Okay, so I did comment on Alicia and Tara's posts but I did so with the anticipation that we would be discussing more in class, not sure why I thought that. Anyhow.
In Reading Tara's paper I was really interested in what she said about the importance of breaking Shakespeare into bits - maybe not reading his whole plays but breaking them down into smaller units. I think this is a great approach to teaching because it engages students more proficiently and makes the information more digestible for the average reader. In discussing this idea with Dr. Burton he brought up an idea of John Donne's. He explained that when gold is in brick form it only has potential value but when it is broken up into coins it becomes of great worth because it is exchangeable, a form of currency. I think the same idea applies to Shakespeare's works. Trying to read his complete works is like trying to read the dictionary but when you break it into sonnets, sections of plays, and even the critical work of Shakespeare it becomes digestible. The idea of universality that I discussed in my paper plays into this because it is that global access to Shakespearean commentary that will help teachers make their lessons "bite-size" this is a perfect bridge into Alicia's paper because...
In order to get those bite-size pieces teachers must be willing to incorporate technology in their teaching approach. By sending their students to the internet before they send them to the text they place the students in a comfortable environment where they have control of their learning and can pursue their own interests concerning the plays they choose to study. The vast expanse of Shakespearean commentary online, I think, will prove crucial to successful studies. I commented on Alicia's post that if teachers don't bring technology into the classroom, students will, and we all know it. I read a rate my professor review of a teacher that said "great guy, really smart, but come to class prepared with a laptop to browse the internet or play solitaire." The dynamics of university class rooms are changing whether it is the teachers or the students that initiate it. The benefit of the teachers initiating it is that they maintain control of their class rooms. Given all this information though I can't help but feel obligated to do something with it. I don't know if we're allowed to do our own sub-projects beneath our big final project but if we are..here are a couple suggestions.
The first thing I thought of doing is creating a YouTube video with clips of students (selected randomly throughout BYU campus or from our own classroom) explaining what they expect from their professors (in class discussions, fairness, exciting classes, etc), and just sort of explaining how they want to be taught and engaged in class. I feel like we're at a point where all the professors are telling each other how to teach but what if, as students, we told them exactly what we want/need from them? Dr. B...from your standpoint, would it be helpful if your students told you what they wanted? I guess my thought process is that if professors could hear us saying that we want this sort of switch and that we learn best through this medium, that maybe they'd see more value in it. So that's thought one.
Thought two is to compile a how-to guide for teachers who are stuck in the margins and feel that traditional and technological teaching sit as polar opposites. We could help them ease into a new type of teaching and explain the benefits this teaching will have for their students. Many teachers (I think) resist this change because they would have to surrender some classroom control to make the change. Our guide would ideally address their anxieties and help them to move in a direction that will help their students.
In Reading Tara's paper I was really interested in what she said about the importance of breaking Shakespeare into bits - maybe not reading his whole plays but breaking them down into smaller units. I think this is a great approach to teaching because it engages students more proficiently and makes the information more digestible for the average reader. In discussing this idea with Dr. Burton he brought up an idea of John Donne's. He explained that when gold is in brick form it only has potential value but when it is broken up into coins it becomes of great worth because it is exchangeable, a form of currency. I think the same idea applies to Shakespeare's works. Trying to read his complete works is like trying to read the dictionary but when you break it into sonnets, sections of plays, and even the critical work of Shakespeare it becomes digestible. The idea of universality that I discussed in my paper plays into this because it is that global access to Shakespearean commentary that will help teachers make their lessons "bite-size" this is a perfect bridge into Alicia's paper because...
In order to get those bite-size pieces teachers must be willing to incorporate technology in their teaching approach. By sending their students to the internet before they send them to the text they place the students in a comfortable environment where they have control of their learning and can pursue their own interests concerning the plays they choose to study. The vast expanse of Shakespearean commentary online, I think, will prove crucial to successful studies. I commented on Alicia's post that if teachers don't bring technology into the classroom, students will, and we all know it. I read a rate my professor review of a teacher that said "great guy, really smart, but come to class prepared with a laptop to browse the internet or play solitaire." The dynamics of university class rooms are changing whether it is the teachers or the students that initiate it. The benefit of the teachers initiating it is that they maintain control of their class rooms. Given all this information though I can't help but feel obligated to do something with it. I don't know if we're allowed to do our own sub-projects beneath our big final project but if we are..here are a couple suggestions.
The first thing I thought of doing is creating a YouTube video with clips of students (selected randomly throughout BYU campus or from our own classroom) explaining what they expect from their professors (in class discussions, fairness, exciting classes, etc), and just sort of explaining how they want to be taught and engaged in class. I feel like we're at a point where all the professors are telling each other how to teach but what if, as students, we told them exactly what we want/need from them? Dr. B...from your standpoint, would it be helpful if your students told you what they wanted? I guess my thought process is that if professors could hear us saying that we want this sort of switch and that we learn best through this medium, that maybe they'd see more value in it. So that's thought one.
Thought two is to compile a how-to guide for teachers who are stuck in the margins and feel that traditional and technological teaching sit as polar opposites. We could help them ease into a new type of teaching and explain the benefits this teaching will have for their students. Many teachers (I think) resist this change because they would have to surrender some classroom control to make the change. Our guide would ideally address their anxieties and help them to move in a direction that will help their students.
I think that is a cool idea. :) I think it would be really interesting and grab teacher attention if we got productive student comments.
ReplyDeleteIn my paper interview, Dr. Burton and I discussed how teachers are more willing to integrate technology if we point out how technology will fix some already existing problems in the classroom. I think many teachers hesitate with technology because of their own literacy within it and they find it optional/ not too beneficial. So we can integrate the current realities of a classroom situation and the technological advances/ helps.