forwards and backwards in time, its complex sets of puzzles and enigmas, its moral ambiguities and shifting alliances, but also its uncertain and unpredictable relationship to existing television genres.

If we knew what the operative genre model was, we might figure out what's really happening on the island, but without such a clear mapping, we remain pleasurably lost. Such dramas thrive in part because they support robust internet communities where readers gather online to compare notes, debate interpretations, trace references, and otherwise have fun talking with each other. Its interstitial qualities are essential to Lost's success, even as they account for why other viewers got frustrated and gave up on the series convinced that it was never going to add up to anything anyway.

Lost illustrates another tendency in contemporary popular culture towards what I call transmedia storytelling. Lost is not simply a story or even a television series; Lost is a world that can support many different characters and many different stories that unfold across multiple media platforms. As these stories move across media platforms, Lost also often moves across genres: not unlike early novels, which might be constituted through mock letters, journals, and diaries, these new stories may mock e-mail correspondence, interviews, documents, websites, news magazine stories, advertisements, computer games, puzzles, cyphers, and a range of other materials which help make its world feel more real to the reader. These transmedia works will add a whole new meaning to the concept of interstitial arts.

So, to borrow from Charles Dickens (who borrowed from everyone else in his own time), this is the best of times and the worst of times for the interstitial arts. In such a world, the interstitial thrives and it withers. It finds receptive audiences and harsh critics. It gratifies and grates. It inspires and confuses. Above all, it gives us something to talk about. It opens us up to a world where nothing is what it seems and where little belongs, at least in the narrow sense of the term. We're going Out There!

What happens next is in your hands. Read. Enjoy. Debate. Tell your friends. But also create. Write. Appropriate. Remix. Transform. Just leave your cookie cutters and jelly molds at home. We can figure out what shelf this belongs on later.

 

Bibliography

Ellen Kushner, "The Interstitial Arts Foundation: An Introduction," in Nebula Awards® Showcase 2005, edited by Jack Dann (ROC/PenguinPutnam, March 2005), http://www.interstitialarts.org/essays/kushner_iaf_an_introduction.php

Delia Sherman, "An Introduction to Interstitial Arts: Life on the Border," http://www.interstitialarts.org/what/intro_toIA.html

Susan Stinson, "Cracks," http://www.interstitialarts.org/what/reflectionStinson.html

Mikhail Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination (University of Texas, 1982).

Heinz Insu Fenkl, "The Interstitial DMZ," http://www.interstitialarts.org/why/the_interstitial_dmz_1.html

Barth Anderson, "The Prickly, Tricky, Ornery Multiverse of Interstitial Art," http://www.interstitialarts.org/what/reflectionAnderson.html

Simon Frith, Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music (Harvard University Press, 1998).

Rick Altman, Film/Genre (British Film Institute, 1999).

Grant McCracken, Plenitude 2.0: Culture by Commotion (Periph: Fluide, 1998).

Catherine Tossenberger, Potterotics: Harry Potter Fan Fiction on the Internet, Dissertation, University of Florida, 2007.

Alex Doty, Flaming Classics: Queering the Film Canon (Routledge, 2000).

Jason Mittell, "All in the Game: The Wire, Serial Storytelling and Procedural Logic," in Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Pat Harrigan, Third Person: Authoring and Exploring Vast Narratives (MIT Press, 2009).

Linda Williams, Hard Core: Power, Pleasure, and the "Frenzy of the Visible" (University of California Press, 1999).

Tzvetan Todorov, The Fantastic: A Structural Approach to a Literary Genre (Cornell University Press, 1975).

Renato Rosaldo, Culture and Truth: The Reworking of Social Analysis (Beacon Press, 1993).

Charles Vess, "Interstitial Visual Arts: An Impossible Marriage of Materials," http://www.interstitialarts.org/what/marriage_of_materials.html

Steven Johnson, Everything Bad is Good for You (Riverhead, 2006).

Kristin Thompson, Breaking the Glass Armor: Neoformalist Film Analysis (Princeton University Press, 1988).

John Caughie, Theories of Authorship: A Reader (Routledge, 1981).

Peter J. Rabinowitz, "The Turn of the Glass Key: Popular Fiction as Reading Strategy," Critical Inquiry, March 1985.

The latest volume in Springer’s CSCL book series is: Stahl, G. (2009) "Studying Virtual Math Teams", Springer, 626 pages.

It is a comprehensive, integrated report on a major CSCL research effort, including chapters by 29 authors from the project team and 10 collaborating centers.

It includes sections on project philosophy, pedagogy and technology; interaction analysis; methodology; software design; interaction representations; and theory.

This is a follow-up to Stahl, G. (2006) "Group Cognition: Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge", MIT Press, 510 pages—carrying out the kinds of development, interventions, analysis and theory building proposed there.

You can download the book’s table of contents from http://GerryStahl.net/vmt/book/svmttoc.pdf or a flyer with order form from http://GerryStahl.net/vmt/book/svmtflyer.pdf.

The book is available in hardback and ebook (including as individual chapters) from Springer Press (http://www.springer.com/education/learning+%26+instruction/book/978-1-4419-0227-6) with a 25% discount for ISLS members, or order from Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Studying-Virtual-Computer-Supported-Collaborative-Learning/dp/1441902279) to save shipping and tax.

The latest volume in Springer’s CSCL book series is: Stahl, G. (2009) "Studying Virtual Math Teams", Springer, 626 pages.

It is a comprehensive, integrated report on a major CSCL research effort, including chapters by 29 authors from the project team and 10 collaborating centers.

It includes sections on project philosophy, pedagogy and technology; interaction analysis; methodology; software design; interaction representations; and theory.

This is a follow-up to Stahl, G. (2006) "Group Cognition: Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge", MIT Press, 510 pages—carrying out the kinds of development, interventions, analysis and theory building proposed there.

You can download the book’s table of contents from http://GerryStahl.net/vmt/book/svmttoc.pdf or a flyer with order form from http://GerryStahl.net/vmt/book/svmtflyer.pdf.

