Okay, I think we can put the ranting behind. Finally the article on "Technology as Teacher" has said it for me: "Both groups [us] feel virtuous about their choices, and both manage to lose sight of the real issue: how to use technology, or relate to it, in ways that are productive and meaningful." (p. 34). With this is mind I hope we begin to discuss our ideas about said technologies.
This article starting giving me some framework about ways to use the internet, ie, research, e-mail, ect. It also mentioned some things I haven't heard of or have very little familarity with: listservs, bullentin boards, a program called Daedalus, Dreamweaver, Frontpage, web anthologies, Blackboard, Course Compass, to name a few. I am curious to find out what people think of these, their experiences and thoughts on how they can help the classroom.
The other article, about the CMC, even had a chart where it outlined different on-line tools and what they are good for. The best thing about this article was the suggestion that CMC's can help students brainstorm, and this idea generated some things in my mind that I could get excited about using in the classroom, or at least am interested in.
But I am still at a loss for how to set these systems up, and use them. Any suggestions? Can we begin to talk about what we know, don't know, pros, cons, ect.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
if you feel unprepared to teach with technologies ....
....then you're in the right place. Teaching is not something people can do without preparation. Even though we've all watched teachers and teaching for a long long time by this point, so much of what a teacher does is invisible - the reading, studying, and preparation of both her theoretical grounding and her practices in the classroom. Getting you all on that life long road is the goal of this class.
So in addition to the work we've been doing, particularly with technologies, what can you do? There are several ways you can do the work of getting yourself prepared: one, doing the work in this class (this class is a requirement for new teachers for just this reason); two, do extra reading in areas you feel unprepared in (I’m happy to recommend books for you and there are lots to choose from); three, attend reading group meetings and workshops next semester on writing technologies if that’s your area of weakness; four; focus your observations on teachers whose classes are likely to show you how to do some things.
Acknowledging that there are things you need to work on individually is an important first step - remember when someone (Zebroski?) talked about the meta awareness that is the actual first step in learning something - the recognition that you don't understand? We cannot cover everything in one semester - you need to do work individually to get yourself up to speed on specific things you need more attention to. Teaching at the college level is not just a part of your fellowship; it is a serious commitment to the learning of first year college students who have come to the university with goals and desires for an education. It is hard work that cannot be done half heartedly.
Pam
So in addition to the work we've been doing, particularly with technologies, what can you do? There are several ways you can do the work of getting yourself prepared: one, doing the work in this class (this class is a requirement for new teachers for just this reason); two, do extra reading in areas you feel unprepared in (I’m happy to recommend books for you and there are lots to choose from); three, attend reading group meetings and workshops next semester on writing technologies if that’s your area of weakness; four; focus your observations on teachers whose classes are likely to show you how to do some things.
Acknowledging that there are things you need to work on individually is an important first step - remember when someone (Zebroski?) talked about the meta awareness that is the actual first step in learning something - the recognition that you don't understand? We cannot cover everything in one semester - you need to do work individually to get yourself up to speed on specific things you need more attention to. Teaching at the college level is not just a part of your fellowship; it is a serious commitment to the learning of first year college students who have come to the university with goals and desires for an education. It is hard work that cannot be done half heartedly.
Pam
Monday, October 8, 2007
Burning Issues: Writing with Computers (!)
After class, I couldn’t stop thinking about our discussion on the car ride home. So, here are some further thoughts.
First, for the creative writing folks, here’s how I see your stance (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). Number one – as I said in class – I see it as overly romantic; to me, it’s absurd to think that something is more fulfilling when it’s made artificially more difficult. Number two – and I don’t mean to be insulting – the proliferation of writing on the Internet has made writing into a far less specialized field, filled with more writers writing than ever before. Is there insecurity about your role in the writing world when we are at a point in time where anyone can ostensibly become “a writer?” After all, I'm not a creative writing major, but I have made a semi-career out of creative writing for a handful of websites. Is this kind of situation threatening to you? Maybe this is more of a philosophical question ("What is a writer?"), but I’d like to know.
Number three, I don’t think computers are turning us into depressed automatons. Instead, they provide us with an unprecedented amount of social choices that were not available before the Internet. If I had to limit my communication to the people I could only talk with face-to-face, I would have never met some of the smartest, funniest people I know. And my presence on the Internet has allowed me to make a variety of real-life friends who I often see face-to-face (or as often as I can get back to Youngstown). I have no problem with this.
Here are my main points on the pro-computer side:
Writing with computers can give you a real audience.
