Following up on a couple of postings on Steve Krause's Blog, I thought I'd compose a few thoughts on the role of audio in providing feedback to writers. First, it seems clear to me that things are shifting, at least in the computers and writing community, so that working with sound files is becoming a mainstream academic activity. Steve references a Kairos piece written by Jack Wilson that discusses the use of audio files for providing feedback on written papers, but on e-mail discussions and in blogs it is becoming much more common to hear of scholars moving toward recording lectures, podcasting observations about topics, or making audio files for course materials. It feels as if another evolutionary step in composition is playing out as we move toward not only thinking about sound, but practicing composing with audio

So what can be said about audio feedback for students papers? First, there is the longstanding problem to note of expertise and activity differentials between students and instructors. The one thing that stands out to me is that these audio files are being created by instructors to discuss student papers. The service ethic that so permeates writing programs and the need to see students creating academic discourse still holds so that students are often consuming rather than producing these new media commentaries. Of course, deciding what students need to be writing and how those projects are shifting or may change is a large topic, but it's worth observing.

Perhaps more fruitful for consideration, though, is the differential in modes that one finds with writers producing one form and readers creating another. For me the question is not as much, What comes across differently for readers in audio instead of print? but more how do we read and respond differently when we compose through audio or print? Do audio comments create a more conversational writer/responder dynamic? Or, might written comments bring the reader more in line with the original author, composing thoughts in text about the topic under study?

On a related note, I think audio allure might be dangerous or enabling depending on how well it facilitates the kinds of writer and reader relationships one wishes to acheive. A recent exercise conducted in one of my classes asked readers to act as co-writers or the papers they were reviewing. The comment feature in MS word served as the technical engine for opening the paper to other voices and readers were forbidden to hunt for surface errors, and instead called to write their own thoughts out about the topic under discussion and the issues raised by the paper. The assignment sought to enable the kind of conversational ideal envisioned by Richard Straub in his writings about providing feedback. This podcast on the process of conducting conversational peer review allowed me to reflect on the activities.

So, there is much to be thought about and practiced when it comes to bringing audio into the writer and reader relationship. Audio files alone, won't create an ideal review environment and in fact might hinder the process. Or, they might be the next logical step in creating activities in which writers and readers converse about topics in a realistic and engaging way.