[00:00:00] Bonni Stachowiak: Today on episode number 449 of the Teaching in Higher Ed podcast, John Warner is back to talk about teaching writing in an age of AI. [music] Welcome to this episode of Teaching in Higher Ed. I’m Bonnie Stachowiak, and this is the space where we explore the art and science of being more effective at facilitating learning. We also share ways to improve our productivity approaches so we can have more peace in our lives and be even more present for our students. John Warner is a writer, editor, speaker, researcher, consultant, and author of eight books, including Why They Can’t Write, Killing the Five Paragraph Essay and Other Necessities, and The Writer’s Practice: Building Confidence in Your Non-fiction Writing, which is widely used in writing classrooms from middle school through college.

With 20 years of college teaching experience and 10 years as contributor to Inside Higher Ed via his Just Visiting blog, John has become a national voice on issues of faculty labor, institutional values, and writing pedagogy. He also works as a writer and advisor for educational endeavors, a provider of extracurricular academic enrichment services, and writes a weekly column for the Chicago Tribune about books and writing. Affiliate faculty at the College of Charleston, John’s most recent book is Sustainable. Resilient. Free: The Future of Public Higher Education. John Warner, welcome back to Teaching in Higher Ed.

[00:01:56] John Warner: Oh, it’s my pleasure. Always glad to be here.

[00:01:59] Bonni: As our conversation started before we began recording, time has lost all meaning. You have not been on the show since this thing called COVID, this pandemic began. Let me just start with, what have you been up to, John? [chuckles]

[00:02:17] John: Like a lot of people, I had to adjust my life and my thinking around my future. At the time COVID started, I was actually significantly removed from education. I was still writing at Inside Higher Ed. I had had my books about writing come out, Why They Can’t Write, and The Writer’s Practice. About a year before the pandemic, I decided to take a real full-time job with benefits and that kinda stuff, working for a market research firm, which is a background I had prior to getting into teaching. The pandemic slowed that work down. It made the work much less pleasurable. One of the things that I took the job for was having a little human interaction face-to-face and the company’s in Chicago, so I fly from my home in Charleston, South Carolina to Chicago once a month and spend a few days, and that kind of stuff.

As I started thinking about education, as I started seeing the effects of the pandemic, as things were being revealed, I started working on a book called Sustainable. Resilient. Free: The Future of Public Higher Education. Working on that book made me realize that I had to find a way to get back into working on these sorts of issues day-to-day, which over time led me to start a little consulting outfit with my friend Josh Eyler, author of How Humans Learn the forthcoming book on grading practices. It’s hard to believe that much stuff has changed. Day-to-day it’s not that different. It’s me in front of my computer doing stuff, but the stuff I’m doing is a little different than it was

[00:03:48] Bonni: My first job out of college was working for a computer training company. I think part of just that foundation, that was over 10 years, was just having me be curious about technology and technology not scaring me or messing with parts of my identity. As I quite naturally began teaching people who had a different sense of identity, that technology felt intimidating to them, raised questions of their own levels of competence, I really had to learn a lot about our relationship with technology and how different mine is and with what, to me feels new, but John, I keep trying to retrain my brain. It’s actually not new. It just feels new. I have started to really feel some very deep-rooted, I don’t quite know if it’s fear, or questions around my own identity as a teacher, as a writer when it comes to artificial intelligence.

People, if they’re interested, there’s another episode that’s going to go and define some terms for us, but we’re going to focus today, John, specifically on artificial intelligence as it relates to writing specifically. How common are my feelings about feeling a little bit rattled by this? Even though I know it’s not new, it just feels really new, and how common is that? What are you hearing people talk about, John?