The book is available in hardback and ebook (including as individual chapters) from Springer Press (http://www.springer.com/education/learning+%26+instruction/book/978-1-4419-0227-6) with a 25% discount for ISLS members, or order from Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Studying-Virtual-Computer-Supported-Collaborative-Learning/dp/1441902279) to save shipping and tax.

As it enters its fifth year of publication, ijCSCL has learned that it has been selected for coverage in Thomson Reuters products and services (formerly ISI). Beginning with V. 3 (1) 2008, ijCSCL will be indexed and abstracted in the Web of Science under the following categories:
• Social Sciences Citation Index®/Social Scisearch®
• Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition
• Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences
Since the journal was accepted starting with 2008 the first Impact Factor will be calculated for 2010, which will be published in June 2011.

This is the most prestigious form of indexing for academic journals. Universities and other institutions in many countries consider journals indexed by ISI to be top-rank publications in matters of tenure and promotion. It is rare for new journals to be accepted for indexing so quickly. ijCSCL has been considered the logical place to publish major contributions to the field of CSCL ever since it was founded by the CSCL community in 2006. However, now, the decision by ISI should mean that scholars working in the broader field will—even more than in the past—consider ijCSCL to be a premier publication venue.

ISI’s announcement is not only a tribute to the Editorial Board and many other reviewers who have worked hard to guide authors to meet high standards of academic publication. It is also due to the authors who took the risk to publish in a new journal and the readers who have subscribed through ISLS and supported the journal.

More than anything else, the journal’s increased stature is a clear and direct reflection of the maturing of the field of CSCL. The history of the field can be traced to a workshop in Maratea, Italy, in 1989. The establishment of a regular biannual CSCL conference in 1995 defined a persistent research community. With the 2001 conference in Maastricht and the 2005 conference in Taipei, as well as the founding of ISLS as a supporting institution, the community became self-consciously international and permanent. The Springer CSCL book series and the Springer ijCSCL journal provide crucial publication outlets specifically founded for this field.

As it enters its fifth year of publication, ijCSCL has learned that it has been selected for coverage in Thomson Reuters products and services (formerly ISI). Beginning with V. 3 (1) 2008, ijCSCL will be indexed and abstracted in the Web of Science under the following categories:
• Social Sciences Citation Index®/Social Scisearch®
• Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition
• Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences
Since the journal was accepted starting with 2008 the first Impact Factor will be calculated for 2010, which will be published in June 2011.

This is the most prestigious form of indexing for academic journals. Universities and other institutions in many countries consider journals indexed by ISI to be top-rank publications in matters of tenure and promotion. It is rare for new journals to be accepted for indexing so quickly. ijCSCL has been considered the logical place to publish major contributions to the field of CSCL ever since it was founded by the CSCL community in 2006. However, now, the decision by ISI should mean that scholars working in the broader field will—even more than in the past—consider ijCSCL to be a premier publication venue.

ISI’s announcement is not only a tribute to the Editorial Board and many other reviewers who have worked hard to guide authors to meet high standards of academic publication. It is also due to the authors who took the risk to publish in a new journal and the readers who have subscribed through ISLS and supported the journal.

More than anything else, the journal’s increased stature is a clear and direct reflection of the maturing of the field of CSCL. The history of the field can be traced to a workshop in Maratea, Italy, in 1989. The establishment of a regular biannual CSCL conference in 1995 defined a persistent research community. With the 2001 conference in Maastricht and the 2005 conference in Taipei, as well as the founding of ISLS as a supporting institution, the community became self-consciously international and permanent. The Springer CSCL book series and the Springer ijCSCL journal provide crucial publication outlets specifically founded for this field.

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (ijCSCL)
Volume 5, Number 1, March 2010

The CSCL field matures
Gerry Stahl * Friedrich Hesse

A framework for conceptualizing, representing and analyzing distributed interaction
Daniel D. Suthers * Nathan Dwyer * Richard Medina * Ravi Vatrapu

Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state-of-the-art
Oliver Scheuer * Frank Loll * Niels Pinkwart * Bruce M. McLaren

Exploring whether students' use of labeling depends upon the type of online activity
Eva Bures * Philip C. Abrami * Richard F. Schmid

Towards a dialectic relation between the results in CSCL: Three critical methodological aspects of content analysis schemes
Marc Clara * Teresa Mauri

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (ijCSCL)
Volume 5, Number 1, March 2010

The CSCL field matures
Gerry Stahl * Friedrich Hesse

A framework for conceptualizing, representing and analyzing distributed interaction
Daniel D. Suthers * Nathan Dwyer * Richard Medina * Ravi Vatrapu

Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state-of-the-art
Oliver Scheuer * Frank Loll * Niels Pinkwart * Bruce M. McLaren

Exploring whether students' use of labeling depends upon the type of online activity
Eva Bures * Philip C. Abrami * Richard F. Schmid

Towards a dialectic relation between the results in CSCL: Three critical methodological aspects of content analysis schemes
Marc Clara * Teresa Mauri

The following letter to the editor was printed in The Hoboken Reporter (11/14/09), a local paper in Hoboken, NJ. The letter can also be found on line by clicking HERE. The letter raises some very interesting issues around school uniforms and public education. I would recommend anyone wanting a better idea of the legal issues centering around this issue to visit a posting by David L. Hudson Jr, a First Amendment scholar. He has published a nice summary article on the topic entitled: "Clothing, dress codes, and uniforms"
A quick summary of the issues is that many school districts have turned to dress codes and uniforms to promote a better learning environment. They argue that these policies decrease tensions, reduce socio-economic differences and enhance safety. Others contend these dress codes are merely Band-Aid solutions that do not improve safety. Further, they charge that these policies infringe on students’ First Amendment rights of free expression.

The courts have divided over how to resolve dress-code disputes and reached different results. The legal landscape remains muddled over dress codes and uniforms. -Dr. Petrosino

----------------------

Dear Editor:

Over the past few weeks, there has been renewed talk about school uniforms. Admittedly, there is much room for improvement in the Hoboken Public Schools. Hallmarks of successful schools usually include high expectations of students and teachers, a rigorous curriculum, and a sense of community, or belonging among the student body and faculty. The implementation of a school uniform policy does nothing to address these factors. Bringing up this tired band-aid of a solution is administrative laziness masquerading as educational policy. Let’s look at the facts

1. There is NO conclusive evidence of advantages of school uniforms in terms of reduced school violence or gang related problems. Nor do statistics prove that uniforms increase academic achievement. Supporters who promote uniforms are using misleading statistics. Moreover, these problems are deeply rooted and far beyond the scope of any uniform policy.

