This is where we’ll discuss Kevin DePew’s and Heather Lettner-Rust’s “Mediating Power: Distance Learning Interfaces, Classroom Epistemology, and the Gaze.” PDF | Link
Obviously, the readings this week have a sort of special “experiential” component to them. I mean, we’re in the midst of an online class, right? I am assuming that will have some influence on how we read and understand all of these essays this week, including this one. While I didn’t identify too much with the case study examples they had here (I’ve never thought the teaching with TV or teaching synchronously online made a lot of sense, frankly), there were a couple of things I found striking here, at least it applies to my experiences as a teacher (your experiences as a student might be a little different, and I’m curious to hear about them, too).
I very much agree with the point they make in a couple of places about how while the online class can in theory can change the dynamics of a class– that is, getting away from the model of the teacher “talking” as the source of all wisdom and the students “listening” attentively– this often is not the case in practice. I think that DePew and Lettner-Rust are arguing that this happens for two basic reasons, both of which I have noticed before. First, teachers often try to simply “pour” what they do in the normal face-to-face class into the online class, and that often does not work very well. Second, a lot of the course tools used to support online classes (think of emuonline, for example) are really designed for “banking model” education, or at least classes where there’s a big emphasis on quizzes and tests.
I also think the stuff they talk about with Foucault and education as “surveillance” are very true, and to me, online classes like this one both work with and against this need for surveillance control for an instructor. On the one hand, I can’t really and literally see you in the same way I could if we were all in a face to face class– and by the way, I think that’s the main reason why students in their case studies seemed to resist the camera technologies. It’s that whole “I’m taking a class in my pajamas” thing. On the other hand, there are lots of tools with this site (and even more with emuonline) where I can really track your interactions with this blog, and it’s easy enough for me to go and check the posts you make to your own blogs. It’s like I’ve said before about participation: in an online class, if you aren’t participating, you’re not really “there,” which, in an odd sort of way, means that in an online class like this, you have to willingly submit to a “surveillance” of a sort.
Anyway, let me know what you think– especially as it relates back to what we’re doing here.
I think it’s obvious from this article that whether or not teachers and students ever see each other isn’t exactly important. Students can still learn and meet the outcomes from online learning, but the deciding factor comes from the decisions made by the curriculum designer(s) who have to decide how and what to implement when it comes to designing the class and the technology required. So far, I’ve found that this has been one of, if not the most difficult class I have taken in the last two years. It requires a lot more participation and personal discipline to keep up with everything. There is more reading, more writing, and more stress than with just your average class where the teacher can keep you up to date with everything happening, like changes made to the syllabus as one of the other readings pointed out.
As for methods of learning, sure, problem-posing methods of teaching and learning will always be more important and valuable than the banking model of learning, because students are not empty vessels just waiting to be filled with knowledge. In order to truly learn and understand, students must be able to understand a problem and solve it, it’s active learning rather than the banking model. I agree that the way an online course is set up and the background experience of a teacher is important for distance education, and that those instructors really need to think about the implications of everything they do much more than a face to face teacher.
I’m going to steal from my blog response this time because I want to share my experience with the “TV” classroom, as Krause calls it, and my analysis of the experience (even thought it’s a bit long):
Chaucer, with his antiquated language and racy plot lines, isn’t known to inspire romantic interludes like Shakespeare or other poets, but Chaucer was an integral part of sparking the romance that brought me to the man of my dreams. My husband and I fell in love during a synchronous video Chaucer class, so I have fond memories of such “virtual” courses – but not for the fact that this forum provides a wonderful new way for students to learn! I’ll never forget the whispered flirtations that would frequently cause the video personnel to come out from the back-room and reprimand us for triggering our microphones and, thus, the video camera that was designed to respond to sound.