[00:05:17] John: The first thing I wrote at my Inside Higher Ed blog after the wide release of this ChatGPT AI large language model interface was released, was titled Freaking Out About ChatGPT. That was based on just seeing on social media and talking to folks, their minds were blown by what appeared to be the capabilities of this technology. It wasn’t a super surprise to me because I had been playing with previous versions of the same algorithm and writing about them 16, 18 months ago. At the time, you could see something impressive on the horizon, but it wasn’t particularly meaningful. It could not knock out a school assignment with such accuracy and acuity and that kind of stuff as the current version does.

Even having been familiar with these things and played around with them, ChatGPT, really, it did blow me away. The degree of improvement and sophistication that this AI shows was really beyond what I would’ve expected having messed around with this precursor 12 or 16 months earlier. I don’t know that I was quite freaked out, but I was a little surprised, which shouldn’t be surprising. These things are new. It’s technology we really haven’t seen before. It feels like a quantum leap in capabilities, but it’s nothing that we haven’t been told is coming.

It’s really just seeing it work in front of us and seem to work so smoothly that is a little unsettling, but this is the story of my life with teaching and technology. I’m 52. The first time I taught a writing course as a graduate student in 1994, I still had students using the periodical guide to literature and the card catalog in the library, and the internet felt like a shock. These things happen. Tools arrive, technology comes on the scene, and we can’t ignore it, we can’t wish it away. We have to deal with it, and that was the message of my initial writing at Inside Higher Ed, was that, “It’s here. It has implications for education. What are we going to do about it? Let’s talk about this stuff.”

[00:07:32] Bonni: It’s something to read about it and I’ve been following your columns very closely and so many other people’s writing on these important topics and learning a lot, but it’s something else to stumble over it yourself. I report to our university’s provost and have been increasingly doing additional communication work with him. We’re getting prepared for, I think, the year 2024, the next time our accreditation formal visit will happen, and what that time looks like. I’m using this new to me app called Craft. The URL is craft.do.

I am just going in there and trying to prepare all these blank pages for different communication announcements that are coming and things like that. All of a sudden, I’m typing in there and I can’t even figure out how to get the formatting to work exactly, and so it’s offered me an assistant. I thought, “Well, of course, I’d like to use the assistant. I can’t figure out how to format this thing.” Literally, before I knew it, it had written two of the most beautifully crafted paragraphs about a forthcoming accreditation visit and the timeline. I thought, “All I wanted you to do was tell me how to make a level 2 heading out of this,” [chuckles] and before I know it–

It was something else to stumble upon it without the intent to get something to do the writing for me and to see– In this particular case, I know this is certainly not always the case, but just to see it. Literally, I wouldn’t have changed a word other than specifying the details of the year 2024 and when that visit was coming. It was something else just again to see it. I know from reading your work and so many others that it can be helpful to rather than try to eradicate the fear, to try to think about some of the affordances. It isn’t like we should try to wish this away because that isn’t going to happen.

It isn’t like we should try to, at least not from my own reflections on this, scare students straight. I saw Tressie Cottom McMillan. I know you really admire her work on this and her writing on this as well. I saw her say that scare them straight or scare them like the whole ’80s. I’m 51. You and I are very similar in age, and so I still remember those, the egg frying and the fry pan to teach us not to use drugs. I don’t think that’s really going to work here, John. What would you talk about to people who do feel the fear to some of the affordances artificial intelligence might be able to do for us as a writer? Then we’ll spend a little bit more time how do you still teach the skill of writing when such things exist.

[00:10:17] John: Your example of the AI assistant coming in and doing your work for you in a way is a good example of how we can use these things as tools where language is purely functional boilerplate. Versions of these tools have been around for a long time. If you read a release from a sports information office at a university’s athletic department, they’ve likely had automated macros for post-game press releases for years just using Microsoft Word and Excel fields and that kind of stuff where it’s like fill a name, led the team with, fill a number of points as the Spartans went to victory. These sorts of things.

This feels like a leap because it’s actually good. Since we’re around the same age, we probably both remember Microsoft’s Clippy mascot which would show up when you’re working on something and say, “It looks like you’re working on a memo. Would you like help?” and you learned pretty quickly that you didn’t want Clippy’s help. Clippy was an annoyance.

