Gee and Learning

Consider how you might take a few of Gee’s learning principles and apply them to the composition classroom without the use of video games. Think about the learning principles that might be applied to assignments or the classroom in general.

In a composition classroom, I think that it is always good to have common goals for the semester in general and for each assignment. I always ask myself “what are you trying to accomplish with this assignment?” This question helps me to put things into perspective. In a similar vein, I think that Gee provides some useful ideas on how to create realistic goals for a class. I have chosen four that I think are feasible and attainable in a 16 week period. The four principles that I chose, along with a brief description of how I would use them, are as follows:

Active, Critical Learning Principle: All aspects of the learning environment (including the ways in which the semiotic domain is designed and presented) are set up to encourage active and critical, not passive, learning.

The Active, Critical Thinking Principle is one that I could use to talk about writing in general. Using it to begin each writing assignment would teach students the importance of engagement; it would also show them that they have a goal/purpose with all types of writing.

Multimodal Principle: Meaning and knowledge are built up through various modalities

(images, texts, symbols, interactions, abstract design, sound, etc.), not just words.

The Multimodal principle will help me to do what Cynthia Selfe speaks about in terms of meaning making in different modalities. I could use this principle to talk about genre and audience.

Transfer Principle: Learners are given ample opportunity to practice, and support for, transferring what they have learned earlier to later problems, including problems that require adapting and transforming that earlier learning.

The third principle is important because I do think that teachers should have appreciation for the different backgrounds and knowledge bases that students will bring to the class. This principle will help in terms of providing an open space that will help students to develop ethos as writers. In other words, the transfer principle will teach students that they are indeed writers that have something to say.

Affinity Group Principle: Learners constitute an “affinity group” that is, a group that is bonded primarily through shared endeavors, goals, and practices and not shared race, gender, nation, ethnicity, or culture.

The Affinity Group principle could facilitate class success as it speaks to community building and listening. It is important for a class to be able to not only listen to the teacher, but to actively listen to other peers as well. Listening is a sign of respect, really, and I think that this principle would promote a type of needed decorum in the classroom.

My thoughts about Live Chat on Angel

Describe how the chat went for you. What did you enjoy? What drove you mad? And what would you do as an instructor if you chose to use a space such as this?

• For me, the Live Chat on Angel was frustrating. There was just too much going on that I had to resort to Rovai's conversation about lurking. I found lurking to be comfortable in this space because 1.) when I typed something, it seemed irrelevant or 2.) things were just moving to quickly for any type of engagement (so, I could not really focus on one comment for too long). Although I commented a few times during the chat, I found lurking to be my most viable option.
• Moreover, Faigley's discussion relates to my (our) experience on the Chat as it moves us from a current-traditionalist mode to a new rhetoric platform; he mentions that the text and the teacher become “decentered” in InterChange. He also talks about this idea of equal exchange within the online system. After engaging with the Live Chat, I began to think about Faigley’s online discussion form. It's really crazy to me that I am about to say this (because I'd like to believe that I'm a proponent of new rhetoric) but I think that the teacher as "decentered" greatly depends on the medium and the purpose of the assignment. So, I don't think that new rhetoric should be excersied all of the time. I think that teachers much strike a nice balance and that is what I hope to do as an instructor using Wysocki's idea of "new media."
• As a person who is used to face-to-face interaction in a variety of different ways, then, I don't think that I can afford to try to make the online space something that it is not...and I think that we tried to do that by attempting to focus in our discussion in Live Chat. Simply, I think that Live Chat would be useful for team building (collaborative projects) where small groups of students could brainstorm; I could see myself using Live Chat in this capacity.
• Also, I am reminded of the multimodal event that Cynthia Selfe and Doug Hesse engaged in at CCCC last year. While watching it in Dr. Monroe's class last year, the Live Chat seemed to work well when there was a major faciliator (via Skype) and the chat function was used to comment on the discussion. Although there were many things going on at once during the multimodal event (video, chat, phone), there seemed to be some focus...I don't think that there was any real "decentering." I do think, however, that what we want to do is bring the classroom to the internet...I don't know if that can really happen in a place like Live Chat ...

Response to Peterson (with images)

Represent your experiences/perceptions of online learning with 3(ish) picture/symbols/etc. and briefly explain how your choices relate to Peterson’s three key issues.

Teacher Role:
Peterson notes that some composition specialists think about online education as “decentered, thus inviting students to become co-constructors of knowledge in the classroom” (375). I am not sure if I buy into this concept, but I like Peterson’s discussion of how binary thinking will lead us nowhere. So, thinking about the quote above, this picture of a table comes to mind as the students and teachers are able to co-construct a space that will be comfortable for both parties. They are all able to “come to the table” to talk about needs and wants in the virtual space (and I thought that the orange slices add a nice touch).

Educational Goals:
The author also highlights information from Sharon Crowley noting that, “any time a new population has been admitted to higher education, a learning crisis has been identified (or constructed) due to the challenges posed by the outsiders to the traditional structure of the university” (378-79). I think that it is interesting that she uses the word constructed because it speaks to hegemony (in my eyes). Nonetheless, issues of access come up again. Peterson alludes to Selfe a great deal here to validate her claims about nontraditional students and questions of access. I chose this picture to represent educational goals because I do think that it is a structure that has fewer people at the top who make the decisions.

Student Learning:
Peterson’s discussion about how online education is teacher-centered makes great sense as it models many state and federal programs. Even more, many administrators in our own academic systems make rules and regulations for faculty, staff, and students to follow with little feedback from those who will be impacted by the decisions. Thus, Peterson brings up some important points pertaining to student’s feelings of isolation and the potential lack of communication with teachers in the virtual space (381). I hope that these feelings can be alleviated by some kind of merger between students, teachers, and administration...that we move away from the image that I mention in the education section to a more inclusive model. This image of arrows remind me of student learning. Each arrow represents a student because most students have similar goals (to obtain an education), but they have different modes or ways to reach their goals.

Note: All pictures were pulled for google images.