What I can say from this experience though, beyond taking myself down memory lane, is that it is consistent with what Kevin DePew and Heather Lettner-Rust describe regarding the power structure of such a classroom. In their chart on page 179 of the article entitled “Mediating Power,” the authors lay out how teachers negotiate power in different types of virtual learning environments. They explain that a synchronous video classroom works best for a lecture format. I must say that I agree and that they aren’t even that conducive to a “good” lecture format (if any lectures can be considered “good”). While we had microphones, it was very awkward to utilize them for the purposes of conversing with our bushy bearded professor thousands of miles away, even though he was a personable fellow.
I’m not sure though that it’s impossible for synchronized video classes to enable interactive, collaborative learning. As with Online courses, a lot of that depends on the instructor and how creative he/she is with the technology and with instruction. I think a lot of the virtual mediums have potential for great instruction…the contingent dynamics are the teacher’s interest in making learning inquiry based and requiring students to contribute to the knowledge built in the classroom. I’ve seen instruction done very well in Online courses (this class included), and I’ve seen it done really poorly – a lot of it depends less on the medium and more on the teacher.
That’s a pretty amusing story about you and your husband, Andrea.
I also think you’re spot-on about the “it depends” comment. To boil this down a bit, I think that it’s possible to teach really poorly online and really well online, and it’s possible to teach really poorly face-to-face and really well face to face. So when you say it depends less on the medium and more on the teacher, I completely agree.
Though I will also say this: just because someone teaches well online doesn’t mean they can teach well face to face, and vice-versa. Which does speak to the idea that it’s important for teachers (and students) to adapt to the format.
I was pretty skeptical about taking an online course because everyone I knew who had taken one in the past had such differing opinions. All of those opinions centered around one thing, though– they didn’t learn as much online as they did in a classroom. The online classes taken by them seemed to follow the discussed banking model of learning and the class was very impersonal. For instance, the method used was where you log in, you do the readings, you answer online quiz questions, you submit a couple essay tests, maybe the professor emails you once or twice in the semester, and the end. How effective is that going to be?? Friends in those kinds of classes ended up viewing the class as more of a thing they had to get through than an actual learning experience.
Do cameras need to be involved to add an extra sense of collaboration/personalization? Not really. I think we have evolved– as the Internet has grown in popularity– to converse digitally and not require verbal interaction. As long as the teacher makes him/herself available and keeps on top of questions asked, I think that works. And, as long as you have a student base that is fully invested in participation, I think that works, too. This class is an example, I think, of how an online class can reach a happy median. True, this class is difficult paticipation-wise, but I think it is more effective to do online classes in a blog format such as this. It feels personal with the avatars and the links to personal blogs and the ability to comment on each other’s posts. And, we even occasionally see each other via YouTube or in-person meetings. But, as Angie wrote, it all depends on how the teacher decides to structure a course that makes it successful or not– either online or in the traditional classroom.
I wonder, though, if anybody has an opinion on whether they could see online classes working better for undergrad versus grad students? Or, in the same, whether they think a banking model or a sychronized video class would be best for either of those levels? Just wondering.
What a perfect lead-in to what I was going to post, Ashley. I do think it entirely depends on both the subject of the course and the participants. For example, I think this course has been really good. Yes, like Angie said, it’s been a lot of work. I literally check this site almost everyday, usually more than once. But, I think that’s a good thing because I almost never think about my other classes more than once or twice a week. When we started, I was thinking to myself, “This is gonna suck! I’m going to be forced to do things on a schedule rather than on my own time.” But, I’ve actually liked the structured aspect of it and I think it’s important to the desired outcomes.
But, I also think that the benefit of this course has a lot to do with the students in it. I knew about half the class before it started, and feel like I’ve come to know (at least somewhat) everyone else. And, all being experienced, obviously intelligent/articulate people, I know I’ve learned a lot from others. But, part of that is driven from confidence in ourselves. We all have undergrad degrees and are pretty passionate about what we do/study. And, I think that gives us the confidence to feel like we have something to contribute to the coversation. But, as an undergrad, you may not feel that way yet, and the constructivist approach may not be as succesful. I think it may have a lot to do with the fact that we are grad students studying something we love. If it was a sophomore Organic Chemistry class, it may not be as easy to achieve. But, part of that may be that we’ve been brainwashed through years of the banking-model.
