Mike wonders how the changing definition of writing will affect the phrase and job of the “writing teacher”. If we include computers into our realm of expertise are we adding to or detracting from our profession? Are we simply adding a layer to the already complex make up of the job of writing teacher?Are we keeping up with the Joneses? Are we keeping ourselves from becoming obsolete? Are we spreading ourselves too thin? Are we raising the bar for other teachers in order to insure that only the most well trained and overworked “computers and writing teachers” are marketable? Hmmm… Mike also makes a good point about the fallacy of the idea that educational MOO discussions need to be fairly tightly reigned in order to be effective. If we don’t give the students a sense of play and/or freedom how are they supposed to feel free to think and express
themselves? This is not to say behavior that is disrespectful to the instructor or other students is acceptable but there has to be a good degree of freedom. This always makes me think of Foucault’s _History of Sexuality_, how can we expect students to become active citizens if we raise/train them to be passive? On Dibble,
what is the body? Can it be replicated in cyberspace? Is this psychic body the same as the physical body? Is violence against the psychic body comparable to violence against the physical body? How can we get students to the point that they can discuss this in an informed way?