I went to a presentation by Senioritis, A.K.A. Becky.
She had some interesting things to say about not making assumptions about what kinds of sources are the most valid sources for student research. She gave examples of people, like herself, who have both books and blog entries on related subjects. Thus, we can't just make blanket statements in the vein of blog = bad source, journal = good source.
I have to admit I didn't take copious notes at any of the presentations I witnessed, and I don't actually remember if that was the main point she made, or if that's just what she happened to be talking about when I looked up and thought, "Hey, good point." I do remember thinking, "Hey, good point," though, and that's good enough for me if it's good enough for you.
Anyhow, I learned something else from her. I can't assume that people at more privileged institutions don't have the same problems I have. I want to do more with technology in the classroom. I want to push myself and my students to be more literate in new technologies (psst...now that I mention it I think there was something about techno-literacies in her paper too). In order to do that in a way I think works well, I need access to a computer lab all or most of the time. There just aren't enough labs for that to happen for all composition classes, and if even one does it, that class would take away time with computers that other classes need. Therefore, to do what I want to do with my students, I have to be a real jerk toward the other instructors and grab up their lab times in addition to my own. Given my seniority in my department, maybe I could get away with that. But should I? Really?
It never crossed my mind that people at places like Syracuse might be facing similar conundrums. It's probably a kind of reverse classism that I have the perception "they rich, we poor." But I sort of, kind of, distinctly remember Becky Howard saying she did face problems of inadequate lab space and had the same qualms about how to deal with this that I've had. Who knew?