I also wonder if certain subjects would work better than others because for example, a writing class is really teaching a process of understanding more than facts. Maybe this is just my prejudice speaking, but I don’t really see how an open discussion like this would work in say a biology class. Yes, certain topics could be discussed and argued. But when it comes to learning something like anatomy, it seems that the banking-model is really the only way it will work. Sometimes, you just have to memorize facts. And you can’t really have a collaborative discussion about how many chambers there are in the heart. No matter how many discussions you have and how student-centered they are… the answer is always going to be four. It seems like it works best in a theory-focused class.
But, with all that being said, I think that in the context of a composition class, an online structure like this is great. It provides an opportunity for open discussion, focuses on what we as students can bring to the costruction of knowledge, and can keep things inquiry-driven as opposed to teacher-as-expert-driven.
Really, Dave, any class that is more Arts and discussion-centered is going to do better in a blog/wiki format. I think a topic that requires that people bounce ideas off one another is going to be much more successful like this than, let’s say, a math class.
I think your probably right on that point Ashlee. I imagine a discussion driven class such as this is more suited to an online format. Also, because this is a writing class, we get a hands-on experience everyday with how the mode of writing differs from speech in communication.
On the subject of there being a lack of F2F communication, while I do agree it’s more difficult to get a sense for how people are interpreting your comments, there are ways to get around the problem. One of these is the book review. I’ve found I’ve got a lot better idea of who some of you folks are by seeing and hearing you speak on camera.
This basic topic– the idea of at what courses work best online– has been a topic of some discussion in the English department over the years. The basic philosophy for the writing program has been that we are not at all crazy about the idea of offering first year writing online, mainly because that’s a group of students we want to see in person and that’s a group of students who do not necessarily have the discipline it takes to successfully complete an online class. We have so far thought that the best place for online writing classes is at the upper-level undergraduate and graduate level.
Generally speaking though, the literature people have had the opposite philosophy. They have been willing to teach online versions of literature classes at the 100 level, the basic philosophy being that if we are willing to teach these classes in a lecture hall, then why shouldn’t we be willing to teach them online? On the other hand, they have resisted offering upper-level undergraduate and graduate classes online because they think that the discussion would suffer from a lack of the face to face experience.
And just to comment briefly on the camera thing: I agree that always being “on screen” would be bad– I’m thinking of the TV class. But I do think it’s kind of nice in this format that almost all of you have some picture that is either you or representative of you with the avatar thing. And I also think that the next time I teach this class, I will try to do some group Skype type things as an “optional” discussion.
And of course, I like to push everyone to participate in at least one “face to face” discussion session each term. We’ll probably have one before the end of the term, btw….
Wow… that’s quite interesting about the Lit classes. I must say, I kinda think their logic is completely backwards there. Sometimes in those lower level Lit classes, students don’t even know HOW to have a productive conversation about literature. They need more teacher guidance to get beyond surface level observations. I’ve found it to be similar to lower-level writing students and reflection. They don’t all really get how to reflect beyond surface level stuff and it takes time for them to reflect in any kind of deep or meaningful way. In order to have a really meaninful discussion of lit, you have to be a really active reader and a lot of times younger students haven’t necessarily developed or practiced those skills yet. Seems to me that F2F would be better for that.
I think a lot of that of that depends on the student. Some work really well and keep on task and others need that deadline reminder each week from someone.
This format works well for this class. Some articles for my research project that I have been reading talk about online classes and instructor involvement. Prof. Steve is there right along with the discussion, modeling what needs to be but not in a traditional power sense as in F2F. They encourage that kind of response for online classes. Some, students barely hear from the instructor except for assignmnets. This is test/quiz format. I know many instructors that won’t give up the authority of up front, lecture and presenting. They do not let their students become independent learners, which is where we want our students to be.
