Book Review:
Haas, Angela M. “A Rhetoric of Alliance: What American Indians Can Tell Us About Digital and Visual Rhetoric.” Dissertation. 2008.
When deciding on a book to review I chose a dissertation that I’ve wanted to read in its entirety for some time. My background is in public policy and comparative studies in race and ethnicity, so I’ve always had fun trying to understand my identity as a scholar of rhetoric. However, the weaving of my multiple scholarly trainings is of the utmost importance to me as a cultural rhetorics scholar. So I’ll try to sort through all of that while also telling you about Angela Haas.
In “A Rhetoric of Alliance,” Angela Haas takes on the task of tracing how American Indians have been represented in relation to technology by both Natives and non-Natives alike. Haas describes her project as follows:
"Specifically, my dissertation aims to rupture racial stereotypes and widely held theoretical and political assumptions by providing case studies on specific culturally-sitated technological practices of a specific race, utilize a broader, more flexible, and more historically-situated definition of technology and considerations of technological theories and practices, thereby reflecting a larger history of technological design and use by people of color" (70).
What I appreciate about this project is the manner in which it deconstructs culturally specific theories of technology to broaden the utility of professional writing practice and study. For example, as an rhetoric scholar Haas goes to great lengths to highlight the commonalities in the theory of the communication medium (or the skill or art of what she sees) as opposed to a given author’s utility of it. By doing so, a reader is able to see how shifting the perspective from studying the product to studying the process of making meaning, particularly in the context of Native making practices and digital technologies. It’s not an argument of better or before, but of the affordances of seeing how they’re related (I’ll return to this a little later). The secret to this argument, though, lies in her methodology.
Angela describes her theoretical framework as an "indiscipline," noting how she pulls three distinct fields together to inform conversations for Rhetoric and Writing as well as American Indian Studies (145). What I see her doing to achieve this is describing how her multiple, mixed methods collaboratively construct a picture of teaching, research, and scholarship that accounts for politics, identity, culture, dominance/power, and historical/social contexts (see pp. 170-190 for an in-depth exploration of pedagogical strategies). Angela’s methods specifically include literature reviews, rhetorical analyses of theories, historiographical/archival research, case studies, oral history, and interviews (60). And through these data she asks her readers to see how such knowledge might make them reimagine their pedagogy, as it did for me when I taught Science and Technology as a First Year Writing Course.
So, how will my work benefit from grappling with such methodological concerns? As I see it now, the affordances of generating a discourse informed by multiple methods and multiple fields of study increases the utility/applicability of an argument. I would argue that the strongest feature of Haas’ dissertation is in the realm of pedagogy, and this is largely a result of her orientation as a cultural rhetorics scholar. Haas explains that “cultural rhetorics inquiry is concerned with challenging traditional canons of rhetorical thought through the study of rhetorics historically margianalized or unrecognized by Western culture and with constructing new methodologies for investigating the plurality of histories of rhetoric" (8). When it comes to teaching a class on science and technology, consider the power in the pedagogical decision to interrogate cultural notions of science and technology. In my mind this is a big move because it facilitates the possibility of student learning outcomes to include politics and everyday life.
Again, I appreciate that Haas’ work encourages a shift of theoretical perspective and orientation surrounding the topics of technology and writing. But also useful is the way in which she connects the pedagogical with the political in order to illuminate 1) disciplinary shortcomings and 2) practical methods of challenging the dominance of colonial notions of knowledge-making.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
The Politics of Technology in Curriculum and Instruction
Reading Response 4:
Carroll, David. “Mobile Learning Tools: A Teachable Moment in the Age of the App.” In Learning Through Digital Media: Experiments in Technology and Pedagogy.
As you may have read in my post on how/who I understand my students to be, I recognize myself as a teacher who is not technologically proficient in digital environments. It is because of this that I found David Carrol’s piece to be especially helpful for understanding how scholars who DO experiment pedagogically with common, new technologies think about instruction.
The greatest strength in Carroll’s article can be found in the way he coordinates a review of the scholarly conversations surrounding mobile technologies with macro-level, societal concerns. For example, Carroll emphasizes a strong need for balancing private technological development with public access and use. Comparing institutional desires with the legal constraints in corporate development, Carroll argues that we need to move toward a disentangling of private and public interests in the realm of systemic educational development. In other words, the “ad hoc” manner in which schools locate funding for technologies may in fact be to the detriment of the students in the long run as a result of capitalist drives.
For me this piece is useful for the questions it raises about seeking and adopting new technologies into classrooms and curricula. The lines between private profit and public education are so blurred at this point it is becoming increasingly difficult to determine who is really profiting: students or the owners of the corporate firms developing and selling the technologies. I, like David Carroll, favor the development of educational technologies in so far as access and enhancing learning remain higher priorities than profit and scale.
Carroll, David. “Mobile Learning Tools: A Teachable Moment in the Age of the App.” In Learning Through Digital Media: Experiments in Technology and Pedagogy.
As you may have read in my post on how/who I understand my students to be, I recognize myself as a teacher who is not technologically proficient in digital environments. It is because of this that I found David Carrol’s piece to be especially helpful for understanding how scholars who DO experiment pedagogically with common, new technologies think about instruction.
The greatest strength in Carroll’s article can be found in the way he coordinates a review of the scholarly conversations surrounding mobile technologies with macro-level, societal concerns. For example, Carroll emphasizes a strong need for balancing private technological development with public access and use. Comparing institutional desires with the legal constraints in corporate development, Carroll argues that we need to move toward a disentangling of private and public interests in the realm of systemic educational development. In other words, the “ad hoc” manner in which schools locate funding for technologies may in fact be to the detriment of the students in the long run as a result of capitalist drives.
For me this piece is useful for the questions it raises about seeking and adopting new technologies into classrooms and curricula. The lines between private profit and public education are so blurred at this point it is becoming increasingly difficult to determine who is really profiting: students or the owners of the corporate firms developing and selling the technologies. I, like David Carroll, favor the development of educational technologies in so far as access and enhancing learning remain higher priorities than profit and scale.
Fitzpatrick and New Technologies
Reading Response 3:
Fitzpatrick, Kathleen. “Google Wave: Pedagogical Success, Technological Failure?” In Learning Through Digital Media: Experiments in Technology and Pedagogy.
Kathleen Fitzpatrick’s piece on Google Wave is an excellent article for contemplating the incorporation of new, complex technologies in writing classrooms. On one hand, this is a success story focusing on the affordances of incorporating socially-geared digital environments into one’s pedagogy. On the other, this is a cautionary tale for scholars who may be made vulnerable by a tool mismatched for the learning. I can’t help but think of Latour’s Aramis here.
—Check out my brief overview of Bruno Latour’s Aramis, or the Love of Technology if you would like to know where this is coming from—
Fitzpatrick’s piece does a phenomenal job of highlighting just how powerful a strategic application of new technology can be. Given that Google designed Wave to help people engage writing in social spaces, it provided an ideal format for one unit during a semester. Fitzpatrick wanted students to think and gather information socially and collaboratively. I recognize her decision to experiment with communication environment rather than type of product to be a sound strategy worth emulating. However, because of the overwhelming influence of corporate strategies in developing mass-market systems there’s also a downside.
As in the case with Aramis, “the most crucial problem was perhaps that Wave’s users—and more importantly its evangelists—didn’t have a clear enough sense of what the system was actually good for” (paragraph 9). The pitfall in using technologies like Google Wave is that large, systemic shifts in business models and technical support often subvert the ability of people to meaningfully engage technology consistently over time. Either educators must become endlessly adaptable, or more rigid in their infrastructural demands.
For me I take this as a practical lesson in pedagogical portability. I value a technology’s applicability over its complexity any day of the week. Maybe it’s my favor toward inductive pedagogy?
Fitzpatrick, Kathleen. “Google Wave: Pedagogical Success, Technological Failure?” In Learning Through Digital Media: Experiments in Technology and Pedagogy.
Kathleen Fitzpatrick’s piece on Google Wave is an excellent article for contemplating the incorporation of new, complex technologies in writing classrooms. On one hand, this is a success story focusing on the affordances of incorporating socially-geared digital environments into one’s pedagogy. On the other, this is a cautionary tale for scholars who may be made vulnerable by a tool mismatched for the learning. I can’t help but think of Latour’s Aramis here.