Yes, you no longer have to think about your “audience” in rhetorical terms – it actually exists! This gives students a real purpose for writing, and also feedback on their writing, which we learned can be an immensely valuable thing. Students will also get the feeling that their writing will do more than sit on your desk until it’s graded.
Computers have created a generation of more readers and writers than ever before.
This is impossible to ignore, given the rise of blogs and other forms of Internet communication. People are now writing critically about culture, their lives, politics, entertainment, and other subjects. This would be impossible on such a large scale 15 years ago. And do you honestly think people in the pre-Internet days were articulating their opinions in writing even 5% as much as they do today? Computers have given writing more value, and have given the power of the written word to a group of people that previously did not have it. I can’t see how anyone couldn’t be excited about that – there’s more to read out there than ever before.
The snobbish coteries of old have been replaced with a democratic community of readers and writers constantly sharing information. What’s not to like?
I have some other points, but these are my two main ones. I’d like to know what everyone thinks.
First, for the creative writing folks, here’s how I see your stance (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). Number one – as I said in class – I see it as overly romantic; to me, it’s absurd to think that something is more fulfilling when it’s made artificially more difficult. Number two – and I don’t mean to be insulting – the proliferation of writing on the Internet has made writing into a far less specialized field, filled with more writers writing than ever before. Is there insecurity about your role in the writing world when we are at a point in time where anyone can ostensibly become “a writer?” After all, I'm not a creative writing major, but I have made a semi-career out of creative writing for a handful of websites. Is this kind of situation threatening to you? Maybe this is more of a philosophical question ("What is a writer?"), but I’d like to know.
Number three, I don’t think computers are turning us into depressed automatons. Instead, they provide us with an unprecedented amount of social choices that were not available before the Internet. If I had to limit my communication to the people I could only talk with face-to-face, I would have never met some of the smartest, funniest people I know. And my presence on the Internet has allowed me to make a variety of real-life friends who I often see face-to-face (or as often as I can get back to Youngstown). I have no problem with this.
Here are my main points on the pro-computer side:
Writing with computers can give you a real audience.
Yes, you no longer have to think about your “audience” in rhetorical terms – it actually exists! This gives students a real purpose for writing, and also feedback on their writing, which we learned can be an immensely valuable thing. Students will also get the feeling that their writing will do more than sit on your desk until it’s graded.
Computers have created a generation of more readers and writers than ever before.
This is impossible to ignore, given the rise of blogs and other forms of Internet communication. People are now writing critically about culture, their lives, politics, entertainment, and other subjects. This would be impossible on such a large scale 15 years ago. And do you honestly think people in the pre-Internet days were articulating their opinions in writing even 5% as much as they do today? Computers have given writing more value, and have given the power of the written word to a group of people that previously did not have it. I can’t see how anyone couldn’t be excited about that – there’s more to read out there than ever before.
The snobbish coteries of old have been replaced with a democratic community of readers and writers constantly sharing information. What’s not to like?
I have some other points, but these are my two main ones. I’d like to know what everyone thinks.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Scott Carlson Article
I found this article interesting because it was essentially about us (Note: I’m assuming that most of us were born in 1980 or later). For example, I spent most of today working on an article for a website, I’m listening to my iPod while I read these articles and write about them, and when I’m done I’ll probably go play a video game (!).
Interesting point: professors are no longer becoming the sources of knowledge in their classrooms. I’m not saying that professors are useless (if so, I wouldn’t want to be one), but with the Internet at their hands, students can instantly look up almost any answer – though it may not be completely right. I remember my astronomy teacher – he was very old – telling us how people used to call him all the time to ask him when Easter would be that year. How crazy is that? Now, I can click on my calendar in the bottom of my monitor and get the information in five seconds.
I remember being very bored in one of my films classes because, as part of an online film nerd culture, I knew everything the professor was going to say.
The situation reminds me of a (pre-Internet) episode of the Simpsons where the Teacher’s Editions are stolen from the school, making the teachers absolutely powerless. The message on the show was obviously a pointed piece of social commentary unrelated to this topic, but I thought of it when the article brought up how the source of knowledge has shifted.
Interesting point: professors are no longer becoming the sources of knowledge in their classrooms. I’m not saying that professors are useless (if so, I wouldn’t want to be one), but with the Internet at their hands, students can instantly look up almost any answer – though it may not be completely right. I remember my astronomy teacher – he was very old – telling us how people used to call him all the time to ask him when Easter would be that year. How crazy is that? Now, I can click on my calendar in the bottom of my monitor and get the information in five seconds.
I remember being very bored in one of my films classes because, as part of an online film nerd culture, I knew everything the professor was going to say.
