2026 #20 Teaching With AI (Bowen/Watson)

 

Teaching with AI: A Practical Guide to a New Era of Human Learning by José Antonio Bowen
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

If you are an educator, no matter where you land on the topic of AI, you should, as Louis Epstein said in a review of the first edition in the Journal of Music History Pedagogy*, “read this book.” Epstein also notes the authors’ “almost gleeful boosterism,” and indeed, there is no real doubt that they assume AI as a given. In the epilogue to the second edition, the authors generously allow: “Faculty are the ultimate decision-maker, arbiter of quality, and content expert within their own classroom” (319). But make no mistake, the book is unapologetically prescriptive: “You need to start playing and working with AI” (319); “Our curriculum and classroom discussions also need immediately to include AI topics around ethics, data privacy, civics, environmental and energy costs, labor, discrimination and bias” (321). On those latter fronts, if you are looking for advice on how to approach those topics, this is not the book for that (it will only tell you that you need to, not necessarily HOW to). Most of the book is focused on better prompt writing, because, as the authors claim: “All assignments are now AI assignments” (245). In his aforementioned review, Epstein notes that the “unspoken thesis” of the book is that student and faculty are now forced “to decide what really matters to us in our teaching and learning”. I don’t disagree, actually, but I have a feeling my human-generated SWOT analysis of AI and that of the authors would differ greatly.

Bowen and Watson offer: “The new goal of any assignment, especially a writing assignment, is to emphasize the important human contribution while recognizing the realities presented by AI” (250). I like the use of the word “realities” here, but the book is instead heavily focused on “opportunities”, with a strong belief that if we invest the time, students can integrate AI in meaningful ways. What isn’t clear (yet), is how this will really play out, given students’ various motivations for “efficiency.” There are good select studies on issues such as human agency in creative problem solving in AI collaboration, but the full-scale adoption of AI as our “thought partner” in higher ed has not yet come to pass in such a way that we have large-scale data on the impact. But we are probably getting there.

There are some seeming contradictions. Some of the examples and prompts offered by the authors mention how AI can be used to alter/experiment with “voice” in a piece of writing. I’ll be transparent and say that this, along with a new interpretation on the role of citation in writing, is one my biggest issues with AI. If I go full-on “the Borg are coming,” this is where I see a real abdication of human-ness. So, I found it odd to offer guidance on including “voice” in prompts for AI (p.59), but then in Chapter 8, on “Cheating and Detection”, the authors advocate starting a conversation with a student who you suspect might have used AI with “I don’t really hear your voice as much as I would like” (161). I happen to think that’s a GREAT way to start the conversation (and I have), but I also don’t encourage them to use AI with thorough prompts that include directions to “respond as if you were x” or write “like an engineer.” The conflation of “language” and “voice” I find problematic as well.

There is also a lack of acknowledgement of potential tokenism and essentialism in prompting AI in the ways the authors describe. For example, as a faculty member, the authors promote doing a practice conversation with AI wherein it is prompted to be “my student Jeff, who is a nineteen-year-old from Wisconsin majoring in biology and taking my course pass/fail” and then directed: “Please respond as if you were Jeff.” (133) While only a “practice conversation” and not a script, it posits poor Jeff as some sort of archetype of whatever identities we’ve given the AI. It isn’t to say that our experience of Jeff IRL is complete, but one hopes that we might have a better sense of Jeff as a student than an AI combing known character traits of nineteen-year-olds, biology majors, and folks from Wisconsin. More problematic (perhaps) is the counsel: “Perhaps you simply ask the AI to be an under-represented voice in the room (225).” On the same page, an author might ask an AI to “reimagine” their work with the lead character as “an Asian American and identify what plot lines might need to be changed.” I note that it does say “might”, but the idea that we would ask AI to represent “an Asian American” doesn’t seem any better than asking an Asian American to speak for all Asian Americans.

