 Welcome to liquid margins. I want to introduce today's guests. We have Daniel Sanchez from Colorado College, and we have Michelle Sprouse from the University of Michigan. Our moderator today is our own Jeremy Dean, Dr. Jeremy Dean, the VP of Education at Hypothesis. And if our guests would take this time to say something about themselves, that would be great. Daniel, would you like to start? No pressure here. So I'm Daniel Sanchez. I am an African historian. I am currently an assistant professor at Colorado College where I get to teach a range of really fun courses. I wrapped up a history of health and healing in Africa. That was in the spring, I just taught a magic and Harry Potter course, or he also talked about magic and African history in August. And right now, my big work for the day yesterday was figuring out where I could find 20 lightsabers for my class that starts next Monday and who could teach us a socially distanced lightsaber training session. So it's an interesting experience at CC. I absolutely love it. And I'm excited to be here. Great. I didn't bring my lightsaber, but I'm going to practice it later. Did you see my move? I don't know if that's correct technique, but I will learn next week. Probably not. Thank you for that. And Michelle? I don't know how to follow that, but my name is Michelle Sprouse. I'm a PhD candidate at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, where I'm studying English and Education. Before I came to Michigan, I taught for 12 years, mostly middle, a little bit of high school in New Mexico. And I taught English language arts there. This semester, I have the privilege of working with some teacher candidates, and I'm teaching them a literacy course as part of their professional preparation. But I've also done some work in our English department writing program, teaching composition, and in all of those spaces, I have had the pleasure of experimenting and playing with social annotation with my students. Great. Jeremy, would you like to say a little bit about who you are and what you do at Hypothesis? Sure. I'm Jeremy, and I work at Hypothesis, and I am a lifelong educator. I taught high school English and have a PhD in English from UT Austin, where I taught composition in English. And yeah, Hookham-Horns. Danielle's also a graduate of PhD from UT Austin, different department, but just across the, whatever they call that, the six pack, I think. And yeah, I'm also a lifelong annotator and have been fascinated by collaborative annotation for probably a decade now. All right, great. With that, I think we'll just get started. So Jeremy's going to leave the discussion. I just want to remind people again, jump into the chat and tell us who you are, where you're from, and also ask questions at any time. And at the end, we'll have a Q&A, and we'll wrangle those and answer them for you. If you have specific questions about Hypothesis, those will probably be answered by our question wrangler in the chat. But we can certainly talk about them, but this is more about pedagogy and practical tips for using annotation, teaching philosophies around annotation, etc. All right, so let's get started. Great. Just one programmatic thing from our perspectives in the chat. You have to do that weird thing where you say, all panelists and attendees, it's awkward. I don't know why there's a default as to the panelists, but I see some people just talking to the panelists and you want to introduce yourself to the whole crowd. Go ahead and add the attendees. Great. I'm super psyched to be here with you guys, but I'm also, I imagine there's a lot of a little bit of terror going on right now. And so I just I actually just want to start off by asking you guys like, how are you doing? What is it like to be preparing for this sort of unprecedented fall? I think we didn't have a chance to maybe stop and ask ourselves that question in the spring with the outbreak, you know, back in March. But now we've had the summer and things have been up in the air. And and here we are. And I don't know where Michigan and Colorado College are in terms of students returning to campus. But like, how are you doing? What is it like to be an instructor professor right now at a college or university that's dealing with this sort of unprecedented health crisis? Michelle, you want to start? Sure. So currently, the university is planning to welcome back our students, at least some of them in just a couple of weeks at the end of the month. I think about 70% of our classes will be online and the remainder are hybrid or in person classes. I personally will be teaching just online this semester. So and that's my first time to teach a fully online class. So I'm working on that transition and how to prepare for that. But you know, it's been it's been a long summer at home with the kids and trying to keep them entertained and anticipating a really challenging fall in terms of balancing, you know, the work of teaching and keeping my students engaged and keeping the kids engaged at home too at the same time. And of the local schools, the schools your kids are in planning to be remote? They're remote for now. So in that sense, we're kind of lucky that we don't have to worry about mixing with folks then getting sick and hopefully we'll all stay well. And I think that's going to be a little bit easier for us. Danielle, how are you doing there in the Colorado College? It's been a really interesting past six months. So I had prior experience teaching online while I was at Muhlenburg College. There was a little bit of a workaround with my maternity leave. And so I went through extensive online pedagogy training at Muhlenburg. I see that Jenna Azar is is attending. She's really fantastic and helped me kind of wade those waters far before everyone in the United States was doing this. So I came in with this kind of introduction to hypothesis voice thread and all of these really engaging spaces for students. So when CC made the difficult decision to do the transition to online, it was right