2. School uniforms DO NOT save families money. Making a kids’ current school wardrobe obsolete for school brings on additional expense. School uniforms also bring on additional administrative and legal costs for schools, which ultimately we would all have to pay for. 

3. The opinion of the American Civil Liberties Union is that school uniform policies do violate First Amendment rights.

4. A mandatory school uniform policy stifles freedom of expression. Our society already has enough drones who continue making the mistakes of our predecessors. We need to foster creativity and independent thinking. We are obligated to provide an environment where children openly express their opinions and learn tolerance for the opinions of others.

Allowing kids to decide what to wear to school gives them the opportunity to develop decision-making skills and take responsibility for their choices in life. Schools can be happy, successful, peaceful places without uniforms. The proposal of mandatory school uniforms is a passive approach to solving some of the problems that plague our schools. Skeptical parents have every right to wonder whom on the Hoboken Board of Education or the new administration has ties to the uniform company.

There is much to be lauded in the Hoboken Public Schools. As the parents of two sons who have attended Hoboken Public Schools for the past 17 years, we can say that we have seen progress on a number of fronts. But sometimes it seems as if for every step forward, we take two steps backward. Implementing a policy of mandatory school uniforms would definitely be a step backwards. More often than not the causes for these backwards steps include a.) Board of Education politics and b.) An ever changing cast of administrators including the superintendent. For once, let’s actually put our children first and (with some parental involvement) trust them to make the right decisions.
Danny and Caroline Schott

Picture: The Hoboken Terminal, built in 1907, is a two-story Beaux-Arts structure designed by Kenneth Murchison, an architect with the firm of McKim, Mead & White, which designed the original Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan. The picture features the original Tower which was demolished in 1950.  The entire structure sits over water on a steel and concrete foundation, accommodating six ferry slips and fourteen rail lines. The individually roofed train shed arches are an innovative design by Bush. The entire structure is sheathed in copper.

Anne Smith’s English Literature class recently discussed Act III of Hamlet with Debi Ohayon’s AP class. Not that unusual, perhaps, except that Anne’s class is here at Arapahoe in Centennial, Colorado, and Debi’s class is at The Lovett School in Atlanta, Georgia.

Anne tweeted out that she was looking for classes that might be interested in interacting with her class around Hamlet, and Laura Deisley – who’s the Director of 21st Century Learning at Lovett (great job title, btw) – responded that she knew a teacher that might be interested. Anne’s students are pretty comfortable using the fishbowl with live blogging method of discussing a book, but we wondered if we could make it work with two inner circles, one in Anne’s classroom and one in Debi’s classroom in Atlanta. As Laura writes:
after some traditional back and forth emailing and a Skype conference call, Anne, Karl, Upper School English Department Chair Debi Ohayon and I settled on a collaboration: two joint classroom Skype and live blog sessions on Hamlet.So, one inner circle of discussers in Anne’s classroom, and an outer circle of live bloggers. One inner circle of discussers in Debi’s classroom, and an outer circle of live bloggers. One Skype connection so the two classes could see (sort of) and hear (most of the time) each other and have an oral discussion. One CoverItLive blog so that the outer circles could discuss via live blogging. While the technology wasn’t perfect (pretty wide shot with the webcams and at times the audio broke up a little, but the students just asked each other to repeat what they said), it worked pretty well (see Anne's post for pictures from her classroom). As Anne writes:
Debi’s students rose to the challenge that the technology and new discussion method presented, and my students didn’t back down when discussing Hamlet with an advanced placement class. Both sides walked away commenting about how great it was to hear different points of view than from the students in their own class.And, on Laura’s blog, Debi reflects that:
Boy, am I glad my curiosity or sense of duty or both propelled me forward, as it has been a thrill to watch this pilot project become reality, despite the time commitment, logistical challenges, and alterations of my syllabus. The excitement that both my students and I have felt being pioneers as well as participants in a joint classroom experience across the country has been enormous. As Laura suggested, just the concept of kids in the 21st century talking in different time zones about an early 17th century text is intriguing. It's certainly not just about the fun (though it is really fun); the students agree that the Skype/LiveBlog shared classroom has enriched their learning experience. Meredith captured this sentiment today in class during our feedback session when she said, "We got to branch out beyond our own classroom and discuss similar ideas as well as gain insight about other ideas from students we didn't know." Furthermore, Mark said, "It was not only a blast, but a highly intellectual experience that I will always remember." I know many educators fear technology being pushed for the wrong reasons, but I'm quite convinced this was an example of technology enhancing pedagogical goals.We’re going to do this again on December 9th (over the entire play) and it will be interesting to see if it goes even better. I expect it will, as we’ll probably position the microphones a little better and certainly the students will have more experience under their belts and should be more comfortable with the format.

I think this was not only a valuable experience in terms of students learning about Hamlet, but also because of the sense of community that it engenders. As Debi said:
I'm pretty certain that the something special was a uniquely communal learning environment. Since I also have a personal invested interest in character education, I would be remiss not to note as a bonus what a delight it was to see teenagers from different parts of the country, representing both public and private schools, using literature to discuss timeless, universal moral issues.Yeah, it was a good day.

The Risky Behaviors and Online Safety track of the Youth and Media Policy Working Group Initiative at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University is creating a Compendium of youth-based Internet safety programs and interventions. We are requesting organizations, institutions, and individuals working in online youth safety to share descriptions of their effective programs and interventions that address risky behavior by youth online. We are particularly interested in endeavors that involve educators, social services, mentors and coaches, youth workers, religious leaders, law enforcement, mental health professionals, and those working in the field of public or adolescent health.