My critique of the authors’ suggestions for citation goes far beyond the confines of their book. There seems to have been a large-scale shift in discussion about “checking citations” without highlighting the point of citation in the first place. I carefully say “seems” here, because this is a baseline perception, not a carefully researched thesis. But the authors tell me that I might, as a scholar writing an article, prompt an AI with “Who are the other major figures in this field, who might be reviewers of this article? What work of theirs should I cite?” (114). I understand the pragmatism there, but why not instead: “What work of theirs should I read?” I don’t think that’s a pedantic distinction.

In the chapter on “Reimagining Creativity”, the authors supply a cartoonish image created with Gemini-2.5 via a prompt that prescribed “style of a Renaissance woodcut with seventeenth-century London in the background” and features Genghis Khan on the left with his face merged into a strawberry, and Queen Victoria is on the right with her face hybridized with a cauliflower (Figure 4.1, 81). Both figures then have a thought bubble (as directed in the prompt) that asks “Will anyone care if we are AI generated?” The image is an answer to the question the authors pose: “What if AI makes the art itself?...Humans still need to think of the ideas, but does it matter whether AI was used to realize the actual image?” (80) Bowen and Watson don’t have the answer, but only offer “There are important personal, social, economic, and ethical issues that deserve a place for discussion in society and in our revised curricula.” (80). These discussions have long been part of artistic and creative production (think digital photography), so they aren’t wrong, but I’m growing tired of the “just because we can” advocacy when it comes to AI. I'm reminded of an AI demo on my campus wherein we were shown how one might create a "nature documentary" using AI generated images. I was alarmed that the irony was not acknowledged.

Ultimately, however, the book backs a lot of what is just good pedagogy. For example, there’s an excellent suggested exercise for a class on defining values, teamwork and accountability (180 – 181), something that mirrors the “Community Agreements” I facilitate for all my classes. Whether that discussion needs to be in service of using AI or not might be challenged, but it is good that it is offered in the book. Table 12.1, an “Assignment template combining motivation, task clarity, and success criteria” is another useful example both in and outside of AI contexts. And while I have not yet embraced intentional integration of AI into my own teaching/course content, I might get behind allowing specific prompts such as “Identify which ideas and arguments in this essay are common, flawed, repetitive, heteronormative, or culturally limited”(268). I see this as a bit different than the prompt I mentioned above that essentializes Asian Americans, but I’d have to run it on several examples for myself to see what a given AI calls “culturally limited.”

And that’s probably the biggest problem. One takeaway from the book is that converting core critical thinking skills into AI prompts is no simple task, and it isn’t until the Epilogue that Bowen and Watson seem to vaguely acknowledge the immense amounts of labor being placed on faculty: “Much of the AI-fueled pedagogical revision on college campuses has emerged as another unfunded mandate for faculty and their time.” (325) Even if I entertain sharing just the basic information of this book regarding how to prompt, I cannot imagine doing so at the sacrifice of things I find just as (or more) important for my particular course. And I certainly do not have the time to teach them “how to be expert prompters” AND music history. It isn’t to say that I can’t incorporate “relevant” examples and creative projects, but I certainly cannot afford the time to invest in the type of nuanced prompting the authors promote. So, who will? That remains to be seen.

So yes, my colleague Louis is right. Read this book. It features excellent and recent sources, and it will either strengthen your resolve, confirm your intentions, or move the needle to the middle, depending on your starting point.

*Now called The Journal of Musicology Pedagogy  


View all my reviews

2026 #2 Ungrading (Blum, ed.)

