This Wednesday was almost as bad as my first day of class, I was plagued by a very bad case of nerves. I was being observed by Patricia and though she was my peer that did not help me feel very confident about managing t go through class without the involvement of projectile vomiting. Pat was really nice and she put me at ease but I couldn't stop thinking that if I was freaking out about a peer observation how would I hold up when I got observed by the faculty or get my teaching videotaped!
I started the class introducing her and she went and sat in the circle that my class usually prefer sitting in. The first thing I did was giving out homework for Friday. Experience has taught me that anything I say in the last couple for minutes of class gets processed out with their enthusiasm of packing up and leaving. I wanted them to work in groups and bring in two articles to class on Friday. One article had to look at the benefits of social media and the other on the unsavory aspects of it. Each group would come to class having read the two articles and present it to class. I wanted them to note the use of argument and the process of analysis involving anecdotes, personal experience etc... Somewhere along the way I realised that I no longer felt nervous.
The class spent about 12 minutes freewriting on the three texts for this module. I had them write one point of agreement and one argument that they disagreed with in the Shirky, Kelly and Carr pieces.
What was disconcerting was that the students asked me to summarize the readings, which was annoying since the readings were scheduled for today. Thankfully, I had made notes on each piece and it wasn't very difficult to give them a quick review of the three texts. Once they finished writing we had an interesting discussion of the points they raised.
I used the rest of the class to highlight key issues like cognitive surplus, the difference between Lolcats and Ushahidi, we explored the idea of deterrence theory. I was very happy to see that the students could make fluid connections between texts. The class was animated and I think they managed to showcase their cognitive skills well. Or at least Pat thinks we had a good class and right now that's what matters...
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Social Media [10/11]
The students walked into class and the blackboard was covered in my illegible scrawl. I had listed different kinds of social media on the board and the first exercise we did that day was to mark out the different kinds of media that we had used or were familiar with. I was very surprised when I found that none of my students ventured beyond YouTube Facebook, Wikipedia and occasionally Twitter and Flickr. Even if some of the other names were familiar to them I ended up spending some time explaining the rest. It is paradoxical when you see how much of their lives they live virtually and juxtapose that with how little they explore. Perhaps I was saddled with a particularly tech un-savvy lot.
Using examples of social media we arrived at a definition of social media. The rest of the class was devoted to looking at the issues that arise out of social media. Issues that had both advantages and disadvantages. Finally, I ended the class explaining the module to them and talking about articles and relating it to op eds. This conversation was easy because obviously the one thing they had all had experience reading was articles.
Using examples of social media we arrived at a definition of social media. The rest of the class was devoted to looking at the issues that arise out of social media. Issues that had both advantages and disadvantages. Finally, I ended the class explaining the module to them and talking about articles and relating it to op eds. This conversation was easy because obviously the one thing they had all had experience reading was articles.
Conferences [10/4 - 10/8]
Round one of conferences involved some planning. I made a spreadsheet cataloging absences, online participation and class involvement. Most of my students were good as far as their attendance went. Unfortunately they were rather behind on blogging and discussion forum posts. I ended up spending a lot of time explaining the mechanism of the discussion forum. Finally we looked at the proposal draft. I had deliberately given them an extension on the final draft of the proposal because I wanted them to observe my grading process. We went over the draft together looking at the use or as was the case in most papers the lack of analysis and explication. I had given the class the seven point debate structure and having had a format to fall back on, most of the drafts fulfilled the requirement of the module and I just had to help them make the connection between their ideas and the thesis and finding a process to link the arguments together. Overall, Most of my students felt that analyzing became easier for them after workshopping during the conference and I can see the results in their subsequent writings. Of course, there was that occasional student who went crazy with his/her solutions. It took some effort dissuading one student from creating a lawn in the Commons and then covering that with a tent --- and in the end you know you can't convince everyone but it made for fun reading.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Formal Writing and Peer Review [09/29 and 10/01]
The first drafts were due tonight and I felt that between the workshops and discussions the class was well equipped to work on this assignment. Earlier during the module I had had them post photographs of the places they were going to write their proposals on and that had taken care of any intervention that their ideas might have needed. But I knew that the major stumbling block for them would be the language. They were not used to writing to a decision making body and to compensate for that I had them write one paragraph of their proposal in formal language. We then workshopped the paragraphs and looked at simple ways in which to adopt a more authoritative tone of voice and build audience awareness.
