FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W215252325> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W215252325 abstract "A pilot program at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI), called the Twenty-First Century Citizen Scholars, explores and evaluates the pedagogy of computer conferencing in writing-across-the-curriculum ani makes sure of equal access by students. The purpose of the project is to build intellectual coherence, reduce conflict in students' roles as they balance the demands of family, work, and studies, and create a community fur urban commuters by using computer telecommunications. The teacher models the etiquette of the bulletin board, establishing it as a supportive place. Conference members are classmates and teacher. The project, after 4 semesters of operation, has served 8 classes, over 80 students, ranging from introductory classes to upper-division and graduate courses. All students have the necessary equipment at home, on loan necessary. The program's philosophy defines students as bringing assets of experience and commitment to the learning process, rather than deficits that must be compensated for. The program has achieved the following benefits: students explore new ideas and personal experience that might seem digressions in class, but which lead to broader syntheses and intellectual coherence; all students participate; students take on many insturctional functions as they become active, empowered learners; faculty experience increased involvement with students and with each other; students turn intellectual community into action; and students become familiar with advanced technology useful for their futures. (Sixteen references and an appendix containing selections from a TCCS Bulletin Board are attached.) (SR) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EARS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** 21ST-CENTURY CITIZEN SCHOLARS: TESTING WHAT IS POSSIBLE AND DESIRABLE Helen J. Schwartz Department of English Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis 425 University Blvd. Indianapolis, IN 46202 Bitnet: IBGL100@INDYCMS May 24, 1991 Computers and Writing Conference Biloxi, Mississippi PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC). RTP1DV AVAII ADI C U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office ol Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) )11his document has been reproduced as eceived from the person o. organization originating it r Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality Points of view or opinions stated in Ms docu mint do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy Computer conferencing is growing in use in government and business, in professional groups, in classrooms and on dial-in systems open to the public such as Compuserve and Prodigy. A community bulletin board, Freenet, started in Cleveland to widen community involvement with computer communication, has inspired similar systems in service or in planning stages at over 15 cities around the world. People who would be unable to converse because of difficulties in time or place or social milieu find on electronic bulletin boards a common place for discussion. Why should we be interested in this phenomenon in generale and why should I take your time describing one program in particular, the 21st Century Citizen Scholars Project at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI)? This pilot program explores and evaluates the pedagogy of computer conferencing in writingacross-the-curriculum and makes sure of equal accese by loaning students any computer equipment needed. To sex a phenomenon in three dimensions, ideologically, James Berlin suggests that we look at exists, is possible, and is desirable. Cindy Selfe and colleagues have led the way in this exploration, reviewing the research on computer conferences and setting up a research agenda to test claims: is desirable against exists. It is important to test claims about the medium in different settings to see whether we can use it to create is desirable, and so the human role and responsibilities are in using the medium. Hawisher and Selfe warn us not to confuse the possibilities of a computer medium with its realities. Description and research show tha JekyllHyde nature of computer conferencing: Kiesler et al. suggest that, in an experimental situation, the medium hardens people in opinions and makes consensus harder to reach. Participants in an open-access bulletin board on the Middle East at Purdue University are reported to react to suggested actions by showing how either the Israelis or Palestinians will keep the suggestion from working. Adherents have seen the possibility that the lack of visual cues to status could make computer conferences a place for better collaboration and more egalitarian participation (reviewed in Selfe and Meyer), especially pseudonyms were used. Yet on Megabyte University, a computer conference of teachers of writing, gender and status influenced participation with men and high-status participants dominating (our of 33 participants), even when they used pseudonyms (Self. and Meyer). At one large public university, a writing class that used a bulletin board with pseudonyms and the instructor restricted to read-only status ganged up on one foreignborn student, taunting her with sexist slurs in the four days between the board was started and the class next met (Janangelo). Yet students in firstyear writing classes (using real names) at the University of Michigan are reported to have built close ties and overcome cultural barriers (Shriner and Rice), and at Michigan Tech, a small graduate class