 

Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead) by Susan D. Blum
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Another excellent tome in the Teaching and Learning in Higher Education series from West Virginia University Press, Blum's Ungrading is probably one of the most often cited sources on the topic. The essays in the book provide "solutions in the plural" as Blum puts it, recognizing that capacity and agency will vary across faculty and different contexts, and that ultimately "Ungrading" can mean a lot of different things. Jessie Stommel's "How to Ungrade" offers a fairly extreme form of ungrading (no grades until the course grade, only feedback), while others provide more moderated approaches. Always as entertaining as he is erudite, John Warner gives us "Wile E. Coyote, The Hero of Ungrading" milking an extended metaphor in service of understanding the challenges of ungrading (for both learner and teacher/facilitator). I appreciated Marcus Shultz-Bergin's reflections, "Grade Anarchy in the Philosophy Classroom" which reminds us that we should be prepared for (some) things to perhaps not work as well as we thought they might. In other words --- stay humble. Celebrate your victories, learn from your mistakes. For those interested in a diving in a bit more deeply to pedagogical theory, Christopher Riesbeck's "Critique-Driven Learning and Assessment" gives good information about how to mix the quantitative and the narrative when it comes to assessment.

The mix of approaches and perspectives is generally an asset, although I found some of the essays less relevant and/or robust. As a whole, however, a very worthy read and a great place to start if you want to know about alternative grading.

View all my reviews

Challenges on Storygraph (@rebcamuse):

2026 Reading Goals: 2/60

Tackle Your Physical TBR 2/18

2025 #57 Failing Our Future (Eyler)

 

Failing Our Future: How Grades Harm Students, and What We Can Do about It by Joshua R. Eyler
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a great primer for those uninitiated to the idea of alternative grading, or those who need a baseline rationale. Beautifully researched and convincingly argued, Eyler demonstrates, on multiple levels, the actual harm of grading as a system, without resorting to heavy-handed rhetoric or sanctimonious finger-wagging. Eyler's audience should be parents, educators, and administrators, and there is wisdom here for both K-12 and higher ed. For the purposes of this particular book, his grouping of several alternative grading models under "Standards Based Grading" (SBG) makes sense, but it means that this is not the book if you are looking for nuanced explanations of the differences between, for example, SBG and Specifications (or "Specs") Grading. For that I recommend Grading for Growth by David Clark and Robert Talbert -- a book Eyler cites. Some of the stats and case studies make for tough reading, so consider this a content warning as he does briefly mention suicides at particular institutions (hopefully that doesn't shock anyone working for more than a few years in higher ed). Eyler covers a lot of ground in terms of providing both background and practical advice, and the rich bibliography is a fruitful place for further exploration.

View all my reviews

2025 #30: More Than Words: How to Think About Writing in the Age of AI (Warner)

 

More Than Words: How to Think About Writing in the Age of AI by John Warner
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

One might draw parentheses around "in the Age of AI" when it comes to John Warner's excellent book. If there is one thing that is certain, generative AI has made it necessary to think about writing in general, as the assumed ubiquity of AI has implied definitions of writing that are certainly unsatisfactory from a pedagogical standpoint, and stand as evidence of the marketplace's power to (try to) shape our destiny. But this isn't just another example of capitalism's dominion. Many uses of AI ask us how much of our humanity we are willing to relinquish? The answer is demoralizing for many of us, yet Warner does provide a framework which he details in the last section of the book: Resist. Renew. Explore.

Warner starts, however, at the "beginning". He eschews "intelligence" as a synonym for "automation" --the real function of AI. I'll admit to a strong confirmation bias, but Warner puts AI through its paces to offer a well-considered and informative critique that I found incredibly helpful in quieting the bile that rises in my throat when it seems everyone has just obeyed our AI overlords in advance. He begins with an accessible explanation of what ChatGPT is and what it is doing when activated. While it is informative, it also serves to remind us that, at some level, we must understand how technology works rather than just allow ourselves to be uniformly awed (or galled) by its "magic." He is openly critical of the propaganda put forth by AI advocates who stand to gain financially (e.g. Sam Altman), but carefully debunks their claims rather than resorting to panicked invective.

Some of the chapter titles read like tongue-in-cheek clickbait, but it adds to Warner's overall sense of humor, which pops up throughout the narrative. To be sure, we are reading a very human writer.

