Using the moo was a somewhat uncomfortable experience for me. But the kind of uncomfortable that could be beneficial with more use. As Scott suggests in his blog, over the course of a semester I think I could learn to pick up the on the fast paced interchanges. But for now I am self-consciousness about seeing my words in print on a screen- I want to be able to read over what I write and feel it is "ready" before I project it into any space. By the time what I wanted to say found its way into acceptable wording, the conversation topic had moved on. I have never involved myself much in chat experiences, even the social kind. My limited experiences chatting with friends through facebook have been odd, mostly because they seem to have alternate chat personalities. Within the chat space, they relied on a set of different communication conventions. The short space and fast-paced bursts directed how they wrote, creating a range of communication that began to sound a lot like the same voice. I felt like I lost them in the medium. However, in the moo many people in the class clearly expressed their personalities through chat and for others it brought out different, but not generic, personalities than what they display in the classroom.
With this in mind, I am interested in the idea that finding a way to factor in the underlife of students will result in a more authentic forum for expression. It seems that the underlives of students have their own rules and structures. Like chatting on facebook. Student voices may not be corralled into academic formulations as in Engfish, but is there any functioning space that does not create rules and roles? Perhaps, then, creating opportunities for students to interact with an underlife is not so much a way of getting at individual expression as it is revealing multiple discourses at work. It seems that the most effective students will be the ones that can recognize different worlds of discourse and successfully navigate between them. I think that simply having the awareness that multiple communities of discourse function in legitimate ways opens up the field to question authority positions, while at the same time understanding that we all must operate in authority systems in different contexts.
You have some good points. I think you probably could get used to MOO. I was against it. I think it could be better if the interface was a little different. I would like to see more comments on the screen. I don't think the housekeeper is appropriate. That just takes space away from the comments. As far as underlife is concerned, I think we, as teachers, should strive to relate to our students on their level and not act in a patronizing fashion. That said, there is a limit to how much a teacher can do before authority and respect are lost. I think speaking to students one-on-one is the best way to relate to them. If you make a few students few better about their experiences, then that can be contagious for the whole group.
ReplyDeleteMegan--Enjoyed reading your notes about collaborating in the MOO. A new experience, indeed. One of the great things about any technology is choosing, purposefully, not to use something for a specific reason. Choosing NOT to use the MOO only strengthens the other tools you're using for specific reasons. So, exploring different technologies and thinking critically about how they function or don't, helps you unveil what's working or not in other ways of teaching. What underlife, for instance, is in the classroom right now? There are rules and roles in our classes, now. How do they impact teaching and learning?
ReplyDeleteI really agree that students need to understand the different underlives and communities that surround them. I think this is key to understand rhetoric and relating to an audience. How much to you actually value student's underlives, though? I agree that each community has its own rules and regulations, but would you ever teach a class through text messages? Would you ever accept an assignment turned in that used "u" for you, never capitalized anything, etc? I am a bit of a formalist, and I personally don't value student underlife in the classroom very much, but I suppose I do see how it can be valuable in grabbing student interest.
ReplyDeleteP.S. Sorry if this is not entirely relevant to your post; I am doing this blog in between annotations for 5340.