before block seven, which I should probably explain CC is not on a traditional semester system. We have eight blocks a year. Each block is three and a half weeks long. Students take one block at a time. And faculty teach one block at a time. Our classes are when they're in person, they're three hours a day every day for that three and a half weeks. So it's a very unique kind of space. So we were in a good position right before block seven, because we faculty members were starting classes online, as opposed to transitioning mid semester from in person to online. What makes that difficult, though, is creating that sense of community from scratch when you do not know these students. So I helped out with the digital transition and showed people these really cool collaborative engaging social annotation kind of programs and other things to help with the transition. However, I was off that block. And then I taught and block eight. And for me, it's I it's really easy for me to give advice on how to create fun and engaging spaces. But when it was time for me to create my class, I was like panic. So it's been great having this summer to really build my class for block one, which as I mentioned before, is the Star Wars and anti colonial conflicts course, which will be online as our vast majority of courses at CC at this point. Thanks, Danielle. Let me follow up with you first. In terms of that moment back in March, when suddenly people were needing to move to remote education. Can you talk a little bit about how annotation played into first the sort of faculty training you described, and helping build community or build engagement at that moment? So I feel like hypothesis for me was the most common tool that I recommended to people. First of all, I think at that point, we already had integration with hypothesis in our LMS, which is canvas. So it made that pretty smooth. I also feel like as we were trying to figure out what programs, what kind of tools in our digital tool kits to throw at a bunch of faculty members who had never taught online hypothesis made the most sense. I think we're a small liberal arts college and CC unlike many colleges in the US really did not have online courses before before COVID hit. So like I said, we didn't want to overwhelm even though I had this whole bag of tricks that I just wanted to throw at everybody. But yeah, I think with that rapid transition, it was really streamlining, figuring out people's comfort level. And then definitely hypothesis makes sense because it's something that you can use across the curriculum, whether it's a person who is reading scientific studies, they're able to quickly pop in some annotations, it's or creating a primary source historical kind of engagement, historical document engagement activity. It just like I said, it just made sense. So we did. We rolled out some at least some hypothesis training. I know Jennifer go lightly, who is our incredible canvas wizard. I'm sure there's a correct term for this, but I'm gonna call her the canvas wizard. She did so has so many conversations with people across campus on how to integrate hypothesis into their courses. And I know that I talked with my cohort of faculty members on how to use it in their courses as well. Very cool. And Michelle and Danielle, and I'll start with you, Michelle. Back in March, I mean, you said either, I don't know what you said what you call the next eight. What do you call them? Oh, blocks blocks. Yeah, you talked about, you know, introducing that students type offices and blockade. Michelle, you were always using annotation, you've been using annotation well before COVID hit. Was did that just sort of continue through the moment in March when things shifted? Or did you see kind of shift in terms of more work being done in the in collaboration for you? Or did you change the emphasis of how you use it in your courses back then? And then Danielle, I want to hear if it played a role when you when you started teaching and blockade. Jerry, I actually haven't taught since since December, I was on fellowship last semester in the summer. And so I kind of I got to float through a lot of the challenges of teaching in COVID times. And so I'm preparing now to go back. And so one of the things I'm thinking about differently is what our discussions are going to look like, especially our text based discussions in a literacy class that's now meeting virtually, and how we can really leverage the annotations that students are making to make even a more robust conversation. And then perhaps my students have always had in the past, where they're just a starting point, but like how I can really make those a key part of the classwork. So that we're not in three hour long Zoom meetings, every week, just painfully staring at each other or writing discussion wordposts that my students when I surveyed have already complained about not wanting to do endless series of discussion. Well, let me let me put the question back to you then and generalize it outside of the sort of pandemic context. When you're starting off a course, do you introduce annotation on day one? Or how do you first start talking about this social annotation thing, Michelle, that you're going to have your students do? What are the sort of what practical guidance do you give? Do you have social contract like conversations? Talk about how you introduce this technology to students because it's not something they yet that they do personally as part of their social media life. They don't. So I think before the semester starts, I tend to survey my students because I want to have an understanding of what experience they have with annotation in general and digital and collaborative annotation and technologies. And usually I find that they don't have a lot of experience with collaborative annotation. There's some experience with digital annotation and a lot of experience with paper and annotation of books and things. And so we start there and having a sense of what what they know and what I need to