The situation reminds me of a (pre-Internet) episode of the Simpsons where the Teacher’s Editions are stolen from the school, making the teachers absolutely powerless. The message on the show was obviously a pointed piece of social commentary unrelated to this topic, but I thought of it when the article brought up how the source of knowledge has shifted.
Dickie Selfe Article
At the risk of sounding like a little snot, I didn’t think that the article was really for me. From my perspective, it was too obvious and overly clinical; when I see bullet points and acronyms, I start to get headaches. Most of the advice given here was already apparent to me, but I am a person who uses the Internet far too much for both casual and professional reasons. I couldn’t really approach the article with the attitude of “Here’s the Internet. Now what can I do with it?”
The danger of writing an article about the Internet is that, as the years go by, the changes start to grow exponentially. I wasn’t sure when this article was written, but it couldn’t have been later than 2002. And in comparing 2002’s Internet to the Internet of today, there are some big changes. YouTube didn’t even exist until 2005! I also chuckled at Selfe’s suggestion of using a Zip Disk (admittedly, it was part of a larger list), which is probably the most unreliable piece of technology to be created in the last decade. Luckily, flash drives have killed the Zip Disk.
Another problem with the article – and you can probably all guess what I’m going to mention next – no blogs! I can’t blame the writer; blogs and bloggers really only started to grow in popularity in late 2003/early 2004 (thanks to the Presidential election), but – for me at least – they are the perfect medium for online classroom discussions.
And e-mail lists are the devil.
The danger of writing an article about the Internet is that, as the years go by, the changes start to grow exponentially. I wasn’t sure when this article was written, but it couldn’t have been later than 2002. And in comparing 2002’s Internet to the Internet of today, there are some big changes. YouTube didn’t even exist until 2005! I also chuckled at Selfe’s suggestion of using a Zip Disk (admittedly, it was part of a larger list), which is probably the most unreliable piece of technology to be created in the last decade. Luckily, flash drives have killed the Zip Disk.
Another problem with the article – and you can probably all guess what I’m going to mention next – no blogs! I can’t blame the writer; blogs and bloggers really only started to grow in popularity in late 2003/early 2004 (thanks to the Presidential election), but – for me at least – they are the perfect medium for online classroom discussions.
And e-mail lists are the devil.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Technology in the classroom
The article by Mauriello and Pagnucci was an interesting article. I am figuring that this article is dated because it is dealing with, what I assume, were early difficulties with using the internet in the classroom. I do agree with some of the points though especially at the end when it thought-provokingly questions the idea of technology and whether it is really all that important. How many teachers are using technology because they “have to” not because they necessarily think it strengthens their classrooms. I am not downing technology; I just thought that was an interesting question.
I also thought the idea of pseudonyms was a good idea, until I was proven dreadfully wrong. I then remembered that we live in the internet age of blogs and such and people can be blocked and so the need for this type of privacy is not as important as it may have been in the beginning. I thought that they were working through the idea of privacy well, but I did not agree with the fact that their students could receive criticism from anyone on the web. That did not make any sense to me, because that seems like a dangerous thing to do: ethically and pedagogically. A student’s esteem could be slashed and personal information could be used against them. But again, I think that blogging solves some of that dilemma for us as well, as long as a teacher knows what blogs are decent and whatnot.
Selfe also writes about technology in the classroom and “technology should not drive pedagogy.” I was happy to read that small section because it alleviates some fear of have the internet and using it in my classes ( I know, I am the teacher who thinks they should be an “expert” of something or else they will make an ass of themselves). But! Selfe also explained that we can learn from our advanced students and have them help us, so I may be able to get over my fear. In general, I thought that Selfe’s chapter was helpful. I liked the way it was set up and it made some really good points about technology and how to use it. I particularly liked the idea about sequencing when using technology and the internet because that way the students can learn it and possibly see why they are completing an assignment (always a perk). I hated the “technology” classes I had that would have me do some random thing on the internet/Blackboard or whatever and then I never did it again in my life. It remains an assignment that I miraculously completed through a lot of pain and sweat.
I also thought the idea of pseudonyms was a good idea, until I was proven dreadfully wrong. I then remembered that we live in the internet age of blogs and such and people can be blocked and so the need for this type of privacy is not as important as it may have been in the beginning. I thought that they were working through the idea of privacy well, but I did not agree with the fact that their students could receive criticism from anyone on the web. That did not make any sense to me, because that seems like a dangerous thing to do: ethically and pedagogically. A student’s esteem could be slashed and personal information could be used against them. But again, I think that blogging solves some of that dilemma for us as well, as long as a teacher knows what blogs are decent and whatnot.
