What Writing Students Get From the Net: Using Synchronous Communication
to Develop Writerly Skills
Students' Responses to the Gendered Language Unit
Overall, student comments show their responsiveness to all four of the characteristics
of synchronous communication. The change of venue contributed to students'
engagement with the discussions, the immediate response to input helped students
see how their language use impacts others' perceptions, and the structure of the
chats as "experiments" helped students test their hypotheses, sometimes with results
that surprised them.
The responses below are all from journal entries written soon after
the first or second chat experiment, followed in some cases by my comments
User Anonymity
I felt at ease about what I had to say because I didn't have to
worry about what others thought about it. |
I could say things without worrying about how others looked at me. |
It gave those individuals who may be intimidated by others a chance
to say the things they needed to say. |
One of the primary benefits of user anonymity is exactly what students
have expressed here: students are more likely to participate, and participate
meaningfully, if they can feel somewhat removed from the scrutiny of their
peers. However, have students discuss these comments, and in particular
why students in a learning environment feel intimidated about learning.
Another productive discussion prompted by comments like these is to ask
students whether they think the improved discussion climate in the chat
classes will "carry over" to the face-to-face classes, and why/not.
Immediate Response to Input
I loved it. I had so much fun typing an impulsive thought,
and watch it appear on screen for the entire class to read and respond. |
A break from the classroom environment
I was so comfortable! I liked that I felt at home while I was in
class. |
I didn't have to wait for a teacher to call on me. I also didn't
have to compete to be called on first. ... I was a lot more engaged in
the class discussion. I think off-site class worked for most people because
the people speaking weren't the center of attention. |
It's something different from the everyday routine and it engages
every student in the discussions. |
Of course, doing something just because it's fun isn't always the best
pedagogy, but in this case students' sense of "fun" translated directly,
in most cases, to more input and more engagement in the discussion. And,
since the experiments depended on having a lot of text to analyze, increased
participation in discussion directly benefits the students.
Real-life experiments
No one knew I was a female which was very interesting. I told
what I thought about the articles and people believed it sounded like a
male's opinion. |
It was cool trying to figure out who each color was and if they
were a guy or girl. I found it pretty hard for awhile until there
was some dead giveaways. If we had talked about an issue neutral
to guys and girls than I think it would have been very hard to see who
was who. |
When Julie revealed that she was Cerise, some people were shocked,
just because they had a pre-formed stereotype of the types of responses
that could be expected of girls and boys. |
I was surprised by how wrong I was when you asked us to guess
people's identity. I did have a few right but there were many that
I had guessed wrong. |
One good thing about this chatroom was when nobody used their names
and we couldn't tell who was talking. It did prove an interesting
point. I guessed at least 7 or 8 peoples' sexes just by reading what
they said. |
Opportunity to test preconceptions
about society
I thought that it was fascinating to read responses from a "de-gendered"
classmate, as if that person was a third, unbiased sex. This way, people
were allowed to be more raw, without revealing themselves. I know that
I was probably a lot more abrupt then I would have been in a classroom.
That's probably because everyone was given an equal chance to state his
or her opinions as mildly or brutally as he or she wished. ... |