Chapters 3 to 9 offer a more personalized view--almost a mini-memoir of Warner's own life as a writer-- but peppered with rather significant points about semiotics and rhetoric that are a heckuva lot more reader-friendly than most of what is written about semiotics and rhetoric. On a personal level, Chapter 6, "Writing is Feeling" touched me the most, and I think mileage will vary on that depending on the life experiences of the reader. I wasn't quite prepared for tears in encountering one of the most perfect meditations on grief I've ever read. I won't quote it here, but it is on p. 84 (hardcover). It underscores that this is very much a book about being human.

Chapter 7, "Writing as a Practice" felt a bit less useful and more of a (gentle) mouthing-off against the "one key thing" mentality that prompts us to enthusiastically adopt the shiny thing du jour. His diplomatic takedown of Gladwell and Duckworth's themes felt more gratuitous than other parts of the book, but that may be because I needed no convincing at the outset.

Writing teachers (and teachers that use writing) will find chapters 11 to 14 particularly useful, especially if they are interested in having conversations with their students about AI--or rather, about writing. The title for Chapter 16 privileges an anecdote that Warner uses to address one of the most important points of all: writing as intention.

Importantly, Warner encourages constant education, but measured by our own specialities and areas of focus. We cannot possibly read all the things about AI (my Substack feed overwhelms me every day), but it is important to push back at our own confirmation bias as well. I appreciated that Warner notes that he is almost "more obligated to read [Ethan Mollick] because I disagree with him.' (275). There's hope if we engage with thoughtful voices like Mollick, Marc Watkins, and others. Warner says we must foster community:

"Our communities inevitably must contain both those with whom we agree and those with whom we differ. As long as they are willing to see themselves as a member of the community with the well-being of the community in mind, they should be welcome." (275).

I'd like to print that out banner-size and hang it in a few places...

From the morally questionable beginnings of the founding of AI, the degradation of labor (and human-ness), to the careless implementation of automated grading, Warner is clear that we are leaning toward a Faustian bargain when it comes to AI. As a teacher, I was particularly struck by this:

"Writing is meant to be read. Having something that cannot read [AI] generate responses to writing is wrong. It is a moral betrayal of our responsibilities to students." (240) Far too often in discussions of AI I have heard "efficiency" used as a synonym for "pedagogy" and they are certainly not the same thing.

But Warner is also pragmatic: "There is no wishing away AI at this point, meaning it must be grappled with and done so in a way that preserves our humanity." (128) He allows for the limited use of LLMs in processing text (not reading, not writing): "Only humans can read. Only humans can write. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.." (123)

AI has made it necessary (possible?) to critique our values when it comes to a lot of things, but especially writing. Most educational systems are founded on valuing product over process, so we can't be that surprised when we find that students are using ChatGPT to "cheat." Efficiency is key in the systems we uphold. If we want to truly have our students embrace the "messiness of learning", we have to stop honoring that which privileges standardization and the mechanization of education. The second part of Warner's framework is "renew" and he makes a more-than-convincing case that we can refuse to assimilate into some sort of algorithmic Borg, and instead embrace the human processes of reacting, observing, analyzing, and synthesizing as cause for celebration, rather than erasing them in the name of efficiency.



View all my reviews

2024 #55 Specifications Grading (Nilson)

 

Specifications Grading by Linda B. Nilson
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a great intro to specs grading, albeit maybe a bit dated. I would love to see an update that integrates UDL (Universal Design for Learning) in an overt way. Some of it is implicit, especially in the models that offer options/choice of assignments in learning bundles. I would have liked a better representation of counterargument literature, particularly as I still have questions about those students who sell themselves short already due to things like internalized racism. I'm also questioning the fairness of the specific model wherein "more work" = A, because students have different socio-economic circumstances and it may not be an option for some students to devote the extra time. I suppose it is then incumbent upon the professor to make sure that the "more work" levels are attainable by students just as they would (we hope) in traditional grading. It is a tricky business, on the other hand, because some students have to work so much just to pay their tuition and the cost comes at not being able to fully engage in that which they are paying for. I realize that issue goes beyond specs grading, but I do think it is part of the larger conversation.

