You may be asking yourself “what questions?”, so let me show you.
This is the story of 1 class, 2 sections, 21 undergraduates, 2 graduate students, 6 grant applications, 2 national conferences, 1 digital book, 1 special issue of a digital journal, 13 co-authors, 1 digital tenure portfolio, and 1 faculty member trying to stay sane under the conditions of our changing educational setting…
…. knowing that students have been wondering – for as long as we have, and certainly longer than the duration of this 3-day C&W conference – how our pedagogies can possibly stay relevant when we already know that a single form of academic discourse isn’t possible and when digital media production allows for so much more.
Multimodal Composition class Two weeks before school started… Become “student-experts” in the field through research, reading, and rhetorical analysis Write grants to attend Watson conference collecting digital assets composition of digital media texts write submission proposal to the book collection Before going to conference, imagine what the students thought about their audience from reading scholarship about multimodality, sample webtexts in online journals, and the conference program….
After their initial research but before the conference, students asked these questions: To test me (as one of their potential audiences) : they asked how old Watson conference people were and whether they’d would know, as an example, what “Sex and the City” was so they could use a clip of it in their projects. What students really wanted to know was how do teachers reconcile what they don’t know with what they think they know? Iow, how would teachers keep up?
Research questions Editors, Debra Journet, Cheryl E. Ball, Ryan Trauman I wanted to bring in these RQs to my classroom while also encouraging students to change or update these questions to answer them from their perspectives.
How my own RQs dovetail with both the Watson call and changed somewhat because of the students questions.
So then how do I provide expertise for students in digital scholarship while allowing them a space – which is undoubtedly risky – to produce digital scholarship from their perspective that will still reach an audience of teachers. Iow, how can students talk back to us?
And talk back they did.
Twitter webtext Sustainability of needing to archive a dynamic website for publication and the unsustainability of teaching photoshop, dreamweaver, etc., in an elective and having students still wanting to do it on their own. (Sophie?)
Editorial feedback – when the students and I work together to determine what they value form digital media texts, what the field values in digital media texts (from peer-reivew critieria), then grading in the class becomes a matter of peer-reviewing their work using the same peer-review criteria we use in our own work: Participates in current disciplinary conversations Presents something new/different Suits readers of publication medium Form enacts content Shows innovation/creativity
What will the outcomes of this year-long project be? What questions do we need to continue to ask ourselves?
So how do we answer these questions? **WE** don’t – our students, particularly our undergraduate students, have to answer these for and with us. But we have to make the space to bring our own research into the classroom and have them work with us, even lead us.
When we ask ourselves these questions, what will our answers be?: Sustainable teaching and learning through co-directed undergraduate and faculty scholarship Dr. Cheryl E. Ball, Computers & Writing 2009