—Check out my brief overview of Bruno Latour’s Aramis, or the Love of Technology if you would like to know where this is coming from—
Fitzpatrick’s piece does a phenomenal job of highlighting just how powerful a strategic application of new technology can be. Given that Google designed Wave to help people engage writing in social spaces, it provided an ideal format for one unit during a semester. Fitzpatrick wanted students to think and gather information socially and collaboratively. I recognize her decision to experiment with communication environment rather than type of product to be a sound strategy worth emulating. However, because of the overwhelming influence of corporate strategies in developing mass-market systems there’s also a downside.
As in the case with Aramis, “the most crucial problem was perhaps that Wave’s users—and more importantly its evangelists—didn’t have a clear enough sense of what the system was actually good for” (paragraph 9). The pitfall in using technologies like Google Wave is that large, systemic shifts in business models and technical support often subvert the ability of people to meaningfully engage technology consistently over time. Either educators must become endlessly adaptable, or more rigid in their infrastructural demands.
For me I take this as a practical lesson in pedagogical portability. I value a technology’s applicability over its complexity any day of the week. Maybe it’s my favor toward inductive pedagogy?
Mark Sample and What it Means to Teach
Reading Response 2:
Sample, Mark. “The Question of Expert Learners.” In Learning Through Digital Media: Experiments in Technology and Pedagogy.
In “The Question of Expert Learners,” Sample asks teachers to return to a fundamental question: What do we mean by teaching? I find this to be a useful rhetorical move because it asks teachers to bring their own practices to light alongside Sample’s sharing of experience. Or, in other words, reimagining teaching by reframing learning. The overall argument is simple: if pedagogical decisions are based on theories of learning as a process/skill, a teacher is far more likely to succeed in teaching something. That’s it.
But I think that’s a complicated notion. Sample identifies intentionality, reflection, and accountability as principles for guiding learning. Essentially, if one’s authorial moves can purposefully engage these principles then learning will unfold in the process itself. Sample prefers to think of it as “guided inquiry or cognitive apprenticeship,” where the teacher or other students may guide one another from beginning learner to expert learner. This path, Sample argues, offers a classroom many in roads to learning and development.
I find this essay to be highly pragmatic and applicable to any classroom setting. Those who study art forms know that the processes involved in learning a skill or art are often compatible, if not directly translatable to another skill or art. And the reason for this: we all share some degree of commonality in how we learn, even if our idiosyncrasies differ. Such knowledge can help build strong teachers in my book.
Sample, Mark. “The Question of Expert Learners.” In Learning Through Digital Media: Experiments in Technology and Pedagogy.
In “The Question of Expert Learners,” Sample asks teachers to return to a fundamental question: What do we mean by teaching? I find this to be a useful rhetorical move because it asks teachers to bring their own practices to light alongside Sample’s sharing of experience. Or, in other words, reimagining teaching by reframing learning. The overall argument is simple: if pedagogical decisions are based on theories of learning as a process/skill, a teacher is far more likely to succeed in teaching something. That’s it.
But I think that’s a complicated notion. Sample identifies intentionality, reflection, and accountability as principles for guiding learning. Essentially, if one’s authorial moves can purposefully engage these principles then learning will unfold in the process itself. Sample prefers to think of it as “guided inquiry or cognitive apprenticeship,” where the teacher or other students may guide one another from beginning learner to expert learner. This path, Sample argues, offers a classroom many in roads to learning and development.
I find this essay to be highly pragmatic and applicable to any classroom setting. Those who study art forms know that the processes involved in learning a skill or art are often compatible, if not directly translatable to another skill or art. And the reason for this: we all share some degree of commonality in how we learn, even if our idiosyncrasies differ. Such knowledge can help build strong teachers in my book.
Vygotsky and Learning
Reading Response 1:
Vygotsky, Lev S. “Interaction Between Learning and Development.” Excerpted from Readings on the Development of Children. 1978.
What do we know the teaching of writing is all about? Psychology. Enter Vygotsky and his zone of proximal development. I appreciate scholars who work to make the teaching of writing more accessible and ultimately easier, and this piece is especially useful for those looking for theories of learning.
Attempting to extend the location of learning to include realms beyond the classroom, Vygotsky challenges traditional theories of education. He argues that “any learning a child encounters in school always has a previous history,” meaning that school is not the primary source of development (32). With this knowledge, I don’t believe it is difficult to see how such an idea alone can change the way teachers approach lesson plans or interactions with students. Yet his argument continues to grow.
Specifically, Vygotsky explains the common knowledge that when properly matched, the type of learning and a child’s developmental level can be powerful, coordinated tools for enhancing a learning environment. To provide evidence the author identifies two developmental levels to showcase the relational differences. The first, “actual development,” is “the level of development of a child’s mental functions that has been established as a result of certain already completed developmental cycles” (32). The zone of proximal development, on the other hand, traces a student’s “internal course of development,” or their state of learning as they are in the process of building. This is useful to pay attention to because it can be used as a method of teaching students self sufficiency with a given subject (a result of its prospective characterization) (33).
Learning itself is not development based on Vygotsky’s research. And this conclusion should have serious implications for how we imagine the teaching of writing in particular. If students learn faster than their processes of development can keep up with, then teachers must adjust the location and effects of their developmental lessons/moments.
Vygotsky, Lev S. “Interaction Between Learning and Development.” Excerpted from Readings on the Development of Children. 1978.
What do we know the teaching of writing is all about? Psychology. Enter Vygotsky and his zone of proximal development. I appreciate scholars who work to make the teaching of writing more accessible and ultimately easier, and this piece is especially useful for those looking for theories of learning.
Attempting to extend the location of learning to include realms beyond the classroom, Vygotsky challenges traditional theories of education. He argues that “any learning a child encounters in school always has a previous history,” meaning that school is not the primary source of development (32). With this knowledge, I don’t believe it is difficult to see how such an idea alone can change the way teachers approach lesson plans or interactions with students. Yet his argument continues to grow.
Specifically, Vygotsky explains the common knowledge that when properly matched, the type of learning and a child’s developmental level can be powerful, coordinated tools for enhancing a learning environment. To provide evidence the author identifies two developmental levels to showcase the relational differences. The first, “actual development,” is “the level of development of a child’s mental functions that has been established as a result of certain already completed developmental cycles” (32). The zone of proximal development, on the other hand, traces a student’s “internal course of development,” or their state of learning as they are in the process of building. This is useful to pay attention to because it can be used as a method of teaching students self sufficiency with a given subject (a result of its prospective characterization) (33).
Learning itself is not development based on Vygotsky’s research. And this conclusion should have serious implications for how we imagine the teaching of writing in particular. If students learn faster than their processes of development can keep up with, then teachers must adjust the location and effects of their developmental lessons/moments.
A Set of Learning Goals
Share a Set of Learning Goals:
Here is a brief description of the focus of and goals for an online course engaging Science and Technology from a Cultural Rhetorics standpoint.
As the course title suggests we will spend this semester thinking, reading, and writing about science and technology in the world. For the purposes of our section I built a course asking you to consider the use of science and technology in your everyday lives, in your academic careers, and also in your potential future careers. Under the frame of “The Tools We Use,” we will engage in activities that exercise your critical thinking and analytical skills while practicing for the demands of college writing. Much of what I ask you to do will be based on your own experience. Therefore, the best advice I can give you is to stay close to what you know from your everyday life, and then use the research skills we practice to build on your knowledge. Our specific goals for our section are as follows:
-Assess scholarly notions of Science & Technology as cultural practices
-Critically evaluate our own uses of technologies to better understand how we learn
-Use writing to better understand technology, and technology to better understand writing (ELI Review)
-Engage in academic research processes as a method of knowledge-building
-Understand writing as a communal activity, not an individual one.
Here is a brief description of the focus of and goals for an online course engaging Science and Technology from a Cultural Rhetorics standpoint.
As the course title suggests we will spend this semester thinking, reading, and writing about science and technology in the world. For the purposes of our section I built a course asking you to consider the use of science and technology in your everyday lives, in your academic careers, and also in your potential future careers. Under the frame of “The Tools We Use,” we will engage in activities that exercise your critical thinking and analytical skills while practicing for the demands of college writing. Much of what I ask you to do will be based on your own experience. Therefore, the best advice I can give you is to stay close to what you know from your everyday life, and then use the research skills we practice to build on your knowledge. Our specific goals for our section are as follows:
-Assess scholarly notions of Science & Technology as cultural practices
-Critically evaluate our own uses of technologies to better understand how we learn
-Use writing to better understand technology, and technology to better understand writing (ELI Review)
-Engage in academic research processes as a method of knowledge-building
-Understand writing as a communal activity, not an individual one.