[00:11:15] Bonni: Yes. I was going to say, Clippy just brings outrage in people that remember those days. Oh, just rage.

[00:11:21] John: The legacy of that technology has still been with us. Microsoft Word has all of these automated formatting quirks that often get in the way and make it hard to use, but here’s something that seems to write things for you. What I would say is as a tool, it’s most useful in the hands of people who already have the skills and knowledge to write well. The reason you could work with that tool is because you recognize what effective communication is in the context you were using it in. If you didn’t, you would have no idea if what it produced was good, bad, or otherwise.

This is not something that can be effectively used without human oversight or human intervention or human evaluation, at least not at this stage. Now that doesn’t mean some people won’t try to get rid of people as some kind of cost-saving measure, but I think they’ll pretty quickly realize that that’s a mistake. In terms of teaching writing, one of the things I said as people were freaking out about ChatGPT was that, for me, my approach to how I teach writing, it does not challenge my pedagogy at all because my approach is rooted, in what I call, the writer’s practice, the development of the skills, attitudes, knowledge, and habits of mind of writers.

What it emphasizes it’s the experience of writing. That is the thinking that is associated with the act of writing as opposed to the product that we assess at the end of a experience of writing. One of my mantras about writing is that writing is thinking. When we write, we are both expressing and exploring an idea. This is one of the experiences I want students to have as they learn to write is that while they are in the act of writing they are uncovering new ideas or new aspects of what they thought about what they’re writing about. Anybody who has spent any time writing has experienced this.

When I go to grade my student’s writing, I’m not just looking at the final end artifact which is what everyone is blown away with ChatGPT. I’m looking at the entire process and experience they’ve had along the way to that artifact and assessing that including asking them things like, “Well what did you learn while you were writing this particular piece?” The tech becomes not a threat to my pedagogy but just another tool that I have to integrate into students’ how to write in the world we live in today. In a lot of ways, this is nothing new over the course of my career.

I remember when the internet came and Wikipedia showed up. You can go look at my syllabi from a certain era that said, “Under no circumstances should you use Wikipedia as part of your research.” Now I recommend students one of the first places you should go as you’re starting your research is Wikipedia. Not that you should cite Wikipedia. Not that you should take anything it says for Gospel because it’s frequently wrong, but it is a great way to get an initial background set of information about something you’re not familiar with. I do it all the time. Why would I not have my students do it?

I want to teach them to use that tool in a way that’s helpful to them. This is just another tool that’s on the scene that students should be taught how to use since I think it’s going to be showing up in our lives, in our workplaces, and will exist in the world, so yes, we can’t run from it. It’s here. It has implications for what we do in class or how institutions value what students do, but we can’t police our way out of it. We can’t run away from it. We can’t ignore it. It’s here.

[00:15:03] Bonni: If we can’t police our way out of it, what can we do?

[00:15:09] John: Well, my approach is to value that process, to value the experience of writing so that students aren’t just turning something in because a teacher assigned it to them and they need it for a grade but because they feel a genuine engagement with the experience of writing that I’m asking them to do, that they feel they’re learning. One of my assumptions about students, and I think this is true, is they genuinely want to learn stuff. School often to students, does not feel a great place for that experience. They don’t see it as a place for learning. They see it as a place to do assignments, get to the next thing, earn a credential, and that kind of thing.

If we start with the assumption that students do want to learn and build the experiences we give them around that notion and emphasize the learning that’s going to happen and make that learning transparent to students and have them involved in that learning, I think the temptation to use these sorts of tools as a shortcut to a grade and then end run around the challenges of learning I think are minimized. I wouldn’t say eliminated. In the same way, you can’t eliminate students from taking those shortcuts now.

Again, these behaviors for students are nothing new. When I was in college in the late ’80s early ’90s if there was some way for me to cram for a test, that I didn’t have to learn anything but I could get my B, I would do it. This is not a new challenge in the classroom. It’s simply a different flavor of something we’re always going to have to deal with when we try to help students learn.

