• ThumbnailSolomon Negash, Kennesaw State University
    Tamara Powell, Kennesaw State University

    Introduction
    Engaging students in an online course is a challenge. Students often report that online courses are “death by […]

  • Each week, a member of the JITP Editorial Collective assembles and shares the news items, ongoing discussions, and upcoming events of interest to us (and hopefully you). This week’s installment is edited by Amanda […]

  • Danica Savonick, CUNY Graduate Center
    Generative collaborative experiences require strong infrastructural support—both material and immaterial. This post details the sequence of assignments leading up to a collaborative website project at the end of a basic composition course.

    This past semester, I taught a composition course at Queens College on the topic of “Creativity.” The course, primarily comprised of first-year students, met twice a week (at 8 am!) for an hour and fifty minutes. This semester, I challenged students to take their research papers a step further by creating a collaborative website based on their theories of creativity:

    [caption id="attachment_2907" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 1. Final Project: Collaborative Creativity Website. Figure 1. Final Project: Collaborative Creativity Website.[/caption]

    Logistically, this assignment took up about four full class periods, though our conversations about websites spanned the last three weeks of the semester. I booked a computer lab for two of these classes, during which students used the entire class period to work on their group websites.

    Throughout the semester, students familiarized themselves with the blogging and commenting functions of Wordpress (more specifically, the version hosted by Queens College, “Qwriting”). This final website project, however, challenged them to transition from adding content to our course blog to setting up their own site. 

    Students were placed into groups before we transitioned from their research papers to website projects so that they could become familiar with what their group members were working on.

    For example, the group “Creativity and Oppression” contained students researching children’s art in ghettos and concentrations camps during the Holocaust, creativity and privilege in education, and the appropriation and theft of creative works produced by people of color. The other groups—Dreams and Creativity, Creativity and Writing, Creativity and Business—reflected themes that emerged through course readings and conversations. The groups helped students mentor one another through the writing process and encouraged them to identify points of intersection and divergence among their projects. Some groups shared valuable sources they found through the library’s catalogues and databases. On the day that the final drafts of their research essays were due, they brought in copies for everyone in their group. As we transitioned from research papers to website projects, their homework was to read each other’s final drafts and come prepared with ideas for presenting them on a website.

    In addition to strengthening their collaborative skills, I wanted students to think about the social and public impact of research. We brainstormed who their possible audiences might be, why they might come to a website about creativity, and what they might hope to get out of it.

    Since their final research papers provided the majority of the content for these websites, much of the website work involved translating between “rhetorical situations” (see Purdue OWL): from an academic essay to a collaborative website. And they were no strangers to the difficulties of translation. One blog prompt designed to initiate a conversation about websites as rhetorical situations asked students to “translate” Gordon Harvey’s “Elements of the Academic Essay” in the context of the internet. Students rose to the occasion of this admittedly experimental assignment with aplomb.

    [caption id="attachment_2905" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 2. Blog Prompt: Analyzing Websites. Figure 2. Blog Prompt: Analyzing Websites.[/caption]

    Their responses to this assignment and the more general question, “What makes a good website?” became the fodder for the rubric we designed.

    Before crafting a rubric we looked at these slides that demonstrate the basics of creating a site using Wordpress. Much of the content is drawn from helpful blogs about Wordpress and the Qwriting help site. They reflect my own limited knowledge of the platform’s capabilities, though learning so much more about Wordpress from my students was one of the great unforeseen benefits of this assignment. The website project also allowed us to continue our conversations about the importance of proper citations through a discussion of fair use policies.

    After going through the process of setting up a site as a class, I handed out blank rubrics and posted the following in-class assignment:

    [caption id="attachment_2909" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 3. Drafting a Rubric. Figure 3. Drafting a Rubric.[/caption]

    This activity allowed us to talk not merely about meeting an assignment’s requirements, but about the pedagogy that animates them. I encouraged students to consult the rubrics I used to grade their close reading and comparative essays for examples of the kind of language they might want to include. After they had filled out rubrics based on their understanding of what makes a good website and what a platform like Qwriting allows, we tallied their results and combined some of the categories to produce a rubric that we all agreed upon.