My Students
My Students:
I do know that there’s one thing I can count on in a given semester as a teacher: my students often have more (and more advanced) technological literacies than I.
Working at Michigan State University I teach students from all over the world. So yes, pinpointing who they are is certainly difficult. One cultural phenomenon that is fairly commonplace is the use of the internet for knowledge production. Anybody who visits YouTube can be instructed on how to do myriad things in a matter of minutes. With an increase of knowledge availability comes a strain on knowledge application. Today it’s getting increasingly easier for students to acquire a little knowledge about many things; it’s far more difficult to acquire a lot of knowledge about a few things using the internet. The implications for college writing here are potentially large depending on how a teacher negotiates a student’s technological utilization.
Another category of technology use among my students is entertainment. I am not a video-game player, nor do I have a smart phone. Cell phones are one of the few incredibly visible student technologies in the classroom. With the amount of writing many of them do on their phones alone, it is not difficult to make various technologies relevant to classroom activity. As I mentioned in my technology statement, the process of learning one skill or art can be translated into other skills and arts. Sometimes students just need to be asked the right question about how their knowledge of one skill can be made to apply to another.
Video games then (even though I’m not a player) are often one of my favorite subjects to ask students about. It is usually possible to extrapolate the writing mechanic equivalencies after hearing a game described. Mortal Kombat is my favorite example, particularly with my interest in martial arts. When I ask students who play the game about the opponent in the final fight, they describe the artist who has mastered and can apply the styles of all the combatants, and not to mention in the right context.
I do my best to adapt to the learning needs of a teaching situation. This means that my technological choices are highly rhetorical. If there’s a skill I want students to learn, I will do my best to select the most appropriate medium/format the lesson. If I can show students advanced arrangement with sticky notes, I will do so if that is the most effective and efficient way. If there is a rhetorical affordance of choosing another technological medium, I will certainly cater to my audience (commercials, movies, songs, etc.).
I suppose that makes me a technological opportunist, not necessarily enthusiast.
I do know that there’s one thing I can count on in a given semester as a teacher: my students often have more (and more advanced) technological literacies than I.
Working at Michigan State University I teach students from all over the world. So yes, pinpointing who they are is certainly difficult. One cultural phenomenon that is fairly commonplace is the use of the internet for knowledge production. Anybody who visits YouTube can be instructed on how to do myriad things in a matter of minutes. With an increase of knowledge availability comes a strain on knowledge application. Today it’s getting increasingly easier for students to acquire a little knowledge about many things; it’s far more difficult to acquire a lot of knowledge about a few things using the internet. The implications for college writing here are potentially large depending on how a teacher negotiates a student’s technological utilization.
Another category of technology use among my students is entertainment. I am not a video-game player, nor do I have a smart phone. Cell phones are one of the few incredibly visible student technologies in the classroom. With the amount of writing many of them do on their phones alone, it is not difficult to make various technologies relevant to classroom activity. As I mentioned in my technology statement, the process of learning one skill or art can be translated into other skills and arts. Sometimes students just need to be asked the right question about how their knowledge of one skill can be made to apply to another.
Video games then (even though I’m not a player) are often one of my favorite subjects to ask students about. It is usually possible to extrapolate the writing mechanic equivalencies after hearing a game described. Mortal Kombat is my favorite example, particularly with my interest in martial arts. When I ask students who play the game about the opponent in the final fight, they describe the artist who has mastered and can apply the styles of all the combatants, and not to mention in the right context.
I do my best to adapt to the learning needs of a teaching situation. This means that my technological choices are highly rhetorical. If there’s a skill I want students to learn, I will do my best to select the most appropriate medium/format the lesson. If I can show students advanced arrangement with sticky notes, I will do so if that is the most effective and efficient way. If there is a rhetorical affordance of choosing another technological medium, I will certainly cater to my audience (commercials, movies, songs, etc.).
I suppose that makes me a technological opportunist, not necessarily enthusiast.
Affordances Analysis
Affordances Analysis:
This summer I taught online for the first time. Needless to say, I learned a lot about what doesn’t work so well in my pedagogy as I translate it to an all-online medium. While theories of writing instruction are relatively portable (“what” we’re looking for), the application of tools sometimes requires tweaking. When faced with the dilemma of how/when to use ELI Review, I learned something about varying review types. Here I offer you what I recognize as the affordances and disaffordances of the ELI Review system under a few common circumstances I encountered.
Conducting a Presence/Absence Review
Sometimes we just need students to double check the assignment requirements. This is among the simplest styles of review, and one that I found most useful toward the end of a review phase (but not the last review itself). Students seem to appreciate the double check, and often times learn more about their own work as they briefly review the work of others (compare/contrast). However, this type of review can only be so useful. To really teach writing we need to assemble different kinds of reviews for different purposes.
Conducting a General Review
For example, a general review—or one that focuses on a structural or interpretive element of a piece of writing—can be used to teach about the concept of audience. By asking a series of affect questions about a text in an ELI Review, students can formatively assess the affect of each other’s work. I’ve found these reviews to be most successful when applied after students have been wrestling with their topics and have at least a draft of their project. If done too early or too late, students seem to view it as busy work.
Conducting a Highly Focused Review
Because ELI encourages the use of multiple metrics it is fairly simple to coordinate measures in a way that engages students on a writerly strategy or tactic. A highly focused review is one in which students engage in a variety of different review processes (rating, commenting, checking boxes, etc.), all geared toward a very specific writerly move (such as a thesis). The affordances of this review can best be seen when reviewing a partial—not a whole—document. Because the cognitive load is high for the highly focused review process, students will get more out of the exercise if they extrapolate the lesson, paying most attention to a few carefully selected processes can convey more than working with an array of lessons and mediums.
So overall ELI is worth appreciating at least for its capacity to be versatile. Unlike some technologies, ELI has been designed to give the user a high degree of agency over the application of the software. With a little strategic (scaffolded) thinking it can be turned into something that’s mighty useful, especially when timed appropriately for the writing needs of a group.
This summer I taught online for the first time. Needless to say, I learned a lot about what doesn’t work so well in my pedagogy as I translate it to an all-online medium. While theories of writing instruction are relatively portable (“what” we’re looking for), the application of tools sometimes requires tweaking. When faced with the dilemma of how/when to use ELI Review, I learned something about varying review types. Here I offer you what I recognize as the affordances and disaffordances of the ELI Review system under a few common circumstances I encountered.
Conducting a Presence/Absence Review
Sometimes we just need students to double check the assignment requirements. This is among the simplest styles of review, and one that I found most useful toward the end of a review phase (but not the last review itself). Students seem to appreciate the double check, and often times learn more about their own work as they briefly review the work of others (compare/contrast). However, this type of review can only be so useful. To really teach writing we need to assemble different kinds of reviews for different purposes.
Conducting a General Review
For example, a general review—or one that focuses on a structural or interpretive element of a piece of writing—can be used to teach about the concept of audience. By asking a series of affect questions about a text in an ELI Review, students can formatively assess the affect of each other’s work. I’ve found these reviews to be most successful when applied after students have been wrestling with their topics and have at least a draft of their project. If done too early or too late, students seem to view it as busy work.
Conducting a Highly Focused Review
Because ELI encourages the use of multiple metrics it is fairly simple to coordinate measures in a way that engages students on a writerly strategy or tactic. A highly focused review is one in which students engage in a variety of different review processes (rating, commenting, checking boxes, etc.), all geared toward a very specific writerly move (such as a thesis). The affordances of this review can best be seen when reviewing a partial—not a whole—document. Because the cognitive load is high for the highly focused review process, students will get more out of the exercise if they extrapolate the lesson, paying most attention to a few carefully selected processes can convey more than working with an array of lessons and mediums.
So overall ELI is worth appreciating at least for its capacity to be versatile. Unlike some technologies, ELI has been designed to give the user a high degree of agency over the application of the software. With a little strategic (scaffolded) thinking it can be turned into something that’s mighty useful, especially when timed appropriately for the writing needs of a group.
Technology Statement
Technology Statement:
When it comes to teaching, I like working from principle or theory as it is shaped by practice. What follows is a handful of commitments and beliefs related to my teaching practice. Extrapolation is necessary for now… until I get that teachnology statement all finished up.