• More information can be found at: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/research/digitalnatives/policy/safetycfp
• Submission Deadline: December 21, 2009
• Submission Length: 2-5 pages
• Send Submission to: ymps-submissions@cyber.law.harvard.edu

Program descriptions will be made publicly available. Exemplary programs will be spotlighted to policy makers, educators, and the public so that they too can learn about different approaches being tried and tested. Submissions also will be used to inform recommendations for future research and program opportunities.
Submissions should be documentations of solutions, projects, or initiatives that address at least one of the following four areas being addressed:

• Sexual solicitation of and sex crimes involving minors
  
• Bullying or harassment of minors
  
• Access to problematic or illegal content (including pornographic and violent content)
  
• Youth-generated problematic or illegal content (including sexting and self-harm sites)

We are especially keen to highlight projects that focus on underlying problems, risky youth behavior, and settings where parents cannot be relied upon to help youth. The ideal solution, project, or initiative will be grounded in research-driven knowledge about the risks youth face rather than generalized beliefs about online risks. Successful endeavors will most likely recognize that youth cannot simply be protected, but must be engaged as active agents in any endeavor that seeks to help youth.

Please forward this call along to any organizations and individuals you think would be able to share information about their successful experiences and programs.

Should you have any questions, please contact us: ymps-submissions@cyber.law.harvard.edu.

safety youth internet bullying harassment

Lawrence Lessig (now at Harvard) has another thoughtful presentation regarding copyright that he gave at EDUCAUSE 2009. He makes a compelling case about how "things have changed" but that our copyright laws have not kept up with those changes. In the past, "copyright had a tiny role." He quotes Jessica Litman:

At the turn of the century [the last century, not this one], U.S. copyright law was technical, inconsistent, and difficult to understand, but it didn't apply to very many people or very many things. If one were an author or publisher of books, maps, charts, paintings, sculpture, photographs or sheet music, playwrite or producer of plays, or a printer, the copyright law bore on one's business. Booksellers, piano-roll and phonograph record publishers, motion picture producers, musicians, scholars, members of Congress, and ordinary consumers could go about their business without ever encountering a copyright problem.

Ninety years later, the U.S. copyright law is even more technical, inconsistent and difficult to understand; more importantly, it touches everyone and everything. In the intervening years, copyright has reached out to embrace much of the paraphernalia of modern society. The current copyright statute weighs in at 142 pages. Technology, heedless of law, has developed modes that insert multiple acts of reproduction and transmission - potentially actionable events under the copyright statute - into commonplace daily transactions. Most of us can no longer spend even an hour [emphasis Lessig's] without colliding with the copyright law.Please note that he is not arguing to abolish copyright in this presentation, but that it needs "to be radically changed in important ways."

It's a full sixty minutes, and the money part for educators is at the end, but I think it's well worth your time. He's said it before, but the part that always gets me the most is when he talks about how our students (children) are "living in an age of prohibitions" and that they "live life against the law," and what that will mean for how they grow and develop if we don't find a way to change that.

I had the opportunity last week to participate along with the amazing Jim Burke from English Companion in an Education Week/Teacher Magazine chat on Social Networking and Teacher Professional Development. I hope some people found it useful and I appreciate the folks at Education Week/Teacher Magazine that put this together. None of the rest of this post is meant to disparage those folks, but simply to ask the question: What makes a chat a chat?

We used CoverItLive for this and Jim and I were fed questions throughout the hour long chat. People in the chat submitted a question, the moderator decided which questions to put through, and Jim and I responded (toward the end of the chat a few comments/thoughts were approved, not just questions, but for most of the chat it was just questions). So this seemed to end up being more of a moderated "panel" discussion than what I think of as a "chat." For most of the hour it was just Jim and I responding to questions, which is not exactly what I think of when I think of chat. Some people on Twitter noted the same thing, expressing some frustration that their questions/comments/thoughts were not getting approved.

As it was happening, I felt myself becoming frustrated as well that it wasn't truly a "discussion" as I've come to expect it. As I was thinking about it later, however, I began wondering exactly how I would've structured it that it would've been any better. My natural inclination was to suggest that it should've just been an unmoderated chat, or at least a moderated chat where every on-topic comment was immediately approved. But, with a large audience (apparently over a thousand people at least asked for email reminders of the event), I'm thinking that wouldn't work so well. So I'm guessing that the format they chose was actually not a bad choice, but perhaps I would've chosen not to call it "chat."

Which brings me to the point(s) of this post:

• What exactly makes a chat a chat?
• How many people can be in a chat before it no longer works?
• What's the best format for these Education Week/Teacher Magazine "chats" that have large audiences? And is there a different tool than CoveritLive they could use that might work better?
• Are there ways to meet the needs of diverse participants - some of whom are used to very fast and furious chats and some of whom are not? Or do we simply have to create different events for different online learning styles (keeping in mind that people's styles might change with experience)?

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

Last January, I wrote the following essay to run as the foreword for a recently published collection of short fiction -- Interfictions 2: An Anthology of Interstitial Writing -- which was edited by an old friend, Delia Sherman. The essay offers my explanation of what we mean by "interstitial writing" and my exploration of the deforming and informing value of genre in contemporary storytelling. Over the next installments, I will also be featuring an interview with Delia about her goals for the book and an interview with some of the contributors about their relationship to the genre conventions of popular fiction. I am hoping that this series of posts will serve to introduce readers of this blog to the work of the Interstitial Arts Foundation, a really wonderful group of writers and thinkers, who are on the frontiers of contemporary popular fiction.

This pendant, inspired by my introductory essay, was produced by artist Mia Nutick as part of an auction being organized around the book. For more, see http://iafauctions.com/

On the Pleasures of Not Belonging
Henry Jenkins, 2009

(Note: The following essay appeared as the introduction to Interfictions 2, the recently-released anthology of interstitial fiction from the Interstitial Arts Foundation.)

"Please accept my resignation. I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member."– Groucho Marx

Let's start with some basic premises:

1. I do not belong in this book.
2. The contributors also do not belong.
3. You, like Groucho Marx, wouldn't want to belong even if you could. Otherwise, you probably wouldn't have picked up this book in the first place.

Let me explain. The editors of most anthologies seek stories which "fit" within prescribed themes, genres, and topics; the editors of this book have gone the opposite direction – seeking stories that don't fit anywhere else, stories that are as different from each other as possible. And that's really cool if the interstitial is the kind of thing you are into.

