home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!uvaarpa!darwin.sura.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!!COLLEGE,
- X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
- X-VMS-To: IN%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"
- X-VMS-Cc: RHODA
- MIME-version: 1.0
- Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
- Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
- Message-ID: <01GTWB27ZC029350SJ@NORWICH.BITNET>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 12:54:12 -0500
- Sender: "Megabyte University (Computers & Writing)" <MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET>
- From: "Rhoda Carroll, Vermont College,
- Montpelier" <RHODA@NORWICH.BITNET>
- Subject: Re: cai assignments
- Lines: 51
-
- Marcy, I'm very new at this too, and I queried the list in December
- requesting suggestions, but I knew that I would have to be *in the class*
- and *in the lab* and *with the students* before I would think up anything
- remotely useful. Doing the work of preparing for class will yield some
- ideas about specific computer applications for specific goals.
-
- For example: last week I wanted to introduce an intro lit class to
- structural criticism ("New" Criticism, for all you boomers listening in),
- so I gave some handouts laying out goals, methods, criteria -- the
- usual sort of thing. In lab, I clustered 2-5 students about a focused
- analysis -- one group had "character," one had "point of view," and so on.
-
- I asked each group to create a collaborative document that would set forth
- their focused discoveries and would be ready to read about 2/3 through
- the class meeting (we meet for 75 minutes). Further, I asked
- students to copy this draft group document onto their own data disks
- for further solo work in the designated area of inquiry. The collaborative
- document and the solo document will become part of each student's
- course portfolio (for presentation at midsemester and at the end of the
- course).
-
- So here's what really happened:
-
- At first, there was a lot of anxiety, but within a few minutes, groups
- were working noisily and productively. I visited each group but pretty
- much kept my mouth shut except to insist that textual evidence for some
- of the wilder assertions be inserted right into the draft document.
-
- Students arranged tasks for themselves. People who could type fast assumed
- the role of scribe. Others, clustered around the pc, offered suggestions
- and jokes and jibes and textual evidence. Each group prepared a document
- for reading to the whole class. For each group's presentation, I offered
- several ways to evaluate the work (clarity, complexity, amount of evidence,
- and so forth). Some of the groups did fine work, and some didn't. By the
- end of class, and after our discussion of the relative merits of each group's
- analysis, I am sure that students had a feel for what kind of work
- was solid and what kind of work was superficial. Peer pressure may nudge
- some people into higher productivity -- I don't know yet.
-
- But during class, I saw people working, arguing, turning to the text
- instead of the professor for arbitration. I liked that. It didn't
- look like "class" and it didn't feel like "class," for which I am
- grateful and pleased. At the end of "class" time, students were busy
- at their individual pc's copying files and printing drafts and continuing
- to argue about some of the ideas raised in class.
-
- I would like to hear from others how they negotiated the change into
- a writing lab with stand-alone pc's.
-
- Rhoda Carroll
- Rhoda Carroll*Vermont College of Norwich University*Rhoda@Norwich.Bitnet
-