<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for edwired</title>
	<atom:link href="http://edwired.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://edwired.org</link>
	<description>Teaching History in the Digital Age</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 12:51:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on To MOOC or Not to MOOC? What&#8217;s In It For Me? by Derek Bruff</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/05/07/to-mooc-or-not-to-mooc-whats-in-it-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-637658</link>
		<dc:creator>Derek Bruff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 12:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1742#comment-637658</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent post, Mills. Of the MOOC instructors I know personally (the Vanderbilt professors, as well as a couple of others here and there), educational altruism seems to be the primary motivator, with perhaps a bit of the self-branding Jason mentioned. Some are also interested in the experiment of it all--what kind of learning can one foster in a course of tens of thousands?

Thinking about your random sample, I wonder if there&#039;s some sample bias in there. I get the impression that most universities partnering with Coursera aren&#039;t letting their junior faculty teach MOOCS. It&#039;s too risky of a move for those without tenure. That leaves only the more experienced faculty in the pool of MOOC instructors. Since you don&#039;t want a dud MOOC, you want to have a rather accomplished faculty member in there teaching, preferably on something they know very, very well. So the faculty most likely to teach MOOCs are senior, experienced, and well-versed in their topics... exactly the kind of faculty most likely to have written books.

The questions you raise about profiting off of MOOCs are still relevant, of course. I&#039;m just not sure how many of the MOOC faculty out there are primarily motivated by book sales.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent post, Mills. Of the MOOC instructors I know personally (the Vanderbilt professors, as well as a couple of others here and there), educational altruism seems to be the primary motivator, with perhaps a bit of the self-branding Jason mentioned. Some are also interested in the experiment of it all&#8211;what kind of learning can one foster in a course of tens of thousands?</p>
<p>Thinking about your random sample, I wonder if there&#8217;s some sample bias in there. I get the impression that most universities partnering with Coursera aren&#8217;t letting their junior faculty teach MOOCS. It&#8217;s too risky of a move for those without tenure. That leaves only the more experienced faculty in the pool of MOOC instructors. Since you don&#8217;t want a dud MOOC, you want to have a rather accomplished faculty member in there teaching, preferably on something they know very, very well. So the faculty most likely to teach MOOCs are senior, experienced, and well-versed in their topics&#8230; exactly the kind of faculty most likely to have written books.</p>
<p>The questions you raise about profiting off of MOOCs are still relevant, of course. I&#8217;m just not sure how many of the MOOC faculty out there are primarily motivated by book sales.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on To MOOC or Not to MOOC? What&#8217;s In It For Me? by Coursera, Chegg, and the Education Enclosure Movement</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/05/07/to-mooc-or-not-to-mooc-whats-in-it-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-637437</link>
		<dc:creator>Coursera, Chegg, and the Education Enclosure Movement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 03:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1742#comment-637437</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] a recent blog post, George Mason University history professor Mills Kelly explores this particular angle of the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a recent blog post, George Mason University history professor Mills Kelly explores this particular angle of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on To MOOC or Not to MOOC? What&#8217;s In It For Me? by Robert McGuire</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/05/07/to-mooc-or-not-to-mooc-whats-in-it-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-637087</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert McGuire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 11:38:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1742#comment-637087</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s reasonable to wonder if profit, ego and self-promotion are part of the motivation, and we should be on guard against those and hold MOOCs to high standards But I hope people won&#039;t rush to those conclusions or use any few cases of it to tar the MOOC concept itself. For one thing, despite their giant presence in the media coverage of MOOCs, Coursera is still a fraction of the overall MOOC offerings. A much larger universe of independent and unaffiliated MOOCs preceded and continues to grow outside of Coursera. Second, the 3 other MOOCs in your sample suggest other motives than profit. Third, the profit and self-promotion explanations don&#039;t ring true in my experience. I&#039;ve asked several school administrators and teaching faculty the question you&#039;re asking -- What&#039;s in it for them? I believe they are sincere when they say they are just energized as educators by the possibility of reaching more people MOOCs offer a new opportunity to achieve their educational mission, and the desire to learn more about that may be the most true explanation. It certainly sounds so to me. I would encourage you to look at the UW - La Crosse math MOOC profiled on our site last week and consider what&#039;s in it for those teachers. I didn&#039;t get a whiff of ego in talking with them.