Those questions aside, however, there are plentiful examples of application and syllabus language that are very helpful. Nilson explains relevant terms and makes the text very accessible. The index makes the book helpful as a reference.

View all my reviews

2023 #11: Small Teaching Online (Darby/Lang)

 

Small Teaching Online: Applying Learning Science in Online Classes by Flower Darby
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a useful book, packed full of good tips, but could have been a bit more concise in places. I found myself wishing for a bit more empirical evidence that these things work, but I understand not all of them are tried and true (yet). For skeptics, some of it may seem idealized, but one can push past the sunny language and see the point Darby makes. For example: "When they see the relevance of coursework, the thread that ties everything together, students are more wiling to complete activities and assessments in a way that promotes meaningful learning. (23)" Well, we know that's not always the case, but Darby pushes us to honor the highest potential. I very much appreciated the application of "small teaching" approaches and the advocacy that online teaching can be (and should be) meaningful and interactive. At this point, even those who had to "emergency pivot" to online teaching during the pandemic should have figured out that it requires pedagogical considerations and isn't just a 1:1 transition. From that perspective, I found some of the cheerleading excessive, but not to the detriment of the book's value as a whole. Darby offers specific ways to implement UDL (Universal Design for Learning) practices (i.e. "Provide multiple topics and questions in online discussion prompts" and "Let students sign up for groups based on a topic they want to delve into"). There's a lot of general wisdom as well, that isn't just applicable to online teaching: "Giving the students something to do while watching a mini-lecture video, for example, encourages active listening and attentive processing of new information." (187). That seems obvious, perhaps, but I think there are times in my own teaching when I've just dialed in the lecture or the listening assignment, without really connecting it to its own specific learning outcomes. To be sure, it can be tough to give that extra 10% sometimes, but the idea of "small teaching" is based upon making these small changes, one at a time, for greater cumulative effect down the road. Darby makes sure to reiterate this in the final pages when discussing how we approach challenges. And perhaps the most important question Darby asks is: "How will you keep yourself motivated? How do you plan to assess the impact of your efforts? (225)". THIS is the missing piece. Teachers can read books and attend conferences, filling their hearts and minds with myriad exciting ideas...but what happens when those experiments fail? Do we just assign "x idea" to the scrap heap, or do we sit down and assess what went wrong and what are the adjustments that need to be made? That's where the space/time is really needed, and perhaps institutions of higher ed would be wise to consider pedagogy-specific guided sabbaticals, increased PRODUCTIVE and CONSTRUCTIVE faculty reviews, and mandatory (and compensated) faculty peer groups. Darby's offerings are helpful for the already-motivated teacher, but should also be embraced by administrators.

View all my reviews

2020 #9: So You Want To Talk About Race (Ijeoma Oluo)

So You Want to Talk About Race by Ijeoma Oluo
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Because if you believe in justice and equality you believe in it all the time, for all people. You believe in it for newborn babies, you believe it in for single mothers, you believe in it for kids on the street, you believe in justice and equality for people you like and people you don't. You believe in it for people who don't say please. (204)

This is just one of many "mic drop" moments from Ijeoma Oluo in a book that is a terrific "primer" on racial dialogue (or sometimes, monologue--therein lies part of the problem). Oluo tackles the most common complaints and the stickiest topics: privilege, intersectionality, police brutality, affirmative action, school-to-prison pipeline, the "N" word, cultural appropriation, microaggressions, and more. If you know that person who says they aren't racist but also feels fragile when it comes to confronting these issues, this is probably a great book for them to read.

