February
5th 2014
Mooks talking MOOCs: Our AHA MOOC panel comments are now online at Perspectives

Posted under: American history, class, European history, jobs, publication, students, technoskepticism

cowgirlropeAnd guess how I learned this?  Through the Twitter machine, when I saw Jonathan Rees tweet a link to his contribution, “The Taylorization of the Historians’ Workplace.”  (Regular readers will recall that Jonathan put together a panel on “How Should Historians Respond to MOOCs” at 2014 annual conference of the American Historical Association in Washington, D.C., last month.)

Our panel comments–slightly tweaked and edited–are now available at Perspectives.  Many thanks to editor Allen Mikaelian for his patient editing and great title suggestions for my contribution, “Can Teaching Be Taken ‘to Scale’?”  (Check it out–I quote William F. Buckley approvingly!)  I also quote one of you I saw at AHA who said to me something like as historians, “we merely study change; we don’t recommend it.”  Who was it who said that–was it Tenured Radical, or maybe Katherine?  Step up and take your bow!

The other panelists, Philip Zelikow (“A Worthwhile Experiment”) and Jeremy Adelman (“History a la MOOC, Version 2.0″), have experience as MOOC “superprofessors” and have interesting insights based on their engagement with the MOOC format.  Our panel Chair, Elaine Carey, offers more context for our conversation in her introduction & overview of the panel.

Of course, you can see the recorded version of our panel here at History News Network.

9 Comments »

9 Responses to “Mooks talking MOOCs: Our AHA MOOC panel comments are now online at Perspectives

  1. Jonathan Rees on 05 Feb 2014 at 3:25 pm #

    Historiann,

    Repeat after me: “Twitter is your friend.” Well, at least academic Twitter is.

  2. Historiann on 05 Feb 2014 at 4:27 pm #

    It is my friend!

  3. Indyanna on 05 Feb 2014 at 8:39 pm #

    It wasn’t me who said that, but I bet you could run a whole thread based on other things that we revel at in the deep archival past, but then maybe blanch at in media us…

  4. Katherine on 06 Feb 2014 at 5:21 am #

    I wish I had said “We only study change, we don’t recommend it,” it’s a good line, but I can’t take credit.

  5. Historiann on 06 Feb 2014 at 8:13 am #

    Maybe it was Allyson?

    It’s a great line!

  6. Historiann on 06 Feb 2014 at 2:49 pm #

    p.s. See Jonathan’s post today w/commentary on our contributions to Perspectives.

  7. Indyanna on 07 Feb 2014 at 2:53 pm #

    What’s going on with the sudden crash-and-burn of Twitter on the stock side? Is the measured flow of serious rapporteurs and analysts into the space driving the loquacious tailbacks and pop artists into the proverbial tall trees, and spooking the edgy investors who’ve held onto the shares waiting for it to find profitability? I kind of thought this was what happened after I set up a Facebook page, about which I continue to be e-nudged weekly by the boys out in Petaluma that my “profile” is only “60% complete,” because I haven’t told them “where I grew up.” As if I grew up!

  8. Indyanna on 07 Feb 2014 at 8:46 pm #

    I just saw this MOOCS piece in the paper _Perspectives_. Reads good!

  9. Tenured Radical on 12 Feb 2014 at 8:31 am #

    “We study change, we don’t recommend it” sounds like Tony Grafton, happily shouting across a table of beer glasses.