gsole

#Welcome to my ePortfolio [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a> | [[Artifacts Bank->artifacts]] Hi! I'm Vee Kennedy (they/them/theirs) and I'm a Visiting Instructor in the Department of Rhetoric and Writing at the University of Central Florida. I'm also a student in the <a href="https://cah.ucf.edu/textstech"> Texts and Technology PhD Program</a> at UCF. Here's a very brief list of examples of creations I'm most proud of from my time in the <a href="https://gsole.org"> Global Society for Online Literacy Educators </a>Certification Program. In this portfolio, I have striven to convey a cohesive online literacy instruction centering around concepts of access and composition studies within disability studies as well as that of an instructor with interests in game studies and queer and trans rhetorics both inside and outside of my pedagogical processes and applications. The artifacts selected are products I created specifically for GSOLE Certification, although byproducts of my PhD in Texts and Technology at the University of Central Florida often in a synergistic sense appear here and there as well, as both influenced each other over the course of the eight-month certification process. The ePortfolio process was challenging in a number of ways, including determining how to select artifacts, which to select, and how to properly convey those artifacts. This is actually my second attempt at an ePorfolio for GSOLE, as my first one was returned for revisions. I have completely redone this ePortfolio from scratch, using both Twine in addition to more sophisticated HTML and CSS to code the shell. I also happened to option for GitHub as my host for this piece and coded each of the pages individually in Virtual Studio Code, which was also a challenge as it was somewhat outside of my purview but happened to be a skill I wanted to nurture. If I had to do it all again, I wish I would’ve built my portfolio continuously over the process of the certification instead of waiting until the end. I found it quite overwhelming to attempt to put the ePortfolio together at the very end over the Christmas holiday. Quite ironically, what happened to me is exactly what I try to avoid happening in my First Year Composition Students – I struggled at the end as opposed to thinking of the ePortfolio as part of the writing process from the very beginning. If I had a suggestion to make to the GSOLE faculty, it would be to consider this for future cycles of GSOLE participants. ###Artifacts [[Unit One QuickWrite->Unit One QuickWrite]] [[How I'm Thinking of Access in My Online Writing Classroom->oli-access-video]] [[Resources for Online Students at UCF Video->Resources for Online Students at UCF Video]] [[OLOR Review->OLOR Review]] [[Webinar Debrief->Webinar Debrief]] [[Teaching Community to Instructors->Teaching Community to Instructors]]

#About Me [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] Vee Kennedy (they/them/theirs) is a Visiting Instructor in the Department of Writing and Rhetoric at the University of Central Florida and a student in the Texts and Technology PhD Program. Their research interests are at the intersections of queer and trans rhetorics, gender, fandom, neurodivergence and (dis)ability.

