Comments for Steve Ersinghaus

Comment on Marie Bjerede on Phones in the Classroom by SMD

SMD — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 04:53:07 +0000

I want to know when educators and adults alike are going to stop being shocked by things that make sense to the rest of us. Things like:

–Kids are more likely to enjoy reading if you let them choose what they read. Turns out it’s true. Who knew?

–Shy people will ask questions if they can use the net for such activities in class. Turns out that’s true too. Who knew?

I mean, it’s great that these folks are bothering to pay attention now, but these aren’t great stretches of genius for anyone who was paying attention in the last 15 years. Being a new educator (yay composition studies and Freshman), these always seemed like obvious things to me.

But maybe I’m weird.

Comment on Marie Bjerede on Phones in the Classroom by Steve

Steve — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:09:02 +0000

Some types of content may indeed be intrinsically different, but this is he “pedagogical” question. Our lit course requires that we explore and think with what we have in our brains at the time, unless the students bring in more, such as content from other courses. What can we look up that will help? Not much, I don’t think. Comp’s different, though, in that we deal with evidence and appeals and we often need to consult other texts. In terms of Burroughs, what would we have sought out. Perhaps other readings?

Comment on Marie Bjerede on Phones in the Classroom by Darren Bruno

Darren Bruno — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 21:49:25 +0000

Using a laptop during class, especially the type you conduct (discussion based), makes the entire experience less personal, in my opinion. Staring at a screen is what we do all day long, I look forward to class because it isn’t conducted through a technological medium. Everything is far too techno-polluted (I made that up), and I guess I’m just a traditionalist.

P.S. Editing in this tiny box is not easy.

Comment on A New View of hypertext Cadif/Juanita in Tinderbox 502 by Jesse Abbot

Jesse Abbot — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:19:49 +0000

This is visually arresting—fantastic—like a beehive or some swirling celestial phenomenon. I look forward to seeing more soon.

Comment on Multiplatform Publishing by Jeremy J. Jones

Jeremy J. Jones — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:35:23 +0000

That’s an interesting thing to learn, and something I need to get up on.

I assume authors could use this technology to self-publish digital media, true?

Comment on Canavan’s ‘Avatar’ and the War of Genres by Andreas

Andreas — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:11:13 +0000

Its probably because Cameron got many ideas from a Frank Herbert novel .. look at this:

“The surface of the planet Pandora is 80% seas in which lives a type of kelp which appears to be sentient. The land is populated by a number of predators who are efficient killers requiring people on the planet surface to adapt to a highly stressful lifestyle living within a fortress. The main fortress is known as Colony, a small city that is predominately underground.

The planet Pandora itself with its non-human inhabitants is another main character of the book, echoing a strong version of the Gaia Hypothesis. As the book progresses, the reader discovers that the kelp, the hylighters, and other creatures of the planet appear to be linked into a large entity with a shared consciousness, Avata.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jesus_Incident

Comment on Avatar by Andreas

Andreas — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:53:56 +0000

Funny, here in Germany were as well two movie trailers drawing from greek mythology shown before Avatar! But anyway, the corporation is doomed from the beginning, because the metal they´re looking for is called “Unobtanium” ;)

Comment on Why the War on Terror is a Dumb Idea by Tracy

Tracy — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:37:53 +0000

The Random House Dict. claims war to be mainly a conflict but usually including weapons. Our weapon of choice these days seems to be intimidation = terrorism. So, it is war, but modernized and stylized to fit society.

Comment on Why the War on Terror is a Dumb Idea by Scott

Scott — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:33:28 +0000

If this incident (prolonged time spent in a bathroom and verbal abuse) happened in a less tense environment, like a restaurant, or a mall, perhaps the idea of terrorism would never have surfaced. It seems like the airplane (the idea of flight alone gets many people on edge) environment is incredibly rigid, and even the slightest aberration is treated as potential catastrophe. It is certainly ridiculous though, that every individual’s luggage was checked on the airport runway because one man behaved strangely. This action forces me to agree that the war on terror is a “dumb idea”. How are security scans going to stop ideology? They won’t! The 9/11 hijackers were armed only with box cutters, according to the official story, and executed one of the most precise military attacks in history. (Piloting a 747 as a missile is no easy task, from what I’ve been told by a friend who is a commercial airline pilot)

Imho, the new regulations put in place by the FAA will only discourage travel for Americans and those flying to America. No bathroom, reclining, or movment in the aisle 1 hour before landing?! It seems that the definition of war has been changed to encompass natural states of mind, and with it the definition of “traveler” has been changed to “potential national security threat”.

Comment on Why the War on Terror is a Dumb Idea by gibb

gibb — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:32:14 +0000

But are you saying that because things cannot be foreseen but are always simmering beneath the surface that we not take precautions when we’re reminded of a vulnerability? It would seem to me that very often copycat acts follow the random (but planned) legitimate threat. In a case like this, where the real Christmas Day Danger was passed along without being caught, isn’t it human nature (and smart?) to follow the once burned, twice burned concept?

Strange how once again LeGuin’s Omelas comes to mind; the unsettling of many versus the suffering of the individual.