I am committed to:
-inquiry as method, process, and mediation
-critical pedagogy
-activities enacting embodied cognition
-teaching students as teachers
-destabilizing oppressive hierarchies
-dialogic problem solving
-deterring those who know too much from going too far
I believe this about learning:
-learning to teach something increases one's ability to understand it
-knowledge-making is a collective activity, not an individualistic one
-after deeply reflecting on experience and practice, the process of learning one skill or art can be translated into other skills and arts
-learning is driven by inquiry, and inquiry is driven by learning
I believe this about technology:
-a technology is only as strong as its operator’s understanding
-a technology’s applicability should outweigh its complexity
-less is more: focusing heavily on a few carefully selected processes can convey more than working with an array of lessons and mediums
-access is among the most important questions for deciding on technological application
When it comes to teaching, I like working from principle or theory as it is shaped by practice. What follows is a handful of commitments and beliefs related to my teaching practice. Extrapolation is necessary for now… until I get that teachnology statement all finished up.
I am committed to:
-inquiry as method, process, and mediation
-critical pedagogy
-activities enacting embodied cognition
-teaching students as teachers
-destabilizing oppressive hierarchies
-dialogic problem solving
-deterring those who know too much from going too far
I believe this about learning:
-learning to teach something increases one's ability to understand it
-knowledge-making is a collective activity, not an individualistic one
-after deeply reflecting on experience and practice, the process of learning one skill or art can be translated into other skills and arts
-learning is driven by inquiry, and inquiry is driven by learning
I believe this about technology:
-a technology is only as strong as its operator’s understanding
-a technology’s applicability should outweigh its complexity
-less is more: focusing heavily on a few carefully selected processes can convey more than working with an array of lessons and mediums
-access is among the most important questions for deciding on technological application
Interactions Audit
Interactions Audit:
I try to keep all the types of interactions I encourage in a given unit flexible and adaptable. However, I do have a pattern of interaction stemming from the activities of reading, writing, review, and consultation.
Early on in a given unit I encourage group-related activities that reinforce collective invention and resource pooling. I like to get the kinks out of a project as soon as possible. Additionally, I find that students grow less intimidated by an assignment prompt the more they hear others’ questions and observations.
Once students evidence a command over the prompt I begin supporting their individual inquiry. This often takes the form of an invention activity followed by a proposal/brainstorm. With an articulation (no matter how vague or incomplete) of their project in hand, we are able to discuss pragmatic strategies and concerns for executing the work. Interactions in this phase are primarily one-to-one.
After this phase of invention I enact activities that oscillate between one-to-one and many-to-many type interactions. What links peer reviews and student-to-student activities in my pedagogy is how they are coordinated across the unit. Because knowledge making is always a collaborative activity, I do my best to persuade students of this by getting them to engage in a variety of interactions in hopes that they will recognize the value of others’ knowledge throughout the writing process. If an individual receives similar advice in multiple locations from multiple people, they are more likely to acknowledge the expertise of those around them.
As the end of a unit approaches I once again place a special emphasis on small group peer review activities and instructor guidance (one-to-one). So I suppose my interaction strategy progresses from individual to group to individual and back again.
By starting with individual/small group interactions I work to make visible common writing tensions early on. As we engage in more large group activities I utilize the space for collective instruction, but tailored to the known concerns and tensions. After seeing representations of the group’s overall performance, it is then back in the student’s hands to make the best product they can after having multiple sets of eyes and perspectives on their work.
And in the end, I hope that teaches writing as a process.
I try to keep all the types of interactions I encourage in a given unit flexible and adaptable. However, I do have a pattern of interaction stemming from the activities of reading, writing, review, and consultation.
Early on in a given unit I encourage group-related activities that reinforce collective invention and resource pooling. I like to get the kinks out of a project as soon as possible. Additionally, I find that students grow less intimidated by an assignment prompt the more they hear others’ questions and observations.
Once students evidence a command over the prompt I begin supporting their individual inquiry. This often takes the form of an invention activity followed by a proposal/brainstorm. With an articulation (no matter how vague or incomplete) of their project in hand, we are able to discuss pragmatic strategies and concerns for executing the work. Interactions in this phase are primarily one-to-one.
After this phase of invention I enact activities that oscillate between one-to-one and many-to-many type interactions. What links peer reviews and student-to-student activities in my pedagogy is how they are coordinated across the unit. Because knowledge making is always a collaborative activity, I do my best to persuade students of this by getting them to engage in a variety of interactions in hopes that they will recognize the value of others’ knowledge throughout the writing process. If an individual receives similar advice in multiple locations from multiple people, they are more likely to acknowledge the expertise of those around them.
As the end of a unit approaches I once again place a special emphasis on small group peer review activities and instructor guidance (one-to-one). So I suppose my interaction strategy progresses from individual to group to individual and back again.
By starting with individual/small group interactions I work to make visible common writing tensions early on. As we engage in more large group activities I utilize the space for collective instruction, but tailored to the known concerns and tensions. After seeing representations of the group’s overall performance, it is then back in the student’s hands to make the best product they can after having multiple sets of eyes and perspectives on their work.
And in the end, I hope that teaches writing as a process.
Article/Book Overview
Book Overview:
Latour, Bruno. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. 1996.
My pedagogy for teaching with technology at present is informed heavily by Bruno Latour’s Aramis, or the Love of Technology. I read this book for the first time this year and am now fascinated with the results of such a methodologically complex treatment of technology and society. As I’ve mentioned a number of times, I am a teacher who values developing generalizable skills, moves, and approaches within my instructional repertoire. I do this so that I may be adaptable in a given situation. And Latour’s book encourages me to continue this practice.
Briefly, Aramis is the name of a mammoth, guided public transportation project developed in France spanning from the early 1970s to the late 1980s. It’s a project that was never enacted, despite the level of technological sophistication and the overwhelming appearance of support from governmental institutions and private corporate entities. And it wasn’t just left inactive, it was mysteriously abandoned even though it was slated to be advertised in the 1988 World’s Fair. Latour’s book, then, is an account of the process by which he and his mentor solved the mystery of who killed Aramis. But it is also a rumination on tools, technology, and use in the philosophical sense.
Latour’s investigation, as well as his findings, have a lot to teach educators about the incorporation of technology in instruction. You see, Latour concludes that what killed Aramis is technologists’ and engineers’ commitment to an imagined future of the project (created by the sponsors and government) as it contradicted the social reality of the project’s development. It began as a research project, but was prematurely made real (fully functional) in the minds of those developing it despite any evidence of overall success. The desire to make profit or to have international prowess overshadowed the material reality of the project. In other words, as in the novel Frankenstein, to dream a technology outside the realm of the social or the real produces extreme tension on the system that must incorporate it. I believe this is true at the level of everyday pedagogy as well as at the level of educational system.
Latour, Bruno. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. 1996.
My pedagogy for teaching with technology at present is informed heavily by Bruno Latour’s Aramis, or the Love of Technology. I read this book for the first time this year and am now fascinated with the results of such a methodologically complex treatment of technology and society. As I’ve mentioned a number of times, I am a teacher who values developing generalizable skills, moves, and approaches within my instructional repertoire. I do this so that I may be adaptable in a given situation. And Latour’s book encourages me to continue this practice.
Briefly, Aramis is the name of a mammoth, guided public transportation project developed in France spanning from the early 1970s to the late 1980s. It’s a project that was never enacted, despite the level of technological sophistication and the overwhelming appearance of support from governmental institutions and private corporate entities. And it wasn’t just left inactive, it was mysteriously abandoned even though it was slated to be advertised in the 1988 World’s Fair. Latour’s book, then, is an account of the process by which he and his mentor solved the mystery of who killed Aramis. But it is also a rumination on tools, technology, and use in the philosophical sense.
Latour’s investigation, as well as his findings, have a lot to teach educators about the incorporation of technology in instruction. You see, Latour concludes that what killed Aramis is technologists’ and engineers’ commitment to an imagined future of the project (created by the sponsors and government) as it contradicted the social reality of the project’s development. It began as a research project, but was prematurely made real (fully functional) in the minds of those developing it despite any evidence of overall success. The desire to make profit or to have international prowess overshadowed the material reality of the project. In other words, as in the novel Frankenstein, to dream a technology outside the realm of the social or the real produces extreme tension on the system that must incorporate it. I believe this is true at the level of everyday pedagogy as well as at the level of educational system.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Scaffolding
"Scaffolding is all about providing the right amount of structure in a learning environment, keeping in mind that some learners may require little or no structure and others may require a lot of structure." - Dabbagh
The article Scaffolding: An Important Teacher Competency in Online Learning was of great interest to me. As I mentioned in my entry "My Students", in an Elementary Spanish class I have students who have really never studied the language before, but at the same time I have some students who already studied Spanish for a few years in high school. There is a big range there, and it sometimes poses a challenge when I'm developing activities. There are certain activities that I know will be a challenge for some of my students, but at the same time, I need to make these activities open ended, or find a way to give all of my students the opportunity to showcase their abilities, of whichever level, and not be limited to an overly simple task.