#Theory of Online Literacy Instruction [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] For the most part, I find my teaching philosophy reflected in NCTE’s 2016 Position Statements on Professional Knowledge for the Teaching of Writing and the Mission Statement of the Global Society of Online Literacy Educators. Informed by the 1981 influential work of Flower & Hayes, I believe that writing is a process, and that people can learn to write by practicing writing - on their own, with peers, and with the ethical use of digital tools, which is why I embrace large language models like ChatGPT and GoogleBard as a writing technology when used with intentionality. I see a need for students to develop an understanding of these tools embedded already into the First Year Composition Program’s Learning Outcomes at the University of Central Florida when we ask students to purposefully integrate multimodality and multiliteracies into their work and develop information literacy skills. Writing curricula function best when they are influenced by the canons of both modern and ancient rhetoricians, which ultimately all teach in some capacity the importance of writing as a tool for thinking. Contemporary teaching of multimodality and information literacy must now include artificial intelligence, including how and when to use these technologies appropriately, how to provide appropriate attribution to the technology, the limitations of the technology, and assessing the legitimacy and correctness of the technology’s output. Not only does this empower students in a growingly digital world, but it also normalizes the use of adaptive technology for those of us who are disabled and as such may need to use technological devices in class for accessibility reasons. What, you may ask, is the connection between online literacy education and large language model artificial intelligence technology? In a time when large publications like The Atlantic are hailing the death of the college essay and that writing instructors and writing center consultants will soon be replaced by ChatBots, we cannot forget the human connection of what it means to teach and to learn in an online community. Allow me to provide an example of how these beliefs function within my classroom space. Imagine walking (or zooming) into a college composition classroom on your first day at your new university. Perhaps you are a brand-new First Time in Any College student, or perhaps you are a transfer student. You may have benefitted from ample preparation for college writing in your prior educational experiences, or you may have not. The one thing you know for certain is that you absolutely must pass this class to graduate, whether you plan on majoring in Writing and Rhetoric, or if you plan to never take a writing class again. The instructor plays some AI-generated music and asks who is singing, only to then inform the class that the artist they think is singing never sang this piece, and that the music they’re hearing was constructed by a computer without the artist’s permission and that they were never compensated for the use of their voice. You and your classmates are temporarily riled up enough to want to throw your laptops out the window and swear off technology forever, but then the instructor explains that this same technology was used to let us have one last goodbye with our favorite Star Wars princess and general, Carrie Fisher, and a part of how Dr. Stephen Hawking was able to conduct scholarly work and communicate for an additional fifty years we would not have had otherwise, and even part of how we can have automatically generated captions in our lecture. On the syllabus, the first place we turn is the accommodations section page. The instructor holds up copies of their own Letters of Accommodation from college and invites students to speak to them privately if they’ve ever had a letter like this or a 504 plan or IEP in K-12, think they might need one of these letters, or if they have any questions about disability in college, including mental health conditions like anxiety and depression. The instructor also explicitly states that the letter is in no way a prerequisite to this conversation. All are welcome, at all times. Later, the instructor opens a new tab in ChatGPT and pastes the first assignment prompt into the chat bar. Together, all parties in the room discuss what the technology outputs in conjunction with the rubric. While the product of the technology may be a good start to stimulate one’s writing process, we discuss how the technology cannot authentically replicate the experience of participating in a college writing class and re-thinking, re-seeing, and rewriting a piece and how if all we are able to produce as writers is the same as what this technology can, we are unemployable. Nuance and proper use, we realize, are everything, and we must strive to develop and nurture skill sets that will set us apart after graduation. Together we will spend a semester writing, communicating, and learning in ways that will prepare us all for a diverse set of experiences going forward, regardless of what our backgrounds are, whether we plan to continue college coursework either in this university or in another one, or what majors or career plans we might embark on.

#How I'm Thinking of Access in My Online Writing Classroom [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aRrsy6Tu9b0?si=M5jtyEhZVeXLUbDZ" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe> ###Reflection This module asked us to think about design and access. This is something we have seen referenced in Disability Studies within Composition Studies research, specifically, the idea of access. <img src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/img/oliscreenshotmod12.png" alt="Unit 1 QuickWrite" style="width:px;600 height:450px;"> The principle above referenced from the annotation activity discusses iterative practices and evolving discussions around access. A further expansion of this that came to me in the second module came from this reading out of the PARs book: <img src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/img/oliaccessscreenshot2.png" alt="Unit 1 QuickWrite" style="width:px;600 height:450px;"> ...Which might be instructor access, or thinking of how the conversation of contigent faculty and labor/compensation among junior faculty may intersect with online literacy instruction.

#Resources for Online Students at UCF [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] <div style="position: relative; width: 100%; height: 0; padding-top: 56.2500%; padding-bottom: 0; box-shadow: 0 2px 8px 0 rgba(63,69,81,0.16); margin-top: 1.6em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 8px; will-change: transform;"> <iframe loading="lazy" style="position: absolute; width: 100%; height: 100%; top: 0; left: 0; border: none; padding: 0;margin: 0;" src="https://www.canva.com/design/DAFetlm2La4/PtCeRJJV3y0xVcgnBlas_A/view?embed" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" allow="fullscreen"> </iframe> </div> <a href="https://www.canva.com/design/DAFetlm2La4/PtCeRJJV3y0xVcgnBlas_A/view?utm_content=DAFetlm2La4&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=embeds&utm_source=link" target="_blank" rel="noopener"></a> ###Reflection The readings in this module provided me with a working definiton of access that I found quite agreeable to my practices: "little things that instructors do that impede students." <img src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/img/2oliaccessdefinitionscreenshot3.png" alt="Unit 1 QuickWrite" style="width:px;550 height:450px;"> The examples here are particularly generative, considering things like paywalls, international law differences, and more.

