Dickie Self - "Techno-Pedagogical Explorations" from "Teaching Writing with Computers" ed. Takayoshi & Huot
"All technology-rich pedagogy is experimental"
Selfe argues that teaching with technology is the continual process of creating, adapting, assessing the tools and activities we use to teach with. It is always experimental.
I agree, but I also think, then, that all pedagogy is experimental. Traditional teachers, I hope, complete these same sort of adaptations, adjustments, and assessment.
Selfe speaks to the use of discussion boards and reminds me that the discussion board should have a connection to the classroom context as well. It should be meaningful, connected, and used to build discussions and materials that can be used for subsequent assignments.
This makes me think about my own use of the discussion board. In many ways, I imagine the discussion baord simply as a way of making students accountable to someone other than just teacher, since the material they post is available to the rest of the class.
I also use the discussion board, and ask students to read their peers' work and learn from it. In the workshop we are currently working on, I asked them to post their drafts, and then we read them all and I told them to borrow from their peers -- ideas they had not considered, means of organizing the writing that is effective, etc., but what I find is that students are really unable to judge which work is good and which is bogus.
Often, I ask them to read their peers' posts, and then we discuss the ideas present, but this doesn't usually work too well either because they seem unable to cull the good ideas from the poor, or even an "idea" at all. Damn, I guess I'm feeling pessimistic at the moment; I shouldn't. I've been having some good luck in my 102 classes lately. I have students working together on mock interviews, and I've been spending my time going from group to group and engaging each for a few minutes, asking or answering questions. I feel like I've been getting some relevant questions that help me to understand what's going on with the class. I also feel like the social dynamic in the class has changed a bit. I did, however, notice on my way to my 102 class that the students in the room right next to mine are loud and boisterous before class -- talking, laughing -- but my classroom is dead silent. When I walk in, even early, like today, there is not a single individual speaking to another. It's sort of uncanny.
Anyway, back to the Selfe essay, I really don't find much of grand use in this piece. Most of the stuff I already know, and, some, I simply don't buy. For example, that all technological pedagogy is always experimental. We've been using technology in the comp classes since the 80's, and I think there are some principles of computer-mediated communication that are no longer experimental.
Selfe argues that teaching with technology is the continual process of creating, adapting, assessing the tools and activities we use to teach with. It is always experimental.
I agree, but I also think, then, that all pedagogy is experimental. Traditional teachers, I hope, complete these same sort of adaptations, adjustments, and assessment.
Selfe speaks to the use of discussion boards and reminds me that the discussion board should have a connection to the classroom context as well. It should be meaningful, connected, and used to build discussions and materials that can be used for subsequent assignments.
This makes me think about my own use of the discussion board. In many ways, I imagine the discussion baord simply as a way of making students accountable to someone other than just teacher, since the material they post is available to the rest of the class.
I also use the discussion board, and ask students to read their peers' work and learn from it. In the workshop we are currently working on, I asked them to post their drafts, and then we read them all and I told them to borrow from their peers -- ideas they had not considered, means of organizing the writing that is effective, etc., but what I find is that students are really unable to judge which work is good and which is bogus.
Often, I ask them to read their peers' posts, and then we discuss the ideas present, but this doesn't usually work too well either because they seem unable to cull the good ideas from the poor, or even an "idea" at all. Damn, I guess I'm feeling pessimistic at the moment; I shouldn't. I've been having some good luck in my 102 classes lately. I have students working together on mock interviews, and I've been spending my time going from group to group and engaging each for a few minutes, asking or answering questions. I feel like I've been getting some relevant questions that help me to understand what's going on with the class. I also feel like the social dynamic in the class has changed a bit. I did, however, notice on my way to my 102 class that the students in the room right next to mine are loud and boisterous before class -- talking, laughing -- but my classroom is dead silent. When I walk in, even early, like today, there is not a single individual speaking to another. It's sort of uncanny.
Anyway, back to the Selfe essay, I really don't find much of grand use in this piece. Most of the stuff I already know, and, some, I simply don't buy. For example, that all technological pedagogy is always experimental. We've been using technology in the comp classes since the 80's, and I think there are some principles of computer-mediated communication that are no longer experimental.
posted by CA Lund at 11:17 AM
1 Comments:
Cory, this is an interesting point. I haven't read much by Dickie Selfe though I've seen him present at conferences. (heavens, what a name -- he's cindy Selfe's husband and I know her work well.) But I also have a feeling of deja vu in much of what I read about pedagogical innovations in technology -- clearly there have been technological innovations, but I agree that there are some pretty well established pedagogical principles.
Re your experience with Discussion Board, I'm not really thrilled with the amount of interaction from our class either. Certain individuals are writing great stuff, but I'm not sure the comments are better or even more ample than when I simply put people in groups of 3 and had the 2 peers turn in a 1 page written response. I know I tend to shy away from saying, "You must ppost 3 times" or whatever, but this time I did say "Post at least once and respond at least 3 times." I'm not sure about this. Maybe students just need to get more accustomed to the medium, which still strikes me as awkward. (However, with the dozens of emails I get per day, I cansee that it's essential to keep all the comments from one course and on one topic in the same place. So I would no longer defend pure email for this purpose.)
To be continued.
Jane
Post a Comment
<< Home