introduce is really helpful for me. But I started on day one with having them annotate my syllabus. I loved that idea. So shout out to Remi and clear for that awesome idea. And I since I started using it's been like a practice that I've integrated into every class. It works for me so much better than reading aloud parts of the syllabus and then asking for questions and getting a room full of blank stares. When I assign that first bit of annotation, I ask them to do a couple of things as they look through the syllabus. Of course, I want to know what questions they have about things that I've written what's not clear. I also try to add a few questions myself asking them to think about prior experiences they might have related to some of our course goals or activities so I can get a sense again of what they might already be familiar with and what's going to be brand new. And I ask for them to feel free to react emotionally what things are they excited about what worries them. I find that my students are much more willing to tell me some of those concerns, especially in the annotations than they would if I was asking them on that first day of class to share those feelings to a brand new group of folks. And I invite them to suggest revision. So at the top of that syllabus, it says draft and I try to emphasize that this is what I've come up with before I've really met them and I want their input in the shape of the course and I try to integrate their ideas for things that they want to learn or suggestions they have for making the course better from them and to really start the semester with that sense of teamwork that we're going to create this together. I was going to say my approach is very, very similar. I got the idea from Teneca at Muhlenburg College in the history department to do the annotation of the syllabus exercise. And I find that students are reading it with a fine toothed comb at that point because they realize there's the expectation that they respond to it. So I get actually so many great questions. So I actually pulled up mine from the summer course that I taught and I'm looking through the annotations again. And one of them was, oh no, I didn't realize I needed this book. If I order it today, will I get it on from Amazon fast enough? If not, what do I do? You know, so it's like those little kind of knee jerk reactions that you don't really see. The other thing that I love is that so many times in the classroom, students may have a question, but they think that it's a stupid question and they're afraid of asking it because they don't want to look ridiculous in front of these other people that they don't know, particularly their peers. And when they see other annotations pop up, they're asking the same thing. They're able to chime in. Now, in terms of the drafting kind of thing, one thing that I started, this was in block six. So before COVID was having them look through my participation rubric and make recommendations on what they thought would, what they need, what they felt needed more clarification or how they felt they could tweak it. And I asked them specifically to do that. So how do you want to be assessed when it comes to participation? What do you think here makes sense? What works for you? What doesn't? And we had such a robust conversation, both their hypothesis and in person with that in particular. Wow. What I love hearing about with both you guys and how you introduce sanitation, first of all, just like on day one, like it's a critical practice for the course. So, you know, so obviously you're probably not introducing like the plagiarism software on day one or something like that. It's a little bit more part of the, you know, everyday life of the course, which I think is wonderful. But I also love the way you're talking about it as, I mean, both you seem to emphasize student voice. Like this is a place for you to speak up, right? And it's your space to participate. And secondly, that it's collaborative, right? That can extend beyond the syllabus, right? To like, this is about your knowledge, right? You might be reading some published text, but your feelings about it, your thoughts about it, your interaction with it, you're building off of it is all part of what we do. Moving beyond day one and the syllabus, are there other modes of using annotation that you introduce your students to, Michelle? Other types? Or actually, let's start with you, Danielle. Other ways that you're asking them to use it, I use the tool in different ways on top of other types of content besides the syllabus that emerged as the semester goes along. So this actually, I know you want me to talk about post day one, but I suppose this is day one or day two. In my in-person classes, no matter what, I always assign Binyavanga Waiananas how to write about Africa, which is a piece that was published in Granta before Waianana passed. And as an African historian, it is such a brilliant piece. And I've always worked at small residential liberal arts colleges. So perhaps this is not super surprising. Most students, when they sign up for an African history course, really know very little about Africa. Actually, no, they know a ton, but it's based on Western perceptions of Africa that are incredibly problematic. And what I found as I became a more experienced educator was it didn't make sense to just on the first day of class walk in and say, you know nothing about Africa, recognize that and just kind of shame them in their ignorance. Like that's just not good pedagogy. So I started assigning the Binyavanga Waianana piece and we would initially do it and, you know, read it. We'll talk in small groups and then bring it together as a class or we'll we'll just bring it together as a class in general. But there were always a few students that were like, oh, my gosh, this entire piece is so true. Africa doesn't have cities and they would just like spout off this kind of ridiculous thing and stuff. But I didn't realize that the piece is sincere. So there was this kind of moment of shame