Due to 2 snow days last week, we had a jam-packed session Thursday night. We evaluated and decided to keep using Twitter. We wrote letters to elementary students based on ethos, pathos, and logos. We collaborated on collaboration. It was a very full and fulfilling session.
Class began with an evaluative discussion of Twitter, which we've been using for the last five weeks as outlined here. The actual assignment mentions a couple reasons for using Twitter, but there is an additional reason that I mentioned in class Thursday night. Given the wealth of important, positive connections and contributions I've made via Twitter, I felt I'd be doing students an incredible disservice if it wasn't part of our class. The ultimate decision to keep Twitter, if a bit begrudgingly by some, came with the condition that we designate Wednesday and Sunday nights as optional "tweet-heavy" times. In other words, usage requirements were simplified to "just do it." There is no more 5-per-week requirement. Just be present and accounted for and acknowledged in using Twitter. Since that decision, there's been something of a quick turnaround for a couple students who weren't interested in keeping Twitter part of #567crt. I have to admit to some excitement in seeing how Twitter will work for us the rest of the semester.
So far, discussion of theories that can/should inform how we teach writing have been very measured and reasonable. That is, we've weighed the good and not-so-good aspects of process, expressivist, rhetorical, and collaborative theory, seen how each might play a part in a first-year writing course. As Gia H. concluded on her blog, "there is a time and a place. That seems to be the motto this semester." To the best of my knowledge, there hasn't been a wholesale allegiance made by anyone to one particular theory. There hasn't been a declaration of "I'm an expressivist!" Perhaps there's some reluctance to do so, which is understandable. I'm just as ready to observe and question such declarations. However, I remain curious if any of the theories we've yet to discuss will resonate in its entirety with one/some/all students. Will critical and feminist factions develop after the break? Will #567crt evolve (or devolve) into a microcosm of the discipline of rhetoric and writing overall?
Also: A couple posts on rhetoric/al situations mention the snowstorm that caused the cancellation of last week's class. I'm curious if this recent "snowpocalypse" and the bevy of related descriptors generated to describe it could serve as an interesting example of the rhetorical situation.
----
On collaboration:
Collaboration is definitely another theory that should be used but it needs to be after some familarity has been established in the class.
Throwing it in a students face without explanation seems to be the common thing to do, and no wonder student's have anxiety, and hatred towards group work.
Even if it works for the student in the freshmen composition course, is collaborative writing the correct, most effective way to produce work?
when group work is running at its best, it encourages individual contributions. The point of group work is to get a section of individuals to pull together and to reason, think and do as a unit. This is both a method of doing but should also be looked at as an opportunity to learn.
Some students have experience that goes way beyond alcoholism and other collaborative writings.
What possibly can a classroom learn from this except shock and disbelief.
One weakness of this article was that the authors never really explained why the profession was so against collaboration. Maybe it's just my questioning nature, but I wanted to know the why of it. It would have been interesting for the authors to actually pose that question to various colleges and universities and document the differences/similarities of the responses given.
----
On rhetoric/al situation:
The more I read the more I felt like the conversations were describing two sides of a coin.
I looked at these readings kind of like a boxing match, with the coach being the rhetor.
If our culture is responsible for how we write or how we say something, why has haven't there been significant changes over the last 60 years?
I view a rhetor as a a newsreporter or author and it is their reality the audience is reading, and their interpretation of events. It is important to be very critical of any source of information because it is their views and reactions of the situation, I ask how does the rhetor benefit?
----
On Twitter:
when you surround yourself with the right audience, [Twitter] has positive effects.
[Twitter] is a good starting point for collaboration
How is Twitter better? What can you say in so few characters? I just have this sinking feeling that I’m filling the void with detritus.
Twitter is useful for bouncing ideas around and it’s nice to get to “know” people in a different way. But I guess I’m a little miffed that I feel like I need to be connected to the class on a daily basis, and I guess I don’t think it’s fair.
I think using Twitter is actually a pretty good idea because it allows us to stay in touch with one another outside of class. It has really been nice to not use Blackboard!
My growing interest in mommyblogs and digital rhetoric in general has only benefitted from the communities I have found on Twitter.
Twitter has basically kept a record of our class if you search for our hashtag.
I like twitter for a more recreational purpose.