Rhetorically Speaking

 I glanced at a ATL fellow’s post and saw the word “camel” and thought I’d begin my post with a picture inspired by her post. I do promise to read her post, but for now this image works for me. In responding to Papert’s “Why School Reform Is Impossible,” I wonder why he didn’t identify computers with a capital C. Surely from his statements about reform movement’s expectations from technology, it should be given its status as Computers.

As a former high school technology instructor with a master’s degree in Instructional Technology and now a college lecturer in information systems and writing and a Ph.D. student in Technical Communication and Rhetoric, I question the kind of student sophistication that Papert refers to. I say this while quickly stating that I respect and value my students, but I do not believe that their perceptions of the primary use of computers include academic research. They do research on a computer because the assignment calls for them to use the Internet. However, their motivation does not seem to placed in seeking new and more sophicaticated ways to do research. A student will search and find answers to sports questions, relationships, or game trivia and not see the connection that they can use the same technology to do their research.

An example, my university closed early this week due to snow. My students had an assignment due the following day. The assignment was to gather research from specific areas about the company they are researching. We met in the library where the librarian showed them the electronic databases that she recommended for them to use and many others that they could access as students at a university. The night before the assignment was due (and several hours after campus, i.e. library, had closed) I received an email from a student. In summarizing, the student stated that due to the library closing, he would not be able to complete his report. Hmmmm. This is an upper level college student who has accessed the databases on a computer in a lab in the library and yet he deduced that he had to be in the library to access the databases. Never mind that he apparently had waited until the last evening to begin his work. The class had had a work day in our own lab the day after visiting the library where the librarian had been available to answer any questions. Thus, he had accessed the databases in two different locations. Now, if I had given an assignment based on his favorite game I might have gotten a different outcome. I believe that technology enhances learning; I do not believe that learning happens because of technology.

While this could be a post all by itself, Papert makes a huge assumption when he states that students have acquired a new kind of sophistication. His assumption is that computers are available to all students. For those in the trenches, we know this is not the case.

Now that I’ve added some issues that are close to my heart, I do commend any professional who reminds us all that this School or school or technology is in need of change, reform, or whatever you want to term it. Papert is a visionary and I thank him for that.

Trying to stay calm, I’m thinking through student learning and engagement. I know the perspectives that if instructors provide too much help or too much information that students begin to expect it. One example, a fellow professor felt that students were not prepared for an exam. He also knew that the majority had prepared and done their assignment but felt that offering a night review session (outside of class time) might help many in the class. He received lots of thanks and was interested in student feedback in the end of year evaluations. What he found was the majority of students had a very negative reaction to the review. You might ask, “Was it the time (at night)?”, “Did they not find the review helpful?” No, they responded that he had not met their expectations and not prepared them for class exams because he did not have a review for EVERY exam.  His response to his fellow colleagues in sharing this was that he was responding to a need, he knew this particular exam covered the most difficult subject matter of the semester, and he wanted to see if the review would help student learning. Will he do this again? No.

Another professor posted in social media about her frustration with students not seeking help and yet evaluating her negatively because she was not clear. She had posted and announced five days in advance of a difficult project for students to contact her if they needed additional help. She did not receive ONE email.  I do find it mysterious that some students do not see engagement as their responsibility, as enjoyable, as a means to be successful in their course. I reach the majority of my students. They understand my love for teaching, excitement that they “get it,” and genuine pleasure in their successes.  How do I reach the student who sighs, constantly glances at the time, and then states at the end of the semester that I wasn’t clear and wasn’t passionate about the topic?

Not to beat a topic until it’s absolutely ad nauseum, but I’m finding it very curious as to the personality types that use facebook, texting, and twitter. From my world view which I thought more broad than it is, I’m finding my quieter, keep to themselves friends love to text. So, the mention of post-human interested me because the assertion is that people would rather interact with technology than with humans. Hm… I do have friends who would rather text than call. Recognizing that it could be that I love to talk is causing them to opt to text,, I think it’s more than that.  If I had a research genie I would pursue this topic.

I’ll share that I have had friends tell me that when they are lonely that they listen to the voice mails I’ve left them. It’s very important that my friends know the why to the information Tweeting with friends just won’t cut it; tweeting to share professional info or reminders does in my world.