By this Friday my class was already well-versed in peer review so things went smoothly. I was happy to see that after I had threatened them with dire consequences they were commenting on ideas and arguments rather than sentence level changes. I circulated among the groups giving them feedback and hearing their criticisms. I like that we have an offline component because then it becomes easier to guide the students about the way they should give and receive feedback.
By this Friday my class was already well-versed in peer review so things went smoothly. I was happy to see that after I had threatened them with dire consequences they were commenting on ideas and arguments rather than sentence level changes. I circulated among the groups giving them feedback and hearing their criticisms. I like that we have an offline component because then it becomes easier to guide the students about the way they should give and receive feedback.
Urinals and Toilet Paper Dispensers at 8 [09/27]
There is something ominous about a week that begins with laughter, you know things can only go downhill from thereon but no amount of portentous premonitions could mar the spirit of Monday's class.
Over the weekend I had my students post their mock proposal on the Forum and it was evident that while they had their ideas in place, we still needed to cover a lot of ground when it came to structuring a proposal. I was very fortunate to find two model proposals to take into class and along with that a handout on the 7 Points of Debate. We quickly perused the seven points and applied them in our analysis of the papers. The first paper was a proposal to build a playground for children on temple property and the second proposed the installation of urinals in student dorms. We analyzed the exposition of problems and the positing of solutions with reference to audience. In class we managed to have a rather animated discussion about the merits and problems of each paper. Both proposals were written in very different styles and the class was divided in their opinion about which made for a compelling proposal and this made for very good conversation. Also the paper on urinals seemed to spark some kind of juvenile mirth in my students, they were highly amused by the solutions proposed and felt compelled to point out various counter arguments. I had to step in and break up the discussion when one of the boys decided to drive home his point by enacting the problem.
When we broke for the day it looked like the students would have a decent idea of how to approach their first draft.
Over the weekend I had my students post their mock proposal on the Forum and it was evident that while they had their ideas in place, we still needed to cover a lot of ground when it came to structuring a proposal. I was very fortunate to find two model proposals to take into class and along with that a handout on the 7 Points of Debate. We quickly perused the seven points and applied them in our analysis of the papers. The first paper was a proposal to build a playground for children on temple property and the second proposed the installation of urinals in student dorms. We analyzed the exposition of problems and the positing of solutions with reference to audience. In class we managed to have a rather animated discussion about the merits and problems of each paper. Both proposals were written in very different styles and the class was divided in their opinion about which made for a compelling proposal and this made for very good conversation. Also the paper on urinals seemed to spark some kind of juvenile mirth in my students, they were highly amused by the solutions proposed and felt compelled to point out various counter arguments. I had to step in and break up the discussion when one of the boys decided to drive home his point by enacting the problem.
When we broke for the day it looked like the students would have a decent idea of how to approach their first draft.
Field Trip [09/24]
They had read the articles (or most of them, anyway), they had seen videos, they had researched and brought in photographs and now it was time to take them public. It was time for a field trip.
I had had this planned earlier in the week but the weather had played spoilsport but in retrospect it was probably better to do this after the class had covered some groundwork. I had picked 4 spots on campus that we would look at and then the class would break into groups, choose one of the spots and write a proposal as a group. I had given them some background information about the campus and its history in the context of the student movement. I asked them to keep that in mind when they evaluated the spaces.
The first space we looked at was the children's play pen behind Baldy, we observed the space for a few minutes before one of the groups called dibs on the space. Moving on we walked down the academic spine and here my powers of arbitration were tested severely when several groups started clamoring for ownership. It was a photo finish but I finally managed to assign a team to the space and we moved on to the Commons. While walking as a group it was amusing how the students closest to me were scrupulously talking about the class or not at all, while the others at the back had no qualms about talking about everything but class. Interestingly their position in the group determined their conversation patterns. Once in the Commons we looked at the last two spaces that I had picked out for them, the Commons itself and the area of Lake La Salle behind the university bookstore. When all four groups had picked a space to write their proposal on, I had them spread out all over the Commons and start writing.
It is unusual to see the Commons this deserted and the sight of four groups --- huddled on the bench under the trees, sprawled around the central dividers, grouped around tables ---was quite enchanting. Working in the open seemed to have sparked something in even the quietest boy in class. I walked from group to group, shooting down ideas of turning the clock tower into a discotheque, hearing elaborate volunteer operations for cleaning up litter and watching them attune themselves to the module.
I had had this planned earlier in the week but the weather had played spoilsport but in retrospect it was probably better to do this after the class had covered some groundwork. I had picked 4 spots on campus that we would look at and then the class would break into groups, choose one of the spots and write a proposal as a group. I had given them some background information about the campus and its history in the context of the student movement. I asked them to keep that in mind when they evaluated the spaces.
