Back in 1997, I was in 8th grade and absolutely positively loved getting into chat rooms on AOL (remember AOL?). I wasn’t exactly an active participant in these chat rooms; I would kind of just sit there and see what would happen. A cyberspace wallflower of sorts. But if I did want to chime in with my ideas, I wasn’t concerned about how I would be judged because I didn’t know any of those weirdos (though, I was admittedly one of them). The idea of a bunch of strangers from all around the country discussing random issues in virtual anonymity was a completely safe social experiment in my book. I could see how people interacted with each other, watch cyber friendships emerge, and feel like I was socializing without having to ask my parents if they could take me to “so and sos” house.
Fast forward to 2012. I sign up for my third and fourth online
graduate classes, but my first classes that meet “virtually” in a classroom. I
was genuinely giddy with excitement. Two things that I love: learning and
socializing all in the comfort of my own home. I get to wear pajamas, drink a Shiner
summer brew, and have academic discussions about literature and writing.
Virtual classrooms like the MOO have many advantages that are similar to chat rooms from the late 1990s and early 2000s.
There is a sense of camaraderie and it strangely feels more social than in a traditional classroom, but it's also more anonymous. Students are able to attend to the information presented to them with very
little visual distractions (people walking in late, observing non-verbal cues
from the professor or classmates, etc.).
Everything is in front of you in black and white and if you missed
something said, you can scroll back up to see what you misunderstood. There
have been instances in both of my classes when the professor asked a question
and I wasn’t sure what he asked exactly. If this was on Skype or in a normal
classroom, I would not be able to answer the question. Other students (who are
usually faster processers or not as easily distracted as I am) are able to
answer the question and the professor would move on. In these instances, I am
given an opportunity to participate when I would otherwise not have. Additionally,
the MOO creates an environment that is more safely anonymous (because of the geographical distance between us?) and as a result, feels
safer to a person who would not normally share in class. It seems to make sharing, which could result in learning, more equitable. Because this is a
course in writing, the “black and white” print format of the MOO is an
interesting example of a dialogue or text. As Nancy Sommers discussed in her
research, speech is “irreversible” (44). This begs the question of whether our
course classroom is closer to being a “speech” or a form of writing. Since I
tend to type on the fly in MOO, it is sometimes “irreversible” for me! Though saving
the courses transcripts tends to add a sort of permanence to everything that I
state.
I have never had a class with skype, but I have interacted
with a linguistics professor who was teaching in Japan. In those days it was
100% free (only 6 years ago). Using skype in a classroom format would eliminate
the perceived anonymity some. The same problem with different personality types
would exist (more extroverted and confident students will participate more
willingly than the introspective types), and the loudest talker will prevail! I’m
sure there is a way to make skype more organized, but I imagine lots of talking
over people and confusion. This is a problem in the MOO too, but it is easier
to scroll up to see what you missed. Since this is a writing course, MOO seems
better. But if this was a speech communications course, I could see how skype
would have its purpose.
The idea of becoming whoever your heart desires online is
fascinating and I can see how this type of format may one day become more
popular than a traditional classroom. I think that it encourages more learning and
participation from a variety of personality types.
A note on the writing process: As I am typing this, I have
been hyper-conscious of my writing process. There has been next to zero “pre-writing”
and the revision process is happening simultaneously with my writing (Sommers,
49). I typically get all of my thoughts out on a certain subject, then return to
each of the paragraphs to clarify to figure out what I want to say in the first
place (50). I am constantly examining and reexamining what I am trying to
communicate and how effective I have been. While I am far from an "expert" writer, I consider this a good sign in my ability to revise.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I must agree whole-heartedly with your description of the benefits associated with using MOO (I now realize I am not the only one taking full advantage of our geographically remote location by enjoying a cold one and donning PJs). I like your introduction of Nancy Sommers' idea about the irreversible nature of speech. I would imagine that most of us (even in the fast-paced environment of the MOO) take a moment to reread our comments before hitting enter. This revision process is often missing in speech, and particularly with technologies like Skype that are instantaneous. I think that by using Skype we would focus more of our attention on what we say, and pay little attention to how we say it. Since both skills are valuable in composition, I think it is important that both skills are practiced as much as possible.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thoughts. Different modalities, certainly, work better for different people.
ReplyDeleteThere's a concept called media-naturalness theory which suggests that the more "natural" a communication situation (such as it approximates face to face), the less likely there is to have ambiguity in the situation. Following that theory, Skype (with audio or even video) approximates f2f better than MOO (text only). Still, for some, the semi-anonymous nature of MOO over Skype, as you've indicated, can be useful to getting something out of a class. In fact, sometimes "known anonymity" (that is, the same anonymity every week), maximizes voice (Elbow) but understanding of the discourse community (Bartholmae) and responsibility. It is planned flexibility. Thinking about ways to give room to students to dedicate time needed (and the amount of time is different for every student) to build ideas, etc., before sharing them, is important. For me, text does that better than audio and video, where you're more immediately transparent or on the spot. For me, with online classes, I believe the cognitive development or "aha moments" are more developed with text, with grad students taking rhetoric courses, ultimately..