Oluo remains accessible, but not neutral. She speaks truth to power with patience. It takes courage to look at so many injustices and try to invoke them as "teachable moments" in the hope of creating understanding and action. To be sure, this isn't just about how to talk to that difficult relative or neighbor, but it is an important look at some of our most common failings that drive and create injustices--in our schools, in our communities, and in our homes.

But this isn't just a prescriptive book for white people. It is for everyone. Her chapter on the model minority myth does a really good job of explaining racism against Asian Americans, including (but not limited to), rendering a good chunk of "Asian" peoples as invisible (e.g. Pacific Islanders, Southeast Asians):

While every racial minority in the US in subject to harmful stereotyping, the model minority myth becomes hard to combat when it is not seen as harmful because the people most harmed by it are also made invisible by it. (194)

Occasionally Ijeoma peppers her prose with little bits of humor. When she writes about her mother and says "I am forever a bratty teenager in her presence" that reaches across to many adult daughters and their mothers. But for the most part, the talk is direct and very clear. She uses metaphors for understanding, but never lets them veer off topic. For white people---she lets us know we are racist. Full stop. Men in a patriarchy are sexist. Able-bodied people are ableist. "You can sometimes be all of these things at once," she reminds us. (217).

Oluo calls us to examine all our identities and ALL our moments: "...in reality we are both the culmination of those countless moments, and each moment individually in time." (217). If you find yourself reading this review and thinking "but, but, but" or rolling your eyes, please DO read this book. I think it will help you talk to yourself about race--and that is the first conversation that needs to happen before any others.

2020 #8: Tutoring Second Language Writers (eds. Bruce/Rafoth)

Tutoring Second Language Writers by Shanti Bruce
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This anthology, edited by the same team as ESL Writers: A Guide for Writing Center Tutors is an excellent collection of essays--all of which have use for anyone who teaches L2 learners. There is a strong leaning toward incorporation of diversity, equity, and inclusion principles in various essays that consider the complexity of "competency", multiple frameworks, and "accommodationist" principles (Carol Severino, 2006). Some of the offerings are short, but potent, such as Jose L. Reyes Medina's "Some Things I Did to Help Myself Learn to Write." Others, like Rebecca Babcock's "Examining Practice: Designing a Research Study" and case studies in Puerto Rico, as well as working with specific identities (such as Jocelyn Amevuvor's "Building A Cultural Bridge Between Ghana and the United States in the Writing Center") have more striking relevance in the writing center context. Those who are new to the concept of multi-faceted identity and how that informs a student's experience will appreciate Ben Rafoth's "Second Language Writers, Writing Centers, and Reflection," which, taking its cue from Harris and Silva (1993), recognizes the "diversity of concerns" of the L2 student. Likewise, Michelle Cox outlines the different facets of identity: those which we are born with, those we inherit, those we create, and those constructed for us as key to understanding how to address the multiple challenges of teaching a non-monolithic group of students who are nevertheless categorized as "ESL" (see her essay "Identity Construction, Second Language Writers, and the Writing Center."

As a teacher, the set of the essays that make up the fourth part ("Academic Expectations") was most useful. Valerie Balester reinforces the idea that understanding multiple identities is key to providing an equitable and inclusive experience for L2 students: "In truth, no single approach works, and applying a single approach to all L2 writers/speakers regardless of their needs, desires, or learning preferences, simply because we assume learning English grammar means learning English rhetoric, would constitute Othering." (200-- See Balester, "Tutoring Against Othering: Reading and Writing Critically"). Beyond philosophical considerations, Balester also provides helpful and concrete ways to use meaning to discuss local (lower-order) concerns in a student's writing. While Jennifer Craig's essay "Unfamiliar Territory: Tutors Working with Second Language Writers on Disciplinary Writing" addresses working with students outside one's own discipline, it is very helpful in understanding the challenges of building a general language proficiency and a disciplinary lexicon at the same time--not to mention writing conventions, tone, and style. Primyupa W. Praphan and Guiboke Seong's "Helping Second Language Writers Become Self-Editors" reconsiders "error correction" and its role in the tutoring experience. The authors also help clarify distinctions such as pragmatic errors vs. grammatical errors and recommend a set of strategies for before, during, and after a tutoring session. These principles are easily applied (and should be) to anyone who is assessing/reading L2 learners' writing. This last essay is particularly important as there are several alarming examples (throughout the book) of instructor/professor commentary on student papers that is ego-maniacal, counter-productive, and glaringly unhelpful in its Othering or complete cultural incompetency. In the context of the book the authors see the Writing Center as a place that mitigates this ignorance/bias on the part of the instructors, but teachers would do well to curb these practices at the outset.