[00:16:48] Bonni: I’ve started asking my students some questions toward the end of classes that supplement the standard course evaluations. One of the series of questions I ask has to do with to what extent do you feel like I cared about you in this class, and what was it that I did that demonstrated whatever perception of care that you have. It’s been vacillating between flexibility as a means of demonstrating care, but what’s been emerging in the last year is definitely more of a trend toward giving feedback.

John, I suspect that if I showed you what they see as feedback, you might laugh and challenge me to maybe up my game a little bit more when it came to providing feedback because sometimes just what I do is provide feedback that there is someone who just heard what you said. I do a lot of screencasting as assignments, so they might submit a screencast showing that they went through the SIFT process that Mike Caulfield talks about. That I find a way better way of seeing into what they’re seeing than if I ask them to write something about it for that particular class in that instance.

It might be that I noticed that their dog came into the background when they played the Quizlet flash card game that I have them do and just submit as evidence the fifth round that they did it. Now I don’t really know that they did five rounds, but that’s just a little tiny, tiny little piece of mutual accountability, but I actually watch them. They’re about 30 seconds and hysterical, however long it takes them to go through that silly little game and stuff.

I’m starting to think that there is someone who actually cared enough to watch what I produced or in the case of teaching writing, to read what I wrote. To what extent do you think that contributes to the learning process? Not the actual quality of the feedback but just wow, somebody actually cares enough to want to know what I had to say or what I did with this particular thing.

[00:18:53] John: What you’re illustrating is it’s not just responding to respond but you’re responding as an actual human being who is fulfilling the role of teacher or instructor but is also demonstrating the spirit of the person who embodies that role or who animates that role. With writing, it’s very much the same. One of the most powerful tools in the writing teacher’s arsenal really is just the one-on-one conference.

It doesn’t even have to be a one-on-one conference. One of the things I would do is if there’s a room of 20 students and they’re all working on something, I might spend literally 60 seconds with each student just looking at a single line or reading over their shoulder and making a comment that I am paying attention to what they’re doing, I’m interested in what they’re doing, I have thoughts about what they’re doing. I’m providing a kind of audience and editor-type feedback as opposed to a evaluator and teacher. This makes a big difference. When students write for genuine audiences, that makes a big difference. Even when it’s pretend, they can imagine that they’re writing matters in a way it doesn’t when it’s just for a grade.

What I think this technology illustrates is how important that will be going forward. The chatbots can, if you ask it like, “Write feedback from an instructor on this thing.” You can ask the chatbot to generate the text and then write feedback on its own text. Then both will resemble the kinds of things that happen in classrooms, but students will know the difference between a chatbot-generated comment and the kind of thing you would notice as you’re looking at their videos or I would notice as I’m looking at their writing because I’m responding not as a pattern-matching large language model algorithm but a human who just had a human response to whatever I’ve seen.

I think that work will become more important. My hope is that it’s the work that will become more valued inside of our institutions. I have some doubts around whether or not that’s going to happen, but my hope is this does help us realize how valuable that kind of work and connection is with students.

[00:21:06] Bonni: It’s so fun when we find something that really works to make that kind of a human connection. Starting in January, I’ll begin teaching a business ethics class for probably the, I don’t know, it’ll be the 8th or 10th time I’ve taught it. I have tried and failed before to have them do some writing in that class, specifically to a public audience.

I’ve asked them to select a company that they either would like to affirm their sense of social responsibility or they would like to critique it. Then what I had intended at the time was turn it into me. I’ll print it out and then I’ll literally put a stamp on it. I got an unusual amount of resistance. There was a lot of like, “Do I have to have you mail this in order to get the grade?”

