For the reading annotation I basically had to do just that, annotate readings. However, I had to use the online resource hypothes.is. It was an interesting experience. How hypothes.is works is that you put the url of a website you want to annotate into their form and then it will pull up the website with hypothes.is buttons on the side that allow you to write comments. Your comments are then saved onto your hypothes.is account and available for viewing whenever. What I thought was interesting about hypothes.is was that in addition to just highlighting text and writing comments on it you could also get multi-modal by adding images, sounds, and links to other websites. I am probably going to use hypothes.is again for research with online sources as it allows you to highlight online text which is more helpful than writing your notes down in word and getting lost when you try to find what section of a text you were writing about. One thing that was annoying about hypothes.is though was that it often would not save my comments and I had to go back and redo a couple comments because of this. Also comments that I made on other people’s comments would not show up on my account, which was irritating as I was pretty proud of some of those comments. However, overall hypothes.is was pretty useful. Also the readings themselves for ENGL 3110 were interesting. One of my favorite reads was this article by Janie Kliever talking about fonts. I got a lot of tips in there that I ended up using in my work for Chattahoochee NOW, like for example that serif fonts are better than non-serif fonts for body text. Also, the reading annotations were good practice for technical writing a part of our comments had to summarize/explain what a text was talking about and I feel like that is exactly what technical writers do in that they take complicated information and try to break it down so it is easier to understand. A quote I liked a lot from this class was that “technical writers make tacit knowledge explicit.”