At the heart of the interstitial arts movement (too formal), community (too exclusive), idea (too idealistic?), there is the simple search for stories that don't rest comfortably in the cubbyholes we traditionally use to organize our cultural experiences. As Ellen Kushner puts it, "We're living in an age of category, of ghettoization – the Balkanization of Art! We should do something." That "something" is, among the other projects of the Interstitial Arts Foundation, the book you now hold in your hands.

Asked to define interstitial arts, many writers fall back on spatial metaphors, talking about "the wilderness between genres" (Delia Sherman), "art that falls between the cracks" (Susan Simpson), or "a chink in a fence, a gap in the clouds, a DMZ between nations at war" (Heinz Insu Fenkel). Underlying these spatial metaphors is the fantasy of artists and writers crawling out from the boxes which so many (their publishers, agents, readers, marketers, the adolescent with the piercings who works at the local Borders) want to trap them inside. Such efforts to define art also deform the imagination, not simply of authors, but also of their readers.

All genre categories presume ideal readers, people who know the conventions and secret codes, people who read them in the "right way." Many of us – female fans of male action shows, adult fans of children's books, male fans of soap operas – read and enjoy things we aren't supposed to and we read them for our own reasons, not those proposed by marketers. We don't like people snatching books from our hands and telling us we aren't supposed to be reading them.

One of the reasons I don't belong in this book is that I'm an academic, not a creative artist, and let's face it, historically, academics have been the teachers and enforcers of genre rules. The minute I tell you that I have spent the last twenty years in a Literature department, you immediately flash on a chalkboard outline of Aristotle's Poetics or a red pen correcting your muddled essay on the four-act structure. Throughout the twentieth century, many of us academic types were engaged in a prolonged project of categorizing and classifying the creative process, transforming it to satisfy our needs to generate lecture notes, issue paper topics, and grade exam questions. After all, academics are trapped in our own imposed categories ("disciplines" rather than "genres") which often constrain what we can see, what we can say, and who we can say it to. Academics are "disciplined" through our education, our hiring process, our need to 'publish or perish', and our tenure and promotion reviews. Most academics read or think little outside their field of study. As Will Rogers explained, "there's nothing so foolish as an educated man once you take him out of the field he was educated in."

I may gain a little sympathy from you, dear reader, if I note that for those twenty years, I was a cuckoo's egg – a media and popular culture scholar in a literature department – and that I am finally flying the coop, taking up an interdisciplinary position at a different institution, because I could never figure out the rules shaping my literature colleagues' behavior.

Many literature professors may hold "genre fiction" in contempt as "rule driven" or "formula-based" yet they ruthlessly enforce their own genre conventions: look at how science fiction gets taught, keeping only those authors already in the canon (Mary Shelly, H.G. Wells, Margaret Atwood, Thomas Pynchon), adding a few more who look like what we call "literature" (William Gibson, Octavia Butler, Philip K. Dick), and then, running like hell as far as possible from any writer whose work still smells of "pulp fiction." Here, "literature" is simply another genre or cluster of genres (the academic mid-life crisis, the coming of age story, the identity politics narrative), one defined every bit as narrowly as the category of films which might get considered for a Best Picture nomination. I never had much patience with the criteria by which my colleagues decided which works belonged in the classroom and which didn't.

What I love about the folks who have embraced interstitial arts is that some of them do comics, some publish romances, some compose music, some write fantasy or science fiction, but all of them are perfectly comfortable thinking about things other than their areas of specialization. In that sense, I do very much belong in this collection as a kindred spirit, a fellow traveler, both phrases that signal someone who does and does not fit into some larger movement. Maybe we can go to each other's un-birthday parties and not belong together.

To be sure, academics are not, as Buffy would put it, "the big bad." We may have gotten inside your head but with a little mental discipline, you can shove us right back out again. Most interstitial artists ritually burned their old course notebooks years ago. They started to write the stories they wanted to be able to read, only to be told by their publisher that their book would sell much more quickly if it could be positioned into this publishing category for this intended audience and to achieve that you just need to cut back on this, expand on that, and add a little more of this other thing. I often picture James Stewart in Vertigo gradually redressing, restyling, and redesigning Kim Novak's entire identity, all the while creepily asserting that it really shouldn't make that much difference to her. That's the process those of us who sympathize with the concept of interstitial arts are trying to battle back into submission or at least push back long enough so that we can demonstrate that there are readers out there, a few of us, who want the stuff that doesn't really fit into fixed genres, though it may bear some faint family resemblance to several of them at once. Viva the mutts and the mongrels! Long live the horses of a different color!

So, you are now about to enter the Twilight Zone, where nothing your freshmen literature teacher taught you applies, where we eat with the wrong forks and wear white shoes after Labor Day. But it doesn't mean that academic genre theory has nothing to contribute to our efforts as readers and writers to step across the ice floes and navigate the shifting sands of the interstitial. For the next few pages, I will be proposing a more contemporary account of how genre works in an era where so many of us are mixing and matching our preferences and defying established categories. The work of genre is changing as we speak – in some ways becoming more constraining, in others more liberating – and genre theorists are rethinking old assumptions to reflect the flux in the way culture operates.

To start with Genre Theory 101, all creative expression involves an unstable balance between invention and convention. If a work is pure invention, it will be incomprehensible – like writing a novel without using any recognizable language. Don't worry: a work that is pure invention is only a theoretical possibility. None of us, in the end, is all that original; we borrow (often undigested) bits and pieces from the already written and the already read; we all construct new works through appropriation and transformation of existing materials. As Michel Bakhtin explains, we don't take our words out of the dictionary; we rip them from other people's mouths and they come to us covered with the saliva of where they've already been spoken before. Sharing stories is swapping spit.

However, If a work is pure convention, it will bore everyone. While most of us feel gratified when a work sometimes meets our expectations and most of us feel somewhat frustrated when a work fails to deliver those particular pleasures we associate with a favored formula, none of us wants to read a book that is predictable down to the last detail. All artists fall naturally somewhere on the continuum, in some ways following the dictates of their genres, in other ways breaking with them. And most readers pick up a new book or video expecting to be surprised (by invention) and gratified (by convention).