This is my first online class but my own kids have taken them and their reply was that it was convient, not that they learned a lot or that they thought the material was interesting. It takes more work as a teacher for an online course, so I am told. I’m glad I took this class and we all hooked up. I have learned a lot if not more from reading the online discussions.
This is my first online class, too! I agree that responding to each other here and on our individual blogs re-creates class discussion in a cool and pedagogically sound way.
This term, I’m doing a lot of reading about synchronicity for my research project, and as a result, I could see ways of incorporating some synchronous discussions — perhaps in small groups or something like that — into a course like this one to boost the conversation factor even more.
Others I’ve known who’ve taken online classes (elsewhere) have commented on how convenience tended to trump intellectual rigor, and I’ve appreciated (most of the time
) Prof Krause’s unwillingness to compromise in this respect.
I also just want to say that writing on the course blog has made me a noticeably better writer when it comes to making arguments and responding to others’ arguments, like in emails and proposals, for example. I would recommend taking an online course like this one for that reason alone!
I have three online classes this semester. This class, by far (more work), is the best one only because it requires us to interact almost every single day. We are not only interacting through our class blog, but through individual class blogs, facebook, twitter, and now youtube. We are interacting with each other in every way possible through written word, informally, somewhat informally, and formally. We get to see each others meaning making and practice of these concepts, and the extent in which we wish to involve ourselves on several levels.
Of course, as others suggest, time is an issue, but for the most part the structure and demand of our time has paid off in leaps and bounds.
Independent learning vs bank learning seems to be, mostly, the difference between graduate and lower level undergraduate classes.
This issue of investment is widespread in every class though. I am sure every teacher with every student asks: how far should I go and how far can you go?
This question puts direct pressure on the teacher at all times. I am sure it is reoccurring in actuality and in theory.
The difference, though, are these mediums– they allow the teacher to do much more for the student indirectly, and set up a structure to enable the student to experience much more than the classroom, IMO.
This reading was quite complex and it is so hard to know where to begin. The authors seem to imply that Freire is saying that teachers who use the “banking model” in teaching do so in order to be in control of the class, but I would think that those who use that model do so more because that is the way they were taught or they really don’t feel comfortable using another format. I hope so. I would not like to think that every teacher who uses this model does so only to exercise such complete control over their students.
I wonder, based on p 179, if there are still correspondence courses? I would be surprised if the online courses haven’t usurped the correspondence courses. I also note that the authors have used quite a few resources from the 1970′s era and I wonder why. I know that pedagogy doesn’t really change, however, it would seem that there might be more recent information.
On page 183, the authors state that “the disparity raises the question as to whether the students’ visibility placed them at an advantage or disadvantage for the reasons discussed with the correspondence course.” I wonder if, in fact, these students [those who took the course at a distance] were at an advantage or a disadvantage — or if it evens out, with some being at an advantage and some at a disadvantage.
The most important part of the reading, to me, is the very end, Since I am studying hybrid classes for my research paper, I like this sentence, “..the hybrid nature of this stimulated classroom made the students visible in different ways and allowed the instructors to decide which visual cues they would evaluate,”
I remember back when I first began college at Schoolcraft and they were using the video classes where students would get the videos of lectures when they wanted and needed them. They were self-paced classes and students watched the videos when they wanted to. I can remember thinking…wow that is so weird. No we have whole classes online, use of video, diccussion of all sorts, the abilty to send papers online or email…the possiblities are endless. There are so many ways that students can go to college, some programs are completly online where a student never has to walk into a classroom. I have taken several online classes, all history, and that was fine but the ones I learned the most from were the ones where the instructor was very involved in what was being taught. The one I had where the teacher was just kinda there was boring. I want a teacher who is involved and i feel like it takes more work to be that way in an online class. I also like the discussion that comes from the face to face classes. But for many the online classes are great. I also like the idea of an online component is face to face class. I think that we have to accodate for all types of learners as well as ways of presenting the information. Teachers have to let go of the idea that they should hav all the control in the classroom and allow students to learn. Its not always about mastery but being exposed to things where most people learn the best.