"low scaffolding is recommended when learners have high prior knowledge, possess a wide range of cognitive strategies, are flexible and highly motivated, have low anxiety, and attribute success and failure on tasks to internal factors. Alternatively, high scaf- folding is recommended when learners have low prior knowledge, possess few cognitive strategies, have high anxiety, low motivation, and an external locus of control."
I appreciate the fact that this article mentions anxiety levels. This is something I have mentioned in the past, being aware of the potential anxiety in a learning environment, and I believe is especially crucial in a second-language learning environment. The article goes on to discuss "Scaffolding Strategies" and first on the list is "Establishing an atmosphere of trust and an open and friendly community of learners". As most of you may already know, this was also one of the elements that I included in my Teachnology Statement from day one in our class. For me, it is very important to develop an environment where students feel comfortable and aren't embarrassed when it comes time to work in groups and share their thoughts with each other. Sharing your thoughts becomes even more anxiety-provoking when you are in a second-language learning environment, so I do whatever I can to eliminate the anxiety of sharing with classmates to counterbalance the anxiety of speaking a second-language.
Needless to say, all of the strategies on that list are of great value to me. I will try my best this up-coming year to be a "scaffolder" instead of a teacher. It is not my role to dispense knowledge, but to provide resources. This is especially easy to accept in a second-language classroom because I truly cannot dispense knowledge of the language, whereas some teachers of other subjects (and I'm not defending this) may really feel as it is their goal to transmit their own knowledge of the subject to their students through lecturing; I'm thinking, maybe a science teacher would feel this way. But really, in a second-language classroom, it's true. I cannot just hand my students the knowledge of the language that I possess. I have to provide them with the proper resources and provide them with activities that require critical and analytical thinking to learn the language through their own exploration.
The article Scaffolding: An Important Teacher Competency in Online Learning was of great interest to me. As I mentioned in my entry "My Students", in an Elementary Spanish class I have students who have really never studied the language before, but at the same time I have some students who already studied Spanish for a few years in high school. There is a big range there, and it sometimes poses a challenge when I'm developing activities. There are certain activities that I know will be a challenge for some of my students, but at the same time, I need to make these activities open ended, or find a way to give all of my students the opportunity to showcase their abilities, of whichever level, and not be limited to an overly simple task.
"low scaffolding is recommended when learners have high prior knowledge, possess a wide range of cognitive strategies, are flexible and highly motivated, have low anxiety, and attribute success and failure on tasks to internal factors. Alternatively, high scaf- folding is recommended when learners have low prior knowledge, possess few cognitive strategies, have high anxiety, low motivation, and an external locus of control."
I appreciate the fact that this article mentions anxiety levels. This is something I have mentioned in the past, being aware of the potential anxiety in a learning environment, and I believe is especially crucial in a second-language learning environment. The article goes on to discuss "Scaffolding Strategies" and first on the list is "Establishing an atmosphere of trust and an open and friendly community of learners". As most of you may already know, this was also one of the elements that I included in my Teachnology Statement from day one in our class. For me, it is very important to develop an environment where students feel comfortable and aren't embarrassed when it comes time to work in groups and share their thoughts with each other. Sharing your thoughts becomes even more anxiety-provoking when you are in a second-language learning environment, so I do whatever I can to eliminate the anxiety of sharing with classmates to counterbalance the anxiety of speaking a second-language.
Needless to say, all of the strategies on that list are of great value to me. I will try my best this up-coming year to be a "scaffolder" instead of a teacher. It is not my role to dispense knowledge, but to provide resources. This is especially easy to accept in a second-language classroom because I truly cannot dispense knowledge of the language, whereas some teachers of other subjects (and I'm not defending this) may really feel as it is their goal to transmit their own knowledge of the subject to their students through lecturing; I'm thinking, maybe a science teacher would feel this way. But really, in a second-language classroom, it's true. I cannot just hand my students the knowledge of the language that I possess. I have to provide them with the proper resources and provide them with activities that require critical and analytical thinking to learn the language through their own exploration.
Final Project Materials
Here you can find the PowerPoint that I presented in our group symposium. This presentation will walk you through the two week lesson I had planned for an Elementary Spanish course. It's packed with great information and samples of activities.
My Schedule of Activities gives more in-depth project descriptions and their expectations.
You can find the Interactions Grid of the activities from this lesson on an early blog post.
If my presentation inspired you to learn Spanish, I'll throw this in here for you: In my presentation I mentioned a lesson where I had my students watch an episode of a Spanish television program, El Internado, and then do a worksheet. I actually plan to watch the whole season of this show this coming semester. Anyway, I had created a worksheet to go along with the first episode, so if you're interested, you can watch the video and test your Spanish skills by attempting the worksheet.
Lastly, I had created a Class Blog with some sample materials that are definitely worth checking out. There is a link to a sample activity I created on Conversations (the application I presented for my Tool Review) for practicing the Spanish Vowel system.
I have still yet to find out exactly what Spanish class I will be teaching this fall, but I am excited regardless. I know that it will be either Spanish 102, 201 or 202 and I think that I can adapt these materials for any one of those options. I'm very excited to get a class syllabus and begin exploring how I can incorporate technology into each of the lessons.
My Schedule of Activities gives more in-depth project descriptions and their expectations.
You can find the Interactions Grid of the activities from this lesson on an early blog post.
If my presentation inspired you to learn Spanish, I'll throw this in here for you: In my presentation I mentioned a lesson where I had my students watch an episode of a Spanish television program, El Internado, and then do a worksheet. I actually plan to watch the whole season of this show this coming semester. Anyway, I had created a worksheet to go along with the first episode, so if you're interested, you can watch the video and test your Spanish skills by attempting the worksheet.
Lastly, I had created a Class Blog with some sample materials that are definitely worth checking out. There is a link to a sample activity I created on Conversations (the application I presented for my Tool Review) for practicing the Spanish Vowel system.
I have still yet to find out exactly what Spanish class I will be teaching this fall, but I am excited regardless. I know that it will be either Spanish 102, 201 or 202 and I think that I can adapt these materials for any one of those options. I'm very excited to get a class syllabus and begin exploring how I can incorporate technology into each of the lessons.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Teachnology Statement
As a second-language teacher I understand that acquiring a second language is a slow process. I believe that second-language acquisition should be modeled similarly to child-language acquisition in that language learners can be only expected to produce the language once they have been provided with sufficient input. I understand that the most crucial aspect of learning a language is having sufficient exposure to begin forming an underlying foundation of the language and how it works. I believe that activities for second-language learning do not need to be production-based but rather comprehension-based.
I believe that practicing communicative language teaching promotes the acquisition of a second language. Communicative language teaching focuses on meaning-based activities that work toward goals and emphasize the importance of interaction and communication of information. The communicative language teaching approach greatly impacts the way I create my lessons and helps to make the most of classroom time. This approach aligns with my beliefs that an emphasis should be placed on the ability to communicate rather than on accuracy of language use. I am committed to providing my students with knowledge and desire to pursue and use the language outside of the classroom and the communicative language teaching approach helps to reach this goal by building a foundation for effectively communicating information and providing a practical knowledge of the language that will be useful in a real-world context.
I believe that the dynamic of a second-language classroom is very important in order to promote a certain level of comfort that is necessary when learning a second-language. I understand that learning a second-language can be anxiety inducing and I believe that having a comfortable classroom environment helps to reduce the anxiety involved in sharing thoughts and ideas with others so as to counterbalance the anxiety of working with a unfamiliar language.
I believe that learners of a second-language strongly benefit from exposure to the language in an abundance of formats. It is important to showcase the language through many mediums and I especially believe that exposing my students to Spanish through the same mediums that they already use in their everyday lives will promote them to make more meaningful connections. I believe that technology plays an important role in language learning because it can bring the language into the classroom in different contexts than textbook learning would allow. I believe that it is important to encourage students to pursue learning about the aspects of the language and culture that coincide with their own interests, such as film or music. I encourage this by providing them with many mediums of exploring these different aspects of the language, and encouraging them to share their discoveries with the class. I believe that this collaborative environment that integrates technology and promotes the communicative language teaching ideology will provide students with the desire to continue learning the language, and foundation that will allow them to succeed.