I mean, we all encounter resistance. It’s just when I get that amount after building up lots of safety. This was not early in the class. They would know my personality, but there was something about that that I did just give up because I thought it’s like being a parent. Your children get to be a certain size and you do realize, “I literally couldn’t force you to do anything,” so parenting needs to mean something other than me making you do it. I really do try to treat our children as if this is truly a interplay of two human beings. This is not me thinking that I could ever make you do something.

I feel the same way about students. No, I don’t want to force someone to allow me to put a stamp on something, but there was truly something there that I uncovered. I don’t know if you have any guidance for me on how I might make something like that better because I do really believe in the power of an audience. Maybe it was just shareable, which is a Harold Jarche thing, talking about personal knowledge mastery that it doesn’t mean you have to share everything, but make the writing and the other kinds of reflections sense-making. Make it shareable and then maybe you choose to keep it private. Maybe that’s enough or maybe I did something wrong. I don’t know. Do you have any thoughts on that?

[00:23:15] John: No. I think it’s enough to make it shareable. Some students will be like, “Awesome. Yes. I can’t wait to get my words and ideas and thoughts into the world.” Absolutely. Well, one of the things I think we need to recognize is how foreign that probably was for your students in their experiences. It’s probably a little late. In my view, it’s way late for their business ethics class for this to be the first time that they were asked to write under these circumstances. I would have students doing it in third grade to be writing for genuine audiences with the expectation that it may be read by them.

In fact, I did do it in third grade. They Xeroxed all of our poems every year and put them in a booklet that was given to the parents and that kind of stuff. That does concentrate the mind. It makes you care more. It’s fun to look at these things 40-plus years later and see what kind of weird, goofy kid you were for the limerick you wrote when you were in fourth grade.

This is a foreign experience to students these days because they’ve been writing for the purposes of assessment, not for communication, not for engagement with the larger world, or to affect their ideas in the world. That doesn’t surprise me that they have those reactions. I would come across that often. The way I would break my students through that barrier is the first times I would have them write for audiences, they would do it online under the cloak of either some degree of anonymity or pseudonymity where it might be posting to a website with their initials in a way that I know it’s them.

They can send me a link and I know it’s something they did, but they aren’t identifiable. Their ideas and their expressions aren’t getting traced back to them. A kind of baby step towards putting your ideas in the world. The other thing is they probably are communicating on social media in public forums in many different ways and some of them may be quite comfortable with that and you can draw connections between that. Say, “Well, you’re comfortable doing this here. This feels uncomfortable. Why? What’s different? What would help you get over this hump or if you don’t want to get over this hump, why? What does this say about you?”

It’s just one of those challenges in the world we work in today, given the varieties of students and the varieties of experiences students have had before we intersect with them for a semester at a time.

[00:25:41] Bonni: That’s so helpful. Thank you so much. I guess sometimes it just feels, even after doing this as long as I have, that it feels like you’re failing and then to know that, “Oh, it’s common.” Like, “Oh, that would be a normal response to have.”

[00:25:56] John: This is the story of teaching and one of the things I’ve always said about teaching is it’s an extended exercise in repeated failure where failure is measured against– Usually, most people who care about teaching I find have unreasonable expectations for their own teaching and the outcomes of their teaching. What becomes fascinating is the iterative experience of, “Okay, this didn’t go as well as I wished last time. What am I going to do differently next time?”

For folks who find that process fascinating, as you clearly do, not just through your own work but through your podcast, that just becomes a way of life of thinking about these problems. The notion that you’re failing is also unfortunately unavoidable and you have to buck yourself up every so often like, “I am doing the best I can, and sometimes the best I can is not exactly what I would’ve wished for,” particularly under the way things have been in the last few years and even ongoing conditions today.

[00:26:53] Bonni: I think too that I don’t want to give up because I hear and I read your books and I hear from people like you that that doesn’t mean don’t ever try to do public writing again. That’s not the lesson to draw from that. What was it about it that didn’t work? Then, what would success look like? I think you’re telling me that success would not look like 100% of students in the class being willing to put a stamp on something like that, but I could get closer to it.

