This week we held our first WriteBites of the 2019-2020 academic year focused on writing and technology. Our three presenters gave us insight into three digital technologies they use to support writing and learning goals in their courses. Below, in addition to a brief summary of the event, are links to the resources that were mentioned during each presentation.
Djibo Zanzot discussed Eli Review as a platform th
at can support both writing-to-learn and peer review activities. He uses Eli Review in courses that have up to 350 students as a way to give students opportunities to write, to receive feedback, and to read and respond to each other’s work. He uses writing-to-learn prompts to help students grapple with more complex, sticky topics. Eli Review plugs into Canvas and hosts students’ drafts, reviews, and revision plans. It helps instructors design a peer review wherein students describe what they see in their peer’s writing, evaluate the writing based on criteria for success, and make specific suggestions for revision. Following a peer review, Eli Review provides instructors with data analytics. Looking at these data allows instructors to see which concepts are being identified as present in written responses, which concepts need additional reinforcement, and how students are rating the feedback that they receive. Eli Review is free for instructors and a 6-month subscription can be purchased by students for $25 each ($40 for an annual subscription). Instructors who are interested in piloting the program can attend a Peer Learning Workshop and have students participate in a two-week pilot for free. Institutional subscriptions are also available.
Emily Friedman shared a free, open-sourced textual analysis tool, Voyant. Friedman uses Voyant in her sophomore survey course to conduct distance textual analysis and in her upper-level courses to introduce students to digital research methods. By uploading text-based files (Word docs, PDFs, HTML, Excel, ODT, Pages, RTF, XML, etc.) into the Voyant interface, students can create a corpus to analyze. Voyant then generates several types of analysis: word frequency distribution, key word in context plots, average sentence lengths, vocabulary density, etc. Although widely used by digital humanists, Voyant’s analytical capabilities can be used to examine any number of texts including public policy statements, social media accounts, end-user licensing agreements, etc. Students can also enter their own writing into Voyant to think about their stylistic choices as a writer. This Pedagogy Toolkit features several example assignments. Because it is widely used, Voyant has well-developed tutorial and workshop materials that can help an instructor get started.
Scott Ketring explained how he uses PackBack to get students to do the assigned reading in preparation for class. PackBack is an AI-supported online discussion platform. Students in Ketring’s large, undergraduate course complete their assigned reading and develop a question that they post on PackBack. They also respond to two of their peers’ questions with citations supporting their answers. PackBack then moderates, publishes, and rates all of their posts giving students a curiosity score. Instructors and TAs can log in and review the most highly rated posts to feature in class discussion or quickly review the questions and pull especially interesting responses to generate discussion in class. Ketring pairs PackBack with in-class, small group discussion activities. Since integrating this technology into his course, Ketring has seen the class average increase a full letter grade. Packback costs students $25 per course but does offer a limited number of scholarship access codes. Instructors interested in learning more can request a demo.
Following the presentations, our discussion touched on a variety of topics. A large concern was cost with participants asking how the costs for these platforms could be absorbed by departments or programs instead of placing the fee on students. Attendees also worried about platform fatigue, or the exhaustion students can feel when they are asked to use too many new technologies simultaneously. Ideally, when possible, teachers should opt to nest technologies (like how Eli Review can be housed as a tab within Canvas) or pull in new technologies only when they offer a value-added to the learning goals of their courses. In each of the presenters featured, technologies increased student-centered learning while forwarding the content goals of the courses.
Our next WriteBites event will discuss scaffolding writing across the disciplines on October 30th from 11:30–1:00 in the ePortfolio Studio. Register to attend here.
This panel will feature faculty who use scaffolding to support writing-related learning goals. We will talk about scaffolding in three ways: (1) scaffolding an assignment to invite students to write for different audiences and purposes, (2) scaffolding a course's learning goals across a semester, (3) scaffolding writing plan goals across a program's curricula. In illustrating different scopes for scaffolding, faculty in attendance will discuss how to identify and develop meaningful opportunities for scaffolding.
Presenters:
Bob Boyd is from the Department of Biological Sciences, and he will be sharing how he scaffolds an assignment to invite students to write for different audiences and purposes.
Michelle Worosz is from Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology. She will be discussing how to scaffold learning goals across a semester to support students as critical thinkers, researchers, and writers.
Lindsay Tan is from Interior Design. She will be discussing how to scaffold a writing plan’s learning goals across a program’s curricula.