I believe that practicing communicative language teaching promotes the acquisition of a second language. Communicative language teaching focuses on meaning-based activities that work toward goals and emphasize the importance of interaction and communication of information. The communicative language teaching approach greatly impacts the way I create my lessons and helps to make the most of classroom time. This approach aligns with my beliefs that an emphasis should be placed on the ability to communicate rather than on accuracy of language use. I am committed to providing my students with knowledge and desire to pursue and use the language outside of the classroom and the communicative language teaching approach helps to reach this goal by building a foundation for effectively communicating information and providing a practical knowledge of the language that will be useful in a real-world context.
I believe that the dynamic of a second-language classroom is very important in order to promote a certain level of comfort that is necessary when learning a second-language. I understand that learning a second-language can be anxiety inducing and I believe that having a comfortable classroom environment helps to reduce the anxiety involved in sharing thoughts and ideas with others so as to counterbalance the anxiety of working with a unfamiliar language.
I believe that learners of a second-language strongly benefit from exposure to the language in an abundance of formats. It is important to showcase the language through many mediums and I especially believe that exposing my students to Spanish through the same mediums that they already use in their everyday lives will promote them to make more meaningful connections. I believe that technology plays an important role in language learning because it can bring the language into the classroom in different contexts than textbook learning would allow. I believe that it is important to encourage students to pursue learning about the aspects of the language and culture that coincide with their own interests, such as film or music. I encourage this by providing them with many mediums of exploring these different aspects of the language, and encouraging them to share their discoveries with the class. I believe that this collaborative environment that integrates technology and promotes the communicative language teaching ideology will provide students with the desire to continue learning the language, and foundation that will allow them to succeed.
Book Review
Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen by James F. Lee and Bill VanPatten.
This book is used at Michigan State for ROM 803: Current Approaches to Romance Language Instruction. I believe that they've been using the book for a few years now but I just recently took ROM 803 in the Fall of 2011, which was coincidentally the same semester when Bill VanPatten came to MSU and took over as professor of the course. The book is what some might call a "methods textbook" but I think Professor VanPatten thinks of it as more of an anti-methods book. The goal of this book is to pull language teaching back from the abyss of drilling and teachers telling you to that it's okay to make things up as long as respond to their questions in Spanish.
I have made subtle references to "Communicative Language Teaching" throughout our course. The book sets out to correct the errors in the ways of modern language instruction. It reinforces the need to spend time working with written texts before ever expecting learners to compose in the language, similarly to how you would never ask a first grader to begin writing short stories the same week they began learning to read, something I think I've touched on in a previous blog entry.
Another example, one of my classroom learning goals was to "focus on communication of information rather than on accuracy of language use". Well, that idea comes from this book. Instead of the ideology some teachers have where it doesn't matter what you say as long as you say it in Spanish, this book promotes just the opposite. The main goal of an SLA classroom should be to effectively communicate information. I'll work backward to explain this better.
Think back to my presentation at our symposium. In my presentation of my family tree, the most important aspect, the thing that the students were quizzed on at the beginning of the next class period, was actually remembering the names of my family members. The goal of my presentation was to effectively communicate the information about my family to my students. I did this through periodic comprehension checks, stopping to run through the whole family each time before adding a new branch to the tree. Now, in a non-communicative language taught classroom, imagine that students would get a list of new vocabulary covering family members. The "say whatever you want as long as you say it in Spanish" teacher may ask a student what his mom's name is and he could say "my mom's name is Helen" and she wouldn't care if that really was his mom's name or not and maybe he didn't even know what he said, all he knows is that he assigned a name to a noun. Nothing anyone says in that classroom has any value. A student in my classroom would actually be making a tie between a name and a noun, especially once they catch on to the fact that I will give them quizzes to reinforce their comprehension (comprehension quizzes, don't act surprised when I tell you that they're something I picked up from this book). Honestly though, a month after I give my family tree presentation, my students still remember the names of my family members. Focusing on meaning helps make meaningful connections.
The book also focuses on having all activities in a unit be building toward one big final goal, or one final activity. No minute of class time is ever wasted on an activity that isn't working toward the big picture. Anyway, the book doesn't specifically pertain to teaching with technology but the methodology here is very important to any SLA classroom, technologically enhanced or not. This book has helped me apply what I'm learning about using technology in the classroom from our current class into my current pedagogy. Even using the same materials, and mediums, me and that hypothetical aforementioned teacher could have different end results because of our differing values of communication versus production.
I have made subtle references to "Communicative Language Teaching" throughout our course. The book sets out to correct the errors in the ways of modern language instruction. It reinforces the need to spend time working with written texts before ever expecting learners to compose in the language, similarly to how you would never ask a first grader to begin writing short stories the same week they began learning to read, something I think I've touched on in a previous blog entry.
Another example, one of my classroom learning goals was to "focus on communication of information rather than on accuracy of language use". Well, that idea comes from this book. Instead of the ideology some teachers have where it doesn't matter what you say as long as you say it in Spanish, this book promotes just the opposite. The main goal of an SLA classroom should be to effectively communicate information. I'll work backward to explain this better.
Think back to my presentation at our symposium. In my presentation of my family tree, the most important aspect, the thing that the students were quizzed on at the beginning of the next class period, was actually remembering the names of my family members. The goal of my presentation was to effectively communicate the information about my family to my students. I did this through periodic comprehension checks, stopping to run through the whole family each time before adding a new branch to the tree. Now, in a non-communicative language taught classroom, imagine that students would get a list of new vocabulary covering family members. The "say whatever you want as long as you say it in Spanish" teacher may ask a student what his mom's name is and he could say "my mom's name is Helen" and she wouldn't care if that really was his mom's name or not and maybe he didn't even know what he said, all he knows is that he assigned a name to a noun. Nothing anyone says in that classroom has any value. A student in my classroom would actually be making a tie between a name and a noun, especially once they catch on to the fact that I will give them quizzes to reinforce their comprehension (comprehension quizzes, don't act surprised when I tell you that they're something I picked up from this book). Honestly though, a month after I give my family tree presentation, my students still remember the names of my family members. Focusing on meaning helps make meaningful connections.
The book also focuses on having all activities in a unit be building toward one big final goal, or one final activity. No minute of class time is ever wasted on an activity that isn't working toward the big picture. Anyway, the book doesn't specifically pertain to teaching with technology but the methodology here is very important to any SLA classroom, technologically enhanced or not. This book has helped me apply what I'm learning about using technology in the classroom from our current class into my current pedagogy. Even using the same materials, and mediums, me and that hypothetical aforementioned teacher could have different end results because of our differing values of communication versus production.
Affordances Analysis
I am going to explore the affordances and disaffordances of blogging. Now, blogging is something that I have yet to employ but am planning on using this coming Fall semester.
Affordances of blogging.
Blogging affords students the opportunity to share videos and articles with each other.
Blogging affords discussions of shared videos.
Blogging affords electronic submission of assignments.
Blogging affords archiving and organization of post and submissions.
Blogging affords easily responding to or commenting on submissions.
Blogging affords students the opportunity to read each other's submissions and see different perspectives.
Blogging affords a more casual writing style than "normal" writing assignments.
Blogging affords a less stressful writing process compared to formally typed and printed assignments.
Blogging affords posting videos used in class so students can go back to them if they please.
Blogging affords students the opportunity to see that an assignment is due even if they weren't in class when it was assigned.
Blogging affords students the opportunity to ask classmates what they missed if they weren't in class
Blogging affords sharing ideas with many people at once.
Blogging affords students the opportunity to collaborate with students from a different section.
Blogging affords the addition an afterthought to an assignment via commenting.
Blogging affords editing an entry once it has been submitted.
Blogging affords deletion of malicious comments by blog owner?
Disaffordances of blogging.
Well when it comes to the disaffordances of blogging, I think back to When Blogging Goes Bad..
Non-mandatory blogging affords no blogging at all.
Mandatory blogging disaffords the journal-like characteristics that normally define blogging.
Blogging affords anonymity, which affords malicious comments on posts.
Blogging affords students the opportunity to read each other's submissions, potentially causing the author anxiety.
Blogging affords access to people outside of the classroom network, which can also cause anxiety.