showed no significant differences according to gender or status with or without pseudonyms (Selfe, Pellar-Kosbar and Meyer). Peter Elbow talks about the need for believing as well as doubting. Believing causes us to think what if and often leads to action. Doubting often involves analysis, giving us valuable questions to test with. Believing inspires us to change the desirable into the possible. Doubting enables us to see exists is really desirable. As a review of anecdote and research has revealed, clearly the medium of computer conferencing alone does not create collaboration and egalitarian joy. What then are the important variables? I would like to highlight several that I feel are especially important in evaluating studies, and then I'd like to apply these to the 212t Century Citizen Scholars Project as an example alid, I hope, an incentive to belief and emulation. 1. What is the purpose of the conference and is its goal? With the current emphasis on situating rhetoric in its social context, we need to frame analysis with this important variable--or at least describe it ist I. it information transfer? emotional support? revision of knowledge structures? reaching consensus? or some combination? What norms, rules, etiquette govern or model the way people participate, and sanctions enforce these rules? If a teacher has students use pennames to encourage honest response to drafts uploaded to a bulletin board, should we be surprised students are vicious in their attacks? Is participation entirely voluntary? does it cost anything? Is it part of a course requirement (as in the graduate course at Michigan Tech and for 21CCS) or is the course primarily delivered via computer (as with some classes described by Hiltz and in Herasim)? Is there a moderator who models behavior (as in 21CCS) or does the etiquette emerge, perhaps based on usuaL patterns of conversational style and dominance? Does a moderator or teacher note participants' usage and is this element of power known to participants? Is membership controlled by the moderator? limited or open? What behavior merits deletion from the list? 2. What is the relationship among conference members? What responsibilities do they have to each other? What can they get from each other--in help and in harm? Are they in the same class and likely to be able to recognize a writer from clues other than a name? Are they feuding neighbors? Are they personal strangers but in the same field? 3. How well-defined is the discourse community and how advanced are the conference participants? In my experience, advanced students in a discipline need less leading and can set or change the direction of discueaion, whereas younger or less experienced participants profit from a defined assignment. For this reason, K-12 teachers recommend against a pen-pal approach and for a clearly defined problem and goal" @default.
• W215252325 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W215252325 creator A5063928615 @default.
• W215252325 date "1991-05-24" @default.
• W215252325 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W215252325 title "21st-Century Citizen Scholars: Testing What Is Possible and Desirable." @default.
• W215252325 hasPublicationYear "1991" @default.
• W215252325 type Work @default.
• W215252325 sameAs 215252325 @default.
• W215252325 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W215252325 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W215252325 hasAuthorship W215252325A5063928615 @default.
• W215252325 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W215252325 hasConcept C197352329 @default.
• W215252325 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W215252325 hasConcept C59822182 @default.
• W215252325 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W215252325 hasConceptScore W215252325C17744445 @default.
• W215252325 hasConceptScore W215252325C197352329 @default.
• W215252325 hasConceptScore W215252325C41008148 @default.
• W215252325 hasConceptScore W215252325C59822182 @default.
• W215252325 hasConceptScore W215252325C86803240 @default.
• W215252325 hasLocation W2152523251 @default.
• W215252325 hasOpenAccess W215252325 @default.
• W215252325 hasPrimaryLocation W2152523251 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W1499048129 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W1526029332 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W1547541475 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W1596191187 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W1596441353 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W1994992226 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2007733733 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2061175071 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2067446822 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2076829881 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2086437404 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2107005507 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2112788800 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2116028904 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2120264041 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2139559561 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W2149931922 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W247226962 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W290304707 @default.
• W215252325 hasRelatedWork W294835569 @default.
• W215252325 isParatext "false" @default.
• W215252325 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W215252325 magId "215252325" @default.
• W215252325 workType "article" @default.