Today’s class was pretty good. First I asked the students to individually read one of four different web fictions for ten or fifteen minutes. The options were Tor ?ge BringsvÊrd’s dictionary story Faen. NÂ har de senket takh¯yden igjen, Liz Miller: Moles: A Web Narrative, Gavin Inglis: Same Day Test or Olia Lialina’s My Boyfriend Came Back From the War. Then they discussed the way in which the piece was structured with two or three other students who had read the same piece. I asked them to see if they could draw the structure, and while that didn’t really work with all the works, they figured out some important stuff doing it. For instance, in BringsvÊrd’s piece there’s an index with links to all the other pages. It’s not the entry page of the site. Students decided that since it was called “indeks” and had links to everything else, that must mean the piece is hierarchically organised, which made it obvious that we hadn’t really figured out what hierarchies are in previous discussions.

After that, I talked a bit about hypertext in general, Bush, Engelbart, Nelson, various systems, the web, hypertext fiction, a brief demo of afternoon, and a sampling of some print “hypertexts”. I think I talked for about ten minutes. Yes, it was the short version. Then, after a break (we’d already used 55 minutes) the class regrouped with four to a group and each person had read a different work. They presented the works to each other and tried to work out which, if any, of Mark’s patterns could describe each work. Only two had actually read Mark’s article, and obviously had they read it it would have been easier for them, but they had it on screen and figured some stuff out, and they can read more later. Then I brought out the list of stages of learning we talked about on Tuesday and told them that so far, they’d described and classified, and done a really good job of it too. They’d also started comparing, which is one step up. Another move ahead would be to figure out whether there’s a connection between the patterns in the work and its content (explain causes), and perhaps even generate new ideas based on these reflections.

It all ran smoothly, the students came up with some wonderful interpretations, most of them were avidly blogging their thoughts by the end of the class, and I didn’t even get into a sweat worrying that I had to magically get them to summarise everything in a fancy plenary discussion. I usually worry about that. I’m just so impressed that the students worked so much out on their own. I actually managed to set up an activity where they could do their own learning. Yay!


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

5 thoughts on “a class i’m happy with

  1. meredith

    Sounds like a very interesting class- great links!

  2. Jill

    Thanks 🙂

  3. Robert's blog

    Online fiction
    Finally found some nice on-line fiction; one of several listed in Jill/txt:A class I’m happy with. (I’ve searching the web for this sort of thing for some time but until now hadn’t found much. ) I picked Same Day Test…

  4. Robert's blog

    More on ‘Test’
    I’ve gone through Same Day Test hypertext fiction again. On my first run-through, attempting to check out the various facets of the narrative, I made what I thought was a perverse and erratic navigation, yet the story was over very…

  5. […] Do small group tasks and instead of (or as well as) doing the full class open discussion afterwards, have students write individual blog posts answering the small group assignment towards the end of the class. Many will actually finish a blog post at home if they’ve started on it in class, but hardly any will write it at home if they’ve not already started it – well, unless it’s compulsory and being graded. Here’s an example […]

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.