Blogging disaffords strictly enforcing deadlines (no way to prevent late postings).
Blogging disaffords a "final version" (can always go back and edit after submitting).
Blogging disaffords grading submitted assignments directly on site (lack of anonymity).
Blogging affords answer sharing.
Blogging disaffords group work.
Blogging affords making changes that may go unnoticed if a submission was already viewed.
And I'm sure there are probably more affordances/disaffordances that I haven't even thought of yet..
Learning Goals
My learning goals:
Promote an open classroom environment.
Focus on communication of information rather than on accuracy of language use.
Develop language skills that will prepare my students for real-world applications of the language.
Always make the goals and expectations for each activity clear to my students.
Provide my students with the desire to pursue learning the language once the semester is over.
Use technology to expose my students to different forms of the language (i.e. music, television).
Use technology to expose my students to the language on the same mediums they already use in everyday life (i.e. YouTube, Facebook).
Use technology that will allow students to continue exploring outside of class if they please.
Use technology to expose my students to the language in practical ways (i.e. news and weather websites).
Use technology to keep language use informal.
Use technology to help my students to become more comfortable using the language.
Use technology because my students feel comfortable using it.
Use technology to keep class interesting and fun.
Use a class Facebook group to facilitate students' communication with each other.
Use a class Facebook group to take the burden off of myself when it comes to homework questions that classmates can answer.
Use a class Facebook group to post class reminders and keep everyone on top of their assignments.
Use a class Facebook group to share interesting articles, videos, etc.
Use a class Facebook group to have "questions of the day" and keep Spanish fresh in my students' minds.
Use a class blog for submitting assignments so they feel less formal.
Use a class blog to promote a casual use of the language.
Interactions Grid
Below you will find my Interactions Grid from the lesson that I presented as my final project.
This lesson covers two weeks, or six class periods, of Spanish 101; one hypothetical chapter from beginning to end.
Day 1 marks the beginning of the chapter. This day is lecture based to maximize the input of the new material. There is a homework assignment due before class on Day 2, using the "Conversations" application.
Day 2 begins with a quiz on the material from Day 1. Class is spent watching an episode of a Spanish television show, El Internado and simultaneously completing a worksheet.
Day 3 begins with a quiz on El Internado. All online homework is also due before class this day. In-class information gap activity. Over the weekend students are assigned a story building blog assignment.
Day 4 will be spent working further with the blog stories: sentence re-order, add an ending. For homework students have to complete another assignment using "Conversations".
Day 5 begins with a quiz on the stories. In-class signature search activity.
Day 6 begins with a quiz. In-class PowerPoint Jeopardy review of the chapter.
The class will also have a Facebook group to post reminders, and for the students to ask small questions regarding assignments. This group will also be used for small participation opportunities, such as "questions of the day".
Interaction
Type
|
Resource
|
Goals
|
Evaluation
|
|
Family
tree
|
One
to many
|
Lecture
|
Input;
Communicate
knowledge
|
Quiz
|
Quiz
on family tree
|
Individual
assessment
|
Handout;
Multiple choice
|
Comprehension
check
|
Participation
grade based on correctness
|
Vowel
Practice
|
One
to one
|
Conversations
|
Introduce
Spanish vowel system
|
Participation
grade based on completion
|
Internado
& worksheet
|
One
to many
|
Video
& handout
|
Input;
Handout to aide comprehension
|
Quiz
|
Quiz
on Internado
|
Individual
assessment
|
Handout;
Organization of events
|
Comprehension
check
|
Participation
grade based on correctness
|
Information
gap
|
Few
to few
|
Handout
|
Ask
questions to obtain information
|
In-class
participation
|
Group
Stories
|
Few
to few
|
Blogger
|
Small-scale
language production
|
Participation
grade based on completion
|
Sentence
order
|
Few
to few
|
Handout;
Group stories
|
Organize
sentences logically
|
Quiz
|
Quiz
on stories
|
Individual
assessment
|
Handout;
Multiple choice
|
Comprehension
check
|
Participation
grade based on correctness
|
Interview
|
One
to one
|
Conversations
|
Input;
Respond appropriately to questions asked
|
Participation
grade based on completion
|
Signature
search
|
Many
to many
|
Classmates
|
Ask
questions to receive information
|
Quiz
|
Quiz
on classmates
|
Individual
assessment
|
Handout;
Multiple choice
|
Comprehension
check
|
Participation
grade based on correctness
|
Jeopardy
|
Few
to few
|
PowerPoint
|
Review
chapter materials
|
In-class
participation
|
My Students
My students are students of the 100-200 level Spanish courses at Michigan State University.
My students can be anyone, any age, of any major.
My students are unlikely to be majoring in Spanish.
My students are likely to be enrolled in my course due a requirement that they take one or two years of a language.
My students are unlikely to pursue the language past the requirement.
My students are likely to be full time students, with my class only making up 25% of their course-load in a given semester.
My students are busy with work from the classes pertaining to their major and often do not see Spanish class as high priority.
My students grew up in a high-technology world.
My students are very smart, and very savvy.
My students like to find shortcuts.
As I mentioned, unfortunately, my students often don't see my class as a very high priority. I'm usually willing to give extensions when students are honest about having a heavy work load a certain week. At the same time, if my students give me their full attention in class, none of the work that needs to be done outside of class should be very time consuming. However, students who are taking the class because of a language requirement aren't always interested in participating in class.
Since my students are so technologically savvy, they are constantly looking for the easiest route, often turning to technology to help them. It is up to me to design assignments in which translators aren't useful, but to also be on the look-out for tell-tale signs that a student used a translator on an assignment.
I must also deal with the issue that in a low-level Spanish class, there is a giant gap between the people who have never taken Spanish before, and the people who took it for years in high school. It is a difficult balance creating lessons that accommodate both categories of students, but it can be done by using lessons that allow students to use the language to fullest extent to which they feel comfortable. Also the use of class blogging can be beneficial because although one student may start the class with a lower-level of Spanish, they have access to plenty of examples from their classmates that are published to the blog instead of only ever knowing their own responses to short writing assignments.
Also, as I mentioned in my previous blog entry, my students' comfort with technology can be a huge asset to my class. My class may be low priority but I have the power to use technology to make my assignments the most fun. I can use technology to stimulate class lectures to make even the students who are only there to meet their requirements enjoy being there.
Technology can help my students make the most of their knowledge of the language by getting them to use the language on the same mediums they already use in English, thus learning the language in a more practical, everyday, real-world-situation kind of way that they would never be able to from just a textbook and a classroom environment.
My students can be anyone, any age, of any major.
My students are unlikely to be majoring in Spanish.
My students are likely to be enrolled in my course due a requirement that they take one or two years of a language.
Some of my students have never taken a Spanish course before.
Some of my students took four years of Spanish in high school.
My students are unlikely to pursue the language past the requirement.
My students are likely to be full time students, with my class only making up 25% of their course-load in a given semester.
My students are busy with work from the classes pertaining to their major and often do not see Spanish class as high priority.
My students grew up in a high-technology world.
My students are very smart, and very savvy.
My students like to find shortcuts.
As I mentioned, unfortunately, my students often don't see my class as a very high priority. I'm usually willing to give extensions when students are honest about having a heavy work load a certain week. At the same time, if my students give me their full attention in class, none of the work that needs to be done outside of class should be very time consuming. However, students who are taking the class because of a language requirement aren't always interested in participating in class.
Since my students are so technologically savvy, they are constantly looking for the easiest route, often turning to technology to help them. It is up to me to design assignments in which translators aren't useful, but to also be on the look-out for tell-tale signs that a student used a translator on an assignment.
I must also deal with the issue that in a low-level Spanish class, there is a giant gap between the people who have never taken Spanish before, and the people who took it for years in high school. It is a difficult balance creating lessons that accommodate both categories of students, but it can be done by using lessons that allow students to use the language to fullest extent to which they feel comfortable. Also the use of class blogging can be beneficial because although one student may start the class with a lower-level of Spanish, they have access to plenty of examples from their classmates that are published to the blog instead of only ever knowing their own responses to short writing assignments.
Also, as I mentioned in my previous blog entry, my students' comfort with technology can be a huge asset to my class. My class may be low priority but I have the power to use technology to make my assignments the most fun. I can use technology to stimulate class lectures to make even the students who are only there to meet their requirements enjoy being there.
Technology can help my students make the most of their knowledge of the language by getting them to use the language on the same mediums they already use in English, thus learning the language in a more practical, everyday, real-world-situation kind of way that they would never be able to from just a textbook and a classroom environment.
