Recent Changes

November 9, 2009
The banking model: instructors act as the depositors of knowledge. They are authoritative and place themselves in a privileged position in both real classrooms and online courses.
DePew and Lettner-Rust discuss the “gaze” in the writing classroom as recently advocating collaboration, but still using traditional methods of information dissemination. With this method, too much time is spent on grammar, mechanics, and proper citation instruction.
G + H try to handle this problem by having students evaluate each others’ work, having them read aloud, and even assigning mini-essays for practice. This pulls away from the banking model and allows students to work together, removing ultimate authority from the instructor.
Moodle workshops allow students to compare their work to other students’. An online course helps to remove the powerful gaze from the instructor, thus encouraging further discussion with fellow students. A workshop takes away a lot of work on the part of the instructor, while simultaneously forcing collaboration.
This veers away from the traditional banking model toward the collaborative style that many theoreticians now advocate for writing classrooms.

November 2, 2009
Finally, I see the “method to the madness.” We are writing to learn every week, and it is honestly helpful toward our goal of a final product. Here are some highlights from the readings:
Boyd: “Students emphasized the importance of reading their peers’ posts in a nonhostile environment in which all perspectives could be offered and therefore considered” (226). (Yes, this is one of the most helpful activities for us in ENL 630, and in an online course, it not only would be easy to implement, but a great way to ensure students are participating.)
Difference between “bulletin board” mentality and “conference” mentality. (Bulletin board students find the forums disjointed and unhelpful; conference students find the collaboration beneficial.)
Instructors must be sure to craft assignments clearly, provide lots of timely feedback, and compensate for the lack of face-to-face interaction.
Instructor must make his “reasoning” for the course clear.
G&H: “It would be naïve to assign writing only as a medium of learning or only as performance” (78). (Good writing does not happen overnight; it must be a slow process.)
Questionnaires are helpful for gauging levels of skill. (Beginning of term, midterm, end of term.)
Use of reflective journals, email discussion lists, study questions, reading notes, and concept papers can be combined in any number of varieties.
Writing for preparation. (This is a crucial step. Workshops, debates, etc., should be selected to get students thinking about their writing.)
Informal writing keeps students’ final goal in their heads. Keeps them focused and is a good method of preparation.

October 25, 2009
This week has presented the issue of keeping students on track. Fleckenstein's "Faceless" article has brought up some interesting thoughts, which tie into our chat discussions. According to her, some students don't see the necessity in showing up for online group work because they see do not see it as unproductive to other group members. The students do not think of other class members as "real." Likewise, they do not think of themselves as a real person, but more of an online character.
Teaching the analysis paper will be a four-week, writing-intensive process. I have planned to split up my class into smaller groups, and I will require them to work together. But if they do not show up (after all, there is no physical authority), then they will drag down the group members who ARE trying their best.
Gottschalk and Hjortshoj put a lot of emphasis on response and revision. It is important and efficient for students to read each other's work and revise.
So, perhaps the solution - to keep the students maintaining their work and their fellow group members' - is to require more than simply showing up to group chats, but also require three suggestions per paper they peer review. Students can take or leave review suggestions, but at the very least, this will keep students from shrugging off revision and review.
Now for the hard part. Enforcement.

October 18, 2009
I finally approach the actual creation of the analysis project. After learning about the simultaneous use of wikis and Socratic forums, I think I can use them both to great effect. Assuming the ENL 101 class has a class size of 20-25 students, I will divide the class into smaller groups. Fowles presents 15 appeals. If I divide my students into five groups, that would give each group three appeals to study. Much like we have been going about our chapter presentations in ENL 265, subdividing the topics seems to help with the overload of questions that a Socratic forum might invite. Every group (five groups of five, for example) can have a set of questions, which will effectively contain the actual number of forums.
dedicated to allowing all the groups comingto come together to
This reduces stress on students and instructor. I may also add a bit of time for each group to present their materials to the other students of the class. This would familiarize all the students with all fifteen appeals. However, the integration of presentations is still a bit tricky. I will be reflecting on whether or not I should use presentations throughout the coming week.
Week 1 - Divide Students into Groups and Assign Appeals
About Appeals and Decide "Angle of Attack"
Week 2 - Students Begin Using Wikis (Requirements Still Undecided)
Forum Questions (May or may not require use of forums)
Presentations?
Week 4 - Combine Each Group's Work Together to Create One Final Product
Groups Come Together and Discuss the "Big Idea"

October 18, 2009
I finally approach the actual creation of the analysis project. After learning about the simultaneous use of wikis and Socratic forums, I think I can use them both to great effect. Assuming the ENL 101 class has a class size of 20-25 students, I will divide the class into smaller groups. Fowles presents 15 appeals. If I divide my students into five groups, that would give each group three appeals to study. Much like we have been going about our chapter presentations in ENL 265, subdividing the topics seems to help with the overload of questions that a Socratic forum might invite. Every group (five groups of five, for example) can have a set of questions, which will effectively contain the actual number of forums.
Do I think this will help the students? Yes. I don't think the entire class should write about all fifteen appeals together. I think each group should write about a few, then every group can add their material to a final project. Each group can be given three weeks to compose its own piece about its three assigned appeals. The fourth week will be dedicated to all the groups coming together to create one large, final writing assignment.
This reduces stress on students and instructor. I may also add a bit of time for each group to present their materials to the other students of the class. This would familiarize all the students with all fifteen appeals. However, the integration of presentations is still a bit tricky. I will be reflecting on whether or not I should use presentations throughout the coming week.
Week 1 - Divide Students into Groups and Assign Appeals
Students Learn About Appeals
Week 2 - Students Begin Using Wikis (Requirements Still Undecided)
Forum Questions (May or may not require use of forums)
Week 3 - Rough Drafts and Peer Edits
Presentations?
Week 4 - Combine Each Group's Work Together to Create One Final Product