    [caption id="attachment_2908" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 4. Collaborative Creativity Website. Figure 4. Collaborative Creativity Website.[/caption]

    [caption id="attachment_2910" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 5. Collaborative Creativity Website. Figure 5. Collaborative Creativity Website.[/caption]

    Once the rubrics were ready, we spent two class periods in the computer lab working on their sites. During these classes, we discussed how each group was dividing up work (was one person in charge of images or was each person designing their own page? how were citations being handled?). Often, students would share what they were learning and help one another solve technical issues.

    Prior to our final class, students sent everyone the URLs for their websites. They were given a copy of the rubric for each group they’d be evaluating and told to look at the websites beforehand and come prepared with questions. Here are the instructions for the presentations: 

    [caption id="attachment_2906" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 6. Instructions. Figure 6. Instructions.[/caption]

    After each presentation, students handed in a rubric with scores and explanations, which I later tallied to assign a final, overall grade. Although they were tough on each other, they provided specific examples in the “explanation” category of the rubric to support the scores they awarded.

    This project worked well as an extended application of a final research paper. Students who hadn’t participated much during the semester became some of the most vocal and outspoken contributors to our conversations about websites as rhetorical situations. During these weeks the class became even more student centered, as those with advanced knowledge of web design were able to instruct the rest of the class, myself included.

    [caption id="attachment_2913" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 7. Website by Yonatan Arnon, Nikkia “Rook” Hanson, and Rebecca Rich. Figure 7. Website by Yonatan Arnon, Nikkia “Rook” Hanson, and Rebecca Rich.[/caption]

    [caption id="attachment_2911" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 8. Website by Corey Goldman, Stephen Lau, and Ronen Shahkoohi. Figure 8. Website by Corey Goldman, Stephen Lau, and Ronen Shahkoohi.[/caption]

    [caption id="attachment_2912" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 9. Website by Riddwan Alam, Youlhuy Sung, Paula Volos, and Xian Zhong Zheng. Figure 9. Website by Riddwan Alam, Youlhuy Sung, Paula Volos, and Xian Zhong Zheng.[/caption]

    [caption id="attachment_2904" align="alignnone" width="600"]Figure 10. Website by Joseph Haynes and Zainab Kalair. Figure 10. Website by Joseph Haynes and Zainab Kalair.[/caption]

    Sincere thanks also to my awesome students for allowing me to share their hard work.

  • Each week, a member of the JITP Editorial Collective assembles and shares the news items, ongoing discussions, and upcoming events of interest to us (and hopefully you). This week’s installment is edited by Renee […]

  • Each week, a member of the JITP Editorial Collective assembles and shares the news items, ongoing discussions, and upcoming events of interest to us (and hopefully you). This week’s installment is edited by Amanda […]

  • Each week, a member of the JITP Editorial Collective assembles and shares the news items, ongoing discussions, and upcoming events of interest to us (and hopefully you). This week’s installment is edited by Andrew Lucchesi.

    I’m often struck by the increasingly important roles digital technology plays in times of conflict, strife, and tragedy. Obviously, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms have become essential parts of the action, serving as important sites for information sharing and discussion. More than just serving as hubs for discussion and debate, however, we see that digital technology is serving an important function in helping people respond to tragedy and unrest in real time.

    I’ll start with Nepal, where a magnitude 7.8 earthquake hit the area between Kathmandu and the city of Pokhara on April 25, 2015. This area has long been rated as among the most vulnerable urban areas to seismic disaster, and now, three days after the quake, international news coverage is beginning to grapple with the full scale of the tragedy still in progress, with death tolls and reports of destruction rising. In the midst of this chaos, people are turning to digital technology. Check out how Google has re-launched their crowd-sourced missing persons database, Google Person Finder, to aid in the search and rescue effort.

    From this global tragedy to a scene of local unrest, we see digital technology playing an important role as well in the recent uprising in Baltimore, MD, following the death of Freddie Gray, who died of a spinal cord injury he is believed to have sustained while in police custody. As with other recent protest movements, social media have played important roles in capturing what’s happening on the ground, as in this Google Map where Redditors and Twitter users pull from police scanners and Tweets to provide live-action visualizations of the disruptions. The Mayor’s Office has also turned to digital media (again from Google) to respond to the situation, using a Google Form originally designed by a concerned citizen to allow individuals in Baltimore to request volunteer assistance.

