Hello everyone, and welcome back. As I alluded to in my last round-up, we were on Spring Break, and have now been back for one week. Our student bloggers had a bit of a break as well (I mean, come on, I’m not a total monster). For their first post back we have our blog audits. This is always a tricky one for me to write up. While my students are doing all of the real work all I need to do is briefly summarize their posts and try to entice others to go read the original posts. With the audits the challenge is a bit difference, because the posts are a bit different.
I have used a blog audit week somewhere in the middle of the semester every time that I have had students blogging. I think it is important, at least occasionally, to have students stop and reflect, and potentially engage in a bit of metacognition. That is roughly what is going on here with this assignment. For the blog audits students forego writing a regular blog post and instead review their previous posts. They are encouraged to talk about their posts, the process generally, and how they see things going as they move forwards through the semester with more posts. The idea here is to stop, take a breath, and evaluate the writing process and product.
Part of the point of the blog assignment, overall, is to have students engage in public, open discussions about the law and legal topics in a way that is accessible to a general audience. It is my thinking that stopping to think about how this is going is valuable for the learning process. And with this much-longer-than-normal opening, the stage is set and we can now move on to some brief statements about the audit posts. For full, thoughtful reflections, go read the actual posts.
Elise starts us off with a good, honest reflection on her posts and promises to revisit a few issues and return to addressing timely issue and cases. She talks about what she’s covered, and what she plans to cover.
Erin discusses her posts so far by looking at their content, their structure, and their style. She explains that she has been blogging about the nature of the right to privacy, and the levels of uncertainty that surround this right under the Trump administration. Her reflection is open and thoughtful.
Kaitlyn begins her reflection by thinking about the process of blogging itself, as well as her reservations when first informed about the blog component of the course. I am happy to share and was happy to read), that she overcame these concerns and has come to appreciate the blog assignments. She compares her posts, as well as shares which has been her favorite so far.
Paul writes about how, in reviewing his posts, he found that they follow a similar formula. He discusses the pros and cons of this approach, and how the plans to move forward. He also reflects on what he has gotten out of the blogging process so far.
Adrian starts by reflecting on why he chose the theme for his blog that he did, which is marriage equality. He writes about how this topic has morphed and expanded into GLBT+ rights more broadly. He links up his posts, and explains how he intends to change up the format a little bit moving forward in the semester.
Grace starts off her audit with a reflection on the blogging process this semester compared to when she blogged for my Constitutional Law class last semester. She talks about what is easier, and also what is more challenging, this time around. She looks at the nature of her posts so far, and how she wants the blog to go moving forward.
Selma talks about her shift in topic from free speech, generally, to radicalism and free speech more specifically. She connects her various posts together, as well as realizes part of what she is doing in her posts is wrestling with the Supreme Court’s conception of “freedom of speech.” She does this, in part, through historical parallels and analogies to shed light on current legal developments.
Taylor also compares the blogging process for this course with the process for Constitutional Law. She talks about how having lots of material posts is not always a good thing, especially when civil liberties is the main topic (and women’s rights, specifically, in Taylor’s case).