like other students would shame that student. So it didn't create the cohesion that I wanted it to create. And it didn't create an opportunity for calling in because there's always just like an awkward silence after that kind of comment. So no matter what, I started switching it to a hypothesis exercise. So as students are reading, they're growing with Binyavanga Waianana's writing, but also responding and thinking about how their peers in class are reading and writing, they're able to think about what they want to share, how much they want to share and kind of learn in this process. So I felt like, as I mentioned before, it was an opportunity to call students in as opposed to call students out and hypothesis made that a lot more, I don't know, I suppose, a more meaningful exercise. That's great. Michelle, how does annotation practice evolve for you beyond day one? I think the more I've practiced it with my students and spent time really digging into their annotations, the more I have an understanding of how what I need from them in terms of their reading as the semester progresses changes depending on the purposes for our reading. And I try to be even more explicit now in my pedagogy about helping them understand the different ways of reading that they might need to use at different times. So when I teach first year writing, I like to use my funds how to read like a writer early on in one of our first units where they're they're learning how to kind of appreciate the writerly choices that someone's making and to think about how they might incorporate those in their own in their own writing. But then later we have to shift and we have to do a kind of more focused rhetorical analysis or we might be reading for ideas to integrate into their own writing and so helping them to to think about the different purposes that we have for for reading in that writing class is really important. And right now I'm preparing again that literacy class for my educators and you know, thinking about the different ways that teachers read. So when they're reading a novel or a poem or a short story and they're going to be thinking about how to teach it, that's that's going to require a certain kind of annotation where perhaps they're trying to make connections to the skills and standards that they're expected to teach and the places that might be challenging for their students versus when they're reading some you know, articles published in English Journal or something like that intended for them as teachers about their practice where I'm going to need them to be reflective on, you know, what kind of what model literacy is represented here and you know, how similar is your own teaching context, the context described here and what might work for your students or not work for your students. So being really intentional for students and in thinking about the ways that we read and annotate and the purposes and and building an opportunities for them to reflect on how they've shifted their strategies for the different assignments has been really important. I also think it may be worth building off of that. One of the biggest questions that I always get is how many annotations should I make them do? And I hate that question, but I get why people ask it. And I think so much of this it goes back to the digital pedagogy kind of training that I did forever ago. It feels like forever ago. I as I was learning to teach online, I thought, you know, I should make them do three comments and three responses to other people's comments because it makes it easy to kind of check off, check off. When I realized when did I realize that was a terrible idea? Midway through the first online course that I taught because the students would kind of pop in to discussions at the last minute, they would post after each after each other and say, that was a good idea. I agree. And just kind of like move on. And they they would essentially post and ghost. And I think it's really similar in hypothesis in a way. We don't make them if they're reading a physical text. We don't say you need to underline so many words in your book before you show up for class. You need to make this number of physical comments in a text by the time you get to class. Otherwise, you won't have a meaningful engagement. I would much rather that happen organically with their thoughts. I want them to jump in in a way that feels meaningful for them if they have two really thoughtful annotations instead of three mediocre ones. I would much rather have the two really meaningful engagements with a text or even posing a question that's incredibly rich that leads 20 other people. I never have 20 students our classes are small. That leads 12 people to jump in and think critically about a topic with them. Like that's exciting for me. But going through and doing tick marks for. Yeah, I agree. That doesn't mean anything. That's great, Daniel. And I love how you sort of characterize that as something they kind of learned by mistake, right, where you sort of had a plan and you're like, Oh, wow, this isn't actually the best conditions to set or the way to set it up for students. Michelle, do you have any stories like that where you kind of like had it set up a certain way and then you realized, Oh, this isn't working. I need to kind of reset how I'm talking to to students about this or how I'm directing them. Yeah, so I tend to now if they've attempted the annotations, I give them credit for it. And last fall, I had the opportunity as part of my dissertation research to watch a number of my students as they engaged with our our collaborative annotation work. So I sat down with them in a room. We did a screen capture and they talked me through their thought process. And I, you know, after 10 of those sessions and seeing the many things that students do while they're annotating, they don't always appear in the the shared annotations. I found that they're, you know, counting annotations, things like that. That doesn't necessarily reflect all the work that students