Table of Comments - by contributor (view by section)
- AlexReid (1)
- Anne Balsamo (3)
- bkinney (2)
- Bruce Simon (1)
- C Avery (2)
- Cathy Davidson (9)
- Christine Alfano (1)
- David Theo Goldberg (1)
- dmsilver (7)
- ed lamoureux (2)
- Emcmahon (2)
- Genone (1)
- Jason Mittell (1)
- Kevin Guidry (3)
- kgs (2)
- LAC (1)
- Mechelle (1)
- MikeRoy (3)
- rcsha (1)
- seed (1)
- Trevor Shaw (3)
- steve jones (3)
- tpabeles (1)
- wheat (2)
- yardi1024 (1)
TWO POINTS
1) Re: sec.24 HASTAC has two equally important audiences,with different needs. The first audience consists of scholars and potential scholars who have or can acquire “technological, scientific, & engineering” skills. They need a support network where they can find a community that can critique their projects, inform them of related work occurring in their fields(s), and at best locate potential collaborators. (research)
HASTAC has a second audience of academics and academics-in-training who do not have the skills to advance or create technical, scientific, & engineering tools in a particular area, but who are comfortable with the existing tools (blogging, distributed applications such as Google Maps). They are eager to incorporate these tools into college and general education. This audience needs user-friendly “how-to” directions with varied successful examples, online help sources, and discussion boards for solutions to problems.
2) Re FOOTNOTE 18 nos. 1-4
Can we call the HASTAC project “INSTITUTIONS 2.0″? after the Web 2.0 idea of “distributed applications”?
The type of institution we are discussing is distributed rather than a single physical location; it has no search committees, no official requirements for tenure.
-Pat