    Clearly, not only do digital tools and social media allow us to learn more quickly about what’s happening as high-stakes public events unfold, creative uses of established properties (especially the big names many of us tend to turn to in class assignments and everyday digital living) are playing a big roles in shaping what’s actually going on in the streets. Stay safe out there, people.

    Upcoming and Ongoing Events and Deadlines

    Call for Submissions: Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, Issue 8 Deadline “Disability as Insight, Access as the Function of Design
    Deadline: May 15, 2015

    Call for Proposals: Digital Humanities Forum 2015
    Deadline: June 1, 2015
    Event: University of Kansas

    Call for Participants: Hybrid Pedagogy Summer Digital Pedagogy Lab
    Registration is rolling, but workshops are filling up fast!
    Event: August 10–14, 2015
    Madison, WI

    Call for Presentations: The Digital Arts Project 2nd Global Meeting, “The Borders of Digital Art
    Abstract Deadline: May 1, 2015
    Event: September 15–17, 2015
    Oxford, UK

    Call for Presentations: The Videogame Cultures Project
    Deadline for abstracts: May 1, 2015
    Event: September 11–13, 2015
    Oxford, UK

    Call for Proposals: Thirteenth International Conference on New Directions in the Humanities, “From the Digital Humanities to the Humanities of the Digital
    Abstract Deadline: May 15, 2015
    Event: June 17–19, 2015
    Vancouver, BC

    Call for Articles: FILE Digital Aesthetics E-Book
    Abstracts due: June 15, 2015

    Call for Submissions: Inaugural issue of Digital Literary Studies
    Deadline: rolling

    Did we miss something? Send hot tips, cool CFPs, and warmly worded rants to admin@jitpedagogy.org.

  • Leila Walker edited the blog post Introduction in the group Group logo of Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy (Public Group)Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy (Public Group): 2 weeks, 4 days ago

    Peter M. Gray, Queensborough Community College
    Renee McGarry, Sotheby’s Institute of Art
    1. There are articles here on collaboration and mentoring. We like them. We think you’ll like them, too.

    2. We began our own years-long series of collaborations in the early 2000s, first in a graduate seminar focused on pedagogy for interdisciplinary graduate students, and then later extending our work together to professional presentations. We have seen our professional relationship shift and grow through our various kinds of collaborations, have weathered it when it has become fraught and complicated and messy. We have celebrated it when it has felt rewarding (and produced welcome results), when it has provoked us. And we continue to value collaboration and mentorship as fundamental to how we work within our different areas of academia. This special section has allowed us to cultivate writers who take up ideas around mentorship and collaboration in interesting ways, and we’ve welcomed the opportunity to work with them.

    3. With much of our lives woven through shared Google Docs, around Twitter feeds, and with visits to LinkedIn, the spaces where personal and professional collaboration happen have become ubiquitous — once there were the Yellow Pages, now there is Yelp. Facebook, for example, has for some become useful “for professional conversations and [as] a social network that enables users to create and maintain social capital” (Briggs). This special section, as you will read, helps us think more slowly, with more clarity, about how and why we might use and revise our uses of interactive technology a writers, as teachers, as colleagues.

    4. The writers collected here for this special section think large, pushing our uses of interactive technologies toward serving and enhancing international service-learning projects (Oppenheim, O’Shea, and Sclar). They also consider the pedagogical implications and complexities of mentoring in graduate and undergraduate course work: Macaulay-Lewis articulates a project for graduate students to develop digital skills that will serve them professionally, while Crocco challenges undergraduate writers through critical simulation pedagogy to collaborate on joint projects. Others, like Kuhn, Wipfli, Lipshin and Ruiz, place their seemingly disparate courses together pedagogically in order to enhance the intellectual experience of both courses. Skallerup Bessette tests our assumptions about how we represent collaboration (and how we recognize collaborative academic work: variously, inconsistently) through narrating her experience in a Twitter community around #FYCchat (take a look and jump into the fray). Zabrowski and Rivers formally enact their inquiry into their own mentorship and collaborative relationship, reflecting on rhetorical and material “space” in intriguing ways.

    5. In this time of (relatively) easy heightened interaction through technologies, we holler encouragement to friends around the globe in comment sections, we make suggestions, we offer critique. We hope you consider this section as an invitation to do the same.