Robert McGuire
Editor, MOOC News and Reviews]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s reasonable to wonder if profit, ego and self-promotion are part of the motivation, and we should be on guard against those and hold MOOCs to high standards But I hope people won&#8217;t rush to those conclusions or use any few cases of it to tar the MOOC concept itself. For one thing, despite their giant presence in the media coverage of MOOCs, Coursera is still a fraction of the overall MOOC offerings. A much larger universe of independent and unaffiliated MOOCs preceded and continues to grow outside of Coursera. Second, the 3 other MOOCs in your sample suggest other motives than profit. Third, the profit and self-promotion explanations don&#8217;t ring true in my experience. I&#8217;ve asked several school administrators and teaching faculty the question you&#8217;re asking &#8212; What&#8217;s in it for them? I believe they are sincere when they say they are just energized as educators by the possibility of reaching more people MOOCs offer a new opportunity to achieve their educational mission, and the desire to learn more about that may be the most true explanation. It certainly sounds so to me. I would encourage you to look at the UW &#8211; La Crosse math MOOC profiled on our site last week and consider what&#8217;s in it for those teachers. I didn&#8217;t get a whiff of ego in talking with them.</p>
<p>Robert McGuire<br />
Editor, MOOC News and Reviews</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About the Blog by Kim Richards</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/about/comment-page-1/#comment-636909</link>
		<dc:creator>Kim Richards</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 03:06:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-636909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Mills,

This is a great website! I couldn&#039;t agree more about the lack of women studying history. It&#039;s worse than some STEM fields. I tried to get a job teaching history in HS but couldn&#039;t coach football so here I am in a Learning Science doctoral program. 

Also, I&#039;m very inspired by your pedagogy of disruption and the creation of historical hoaxes to teach how to detect dangerous and untrustworthy information online and develop expert historians.  Given recent events (e.g. Syrian Electronic Army hacking into the AP Twitter account and the Onion), we need to teach how to read like a historian as a form of counter terrorism so that citizens are not susceptible to these types of cyber-attacks.

This historical hoax curriculum has sparked many ideas!

Thanks for the inspiration!
Kim]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mills,</p>
<p>This is a great website! I couldn&#8217;t agree more about the lack of women studying history. It&#8217;s worse than some STEM fields. I tried to get a job teaching history in HS but couldn&#8217;t coach football so here I am in a Learning Science doctoral program. </p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;m very inspired by your pedagogy of disruption and the creation of historical hoaxes to teach how to detect dangerous and untrustworthy information online and develop expert historians.  Given recent events (e.g. Syrian Electronic Army hacking into the AP Twitter account and the Onion), we need to teach how to read like a historian as a form of counter terrorism so that citizens are not susceptible to these types of cyber-attacks.</p>
<p>This historical hoax curriculum has sparked many ideas!</p>
<p>Thanks for the inspiration!<br />
Kim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on To MOOC or Not to MOOC? What&#8217;s In It For Me? by Scott B. Weingart</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/05/07/to-mooc-or-not-to-mooc-whats-in-it-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-636790</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott B. Weingart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 19:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1742#comment-636790</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When our team at IU designed ivmooc, sitting in the countless meetings to get the thing off the ground, we did so for altruistic reasons. The site does suggest my advisor&#039;s book as advised reading (it&#039;s relevant), although once and never again, and we didn&#039;t even think to link to it until well after we&#039;d designed the course. All of our software is open source, and we make a point of making data (generated here and elsewhere) publicly and freely available online. 

As Jason points out, the branding is also nice, and though we never brought it up in the meetings, that was part of my rationale for taking part when I already had to be dealing with finishing my phd. That said, I also believe that the more people have access to knowledge and training opportunities, the better. When I talk to other MOOC instructors, especially those with tenure, they seem to feel the same way; I really don&#039;t think anyone&#039;s making loads of money off book sales.

It sounds like you put altruism at the lowest rung of the latter, but from my (admittedly limited) experience, it seems the cynical solution might not be the most accurate.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When our team at IU designed ivmooc, sitting in the countless meetings to get the thing off the ground, we did so for altruistic reasons. The site does suggest my advisor&#8217;s book as advised reading (it&#8217;s relevant), although once and never again, and we didn&#8217;t even think to link to it until well after we&#8217;d designed the course. All of our software is open source, and we make a point of making data (generated here and elsewhere) publicly and freely available online. </p>
<p>As Jason points out, the branding is also nice, and though we never brought it up in the meetings, that was part of my rationale for taking part when I already had to be dealing with finishing my phd. That said, I also believe that the more people have access to knowledge and training opportunities, the better. When I talk to other MOOC instructors, especially those with tenure, they seem to feel the same way; I really don&#8217;t think anyone&#8217;s making loads of money off book sales.</p>
<p>It sounds like you put altruism at the lowest rung of the latter, but from my (admittedly limited) experience, it seems the cynical solution might not be the most accurate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on To MOOC or Not to MOOC? What&#8217;s In It For Me? by Jason Mittell</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/05/07/to-mooc-or-not-to-mooc-whats-in-it-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-636766</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Mittell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 17:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1742#comment-636766</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A third reason is a variant of #2: ego and self-branding. Even if you don&#039;t have a textbook in Widget Studies ready to &quot;recommend&quot; to your MOOC consumers, there is a market advantage to being regarded by thousands as the leading expert in Widget Studies via a prominent MOOC. For some, that advantage is intellectual - your version of Widget Studies will become more accepted as the norm in the field - while for others the promise is more about salary bumps, upward mobility across institutions, grant/fellowship opportunities, etc., not to mention just the thrill of international recognition and the future opportunities it might bring. 