As they seek to satisfy our desires for surprise and gratification, genre conventions are both constraints (like strait jackets) and enabling mechanisms (like life vests). They are constraints in so far as they foreclose certain creative possibilities, and they are enabling mechanisms in so far as they allow us to focus the reader's attention on novel elements. In the Russian formalist tradition that shaped my own early graduate education, we didn't speak of "rules"; we spoke of "norms," with the understanding that a work only achieved its fullest potential when it, in some way, "defamiliarized" our normal ways of seeing the world and ordering our experience. Or in another familiar paradigm, the auteur critics embraced those filmmakers who were "at war with their materials," that is, who followed the expectations of genre just enough to continue to be employed by the Hollywood studio system but also sought to impose their own distinctive personality by breaking as many of those rules as possible.

Now, let's consider how some of the writers featured on the Interstitial Arts Foundation website are confronting these competing pulls towards convention and invention as they think about their work. Some are seeking to break with the conventions of genre more dramatically than others; they each lay claim to different positions on the continuum between convention and invention.

Here, for example, is Barth Anderson: "If the work comforts, satisfies, or generally meets the expectations that viewers might carry of a genre in question, then the work is genre. This might even apply to works attempting to redefine genre or works which introduce alien elements and disciplines into the genre mix... Interstitial art should be prickly, tricky, ornery. It should defy expectations, work against them, and in so doing, maintain a relationship to one or more genres, albeit contentiously.... Interstitial art is often upsetting. It rocks worldviews, political assumptions, sacred cows, as well as bookstore shelves." Anderson values surprise and sees genre primarily as a constraint.

Susan Stinson, by contrast, sees the artist as moving between the pleasures of operating within genres and the freedom of escaping their borders: "The gifts of being in a genre – reading the same essays and stories; seeking out the same mentors; publishing with the same magazines and presses; writing books that share shelf space; gathering at workshops, retreats, and conferences often enough to know each other – create a common language... I've felt both embraced and constricted by the conventions of those worlds.... The interstitial idea of thriving in cracks and crevices feels like [another] kind of home. Nurturing active, creative, receptive, demanding relationships and institutions that welcome genre-bending and respect a wide range of sources, traditions, and affinities sounds so good that it scares me. The expanded possibilities for joy are worth the risks." Stinson acknowledges the gratifications of consuming genre entertainment and understands genre formulas as both enabling mechanisms and constraints.

Anderson speaks about the interstitial as "prickly, tricky, ornery," while Stinson sees it as welcoming, "nurturing," joyous, and "receptive." One stresses radical breaks from the genre system, while the other is negotiating a space for singular passions within the system.

MORE TO COME

Last January, I wrote the following essay to run as the foreword for a recently published collection of short fiction -- Interfictions 2: An Anthology of Interstitial Writing -- which was edited by an old friend, Delia Sherman. The essay... Henry Jenkins http://www.henryjenkins.org/

In late October, the educational world lost two disparate giants from the world of education. On October 21st, we learned of the death of the quintessential educational reformer, Theodore Sizer. A native New Englander, Sizer dramatically influenced the instructional practices of thousands of educators including those of yours truly.

One day earlier, we lost Gerald Bracey, a longtime education researcher who had the audacity to truly analyze statistics. Bracey, considered one of the foremost defenders of American public schools used long-term international comparisons to demonstrate that America’s public school actually performed much better than critics would suggest.

Ted Sizer

Ted Sizer was the founder of the Coalition of Essential Schools, a group that boasts about 600 members. These schools have adopted a specific school reform concept that construct learning experiences for students by focusing on a core set of principles.

Instead of the traditional comprehensive approach to high school Coalition schools focus on ten core principles:

• Learning to use one’s mind well
• Less is more, depth over coverage
• Goals apply to all students
• Personalization
• Student-as-worker, teacher-as-coach
• Demonstration of mastery
• A tone of decency and trust
• Commitment to the entire school
• Resources dedicated to teaching and learning
• Democracy and equity

Those of us who never taught in a Coalition school wondered aloud about some principles until we had the chance to read his groundbreaking book, Horace’s Compromise. Page by page, the book revealed the shortcomings of the 1980’s high school construct, offering a set of ideas that collectively had one wondering how we were able to accomplish anything of note in the factory model of education.

Though I never met Mr.Sizer, after reading Horace’s Compromise and his later follow-ups, Horace’s School and Horace’s Hope, I felt somehow like I actually knew him, or at least had a sense of what he was all about. At times, Mr. Sizer took on the image of his character, “Horace,” the fictionalized English teacher doing his very best to provide a meaningful educational environment for some 100 plus students a day. At other times, I was Horace, the one making all the compromises to survive, and Sizer my administrator, deftly observing and pointing out that I too was often settling for good enough.

My understanding is that Ted Sizer was the epitome of what an educational leader should be. The former Dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education and headmaster at Phillips Academy in Andover was a brilliant yet reflective practitioner. He clearly subscribed to the Robert Kennedy school of thought, seeing things as they could be and wondering why not.

People spoke highly of his style and his propensity to listen to teachers. His respect for the educational process also meant he spent time with students seeking to determine their views on school and what they had learned.

Most importantly, Sizer’s work represented the antithesis of the current NCLB push, that somehow educational reform can be simplified and codified. Sizer understood real learning was not linear and that mastery could and should be demonstrated in multiple ways.

The current emphases on making larger schools feel smaller and on high expectations for all students were fundamental to Sizer’s principles. Other concepts like the change in teacher role from the “sage on the stage” to “guide on the side” were fueled by Sizer’s teacher as coach model.

Gerald Bracey

Reportedly fearless in the face of power, Bracey was often described in very different terms than Sizer. Adjectives like pugnacious and abrasive were generally used to describe the man who saw Washington as being ignorant and intellectually lazy.