    Peter M. Gray and Renee McGarry, Issue Co-Editors
    Bibliography
    Briggs, Timothy J. 2012. “Writing a Professional Life on Facebook.” Kairos 17 (2). n.p. http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/17.2/disputatio/briggs/index.html

     

     

  • Katie Zabrowski, Saint Louis University
    Nathaniel Rivers, Saint Louis University
    Abstract
    This video production reflects on the place(s) where mentorship and collaboration occur between doctoral student Katie and her advisor Nathaniel. Featuring both of their voices, the video moves through the spaces in which they work and collaborate, seeking to understand how those spaces’ materiality and organization affect the mentoring that emerges within them. The video takes up this inquiry through a collaborative analysis of a shared working place—a local coffee roaster specializing in pour over brewing—as a material blueprint for a particular kind of mentorship marked first and foremost by collaboration.

    Featured throughout the video are reflections upon materiality from scholars working within various fields, but who all impact studies in rhetoric and composition—Katie and Nathaniel’s disciplinary home. Many of these thinkers and the lines of thought within which they work treat materiality as having rhetorical efficacy, and so too does this project credit material spaces and their aggregate parts as rhetorically impacting and shaping the human interactions that occur within and among them.
    [youtube width=”560″ height=”315″]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpLGuxKUeUg[/youtube]
    Music featured in this video:
    Music “I Need to Start Writing Things Down” by Chris Zabriskie
    Available on the Free Music Archive
    Under CC BY license
    Music “Readers! Do You Read?” by Chris Zabriskie
    Available on the Free Music Archive
    Under CC BY license

    Transcript
    Katie: In the early days of writing my dissertation I established a standing date with a 12 oz. coffee and a croissant. Every Friday morning I and the materials of my dissertation made our way to a local spot, Blueprint Coffee, to spend the morning drafting – word by word, sentence by sentence, section by section, and, eventually, chapter by chapter – the tallest project of my graduate career.

    Nathaniel: Writers are nomads in search of a place, and a coffee shop is an oasis for such weary travelers: the right mix of hustle and bustle, sound and silence, caffeine and calorie. A place to be wired and wireless. A medium for a medium.

    Katie: It was the ambience of this architecturally-themed spot that invited me to return week after week. With its drafting tables and stools, crisp white subway tiles, and smooth stainless steel counter tops, the space is a cluttered mind’s sweet retreat into organization of the most satisfying kind. What’s more, the space and its curators exude a palpable hospitality, a concept which is, coincidentally, the support beam upon which my dissertation project rests.

    Nathaniel: Blueprint speaks to and through Katie’s work. It speaks to me too as Katie’s mentor, and models what I have come to recognize as my approach to mentoring. The performance of coffee resonates with the arrangement of the location. There is casual fastidiousness to the place. There is an earnestness in the effort to make coffee visible as an activity – like a building once built that still celebrates it blueprints. The operation of making coffee – cupping, roasting, brewing, and experiments across all three–is performed in public. And so my mentoring amounts to discussing blueprints, my own as well as Katie’s. My own struggles with research and writing. What I’m working on, how I am responding to reviews and other feedback. Whatever advice I brew, it’s brewing is a part of its delivery.

    Katie: There is always, first, the offer of a glass of water upon placing your coffee order. Then there is the request of your name which will in turn not be written on a paper cup and exclaimed into the crowd, but spoke with a caring tone as you’re served tableside, as if in the home of a friend. As unique to this place as its address, is its hospitable treatment of the coffee beans – ground finely with a special grinder, brewed by hand with water heated to a precise and bean-friendly temperature.

    At a certain point it occurred to me: this space and its materials are more than places listed in my weekly calendar but co-collaborators in the project planning and writing that emerges there. I began documenting my work in this space with Instagram pictures; pictures to which my advisor would often respond with words of encouragement. And eventually it began to happen that this space became a blueprint for our mentoring relationship, which always had been but was slowly seeing refinement as one marked first and foremost by collaboration.

    Nathaniel: Writers are nomads in search of a medium. Place is a medium, and a medium can be a place. A medium makes a place by pulling together disparate elements together. Place is a mediated aggregate of actors and forces. Place is a collaborator. Blueprint opens itself up to those working with/in it. It is friendly, forthcoming. Place is a mentor. Blueprint is a place for unique forms of engagement and exchange.

    Places can work with us. They can also, of course, work against us. Because a place is not some inert container it can resist as much as rewards. Place, like any collaborator, can be unreliable. Colleagues must be chosen wisely. Sometimes an oasis is a mirage.

