1. Ways of promoting learning... to think in public, in defensible ways that rely on logic and evidence, not bluster, personality, majority, status/power, expedience, anecdote, rhetoric, emotion or tradition (per se).
1.1. Peer assess 500 words about the module title
1.1.1. 1st shot at writing
1.1.2. peermark
1.1.2.1. Online submission
1.1.2.1.1. with front sheet
1.1.2.2. Simplified rubric
1.1.2.3. Originality report
1.1.2.4. accessing feedback
1.1.3. Rehearse online submission without the nerves of a summative
1.2. Collaborative googledoc glossary
1.2.1. collaborative space
1.2.2. chosen set of key concepts
1.2.3. 2015 eg
1.2.4. 2016 eg
1.2.5. Ramp it up by asking awkward questions
1.2.5.1. how do you know
1.2.5.2. can you prove that?
1.2.5.3. what is the basis of this? Opinion?
1.2.5.4. Can you give me the source?
1.2.5.4.1. implication 'referencing'
1.2.5.4.2. What would be a good way of telling me the source?
1.2.5.5. Style of writing
1.2.6. Critical aspect - Division of labour
1.2.6.1. How can a term be improved?
1.2.6.2. Introduce the rubric
1.2.6.2.1. Is there anything about the prose that scores well considering the rubric criteria
1.3. Module-specific Taboo game
1.3.1. involves everyone - not just 'usual suspects' to enunciate the language of research
1.4. Fishbowl seminars
1.4.1. Explicit epistemology which values the practitioner's working knowledge BUT does not presume it is accurate!!
1.4.2. Openness to challenge
1.4.3. Encourages active listening
1.4.4. Give everyone a role
1.4.4.1. feedback
1.4.4.2. starter
1.4.4.3. timekeeper
1.5. Learning to Write
1.5.1. Reflective writing cycle
1.5.2. onpaper or online
1.5.3. SHARE!
1.6. assessment
1.6.1. Felicity's blogpost about vlogging
2. Key orienting concepts
2.1. Preparation
2.1.1. Habits of mind
2.1.2. Flow
2.1.3. Broad view of University purpose
2.1.3.1. Bildung
2.1.3.1.1. Rising up to the universal
2.1.3.1.2. Stretching the mind
2.1.3.2. Steve Fuller
2.1.3.2.1. Fuller's Keynote at NLC2014, Edinburgh: The Lecture 2.0
2.1.3.2.2. Leaders trained at University (because access very limited) to express and defend their opinions and actions
2.1.3.2.3. Everyone's supposed to demonstrate leadership these days!
2.1.3.2.4. ...and be able to defend themselves, their clients to a host of potential audiences.
2.1.3.3. Or are we just
2.1.3.3.1. Digital Diploma Mills
2.1.3.3.2. Research facilities
2.1.3.3.3. Russell Group
2.1.3.3.4. A metric
2.1.3.3.5. If you build it, they will come (and pay)
2.1.4. Kahneman's Thinking, Fast & Slow
2.1.4.1. Ray Land's Dromological paper in NLC2006
2.2. Rhetoric
2.2.1. Mark Forsyth
2.2.2. Brad Mehlenbacher
2.2.3. Simon Lancaster https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGBamfWasNQ
2.3. Peter Goodyear - Epistemic fluency
2.3.1. What constitutes useful knowledge in the world? 'Actionable knowledge & knowledgeable action'.
2.3.1.1. professional/vocational
2.3.1.2. abstract/traditional academic
2.3.1.3. Critical being/reflexivity
2.3.1.3.1. Personal epistemologies - Stephen Billet
2.3.1.3.2. Ron Barnett
2.3.1.4. All of the above
2.3.1.4.1. Describing Writing about an object or event so that your reader acquires an accurate idea of that object or event.
2.3.1.4.2. Explaining Writing about an event or pattern of events so that your reader understands why that event or pattern of events happened.
2.3.1.4.3. Predicting Writing so that your reader becomes convinced that the event in question will happen.
2.3.1.4.4. Arguing To give reasons for (or against) a particular position, thereby increasing (or decreasing) your reader's confidence that the position is right.
2.3.1.4.5. Critiquing Highlighting the good and bad points of something.
2.3.1.4.6. Explicating Writing so that your reader acquires a clearer understanding of something.
2.3.1.4.7. Defining To define a term is to propose how it should be used.
2.3.1.5. Resources
2.3.1.5.1. New Book
2.3.1.5.2. Old Book
2.3.1.5.3. Blog
2.3.2. Phronesis (practical wisdom)
2.3.2.1. wikipedia link
2.3.3. techne (technical knowledge)
2.3.4. Sophia (scholarship)