<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://pinboard.in">
    <title>Pinboard (mcmorgan)</title>
    <link>https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/public/</link>
    <description>recent bookmarks from mcmorgan</description>
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/MRtLN95uKOM/the-five-paragraph-essay-must-die"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hapgood.us/2018/09/14/a-short-history-of-craap/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine-brandel/first-year-composition-in_b_793588.html"/>
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
  </channel><item rdf:about="http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/MRtLN95uKOM/the-five-paragraph-essay-must-die">
    <title>The perennial 'The Five-Paragraph Essay Must Die' puffery</title>
    <dc:date>2018-12-25T17:13:41+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/MRtLN95uKOM/the-five-paragraph-essay-must-die</link>
    <dc:creator>mcmorgan</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Slashdot discussions are usually pretty good, sharp, insightful. This one is the equivalent of themewriting. Uninformed, over-determined, mindless recitation of received ideas, with all options removed from the world of discussion. Posturing and posing - the trope themewriting - passing for consideration. Just as teaching the theme passes for teaching. 

Read [The Plural “I” by William Coles](https://www.amazon.com/Plural-After-Jr-William-Coles/dp/0867092173/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1545757840&sr=8-1&keywords=The+plural+I ) for a considered critique of the deceit of the 5 para theme and an alternative curriculum. Out of print, so reprints are inexpensive. Or try a library. Or Scribd. ]]></description>
<dc:subject>teaching nonteaching curriculum themewriting rhetoric</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/b:a473fc789637/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:teaching"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:nonteaching"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:curriculum"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:themewriting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:rhetoric"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://hapgood.us/2018/09/14/a-short-history-of-craap/">
    <title>A Short History of CRAAP</title>
    <dc:date>2018-09-15T15:36:20+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://hapgood.us/2018/09/14/a-short-history-of-craap/</link>
    <dc:creator>mcmorgan</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Mike nails the central weaknesses in formula procedures. 

> So let’s keep that in mind as we consider what to do in the future: contrary to public belief we did teach students online information literacy. It’s just that we taught them methodologies that were developed to decide whether to purchase reference sets for libraries. 

Add this: the acronym was created to *teach* how to consider sources; it provides something to practice with, not to use in practice. All such acronyms are training wheels. One an acronym is learned, it should be set aside and insight gained from practice used, not the acronym. ]]></description>
<dc:subject>teaching nonteaching digital_literacy</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/b:f3ed9f15e56a/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:teaching"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:nonteaching"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:digital_literacy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine-brandel/first-year-composition-in_b_793588.html">
    <title>Christine Brandel: First Year Composition in Twenty Tweets</title>
    <dc:date>2010-12-09T14:39:30+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine-brandel/first-year-composition-in_b_793588.html</link>
    <dc:creator>mcmorgan</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Three notes: 1. These tweets aren't teaching; they are a teacher asserting her authority. Looks like teaching, but it isn't. 2. They aren't very good tweets. There's nothing memorable in them, nor concision, just reduction to the simplistic. 3. They sanction a misunderstanding of writing, and of teaching and learning. In a tweet, they fail to enact what they assert. And a comment: What do you do the second day of class? 
]]></description>
<dc:subject>teaching twitter nonteaching</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/b:6e376be5822c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:teaching"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:twitter"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mcmorgan/t:nonteaching"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>