technology + identity
October 12, 2008Individuals & embodiment
Related to this week’s examination of identity and technology, themes such as: “considering individuals as individuals” (Taylor, p. 226) and “virtual world as embodied place” pervaded much of the reading. On the one hand the articles stressed the need to remember that students do not fit neatly into categories while on the other hand we all have the connection to our bodies and our “humanness” in common.
Taylor’s discussion of body language in a networked classroom is so interesting because the lack of physical presence in online interaction is what we begin to miss. “Because a teacher cannot read minds and because students are more often silent than vocal when there is a problem, the ability to read faces, postures, tones and gestures can help one teach effectively” (p. 224). Here though, a student’s silence during a problem may be more likely in a face to face situation than online. So yes, the facial expressions are beneficial face-to-face but maybe students would feel better about approaching a professor without having to see the professor’s reaction (sometimes a confused or frustrated look from a professor can be really disheartening to an unsure student). On a different topic, Taylor notes that our virtual spaces are metaphors that strive to re-create an online body or material existence similar to our offline existence. Traditionally in the western philosophical tradition we try to separate our thoughts/mind/souls from our body but then when given a chance to experience a world online (like MMORGs) we still experience it through a digital “body” or avatar (at least in the more sophisticated virtual worlds)–we are still contained and by choice.
My relationship to much of the reading this week exists primarily through my experiences in DELTA (Distance Education & Learning Technology Applications). Really there hasn’t been too much overlap between the workshops & seminars I took in DELTA and the discussions we’ve had in 704. However, the Dunn & Dunn De Mers (2002) “Embracing Universal Design… in Web Space” and DELTA’s “508 Accessibility” workshop, covered a lot of the same material – the importance of making webpages accessible to those with disabilities and some of the most common ways to go about doing so. For anyone who is not familiar with the US Rehabilitation Act guidelines, this is one DELTA course I would suggest taking. Some of the most interesting tools they introduced us to were sites that allowed you to hear what a web page would sound like if a screen reader like JAWS were used to render the page:
Accessibile IT @ NC State
http://ncsu.edu/it/access/webaccess/bestpract.php
WAVE: a free web accessibility evaluation tool (this is actually kind of fun to test your webpages with)
http://wave.webaim.org/
Audio example of screen reader
http://www.websavvy-access.org/resources/formexample.php
Thoughts on “Social Networking in Plain English” & Bronwyn Williams
I think one of the things we often forget to acknowledge is that a lot of colleagues and people who are in position to connect us to jobs still may not use social networking sites. Also, if everyone does eventually use social networking sites to make connections, how much of an endorsement is that connection if the connecting thread has many many nodes of separation? Also, I’m not sure if I’m convinced by Williams (2008) argument that we need to fully understand how our students use the social networking genres to teach in the classroom. It seems that the tendency would be to try and get them to change how they are using the medium – like Williams’ example with the “about me” section. I could definitely see myself suggesting, “hey as a class activity let’s try to write something really revealing and interesting about yourselves for the ‘about me’ section of your MySpace page”. This seems like I would try to fully understand how they use the social networking site in order to then convince them to change.
I agree with you that some students may simply feel more comfortable asking a professor questions online versus face to face. I know that when I was an undergraduate it was awkward sometimes to sit across from a professor who was reading my paper. We would sit in silence as he read my work and I would try to examine his facial expressions to get an idea of what he was thinking. Whenever I teach I tell my students that they are more than welcome to speak with me face to face, but that if they are uncomfortable doing so that they do have the option of e-mailing me. I even joke about writing an anonymous note and leaving it on the desk for me to read when I come into class. No one has taken me up on that yet, but I certainly have had students who clearly preferred to e-mail their questions/concerns than to address them in person.
Yeah, I’m right there with you on the social networking points. I can say that I have seen practically every single one of my students using facebook at some point during class. I don’t really care, but I like to catch them off guard with quick 180 degree spins and whatnot. Anyway, since we are in a writing class and these students are actively using this particular interface, then it makes sense to do some integration of that interface into classtime rather than doing all of our writing in a word processor. Haven’t tried this type of assignment yet, but I think it could be interesting.
A good anecdote to go along with what you’re saying about the face-to-face interactions: I have had several students who actually admitted to me that they were afraid at the beginning of a class to come ask me questions (it wasn’t acceptable in the classes in their major, apparently – this changed by the end of class but back to the point). Most of these students DID feel comfortable asking me questions via email, however, and it was through that email interaction that I assured them that I wasn’t some monster that was going to attack them and so they eventually did come see me during office hours. But I had to build trust via online mediums before that could happen.