    Katie: With our explicit attention to the places in time that we chose to share, we begin to notice not only all the places in which we formally met, but also where informal collaboration occurred all the time – in the margins of what we were reading, in Instagram photos and comments, in the line-by-line notes made upon chapters under review, and in written and verbal responses to those remarks when we met to review chapters, and in our respective working spaces. Blueprint periodically stabilized this complex collection of collaborations, drawing us in with its unique, ambient qualities. With those qualities, we continually built and maintained a place for mentoring as collaborative.
    The many and diverse occasions upon which our thinking became merged eventually became habitual. The spaces of our collaboration built also the shape of our mentoring relationship outside of those spaces.

  • ThumbnailVirginia Kuhn, University of Southern California
    Heather Wipfli, University of Southern California
    with
    Jason Lipshin, TomTom
    Susana Ruiz, Take Action Games
    Abstract
    Digital media, deployed in the service of […]

  • ThumbnailFrancesco Crocco, Borough of Manhattan Community College

    A map of the world that does not include Utopia is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing. And […]

  • Elizabeth Macaulay-Lewis, CUNY Graduate Center
    Abstract
    This article considers two digital assignments for courses at The Graduate Center, The City University of New York. In one, students developed digital site […]

  • ThumbnailPossibilities for Mentorship and Collaboration within an Online Platform for International Volunteering
    Willy Oppenheim, Omprakash
    Joe O’Shea, Florida State University
    Steve Sclar, Omprakash […]

  • Lee Skallerup Bessette, University of Kentucky
    Abstract
    In January 2011, #FYCchat held its first Twitter chat. Created to connect those teaching Freshman Writing, #FYCchat became a powerful tool for […]

  • Each week, a member of the JITP Editorial Collective assembles and shares the news items, ongoing discussions, and upcoming events of interest to us (and hopefully you). This week’s installment is edited by Carlos Hernandez.

    Usually when we speak of technology and pedagogy, what we really mean is: “This technology has just materialized in the world. Can it be leveraged for educational purposes?” As educators, it’s incumbent upon us to keep up with technologies as they appear—and as they vanish. Our goal shouldn’t be so much to “use technology x,” but rather understand technology trends, so we can “surf the wave” of innovation and bring the most useful tools into our classrooms. Just as often, we should abandon tools that no longer work.

    It’s with that thinking in mind that I have been watching the Apple Watch. Recently I asked my students how many of them have a smart phone with internet access on them, and this time, for the first time in my career, every student did. We are reaching a tipping point where the phrase “digital divide” is changing meaning. The divide will still exist, of course; higher-end computers will still be out of reach for many students. But we may be reaching a point where computer affordability may allow for a total revamp of how we teach. Just as books are readily available now, so are pocket-computers: also known as phones. And now, with the Apple Watch, wrist-wearable computers may follow suit, in time.

    As this New York Times article discusses, the Apple Watch is a device that may be more about showing off its possibilities than delivering quality-of-life and productivity enhancements. Right now, its apps and features duplicate many of the options of other smart watches, perhaps most notable the Pebble, the company that sparked interest in the wrist-wearable computer. But Apple’s entrance into the market will introduce a new level of interest from app-makers, which in turn will make the watch more universally useful. That virtuous loop could lead to a level of innovation that would make smart watches both more affordable and more appropriate for classroom usage.

    Smart phones can already be used as “clickers” to encourage class participation, to access colleges’ cms’s, even to compose essays. Their GPS functions have been used to create ARGs for education, and the ability to take and record photos has myriad uses in a digitally enhanced classroom. What affordances, then, might come with a watch? Students in the health sciences will likely be interested in the possibilities granted by having a computer constantly pressed to the skin that can measure a variety of bodily processes. The accelerometer perhaps becomes potentially more useful on a watch, since it is, again, reliably attached to the body.

    But the most potential resides in not duplicating or even enhancing what a phone can do already, but what app developers will discover in the process of creating new functionality for the Apple Watch.

    Right now, the smart phone has, arguably, the most transformative potential in education because of its wide availability. If we care about using technology in the classroom, we would do well to imagine ways to make use of the phones our students already have. But we should keep an eye on smartwatches as well so as to help us plan for next decade’s ubiquitous technology.