Selfe also writes about technology in the classroom and “technology should not drive pedagogy.” I was happy to read that small section because it alleviates some fear of have the internet and using it in my classes ( I know, I am the teacher who thinks they should be an “expert” of something or else they will make an ass of themselves). But! Selfe also explained that we can learn from our advanced students and have them help us, so I may be able to get over my fear. In general, I thought that Selfe’s chapter was helpful. I liked the way it was set up and it made some really good points about technology and how to use it. I particularly liked the idea about sequencing when using technology and the internet because that way the students can learn it and possibly see why they are completing an assignment (always a perk). I hated the “technology” classes I had that would have me do some random thing on the internet/Blackboard or whatever and then I never did it again in my life. It remains an assignment that I miraculously completed through a lot of pain and sweat.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Nelson Article
Nelson Article
I found myself nodding my head up and down several times when reading the Nelson article. (I wasn't falling asleep, but rather agreeing with the findings. haha...) Students’ views of assignments very often differ from the views of the teacher. I believe this is directly related to the way the American school system is set up. In the end, classes boil down to a letter grade. Therefore, most of the time students write papers to receive a grade, not to grow as learners. I realize that sounds a bit harsh... haha. Teachers view assignments as a way for students to grow; Students view assignments as a way to get a grade. In my own academic past, I have often approached assignments in this way. I thought to myself, "What does the teacher REALLY want." It can almost seem like a game sometimes. You observe your teacher's likes and dislikes and attempt to adapt your writing style to that. I sometimes think that a major part of being "good" at school is knowing how to read your teacher and your classes. This idea is supported in parts of the Nelson article. John, the student from the second class, formulated his paper NOT by how it was outlined in the assignment, but in terms of how his last papers had been graded. The TA stressed recitation, so John responded by giving him/her recitation.
I have mixed feelings about the way in which the "guidelines" given out in the Sociology class affected the students. I think it is important to be clear when outling an assignment, so that students are not wallowing in confusion. Yet, I do not want to be so clear, that they reduce the paper to a list of bullet points that they can check off. That is not writing, it is list making! I guess the problem could be remedied by not giving students a "strict" list of guidelines, and by stressing that things will not be the only aspects of the paper graded. It is a tough line to walk. You don't want to constrict creativity, but you also don't want students to feel so insecure that they cannot produce effectively.
I was not at all surprised when the students did not respond favorably to the comments left on their papers. Revision was not stressed in the classes, so why should students care about continuing on with the texts? Once you give a student a letter grade, they feel as if their job is done. They have already received what they set out to get in the first place. I now know that I will never grade a "draft." If you do, students view it as a final product, not as a work in progress.
I found myself nodding my head up and down several times when reading the Nelson article. (I wasn't falling asleep, but rather agreeing with the findings. haha...) Students’ views of assignments very often differ from the views of the teacher. I believe this is directly related to the way the American school system is set up. In the end, classes boil down to a letter grade. Therefore, most of the time students write papers to receive a grade, not to grow as learners. I realize that sounds a bit harsh... haha. Teachers view assignments as a way for students to grow; Students view assignments as a way to get a grade. In my own academic past, I have often approached assignments in this way. I thought to myself, "What does the teacher REALLY want." It can almost seem like a game sometimes. You observe your teacher's likes and dislikes and attempt to adapt your writing style to that. I sometimes think that a major part of being "good" at school is knowing how to read your teacher and your classes. This idea is supported in parts of the Nelson article. John, the student from the second class, formulated his paper NOT by how it was outlined in the assignment, but in terms of how his last papers had been graded. The TA stressed recitation, so John responded by giving him/her recitation.
I have mixed feelings about the way in which the "guidelines" given out in the Sociology class affected the students. I think it is important to be clear when outling an assignment, so that students are not wallowing in confusion. Yet, I do not want to be so clear, that they reduce the paper to a list of bullet points that they can check off. That is not writing, it is list making! I guess the problem could be remedied by not giving students a "strict" list of guidelines, and by stressing that things will not be the only aspects of the paper graded. It is a tough line to walk. You don't want to constrict creativity, but you also don't want students to feel so insecure that they cannot produce effectively.
I was not at all surprised when the students did not respond favorably to the comments left on their papers. Revision was not stressed in the classes, so why should students care about continuing on with the texts? Once you give a student a letter grade, they feel as if their job is done. They have already received what they set out to get in the first place. I now know that I will never grade a "draft." If you do, students view it as a final product, not as a work in progress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)