Cross-posted at Musical Miscellaneous Mayhem

2020 #4 Learning Across Cultures (Eds. Mikk/Steglitz)

Learning Across Cultures Locally and Globally by Barbara Kappler Mikk
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

While this book is geared toward international and study-abroad programs, there are many essays within that will be helpful for anyone who teaches international students. There are places where the prose could have been curtailed and occasionally the boos seems like a thinly veiled advertisement for NAFSA (Association of International Educators--and the publisher of the book).

Depending on the needs of the reader, mileage will vary in terms of the relevance of each chapter. Jeremy Geller's "Terminology and Intersections" is a good primer for those new to the concept of interculturalism. Geller's parsing of "international" vs. "global" is a useful mindset for considering approaches to curriculum and pedagogy. Shanton Chang and Catherine Gomes offer valuable insights in their contribution, "International Student Identity and the Digital Environment." In addition to an overarching application of "mobile" and "interesecting" identities, the authors make several sound recommendations for how best to approach integration and use of digital platforms with a student cohort. This particular essay has immediate relevance to our current situation in 2020. Most importantly, the authors remind us that a student's self-identification in terms of culture (broadly defined) is central, and that even seemingly innocuous terms like "international student" can mean something different to the student than those who use the terms most frequently. Katherine Punteney introduces the concept of "intercultural competence" and continues some of the threads implied in the previous essay. As with the Shang/Gomes essay, Punteney's "Social Psychology in Intercultural Contexts" offers strategies and recommendations, notably four "essential strategies for creating safe and inclusive learning environments" (based upon Marcia Baxter Magolda's work).

While Yuliya Kartoshkina's "Neuroscience Behind Intercultural Learning" is interesting, it does seem to be a bit of an outlier in the collection. She takes a pro-learning styles approach and advocates for an understanding of neuroplasticity as an educational goal. Also valuable is the note that people with a shared culture often display shared neurological patterns.

Tara Harvey's "Design and Pedagogy for Transformative Intercultural Learning" is one of the more robust essays of the book, both in its clear delineation of best practices, as well as a 7-step adaptation of Dee Fink's backward course design principles. This would be a valuable essay to share with anyone involved in a curricular review process, and would offer a clear-cut and specific approach to "reverse engineering" (or backward design) for instructors, rather than just a general philosophy of considering "learning outcomes when constructing your syllabus". Barbara Kappler Mikk and Thorunn Bjarnadottir's "Intercultural Facilitation" is likewise a very useful offering for teachers. There are also helpful ideas about facilitation that could be implemented by students themselves in discussion-based classes and seminars.

"Mindful Reflection in Intercultural Learning" by Linda Gross and Michael Goh presents a few helpful models, specifically IDEO/Tim Brown's "T-shaped" competencies model, and Ash and Clayton's 2009 DEAL model for critical reflection. The former needed a bit more contextualizing, particularly in terms of distinguishing between disciplines and systems. The essay, however, provides a meaningful prelude to the work of James Lucas and Scott Blair that follows. In "Learning Outcomes and Assessment" the authors clearly differentiate between assessment and evaluation--something that is often overlooked in higher education. The subtext here is that if "grading" is assessment, it deserves to be inextricably tied to learning outcomes but should also be done in such a way that the feedback is geared toward continuous improvement in the student. What the authors don't say, but is implied, is that instructors should consider their own ability to give *timely* feedback when considering what is assessed in a course. There's a clear intention to align Bloom's taxonomy levels in learning outcomes, assignments, types of evaluation, and types of assessments.