    Upcoming and Ongoing Events and Deadlines

    Call for Submissions: Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, Issue 8 Deadline “Disability as Insight, Access as the Function of Design
    Deadline: May 15, 2015

    Call for Proposals: Digital Humanities Forum 2015
    Deadline: June 1, 2015
    Event: University of Kansas

    Call for Participants: Hybrid Pedagogy Summer Digital Pedagogy Lab
    Registration is rolling, but workshops are filling up fast!
    Event: August 10–14, 2015
    Madison, WI

    Call for Presentations: The Videogame Cultures Project
    Deadline for abstracts: May 1, 2015
    Event: September 11–13, 2015
    Oxford, UK

    Call for Proposals: Thirteenth International Conference on New Directions in the Humanities, “From the Digital Humanities to the Humanities of the Digital
    Abstract Deadline: May 15, 2015
    Event: June 17–19, 2015
    Vancouver, BC

    Call for Articles: FILE Digital Aesthetics E-Book
    Abstracts due: June 15, 2015

    Call for Submissions: Inaugural issue of Digital Literary Studies
    Deadline: rolling

    Did we miss something? Send hot tips, cool CFPs, and warmly worded rants to admin@jitpedagogy.org.

  • Each week, a member of the JITP Editorial Collective assembles and shares the news items, ongoing discussions, and upcoming events of interest to us (and hopefully you). This week’s installment is edited by Suzanne Tamang.

    Game-changing Medical Technologies

    Why have some Nobel laureates recently dipped into bench time to publish on ethics and governance?  And what’s inside a billion dollar lab notebook?   The answer to both questions is the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas system. In a nutshell, CRISPR is magnitudes better than what has previously been available to genomic engineers.  Though some of the more alarming rumors on editing human embryos are just that, it’s nonetheless alarming, pushing an unavoidable topic to the frontline as technology propels forward.

    If a CRISPR article hasn’t made it to your reading lists yet, at least one piece should; it’s positioned to be the game-changer in genomic engineering, and the new obsession of some biotech entrepreneurs.  The field’s lack of consensus on what constitutes ethical research will not be breaking news, but the future of CRISPR research, and how it will be shaped by scientists, entrepreneurs, government officials, and the public over the next few years, is relevant to the world.

    CRISPR research can be tracked back for at least a year, but the patent war and the intensity of the ethical debate is what’s heating-up.  Over the last month, several top scientific journals have published perspective pieces on CRISPR, breaking down the technology, the underlying scientific ideas, and the ethical debate. In contrast to the bulk of scientific literature, many CRISPR pieces are designed for mass consumption, and the authors include some of the top scientists in the world.  These scientists are helping outsiders to get educated and involved in the discussion, now.  The proof is in Science and Nature.

    Collectively, the perspective pieces on CRISPR project an ominous cloud on the future of genomic engineering and highlight the need for responsible science and self-governance. What has trickled down to the mainstream news is focused on the patent war, which could be decided by “all knowing” lab notebooks.  However, my favorite mainstream piece appears in this week’s TIME.  Emmanuelle Charpentier (Hanover Medical School, Germany) and Jennifer Doudna (UC Berkeley, USA), the creators of CRISPR, were featured in The 100 Most Influential People; they’re interwoven with celebutants and philanthropists, and they’re obviously female.

    Upcoming and Ongoing Events and Deadlines

    Using Virtual Reality As a Compelling Media For Science Communication
    April 24
    Stanford, CA

    Dakini Wisdom: Tracing the Emergence of the Feminine Principle and the Role of Women in Buddhism
    April 27
    Stanford, CA

    Joseph Stiglitz: The Great Divide
    April 29
    Commonwealth Club of California

    The Art of Sequential Optimization via Simulations
    April 30
    Stanford, CA

    Humanities + Digital Tools
    May 5
    Stanford, CA

    Silicon Valley Open Studios
    First three weeks in May
    Silicon Valley, CA

    Makerfaire Bay Area 2015
    May 16 and 17
    San Mateo County Event Center, CA

    Big Data in Biomedicine Conference: driving innovation for a healthier world
    May 20-22
    Stanford, CA

    First Workshop on Corpus-based Research in the Humanities (CRH)
    Paper deadline September 1

    Did we miss something? Send hot tips, cool CFPs, and warmly worded rants to admin@jitpedagogy.org.

  • Load More