As a final assignment, we were asked to evaluate the format of this course as it was an online one using Skype and Gmail chat and most assignments were submitted through a blog. Here are my comments on the format:
The online lectures were a bit problematic because of internet connection issues. I think before the department can do this type of class, we have to be sure of a good connection. Also, instead of everyone in class having to be together in one place for the lectures, we can just activate an online conference so everyone can log on from where he/she is. The department’s computer and internet connection should be made open for those who don’t have their own internet chat capabilities at home. This way, the online lectures and meetings are not dependent on just one internet connection. I think this is how some online UK and Australia classes are conducted but I’m not sure how it works or whether it does work.
The reading groups were a lot of fun but I am not sure we executed them right. We learned from each other but maybe the output should be more concrete? I’m not really sure whether the discussions fulfilled their purpose. Or, since this was an online class, maybe we could have blogged more instead of meeting each time? I don’t know, really. I understand why the reading groups were put together but maybe the format needs to be tweaked some more.
The best and most ingenious part of the class’s format was the use of blogs (that was brilliant, Bea!). One, the blogs allowed us to share our ideas with everyone involved in the class. Second, they were essentially the output of independent study (which is how I view graduate studies so I liked it very much). Third, we could comment on each other’s postings and read whatever comments had been uploaded. When we would meet, we would talk about the comments posted on each other’s blogs and encourage each other. It was a very high-tech but personal way of sharing learning. We also got to know each other more. Fourth, I tend to be a bit shy about my ideas and I get scared about sharing them. Posting them on a blog was very zen... let go, little grasshopper! This experience was amazing; I would not mind going through it again.
Although this does not have anything to do with the class’s format, I just have to say that the materials were wonderful (excellent choices, Bea!). There was so much to think about and say that my only regret with this class is that it was too short. Bea, you are a wonderful teacher and mentor.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Ph.D Blog Assignment 8: Language Research and the Transformation of Me
I must admit that this class took me by surprise. I expected it to be on general theories on language policy and practice, with some input on teacher education and classroom policies. What I did not expect was that it would be on critically thinking about language and the unspoken policies and ideologies that underlie the way the world thinks about language. That made the class very exciting and controversial, which I loved a lot (great job, Bea, Tops!).
Several things struck me. First, Canagarajah’s critical ethnography. Ethnography is the last thing I ever expected would interest me. I think I just associate it too much with the fear of being stuck in a far away place with no bathroom. However, what interested me was the idea of language policy from below. An ethnographer is in the position to ask people what language policies and practices they think they need. Also, he/she can stay with the target community long enough to see how these language policies and practices are working out and what changes are needed. I think this is a step toward a linguistics that has a stronger sense of social justice. This is a project I should seriously consider later on.
Second, and this is related to the first, there is a lot of critical work that can be done through the classroom while talking to and observing teachers and students. I tend to associate classroom research with rather boring findings of the types that detail typologies of language use and other less exciting issues. However, the essays discussed in class which reported findings taken from classroom research were very sexy! These pieces of research located the classroom within issues of power, resistance, and understanding what happens when teachers and students are prescribed certain materials with profound hidden political implications. I especially liked Lin’s and Martin’s study on textbooks and Topsie’s forthcoming study on norms.
Third, and this is the most important, since this class stressed questioning everything, it changed the way I think. Through our exercises, I had to re-think my own work, my own view of language, and even my own understanding of what critical thinking means. At the very least, I learned that there is more than one way of viewing something and once one looks at something in another way, all sorts of other possibilities open. I must remember this when I finally write my dissertation.
Finally, I learned a certain fearlessness from this class. All the essays we read were different in the sense that they look at old things in new ways. Doing that is never easy and is a bit frightening. I take with me the courage to explore new things to the full.
Several things struck me. First, Canagarajah’s critical ethnography. Ethnography is the last thing I ever expected would interest me. I think I just associate it too much with the fear of being stuck in a far away place with no bathroom. However, what interested me was the idea of language policy from below. An ethnographer is in the position to ask people what language policies and practices they think they need. Also, he/she can stay with the target community long enough to see how these language policies and practices are working out and what changes are needed. I think this is a step toward a linguistics that has a stronger sense of social justice. This is a project I should seriously consider later on.
Second, and this is related to the first, there is a lot of critical work that can be done through the classroom while talking to and observing teachers and students. I tend to associate classroom research with rather boring findings of the types that detail typologies of language use and other less exciting issues. However, the essays discussed in class which reported findings taken from classroom research were very sexy! These pieces of research located the classroom within issues of power, resistance, and understanding what happens when teachers and students are prescribed certain materials with profound hidden political implications. I especially liked Lin’s and Martin’s study on textbooks and Topsie’s forthcoming study on norms.
Third, and this is the most important, since this class stressed questioning everything, it changed the way I think. Through our exercises, I had to re-think my own work, my own view of language, and even my own understanding of what critical thinking means. At the very least, I learned that there is more than one way of viewing something and once one looks at something in another way, all sorts of other possibilities open. I must remember this when I finally write my dissertation.
Finally, I learned a certain fearlessness from this class. All the essays we read were different in the sense that they look at old things in new ways. Doing that is never easy and is a bit frightening. I take with me the courage to explore new things to the full.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