Couldn&#039;t you ask the same question as to why any faculty member would blog? It&#039;s time-consuming &amp; gets you no &quot;official&quot; accomplishments to put on your CV - but many of us still carve out time to do it, for a combination of altruism, self-promotion, and the pleasure of community &amp; conversation. That being said, my blog doesn&#039;t undercut the publication opportunities of other faculty, while arguably teaching a MOOC does threaten teaching opportunities for others.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A third reason is a variant of #2: ego and self-branding. Even if you don&#8217;t have a textbook in Widget Studies ready to &#8220;recommend&#8221; to your MOOC consumers, there is a market advantage to being regarded by thousands as the leading expert in Widget Studies via a prominent MOOC. For some, that advantage is intellectual &#8211; your version of Widget Studies will become more accepted as the norm in the field &#8211; while for others the promise is more about salary bumps, upward mobility across institutions, grant/fellowship opportunities, etc., not to mention just the thrill of international recognition and the future opportunities it might bring. </p>
<p>Couldn&#8217;t you ask the same question as to why any faculty member would blog? It&#8217;s time-consuming &amp; gets you no &#8220;official&#8221; accomplishments to put on your CV &#8211; but many of us still carve out time to do it, for a combination of altruism, self-promotion, and the pleasure of community &amp; conversation. That being said, my blog doesn&#8217;t undercut the publication opportunities of other faculty, while arguably teaching a MOOC does threaten teaching opportunities for others.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Really? Really, Really? by Diary of a Visiting Assistant Professor, week 16: in which my students self-evaluate and add to Wikipedia &#124; Patrick C. Fleming</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2010/06/14/really-really-really/comment-page-1/#comment-634937</link>
		<dc:creator>Diary of a Visiting Assistant Professor, week 16: in which my students self-evaluate and add to Wikipedia &#124; Patrick C. Fleming</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 11:36:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=665#comment-634937</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] fantastic but which rather pissed off Jimmy Wales et al. (Kelly, who&#8217;s done the course twice, responded a couple years [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] fantastic but which rather pissed off Jimmy Wales et al. (Kelly, who&#8217;s done the course twice, responded a couple years [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The History Curriculum in 2023 by Putting Theory in Action in the Classroom &#124; erin n. bush</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/01/01/the-history-curriculum-in-2023/comment-page-1/#comment-634172</link>
		<dc:creator>Putting Theory in Action in the Classroom &#124; erin n. bush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 00:36:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1531#comment-634172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] are available online. Mills Kelly argues that the future of teaching history lies in the &#8220;making, marking, mining, and mashing&#8221; that students do online already. I tried to provide some structure to help students make [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] are available online. Mills Kelly argues that the future of teaching history lies in the &#8220;making, marking, mining, and mashing&#8221; that students do online already. I tried to provide some structure to help students make [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Auf Wiedersehen, Mein Freund by weblog.histnet.ch &#187; Blog Archive &#187; In Memoriam Peter Haber (1964 &#8211; 2013)</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/04/29/auf-wiedersehen-mein-freund/comment-page-1/#comment-633201</link>
		<dc:creator>weblog.histnet.ch &#187; Blog Archive &#187; In Memoriam Peter Haber (1964 &#8211; 2013)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:38:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1735#comment-633201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] edwired (Mills Kelly) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] edwired (Mills Kelly) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Looming Disaster for History (II) by Mills</title>
		<link>http://edwired.org/2013/04/16/a-looming-disaster-for-history-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-633181</link>
		<dc:creator>Mills</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:54:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwired.org/?p=1716#comment-633181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Leslie: I too worry about the &quot;less yack, more hack&quot; theme in digital humanities, both because I think it raises the bar to entry into DH work for everyone -- a bar that is already perceived by many to be pretty darned high -- and because there is certainly the chance that an increased focus on the tech side of DH work may make it into a more male zone of endeavor. Thus far that doesn&#039;t seem to be the case, as some of the best programming historians I know are women. But if general trends about the hack side of the tech industry apply to our discipline, then the &quot;more hack&quot; approach is potentially problematic. Potentially.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Leslie: I too worry about the &#8220;less yack, more hack&#8221; theme in digital humanities, both because I think it raises the bar to entry into DH work for everyone &#8212; a bar that is already perceived by many to be pretty darned high &#8212; and because there is certainly the chance that an increased focus on the tech side of DH work may make it into a more male zone of endeavor. Thus far that doesn&#8217;t seem to be the case, as some of the best programming historians I know are women. But if general trends about the hack side of the tech industry apply to our discipline, then the &#8220;more hack&#8221; approach is potentially problematic. Potentially.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