are doing. Some of them will be taking notes and documents on the side. They're doing other things. Some will spend more time reading, but perhaps not responding because they reply. And like, you know, Danielle's example of, I agree, that's great. They don't want to add that because they know it doesn't really make a significant contribution to a conversation. And so, you know, if students are adding some annotations, I like to give them some credit for the work and then encouraging the kinds of thoughtful work by, like I said before, giving them opportunities to reflect on how their practices with annotation are contributing to their learning for a particular unit or for the course as a whole and using what they've written in the class and highlighting the most helpful comments. So they have models of things that are moving the conversation forward. And working on those kind of positive things, rather than grades, which to me often feel punitive because as soon as the student doesn't have full credit, they feel like they're being punished or something being taken away from them. And that's not the kind of place where I want to spend my energy as their teacher. Ever get pushed back from students around using this technology or having to do annotations? I actually, I found that most students by the end of the semester, say I had one student in fact that said, I thought I was going to hate this. But actually, this was really important to my learning and to my connection to my classmates. So I think they're hesitant at first because they feel like it might be just another chore. But if it becomes something that is really used in the class and really helps them engage, I find that they don't by the end of the semester, I don't have complaints about it. Maybe to I've over time, I've shifted away from assigning tons of reading and, you know, giving them space to focus a bit more. And as I said, that I think I have to go back to my syllabus for the next semester and see what I can cut. But cutting down on the number of things that I ask students to annotate so that they can really engage with it. And when we meet together, I can really engage with it, too. So it's not something that was done and then ignored or forgotten. Danielle, do you ever get any pushback from students? Like, ah, why are we doing this? Not really. And I think when we did the digital transition, maybe the easiest thing for me was to keep things consistent. So as I built my class, there was the expectation. They knew that they were going to be doing some secondary source readings, they were going to be doing hypothesis on a primary source. We would have a mini lecture through VoiceThread and then we would have discussions every other day. And that's what worked for my students in the online setting. But that doesn't mean that, you know, in other courses or maybe in block one or block two, I might use it more sporadically. I just feel like, yeah, having that routine was really helpful. And it also helped students jump in really quickly and really understand that it was expectation, I suppose. Were the high, or were the annotations great from the beginning? Some of them were, but some students really grew. And I think, I don't know. I went to undergrad at the University of Texas, where I, there were 50,000 other students. I think one of the things that I struggled with, particularly in my classes that had 300, 400 students, it was finding what my voice was and realizing, wow, I do have something that I bring to the table. I can critique this really famous historian, which is really, really scary. I think when I went to I think when I was told originally as an undergrad student that professors wanted to hear my thoughts, I thought, I guess my response was, what do like, what am I supposed to say? This is a person who's been researching this their entire life. So I didn't even know how to behave in such a way, as weird as that sounds. And so I think hypothesis is really great because you're able to model that in a way. You're able to show what annotations look like and students are able to jump in and kind of figure things out as they go. So now I've never had push back. Great. Well, I think it's about time for us to open up the conversation to others and see if there are questions that Fanny, for anyone wants to surface from the chat or folks want to unmute and ask our panelists some questions. I'm going to open the floor. Kind of a shy group today. Um, but there is a question from Thomas and I think Nate's probably better prepared to answer that or you are Jeremy than I am. And that's in the Q&A if you want to pull that up. And then I have a couple questions of my own as well. Yeah, so Thomas was interested in learning a little bit more about the actual mechanics of the annotating on your syllabus exercise. Like, did you have it up on the screen? Did you do it together? Did it happen asynchronously? So if you could kind of talk us through how you guys actually manage that. So in my in person classes, the first time we did annotation, I would do the exercise with them on the screen and then we would spend about five or 10 minutes annotating a document and then bring it together for a discussion. What's nice about that is that they're reading it all at the same time. And we can really jump into the questions that seem to be recurring with the syllabus. I've never done it synchronously. It's typically an asynchronous exercise. However, yeah, I know lots of colleagues in natural sciences, humanities and social sciences who have done the annotation experience synchronously. One thing I would say I made a very, very awkward video to put on my canvas page about how to use hypothesis since we're not doing it in class where I could just pop it on the screen and show them in person. I made one where I screen captured what I was doing. They got to see my million tabs open and everything. And then I quickly walk them through how to select the correct group on hypothesis. If you're annotating a website, how