Students and Technology
It has become clear throughout our course, and especially through the "Students" readings that the best way to reach my students is through technology.
Before this class I didn't think that technology necessarily needed to play a huge role in an SLA classroom. I equate this to the fact that my main concern has always been making sure that students participate in class, and I thought of technology as being counterproductive. In my eyes, technology is used to make tasks easier, and to cut corners, which would mean losing valuable hands-on experiences.
I've come to realize that this is not the case.
As shown in Revisualizing Composition and Generations Online in 2010, the students I teach are of a generation that is very comfortable with technology. Now yes, there are certain technological means that these students can employ to cut corners, but this does not apply to all.
I've learned that I need to take advantage of how comfortable my students are with technology. Comfort, actually, is something that I've been talking about since Day 1 of our class; that it's one of the most important things in an SLA classroom so that students are willing to be open and share their thoughts. If they aren't comfortable in the classroom environment they won't want to participate, and not participating means only learning the language one-dimensionally.
So let's take the idea of comfort and run with it. I think I was on the right track saying that when the students are comfortable they will be more willing to open up and try to use the language, and that applies to technology also. My students will probably be much more comfortable using the language if they're being asked to post to a blog or to a Facebook group than if they were being asked to type up and print out paragraphs to turn in as homework.
Using technology such as Facebook or blogs eliminates the taboo of writing. Luckily for me, SLA writing at the levels I teach never needs to be super formal. However, as I mentioned, if I were to assign a short paragraph writing assignment as homework with instructions to print it out and turn it in, it would be hard for that assignment to not feel formal, and for my students to not feel pressure writing it. They would be critiquing every word they wrote, second-guessing their knowledge of the language and that is not what I want at all; it is not beneficial nor even possible for them to write formally and accurately at their level.
Using technology would be more casual, less stressful, and would allow them to be more open and free with their use of the language since it is through a casual medium that they are comfortable with, and already use in everyday life.
Also, thinking back to the chart in Generations Online in 2010, plenty of the categories of activities in which 50% or more of people ages 18-33 engage in could be transformed into SLA lessons:
At least 80% engage in watching videos? Well that tells me that I should assign them to find videos in Spanish and to share with the class. The gears in my head are turning now: assign a few students each weekend to find a video and post it to the blog, and then we can discuss them on Monday mornings.
70% get their news? Again, gears are turning. Assign students to find a news article from elpais.com or another Spanish news source and summarize it on the class blog.
My eyes have been opened. My students have no idea what I have in store for them this coming semester. Technology is definitely not going to hinder their exposure to the language, but rather open all kinds of new doors.
Before this class I didn't think that technology necessarily needed to play a huge role in an SLA classroom. I equate this to the fact that my main concern has always been making sure that students participate in class, and I thought of technology as being counterproductive. In my eyes, technology is used to make tasks easier, and to cut corners, which would mean losing valuable hands-on experiences.
I've come to realize that this is not the case.
As shown in Revisualizing Composition and Generations Online in 2010, the students I teach are of a generation that is very comfortable with technology. Now yes, there are certain technological means that these students can employ to cut corners, but this does not apply to all.
I've learned that I need to take advantage of how comfortable my students are with technology. Comfort, actually, is something that I've been talking about since Day 1 of our class; that it's one of the most important things in an SLA classroom so that students are willing to be open and share their thoughts. If they aren't comfortable in the classroom environment they won't want to participate, and not participating means only learning the language one-dimensionally.
So let's take the idea of comfort and run with it. I think I was on the right track saying that when the students are comfortable they will be more willing to open up and try to use the language, and that applies to technology also. My students will probably be much more comfortable using the language if they're being asked to post to a blog or to a Facebook group than if they were being asked to type up and print out paragraphs to turn in as homework.
Using technology such as Facebook or blogs eliminates the taboo of writing. Luckily for me, SLA writing at the levels I teach never needs to be super formal. However, as I mentioned, if I were to assign a short paragraph writing assignment as homework with instructions to print it out and turn it in, it would be hard for that assignment to not feel formal, and for my students to not feel pressure writing it. They would be critiquing every word they wrote, second-guessing their knowledge of the language and that is not what I want at all; it is not beneficial nor even possible for them to write formally and accurately at their level.
Using technology would be more casual, less stressful, and would allow them to be more open and free with their use of the language since it is through a casual medium that they are comfortable with, and already use in everyday life.
Also, thinking back to the chart in Generations Online in 2010, plenty of the categories of activities in which 50% or more of people ages 18-33 engage in could be transformed into SLA lessons:
At least 80% engage in watching videos? Well that tells me that I should assign them to find videos in Spanish and to share with the class. The gears in my head are turning now: assign a few students each weekend to find a video and post it to the blog, and then we can discuss them on Monday mornings.
70% get their news? Again, gears are turning. Assign students to find a news article from elpais.com or another Spanish news source and summarize it on the class blog.
My eyes have been opened. My students have no idea what I have in store for them this coming semester. Technology is definitely not going to hinder their exposure to the language, but rather open all kinds of new doors.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Do Artifacts Have Politics?
"By the term "politics" I mean arrangements of power and authority in human associations as well as the activities that take place within those arrangements" - Winner
While reading this article I had a few different thoughts crossing my mind.
First, the most general of those thoughts was a potential relation of artifacts and politics to consumerism:
Now I may be misinterpreting things a bit but when Winner explains "inherently political technologies" as "man-made systems that appear to require or to be strongly compatible with particular kinds of political relationships" my mind goes directly to consumerism. The examples are infinite, but I'll pick one and then continue on.
Let's talk about cars. We use cars to get around. At one point in time, owning a car was enough to denote hierarchical status. In the current decade, cars have become more or less a necessity. However, what isn't necessary is to have cars that cost $300,000. Those cars don't necessarily get you from point A to point B more efficiently than the average $20,000 midsize car. What they can do, however, is denote hierarchical status in a time when simply owning a car isn't enough to set the upper class apart from the lower class. Pushing the envelope even further are the vehicles that are not only expensive, but also unnecessarily oversized, resulting in poor gas mileage. Now obviously there are people who need big trucks because of their profession, but there are also people who buy big gas-guzzling trucks just because they can, because money is no object to them, and therefore gas being $4.00 doesn't phase them.
My next comments pertain to the topic of healthy living and its relation to wealth and power.
Food. Is fast food a form of natural selection? In our country, our government is not making it easy for us to eat healthy. They've "accommodated" our busy schedules and tight budgets by placing fast food restaurants on every corner, each with its own "econo-menu". The result is that our lower class citizens eat at these restaurants because it's cheap, it's easy, and also because they are likely under-education on just how bad it really is for them. Then you have the upper class citizens who can afford all the glorious healthy food that is more expensive than it should be, and are unlikely to even consider eating at a fast food restaurant. There once was a time when not having money meant not being able to afford food. In the 21st century, not having money means being able to afford food, but it's food that will slowly destroy your body from the inside out. Therefore, food and health have also become symbols of social status. It takes money to eat healthy and be fit.
Once upon a time being pale was a sign of wealth whereas people with tanned skin were those who were physical laborers working outside. Later, being tanned became a symbol of wealth because it meant being able to afford fancy vacations and being able to spend time outside instead of working. Then, tanning salons were invented. Now to me this seems like an inherently political technology. This technology was specifically invented to allowed even those people who were unable to afford fancy vacations to get a tan to emulate the wealthy. However it wasn't long before tanning lost its value as a symbol of social status due to the discovery of the health risks involved (and probably thanks in part to Snooki too). Now pale (or "natural") skin tones have once again become a symbol of beauty and wealth.
Similarly, in the 1920's smoking cigarettes was a symbol of power, fashion and freedom. Soon after, everyone began emulating this habit eventually causing it to lose its value as a symbol of status. The upper class citizens, now aware of the health risks, dropped the habit, leaving it to now instead be a symbol of lower class status.
Artifacts do have politics. Apple keeps producing new versions of the iPad so that the wealthy can keep demonstrating their wealth. They manage to stay one step ahead of the middle class, who can afford to buy iPads, but can't afford to keep upgrading every time a new version is released. Even Apple in itself is representative of status. And why does Ford bother to make both the Lincoln Navigator and the Ford Expedition when the two are so similar? Because people will buy a Lincoln Navigator simply because of the fact that it's more expensive; because they can afford it, and because they want to let other people know that they can afford it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)