I’m also thinking, what would it look like, John, if I wrote a letter to a company and assigned it to myself three weeks to a month before I’m going to ask them to do the same thing. Then who knows? Maybe the company would respond. I don’t know, but it would be an interesting experiment and then to model for them that these are the kinds of things that we do as citizens and we talk about the common good in the class.

I’m not sure I ever successfully will be able to get us all there to the extent that I wish I could, but that would be a way of modeling the values that I have and then showing them that I’m also risking some things by sharing it with them and then modeling that vulnerability that is required to speak one’s voice.

[00:28:09] John: That you’re invested in too, but even if you don’t get more students who want to put that stamp on, one of the outcomes can be them understanding themselves better why they are hesitant to do it or what is keeping them from doing it? Where they may be perfectly comfortable going on Twitter or Instagram and saying, “Hey, insert name of corporation here.” What’s up with that ad that they don’t like, what it’s representing or that sort of stuff.

They may reflexively do that, but they may hesitate for the kinds of things you’re asking them to do and they can explore why. It may be because they think they don’t have the standing or the credentials or that it will have negative impact on the future or something like that. Then that’s part of learning too is gaining that kind of self-knowledge around what we are comfortable with and what makes us uncomfortable and how we negotiate that discomfort either by overcoming it or just recognizing this is something that is part of me that I have to either work around or live with as I make my way through the world.

[00:29:14] Bonni: That’s really helpful. It’s interesting because I had taught at the doctoral level with people considerably older than most of the students I teach in my regular job, and you speaking just now was reminding me of some of the things people in their 50s and above, the concerns they have. Well, those could be some of the same concerns that students have. I just tend to sometimes stereotype type them as people that do feel very comfortable sharing in social spaces, but a letter that has a stamp on it is an entirely different medium than 140 or 280 characters.

[00:29:49] John: It could just be the medium feels strange to them. It may seem permanent in a way, which is odd given that everything on the internet to some degree is embedded in there forever somewhere. Yes, I mean, it’s interesting. It’s always fascinating to do these experiments and then see what happens and try again next time around.

[00:30:11] Bonni: Yes, thank you so much. This is the time in the show where we each get to share our recommendations. I found a website, John, that I can’t even recommend the website today because I want to dole it out to people. I want to just carefully, creafully dole out the precious things that I’ve found. The website is called pudding.cool. You might instantly wonder what on earth is the word pudding doing in a website. Well, this website will explain to you exactly the proof is in the pudding and actually where that expression comes from and what the original expression was, and how it’s different from … 

I’m not going to even waste the time because I’m going to start with John being here, being back on the show is exciting to me. I wanted to celebrate that with the closest thing from the pudding I could find that I think that John will enjoy. They have a game that they play once a day, and the game is called Words Against Strangers. They have people who apply to be this stranger, and the stranger will get selected. Today is December the 27th, and it’s Welcome to Words Against Strangers number 96. The person’s name is Evan. Evan is from New Jersey.

They will ask you to come up with all different kinds of words. When I played, I was terrible at it. I was playing against someone. I think the person’s name might have been Maria or something like that. I came up with maybe nine words throughout this game and Maria had 62 words. I was really bad at it, but it was really fun. What a clever way of building community in a way that I’ve not seen before. This is just the beginning.

Please do expect that you will be seeing some regular recommendations from the website called pudding.cool. The one that first got me into it was an article about income inequality and a little bit about statistics and economics, but I’m going save that one up. Since John’s here today, John likes words. We’re starting with Words Against Strangers and maybe John will play that sometime this week and have fun competing against someone from the internet, maybe even Evan. You never know. When we get off today, John, you may go compete against Evan.

[00:32:38] John: I may. I’ve already opened it up on my web browser, so it’s my next stop.