In 1991 he founded the Education Disinformation Detection and Reporting Agency or EDDRA. To most folks it did not seem to matter the subject – whether it was charter schools, teacher merit pay, or high-stakes testing — Bracey stood in opposition.
Even when it came to the concept of standards, Bracey stood in opposition. He was reported as offering this as one of his last Tweets:

“Thinking that the light at the end of the education tunnel is a standards freight train coming our way. Gonna hurt bad.”
Bracey taught the non-statistical world about Simpson’s paradox and the concept of averages. The concept reveals the possibility that data collectively could contradict what happened within subgroups creating the total.

Such was the case with American SAT scores. While minorities and white majorities were each increasing their scores, the large number of minorities now taking the test meant the overall average test scores were decreasing.

Once a person begins to understand Simpson’s Paradox, any thought of supporting NCLB and its various subgroup expectations goes out the window.

Bracey also pointed out in his book, Reading Educational Research, How to Avoid Getting Statistically Snookered, the workings of former President George Bush and his tax cuts. Bush used the concept of average to create the illusion that Americans as a group were seeing significant tax reductions, about $1500 per person per year.

However, Bracey pointed out that was “on average.” Citing the work of the Washington Post, Bracey noted how the typical teacher would receive a tax reduction equal to the cost of a new television set while someone earning a million dollars a year received a tax break that was roughly twice as large as the typical teacher’s salary. But when these amounts were averaged, every American appeared to receive a substantial break.

Each year Bracey would offer his annual Rotten Apples in Education awards and with it he would take no prisoners. It must be noted that while an enormous critic of George Bush and a one time advocate and campaigner for Barack Obama, he was quick to call Obama to task earlier this year regarding his assertions that three-fourths of the fastest-growing occupations require more than a high school diploma.

“Not really,” Bracey was quoted. “Look it up.”

It was classic Bracey who had one consistent response to many of the claims being asserted regarding public education, “Show me the data.”

I prepared a new talk today for Web2.0 Expo that I wanted to share with you:

"Streams of Content, Limited Attention: The Flow of Information through Social Media"

The talk is about the shifts in information flow thanks to new kinds of technology, focusing on some of the challenges that we face because of the shifts going on.

Unfortunately, my presentation at Web2.0 Expo sucked. The physical setup was hard and there was a live stream behind me. I knew something was wrong because folks started laughing in the audience. Unable to see anything (the audience, the stream), I found myself closing down. And so I collapsed and read the whole thing, feeling mega low on energy and barely delivering my points. Le sigh. I feel like I failed the audience so, if you were in the audience, I'm sorry. But hopefully you'll get more out of reading the presentation than I got out of giving it.

web2.0 information socialstreams talk

I'm pleased to announce that the 2010 Edition of Learning 2.0: A Colorado Conversation will be hosted by Loveland High School on February 20, 2010. Like the original in 2008 and the 2009 Edition, this year's get together is free.

What is Learning 2.0: A Colorado Conversation?
Learning 2.0: A Colorado Conversation is a one day conference/meetup for teachers, administrators, students, school board members, parents and anyone who is interested in education. It will be held on Saturday, February 20th, 2010, from 8:00 am until 3:30 pm at Loveland High School in Loveland, Colorado, USA (different location than last year - here's a map. We assume most folks will be from Colorado, but everyone is welcome to attend, and we are working on some ideas for virtual participation.
Education is conversation.

Conversation creates change.
The future of education does not exist in the isolated world of theory and abstract conference sessions. Instead, it exists in conversations. It exists in creating a robust learning network that is ever-expanding and just-in-time. Learning 2.0 is not the beginning of this conversation. It is merely a stopping point, a time to talk about the visible difference that we all seek.
We read. We reflect. We write. We share. We learn. Come join us for a day of conversation about learning and technology.

You can learn much more about the conference on the wiki, including information about registering. Here are some highlights:

Tentative Schedule
We're still working on the details so this will be updated before the conference. Also, this may expand if we have more folks register than we are anticipating. (To quote Bud Hunt, "This conference stuff is hard!"). We also need folks to submit proposals to facilitate conversations.

Registration
You must register so that we know how many folks to expect.

Cost
Free, baby. We also anticipate that lunch will be included as in previous years, however - with our various school district budgets being what they are this year - this is not for sure just yet. We're working on it.

Wireless
BYOL (that would be Bring Your Own Laptop) - we'll have wireless access to the Internet (filtered) - we may test our capacity to handle density of machines, but hopefully things will go swimmingly. If not, we have wired machines in various places you can access.

Invite Others
We strongly encourage you to invite other folks from your school, district, neighborhood, or learning network to attend as well. It would be great if everyone could bring at least one person with them that is perhaps new to this conversation.

Call for ConversationsHey, did you miss it above? We need folks to submit proposals to facilitate these conversations. This doesn't happen without you.

Questions?
Feel free to leave a comment on this post or on the FAQ page on the wiki.
Promote Learning 2.0
Did we mention that you should tell others? Blog about this. Link to the wiki or this blog post. Or use this nifty image.

Part of the Conversations.net interview series.

Join us this coming Thursday as Howard Rheingold continues "Howard's Brainstorm," the second in a monthly series of interactive discussions in Elluminate on technology, culture, and education.

Learn more about the eclectic Howard Rheingold at http://www.rheingold.com/howard/ and join us for a fun discussion! The topic will be "Thinking about Thinking Tools." Howard will briefly summarize some of the foundational documents in this area, recap via screensharing and TheBrain, and then facilitate a discussion inviting questions from the community online.

Date: Thursday, November 19th, 2009
Time: 5pm Pacific / 8pm Eastern / 12am GMT (next day) (international times here)
Duration: 1 hour
Location: In Elluminate. Log in at http://tr.im/futureofed. The Elluminate room will be open up to 30 minutes before the event if you want to come in early. To make sure that your computer is configured for Elluminate, please visit http://www.elluminate.com/support. Recordings of the session will be posted within a day of the event.