#OLOR Review [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] <embed src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/Kennedy_Review.pdf" width="750" height="1000" type="application/pdf"> ###Reflection For this module, I had the privilege of writing a book review as my artifact. The article has since been sent off to an editor and, as of the sixteenth of May, 2024, was published. The finalized published version can be found <a href="https://gsole.org/olor/reviews/2024.05.16/"> here. </a>

#Webinar Debrief [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] <embed src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/WebinarDebrief.pdf" width="750" height="1000" type="application/pdf"> ###Reflection In addition to the lovely webinar, readings this module accessed the acessibility of grades. I related this to additional stakeholders within writing program administration. <img src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/img/4pushback.png" alt="Pushback" style="width:px;550 height:450px;"> Additionally, as time as gone on in Florida, my teaching context makes me reflect on this webinar with a bit of a sadness -- DEI is currently outside of the realm of our capabilities.

#Teaching Community to Instructors [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QUUN1DAThuI?si=slffIWEu7nFgLxAf" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe> ###Reflection The original title for this video walkthrough was ‘Teaching Community to Instructors’ in line with the readings and materials of GSOLE’s Module 7 Materials, however, a proposed retitling for this section was ‘How I Foster Community’ instead. Reason being, there is a marked difference between mandating replies and inauthentic exchange in an online discussion board and actually fostering community. One of the greatest challenges we may face as online writing instructors is ensuring that students are actually interacting as a community instead of just typing into the void. My strategies for fostering better community engagement include using the Canvas gradebook functionality to ‘Message Students Who…’ in order to communicate both broadly and individually with students to provide reminders and feedback. Discussed in this video is also concerns I have about access with tools like Flipgrid that mandate video responses. One key takeaway not emphasized enough in this video is how text-based conversation and replies alone are not enough to scaffold community. It should be noted that this environment exists in a context situated with multiple icebreaker activities over a period of multiple weeks where students are consistently provided choices for engagement. A useful reflection from this module comes from the assigned reading on fostering instructional design for social presence from MacKinnon et al, entitled Instructor Perspectives on Building Community in Online Discussion-Based Courses: Issues of Pedagogy and Functionality (2020) which centers around the collaborative workspace tool PeppeR. While I do not use PeppeR, I do strive to and am continuing to build ways in which, as the author’s advocate, to ensure a balance between Richardson et al’s ideas (2012) of teaching presence, social presence and cognitive presence are balanced within the webcourse space. One strategy that I was introduced to in this module from a peer in the QuickWrite phase was the idea of a ‘weekly recap’ video, in which the instructor would close out the week by speaking to points discussed in the discussion board and providing shoutouts to students for their exemplary engagement as well as a space to answer any questions that may have arisen in an open space.

#Unit 1 QuickWrite [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a>| [[Artifacts->artifacts]] <img src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/gsoleqw.png" alt="Unit 1 QuickWrite" style="width:px;600 height:450px;"> ###Reflection The readings in this module include GSOLE's Mission Statement and Online Literacy Instruction Principles. For me, this module was also the first place where I began to rethink of what constituted "online literacy instruction" as something that does not just occur in fully asynchronous or mixed mode courses. <img src="https://veekenne.github.io/gsole/img/oliscreenshotmod1.png" alt="Mission Statement Annotation" style="width:px;600 height:450px;"> When I was in my K-12 school programming in the United States and even in my undergraduate courses, having an in-person class meant having a class that met in person and seldom, if ever, included a computer. Often times in undergrad, in-person courses had no online gradebook, and instead of readings coming from PDFs on a GoogleDrive or Canvas, we were instructed to go to the local printing store to buy a printed copy of a course pack curated by the professor. Now, a decade after finishing my BA, the so-called "fully face-to-face" writing courses I teach include fully developed online component web shells not terribly different from the ones I include in my Mixed Mode or fully online courses. In this QuickWrite, I was considering between two modes of meaning for my first artifact. I ended up selecting the video option, which can be watched [[here->oli-access-video]].

#Artifacts Bank [[About Me->About]] | [[Theory of Online Literacy Instruction->OLI]] | <a href="https://veekenne.github.io/home/kennedycv.pdf">CV</a> [[Unit One QuickWrite->Unit One QuickWrite]] [[How I'm Thinking of Access in My Online Writing Classroom->oli-access-video]] [[Resources for Online Students at UCF Video->Resources for Online Students at UCF Video]] [[OLOR Review->OLOR Review]] [[Webinar Debrief->Webinar Debrief]] [[Teaching Community to Instructors->Teaching Community to Instructors]]