Lucas and Blair echo the work of the others in describing the features of a global (rather than "international") focus, and perhaps the most salient is that the global:

conceptualizes culture from multiple perspectives and layers, with culture becoming more than race or nationality and involving a knowledge of self, one's place in greater society, and the biases, privileges, and implications of that place. (208)

As a whole, the collection admirably keeps this larger understanding of culture as a thread throughout the essays and has a transparent agenda in that regard. Most of the readings are accessible to those who are not entrenched in pedagogical theory, and each essay offers extensive bibliographies. The Appendix condenses the "take-aways" from each chapter, which is helpful for future reference and potentially for sharing out the information in a concise way across faculties and other cohorts who might find it useful.

2017 #2: Engaging Ideas (John C. Bean)

Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom by John C. Bean
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book is an essential read for anyone teaching in higher ed in any discipline that can involve writing. It will serve as a primer for some, a review for others, and a reference for all. With wide margins for annotation (for a meta experience see Chapter 8 "Marginal notes approach), this book will encourage and invigorate you to incorporate writing and and critical thinking in meaningful ways. John C. Bean offers different approaches, and while not all are created equal, he manages to strike a balance between "my way or the highway" and just a survey of methods. He offers different types of marking rubrics and plentiful examples. Both idealistic and pragmatic, Bean has managed a guide that balances pedagogical theory/philosophy (Piaget, Rogers, Elbow, Perry) with good old-fashioned "how to". The book diagnoses problems with writing (such as the "data dump" or the "and then" paper) and looks at the teacher's role in creating "cognitive dissonance" to present knowledge as dialogical, not informational. I have only one question that went unanswered. Bean is a big fan of "rewrites". One aspect he doesn't address is those students who may decide to do less than is required the first time around because they know they'll have the chance to rewrite. For me, that is different than "revision." But I value the fact that Bean's book raised this question for me. This is an indispensable book that I will return to time and time again.

2015 #8: Teaching With Writing (Toby Fulwiler)

Teaching with Writing by Toby Fulwiler
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

While somewhat dated (the book was published in 1987), Fulwiler's book is full of good lessons and exercises for teachers who wish to engage more with writing in their classes. It is essentially a teacher workshop in book form, and each chapter has pre- and post- journal writing exercises.

The handouts that are included at the end of each chapter are particularly helpful. I will be using many of them in my classes next semester. The handout on "Following Directions" at the end of Chapter 8 is fantastic as it serves as a reminder that prompts are as important as the assignments we receive. The handout breaks down the nuanced differences between words like "analyze", "compare", "contrast", "justify", etc. for our students and in turn makes us more conscious about what we ask them to do.

Admittedly, Fulwiler's scenarios are a bit rosy at times, and he doesn't address working with ELL students in any kind of meaningful way. Many of these activities fail when there is not a uniform level of English ability in the classroom. Chapter 7 on "Research Writing" spends a lot of time on conducting interviews as a major source of research. That's likely to be more helpful in some subjects more than others, and the chapter really doesn't offer ideas for motivating students to do other kinds of research, although it recognizes that as a major problem. Fulwiler also encourages collaborative editing and proofreading among students outside of class, saying "Such cooperative work does not amount to cheating; virtually all serious writers rely on outside editorial help." There's the problem, however--it isn't really "outside" when you're talking about students in the same class. It can open the door for plagiarism, even if it is not intentional.

Overall, however, Fulwiler's book is still a very relevant resource for any teacher in any subject who wants to integrate writing as a tool for learning, not just evaluating.