Howard Rheingold is the author of:
Tools for Thought http://www.rheingold.com/texts/tft/ The Virtual Community http://www.rheingold.com/vc/book/ Smart Mobs http://www.smartmobs.com Was: editor of Whole Earth Review http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_Earth_Review editor of The Millennium Whole Earth Catalog http://www.well.com/user/hlr/mwecintro.html founding executive editor of Hotwired http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotWired founder of Electric Minds http://www.rheingold.com/electricminds/html/ Non-resident Fellow, Annenberg Center for Communication, USC, 2007 http://www.annenberg.edu/info/rheingold.php Visiting Professor, De Montfort University, UK Has taught: Participatory Media and Collective Action (UC Berkeley, SIMS, Fall 2005, 2006, 2007 ) http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/participatory_media_and_collective_action/participatory_media_and_collective_action.cfm http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/programs/courses/296a-pmca Virtual Community/Social Media (Stanford, Fall 2007, 2008; UC Berkeley, Spring 2008, 2009) http://socialmediaclassroom.com/vircom09
Toward a Literacy of Cooperation (Stanford, Winter, 2005)
Digital Journalism (Stanford University Winter, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 )
http://socialmediaclassroom.com/digitaljournalism09

Current projects:
Social Media Classroom http://socialmediaclassroom.com
The Cooperation Project http://www.cooperationcommons.org
Participatory Media Literacy https://www.socialtext.net/medialiteracy/
HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation grantee http://tinyurl.com/yqjsmr

Recent Videos:
21st century literacies 40 min video http://blip.tv/file/2373937
JD Lasica's 6 min video interview with me, same subject: http://bit.ly/eFqeI

(photographer credit: Robin Good)

When I think about a classroom one of the first things I think about is movement.

A classroom is a small hive buzzing with energy and diversity. And in this hive, when you pay attention closely, you can see a host of dances taking place.

In a recent post, Ways to think about movement, Celine Llewellyn-Jones shares her thinking about the connection between dance and classroom activity. According to Llewellyn-Jones, dance embodies four specific elements that she learned from the work of Anne Green Gilbert, Director of Creative Dance Center Seattle, Washington, :

Space
1. Place self space (personal space), general space (room space)
2. Size big (far reach), medium (mid-reach), small (near reach)
3. Level high, middle, low
4. Direction forward, backward, right, left, up, down
5. Pathway curved, straight, zigzag
6. Focus single focus, multi-focus

Time
7. Speed fast, medium, slow
8. Rhythm pulse, pattern, grouping, breath

Force
9. Energy sharp (sudden), smooth (sustained)
10. Weight strong, light
11. Flow free (continuous, off-balance), bound (controlled, on-balance)

Body
12. Parts head, neck, shoulders, arm, wrists, elbows, hands, fingers, hips,
pelvis, trunk, spine, stomach, sternum, legs, knees, feet, toes, heels, etc.
13. Relationships over, under, around, through, above, below, beside, between, near, far,
in, out, on, off, together, apart, alone, connected, mirror, shadow
14. Shapes curved, straight, angular, twisted, symmetrical, asymmetrical
15. Balance off balance, on balanceLlewellyn-Jones also reminds us that movement can also be defined as loco and nonlocomotor skills such as crawling, rolling, running, leaping, skipping, dashing and bending, twisting, stretching, swinging, melting, gliding, kicking, slashing and so on.

Thinking Aloud
The language of dance gives us a common lens to approach movement in the classroom, a common vocabulary to describe our action, our individual and collective activity. This vocabulary provides a way to re-vision the ways that we teach and learn. Such a reframing provides another set of triggers that can possibly lead to deeper and more effective learning.

In this sense, the connections between dance/movement and the classroom are both physical and metaphysical. Physically one can express feelings about words in movements, role-play, own, re-enforce, translate words and concepts. Role-playing reinforces the the importance of living an idea, acting out a concept. This builds on mental, emotional, and physical connections to our knowledge and understanding (Moyles, 2005).

Metaphysically, the four major components of movement described above can provide a framework to look at "translating movement from one body into another medium and back" [2]. In this case, when thinking of ways in which to organize a learning environment, it is important to remember that there is a dance taking place, that there are movements both within and without participants' thoughts and actions. Multiple dancers requires coordination of multiple movements sometimes happening all simultaneously.   As a classroom leaader, it is important to provide participants guidance when needed, point towards pathways when warranted, allow participants to zigzag, focus, fold, relate, weigh in, breathe in, breathe out.

As a classroom leader it is also important to recognize participants' needs to flow free, work off-balanced as well as within bounded and controlled settings.  Words and ideas can twist, extend, shape, force ways of thinking. It is important for members of a learning community to pace themselves, to reach, to share, to extend interactions in meaningful and supportive ways for the learning community to offer value. This dance involves learning to express oneself and how to participate. If this dance offers no joy, no reward for the effort, we are probably want to walk away. When the dance is fun, when we enjoy the company and commitment, we begin to develop trust and experiment with rhythms and energy levels, moving forward, backwards, skipping, kicking, flipping topics, activities, across multiple exchanges.

Like bees, our hive dances attract attention across consciousness levels as well [3]. Stances, postures, positions all offer hints at the way we feel and what we're thinking. Tip-toeing is a different approach than slashing, spinning, and melting.

Does the dance evolve over time? In what ways are time, context, intention, and design related to message content and the levels at which participants are finding value and engaging with one another?


Further reflection and research required....


Notes:
[1] Celine Llewellyn-Jones Haphazard Journey by Starlight. http://www.ambientperformance.com/haphazard/2009/11/ways_to_think_about_m Retrieved 16 November 2009.

[2] ibid

[3] Bee learning and communication. From Wikipedia--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bee_learning_and_communication.

Reference:
Moyles, J. R. (Ed.) The Excellence of Play. Second Edition. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Images:
bee dance--http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3008/2953440576_f0904a839b.jpg
bee-waggle-dance--http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Bee_waggle_dance

 

Will Phillips appeared on CNN Monday morning with his father, Jay, to discuss his refusal to say the pledge of allegiance. "I've grown up with a lot of people and I'm good friends with a lot of people who are gay and I think they should have the rights all people should, and I'm not going to swear that they do," the ten-year-old Phillips said.



"If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."
— Justice Robert Jackson in West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)

What actually is a student's right in this case? One pretty useful source of information is the First Amendment Center. Click here to read what their position (and the Supreme Court) has to say about requiring students to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Interesting reading...