to select the correct groups, you're not just annotating on the Internet in the public and, you know, how to highlight, add annotation, type in whatever you want to say, etc. And I think it was useful. The students seemed to be able to annotate for the rest of block eight and my summer session. When I'm meeting synchronously with my students, I definitely and in person, I like to take time to do the syllabus annotation together in class. I usually put it up on the screen and show them how to make an annotation. Just one quick example comment is enough for most of my students to get it. And then I like to be able to when I don't have to socially distance, right? Walk around the room and check in with the few students who might have a little bit more trouble or need a little bit more assistance in making their own first annotations. For this semester where I'm teaching virtually, I'm considering just posting like Danielle suggested a small video of me demonstrating it and asking them to do that before the first class session because I don't necessarily want them sitting on Zoom for three hours and staring at their computers. I know that might be challenging for a lot of my students. So we have another question. It's interesting as this one came up in an earlier show, too. What about inappropriate comments? Have you gotten them? And do you prepare students for those via any guidelines that you said at the beginning? I've used annotation from middle school to, you know, graduate students and I've never run into any inappropriate comments. So I haven't had that issue and I used to spend more time talking about appropriate comments to prevent that. But since I haven't found that it's an issue, I instead focus more on the kinds of ways and purposes for reading. And that seems to work just fine for my students. I actually had never thought about that and perhaps that's a good thing. Typically, when I have a comment that isn't great, maybe it's misguided, maybe it's Eurocentric, maybe it's problematic, typically, other students jump in and they kind of call the student in, help them understand why it is problematic. One thing that I do say that I should put out there whenever I use hypothesis, I, yes, students are going to engage. They're going to be the drivers of the conversation. But I do make sure if we're not doing it synchronously, the students know that I'm listening, I'm hearing them and I'm engaging with them too. So if they say, if they bring up a point that's interesting, I typically respond and I acknowledge, wow, that's a fascinating point. I've never thought about it this way. And then I ask another question or how might we put this in conversation with XYZ? How can we expand on this whatever? So it's not only creating a space that's social for students, but recognizing that I'm here too. I'm also participating. I'm helping them in the process of guiding the conversation. They've always kept it professional and I'm grateful for that. I would hate to hear horror stories. And I'm hoping there are none. Danielle, that's that's awesome what you were just saying. I'm an appropriate aside. And you touched on this earlier, Danielle. What about just sort of like, you know, not going deep enough or not do not sort of being the most productive and discussant or, you know, I don't know, just ways that you encourage different sorts of types of engagement to just, you know, bring out the fullness of the possibilities for the kinds of conversation that it's possible. So when students drop in the wow, that's interesting period submit, that's typically when I say, oh, what makes this interesting to you? What do you think about how this might relate? Like I said, how this might relate to this other piece that we're reading or delving to why this jumped out to you. That's typically what I go with. So I prod just like I would in class, you know, I. We wouldn't let that float in a classroom. Like, you know, let me raise my hand and say, I liked this piece. It's good. Period. Move on. Like, no, we're not going to do that in a classroom. We're not going to do it online. We're not going to do it with social annotation. That's great. Doing it in a way that doesn't shut them down and say like, again. No, like a way that's encouraging and helps them develop as a as a young intellectual. I think it's important. You want more. You're asking them for more. Then I mean, Michelle, do you have any ways that you sort of prod or nurture students, annotation practice to evolve and become more robust? One of the things that I really enjoy doing is having students take another look at sets of annotations early in the semester, particularly and think about the annotations that are most helpful and why. And so they're looking at the things that they've produced and the classmates have produced and they're discussing what creates a productive conversation for us. And I think that push helps them to see like this kind of agreed or, you know, just a smiley face or something. That's not enough to really get a conversation going. So it's helping them to evaluate what's most helpful. And that that leads into the later kind of reflective work that I have them do about their own practices too, so that they're thinking about what contributes to my learning and to the learning of the folks in the class. We've got a Nate actually asked a question. Nate, I'm outing you as a question asker. But it's sort of along these lines of what we're talking about right now. Do you find that annotation changes how students read in comparison to teaching without annotation? Are they moving more quickly into understanding and becoming deeper critical thinkers more quickly through annotation? I think so. I'm thinking particularly about a piece between the chiefs of the Herrera and the Nama and one of the chiefs writes to the other one and says, I can't believe that you signed this treaty with the Germans. Your people will be paying for this until the end of time long after I've fallen. And so one of the things that's