[00:32:42] Bonni: Yes, but I can almost guarantee you, John, just knowing you and having read so many of your words that this is a website for you. I mean, my gosh, the technology too is very– They’re pretty incredible web developers. Lots of different kinds of ways that they create very engaging content. Yes, it was really, really fun, so be watching for future recommendations from the pudding, but today’s is called Words Against Strangers. John, what things do you have to recommend for us today?

[00:33:12] John: I want to recommend an experience that others can recreate that I did by accident this fall, where I discovered a book that had been a novel that had been quite popular many years ago that I’d never heard of, which is rare for me. I mean, there’s many books I haven’t read but when I think of classic or prize-winning or prize-nominated fiction, it’s something that I’ve been on top of for most of my life. I grew up in a bookstore in the town I grew up in. I majored in English and creative writing. I’ve written fiction and that kind of stuff.

I was speaking at a conference at Penn State and I walked into a used bookstore near the Penn State campus. My eye just went to this book called The Confession of a Child of the Century by this guy, Thomas Rogers, a hardcover, used book, and I bought it and read it. It was probably my favorite book I’ve read in the last 10 years. It was published in 1972. It was a finalist for the National Book Award in 1973. Thomas Rogers was a professor at Penn State for many years, which is why his books were prominently displayed in the used bookstore in the campus. He only published two more novels in his lifetime. He passed away in the 2000s.

I just became fascinated with this great book that nobody remembers, that’s out of print, that I stumbled upon by accident and because of that, it feels very special that I found this that other people don’t know. Now, I’ve been championing this book everywhere and anywhere, and handing it off to my friends at home to read it. I guess my recommendation is to go out and find something interesting to you that you don’t think other people know about.

I guess pudding.cool is probably a pretty good example of that sort of phenomenon. For me, it was finding a novel that clearly was a big deal at the time it was published but it’s been largely forgotten. It could be any number of things. It could be a spice. It could be a dish. You go get one of those cookbooks from the ’70s and make some recipe that hasn’t been around forever. I was so tickled by the experience of reading this thing that had been forgotten and me bringing it back to life as a kind of memory across time, particularly something that’s almost as old as I am that I’m doing it more.

I’m now seeking out, I’m looking at a stack of three other books from the early ’70s that were award-nominated but didn’t win, and whose writers I’d never heard of until I found the books. That’s my recommendation. Go find something that other people probably don’t know about and discover it for yourself anew.

[00:35:48] Bonni: I love that. John, thank you for coming back to Teaching In Higher Ed. I’m looking forward to the next conversation.

[00:35:55] John: Yes, anytime. Let’s not wait so long next time.

[00:35:58] Bonni: Let’s not have a pandemic in between the next time.

[00:36:00] John: That’s right.

[00:36:01] Bonni: [laughs] Thanks again, John. [music] It was so great to get another opportunity to talk to John Warner. Thanks for being on the show. Thanks to all of you for listening. If you have been listening to the show for a while and haven’t yet given it a rating or review, we’d love to do that as it helps other people discover the show. Today’s episode was produced by me, Bonni Stachowiak. It was edited by the amazing Andrew Kroeger, and podcast production support was provided by Sierra Smith. If you haven’t subscribed to the weekly newsletter, it’s time to do it. teachinginhighered.com/subscribe and you’ll get the show notes and other goodies that don’t show up on the podcast in your inbox on a weekly basis. Thanks so much for listening, and I’ll see you next time on Teaching In Higher Ed.

[00:37:04] [END OF AUDIO]

The transcript of this episode has been made possible through a financial contribution by the Association of College and University Educators (ACUE). ACUE is on a mission to ensure student success through quality instruction. In partnership with institutions of higher education nationwide, ACUE supports and credentials faculty members in the use of evidence-based teaching practices that drive student engagement, retention, and learning.

Teaching in Higher Ed transcripts are created using a combination of an automated transcription service and human beings. This text likely will not represent the precise, word-for-word conversation that was had. The accuracy of the transcripts will vary. The authoritative record of the Teaching in Higher Ed podcasts is contained in the audio file.