The first space we looked at was the children's play pen behind Baldy, we observed the space for a few minutes before one of the groups called dibs on the space. Moving on we walked down the academic spine and here my powers of arbitration were tested severely when several groups started clamoring for ownership. It was a photo finish but I finally managed to assign a team to the space and we moved on to the Commons. While walking as a group it was amusing how the students closest to me were scrupulously talking about the class or not at all, while the others at the back had no qualms about talking about everything but class. Interestingly their position in the group determined their conversation patterns. Once in the Commons we looked at the last two spaces that I had picked out for them, the Commons itself and the area of Lake La Salle behind the university bookstore. When all four groups had picked a space to write their proposal on, I had them spread out all over the Commons and start writing.
It is unusual to see the Commons this deserted and the sight of four groups --- huddled on the bench under the trees, sprawled around the central dividers, grouped around tables ---was quite enchanting. Working in the open seemed to have sparked something in even the quietest boy in class. I walked from group to group, shooting down ideas of turning the clock tower into a discotheque, hearing elaborate volunteer operations for cleaning up litter and watching them attune themselves to the module.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Proposing Public Spaces [09/17, 09/20 and 09/22]
Most of my student papers for this module began with "Public spaces are everywhere..." and perhaps that is why they instantly connected with this module. I used Kunstler's video as a starting point to open a discussion on public spaces. We looked at the economic and social ramifications of a space and used local examples to further the arguments in class. Quite a fair number of my students took issue with Kunstler's rhetoric, they felt that bludgeoning an audience into complicity might be a tactic but its effectiveness was tenuous at best. A lot of the students are from the suburbs and that might have well been the reason why they also felt so strongly about his arguments.
In that same week we looked at the articles by Leinberger and Packer. It was evident that the length of Packer's article proved to be a huge deterrent for my students. In their freewrite on Leinberger they engaged with the ideas in the text as well as the rhetoric. A lot of them were drawn to the use of statistics and I saw them use the same in their proposals. Unfortunately, the same could not be said about their response to Packer, they clearly had not read the article and I was lucky that I had a contingency plan. I had found some videos to support the two articles and we briefly discussed the video supporting Leinberger before moving on to the videos on Lagos. Using the video as a springboard I was able to get them talking about the issues he raises in his articles. Though not ideal, it did get them thinking and talking.
I felt that the discussion of the two classes gave a lot of fodder for thought and I had them bring in photographs of one good and one bad public space to talk about in class for the next day.
I made two separate piles of good and bad photographs after they turned in the photographs with their names on the back. Then I shuffled the piles and the photographs were passed around the class so that each student had two printouts to talk about. What was interesting was that when they submitted the photographs, I did not let them demarcate the photographs as either good or bad, so each student could now interpret the spaces in any way they wanted. Each of them held up a photograph and gave reasons for why they saw it as good/bad and if anyone in class disagreed with them they raised objections. Given the volley of conversations it was a miracle that we managed to go round the entire class.
It was one of those classes when you walk out with your students and they continue as though the class never ended --- I love walking in that conversation bubble.
In that same week we looked at the articles by Leinberger and Packer. It was evident that the length of Packer's article proved to be a huge deterrent for my students. In their freewrite on Leinberger they engaged with the ideas in the text as well as the rhetoric. A lot of them were drawn to the use of statistics and I saw them use the same in their proposals. Unfortunately, the same could not be said about their response to Packer, they clearly had not read the article and I was lucky that I had a contingency plan. I had found some videos to support the two articles and we briefly discussed the video supporting Leinberger before moving on to the videos on Lagos. Using the video as a springboard I was able to get them talking about the issues he raises in his articles. Though not ideal, it did get them thinking and talking.
I felt that the discussion of the two classes gave a lot of fodder for thought and I had them bring in photographs of one good and one bad public space to talk about in class for the next day.
I made two separate piles of good and bad photographs after they turned in the photographs with their names on the back. Then I shuffled the piles and the photographs were passed around the class so that each student had two printouts to talk about. What was interesting was that when they submitted the photographs, I did not let them demarcate the photographs as either good or bad, so each student could now interpret the spaces in any way they wanted. Each of them held up a photograph and gave reasons for why they saw it as good/bad and if anyone in class disagreed with them they raised objections. Given the volley of conversations it was a miracle that we managed to go round the entire class.
It was one of those classes when you walk out with your students and they continue as though the class never ended --- I love walking in that conversation bubble.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)