really great is that a student can read this piece, which is maybe a page and a half and they can get to the end in a normal class as they're reading their whole dossier of whatever they're supposed to read for class. They'll they'll be like, OK, what's the point? Move on to the next thing. But when they're reading with hypothesis or and I feel like it's more intentional for them to read slowly and think beyond, of course, I want them to get the big picture. But think about how they're saying how people are saying things, what they're saying, what it means, why each word is there. Think about the small references to other things so we can delve a little deeper and unpack. I think it for at least in my classes, it's created really rich dialogues, both on hypothesis and in our larger discussions outside of hypothesis. We've also been able to use it, especially in my rating course to kind of read across model text. So like when students are working on a research based argument and I'm asking them to do a little bit of, you know, you know, experimentation or interviews or something that many of them haven't done something beyond just here's some sources that I'm that I'm incorporating into my argument. They need models for how to set that up and write about it. And I like to give them a lot of freedom in the topic that they select and the methods that they might experiment with. And so they need to see a lot of different examples of how to write about it. And so I share with them some of the research that their classmates have found and they're annotating maybe, you know, this lesson, we're going to look at discussion sections and how to set that up. And so they might annotate a couple of different discussion sections. And so being able to share thinking about what it looks like with each other. Some people have background in that topic. Others don't and being able to help each other through that to get what we need, which is an understanding of how to write this part of this genre is really helpful for my students. So we're really we're out of time, but there is one more question. If you want to hang out for a few minutes and answer another question from the chat. If not, we could wrap it up. There is one more question for any that came up in the chat from Chandra about just asking about the percentage of student comments that are typically text based versus other kind of multimedia types of annotations with images or videos or whatever. Do you find a balance there? I can speak to that one a little bit. So I use I primarily use hypothesis for text based. I've actually never used it for images. I'm not sure how that works. So I would love to hear about it. Typically, when I have them do image work, I build it into one of my voice threads and then have students notice and focus. So I say, you know, we're going to talk about this image. I'd like for you to tell me what you see. What are the details that you notice? And then they either type in whatever they notice or they'll do a video recording of themselves. And then they chat amongst each other. I also for videos, I use violas, which I think is similar to hypothesis in a way. Although I really love violas. I want to put that out there. But I like how in voice threat or not voice thread and hypothesis, you can kind of click on a word and see how other people have annotated it. But in violas, it's just kind of a timestamp below the video where it says like two minutes and 27 seconds. What is that flamingo doing in the background? Question mark, you know, so it's just a different kind of program. It's exceptional, wonderful, but it's different. I'm answering this a little bit differently. Most of my students comments are text based. I think sometimes I get a few emojis that kind of sneak in, but not a lot of images and links and memes. Although I do encourage them to try to do that, especially when concepts or ideas or things might be unfamiliar. Providing that kind of like richer annotation, I think can be helpful for other readers. So I encourage it, but I don't see a lot of them in my students annotations. You know, unfortunately, we're running out of time. This is a really great discussion, though. And I would like to give our guests a chance to say goodbye. And I also want to remind people that to join us next week, you will because you're here today, you will get an email with a link to the next show, episode eight, solving problems in the margins, annotating math. No one should be afraid of math. I don't think, you know, not that scary. It should be a really good show. So with that, Danielle, would you like to say some parting words and then Michelle? So thank you so much. This was really, really fun. As I mentioned earlier, I definitely had some slipups in the beginning when I was trying to figure out what I wanted my classes to look like, what meaningful engagement meant. So have fun learning what works for you, what works for your students. It might not always be streamlined, but it is fun. If you want, you can follow me on Twitter at Dr. Danny Sanchez. I tweet a lot about lightsaber apparent in other fun stuff, African history and learning. Yeah, thanks for me and Jeremy and Nate. It was so wonderful to be here and Danielle. It was great to meet you. And if anyone else wants to connect with me, I'm sometimes on Twitter at Michelle's house. And I love to see annotation fun there. So and, you know, my last thought about like annotating with my students, it's really just about learning as much as I can from them about what they're doing with the text so that I can work with them better in class or when I'm meeting with them in person. And I find that that's the most helpful thing for me. Thank you. Those for those are both such thoughtful goodbyes and things to leave people with. I love the encouragement there. Thank you again for being on our show. And thanks everyone for joining. And I'm going to say goodbye and we'll leave this running for a bit. But we will see you next week on the next liquid margins.