Posts Tagged ‘teaching’

Using twitter in class

October 4, 2014 4 comments

Yesterday I started my 3rd year language and gender module. It’s a module I enjoy teaching, but this year I’m adding to my workload and making (being forced to make?) big changes to the content and structure of the module, mainly because of the recent Moodle roll-over which broke almost all of my content from last year… It also dawned on me that I hadn’t really changed much of the content since inheriting the module nearly five years ago, and since I really didn’t want to teach another class on Helene Cixous and Donna Haraway, I had to roll up my sleeves and get stuck in with new lecture notes and seminar activities….

Beyond the changes I’m implementing to my teaching material, one of the big things that I’m trialling this year is using Twitter so that my students can hashtag (yes, it’s a verb now) interesting L&G material and share it with one another. This was inspired by a teaching talk I went to over the summer by Gary Wood, who teaches a module on syntax at Sheffield Uni. One of the things Gary does with his class is to set up a twitter account where students can ask questions, share materials, discuss ideas and so on, and by adopting this particular strategy, he has seen the pass rate for syntax climb up into the 90%, not to say anything about increasing student engagement.

Being a big user of twitter (and social media more generally) in my research and ‘outreach’ activities, it was a surprise to me that I hadn’t thought of using twitter in my teaching. I suppose part of it was the worry of it being too gimmicky and that my students wouldn’t take it up. But seeing I use it at conferences, for public communication and so on, it seems a bit daft to think that it wouldn’t be good enough for my students. So yesterday I set up a hashtag, started tweeting about a few things and had a couple of students follow me on my twitter handle. It’s far too early to tell whether there’s an impact on student enjoyment/engagement, and that will come out at the end of the module, but it’s an interesting experiment.

I also tentatively brought up the idea that students can tweet during classes… I’m not sure if that was a great idea, but the cat’s out the bag now….

The Social Linguist

Proposal to add Dizzee and Brand to new A-Level English Lit and Lang

Today, the OCR exam board announced some changes to the English Language and Literature A-level qualification, changes which have caused a bit of stir in media-land, including the Telegraph and the Guardian (nb. the articles themselves are relatively balanced, but it’s in the comments that things get feisty). The main change is to include a wider variety of texts in the curriculum; so texts by writers such as Blake, Dickinson, Orwell and Shakspeare will be studied alongside texts by writers and performers like Russell Brand, Dizzee Rascal, and Allie Brosh.

Of course, it’s important to say that these are simply proposals at the moment and they haven’t been agreed upon, so there might be further changes down the line. Nonetheless, these proposed changes have ignited a debate about the ‘value’ of Russell Brand’s testimony at a recent Commons home affairs select committee on drug addiction, Dizzee Rascal’s appearance on Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman, and Allie Brosh’s imaginative rendering of her life escapades in her blog, Hyperbole and a Half.

Some people ‘on the inside’ (that is, working in the Department for Education) have criticised the proposals, arguing that “This is exactly the kind of dumbing down we are trying to get rid of. They must be having a laugh if they think A-levels in Dizzee Rascal and Russell Brand are going to be let through”. Others, however, have praised these changes to the curriculum, pointing out that “The new A-level will introduce new approaches and scope for more creative writing, while offering teachers and students the flexibility to explore an extremely broad variety of styles, methodologies and genres”.

I think that it’s worthwhile exploring in more depth some of these positions, primarily because they represent two ideologically diametric stances, but for the moment, I just want to focus on what I think these changes actually entail.

The first thing to say is that the qualification is a qualification in English Language and Literature. That means that students primarily develop skills in English language and linguistics, and then apply these skills to a range of texts. Now, some of these texts will be the canonical classics like Shakespeare and so on, and students will likely examine English in its historical context, the impact writers like Shakespeare had on English, the Inkhorn Controversy, changes over time in English and so on. They might examine these texts from a literary perspective in terms of characterisation, meaning, thematic analysis etc etc, but that starts to move away from the purview of a linguisticĀ analysis. This is all great and good and I am totally on board with students reading and analysing these texts. Not only are they important points in the development of English but they are wonderful examples of literature and as such should be included in a course like this.

But since the qualification has at its heart English Language studies, it makes perfect sense that students examine contemporary texts as well, not as examples of classic literature, but rather as examples of language in action. As linguists, we don’t make appraisals about how good or bad a particular text is. Instead, we try to bring out the kinds of linguistic strategies and techniques that a writer (or speaker) utilises in the production of said text and to position this description within a broader social context. So looking at the Dizzee Rascal clip above, a linguist might examine not only his phonology and grammar and discuss this in relation to standard and non-standard linguistic markets, but also examine how persuasive his arguments are, what kind rhetorical strategies he uses, what his text tells us about language and race in the UK, how power relationship between Paxman and Rascal are encoded, how interruption and overlap are patterned throughout the interaction, and so on. These are all really important issues to examine and go beyond the ideology that because Dizzee Rascal is a hip-hop artist, we should just ignore any text in which he features.

Ultimately, giving students the skills to be able to analyse any text, regardless of its provenance, is a really important skill, and focusing purely on classic texts ignores the complexity of language that happens in every day situations. The OCR acknowledges this in their press release on the proposals: “The aim is for students to develop the skills to analyse any text, whether spoken or written, literary or non-literary, in the most appropriate way.

Analysing Rascal or Brand or Perry or Brosh or any other contemporary writer doesn’t meant the end of the UK as we know it. It doesn’t signal the death knell of a literary education. It doesn’t even represent a ‘dumbing down’ of students’ abilities or of the course material. If anything, focusing wholly on Orwell or Shakespeare or Blake or Wordsworth at the expense of other kinds of texts would simply hamstring students’ abilities to be able to transfer their skills to a variety of texts, would prevent them being able to understand the historical progression of English over time, and would make them think that the language that they listen to every day isn’t worth analysing. And it would be shameful if that happened.

The Social Linguist

Assessment week…

This week has been pretty manic since it was an entire week of assessments for my 2nd and 3rd year undergraduate students. The 2nd year module is Language and Social Identity and the 3rd year one is Varieties of English, and for the past few years, assessment 1 has been the production of a conference-style poster, analysing data the group has collected by themselves through one of the approaches we cover in the module (assessment 2 is the much more prosaic essay-based approach).

There’s at least two responses to the assessment brief when it gets handed out. The first an outrage against group-based assessment. A lot of students dislike group work because it means that other students can coast and get a good grade at the expense of other students’ work. I get around this by having each student write up a regular blog on the weekly meetings they’re supposed to have. I also get them to fill out a self-evaluation form (which can be incredibly revealing about a student’s sense of their strengths and weaknesses). But perhaps the easiest way I get around this is by giving students a mark for the poster element and then a mark for their presentation element. This at least keeps students on their toes that they have to do the work and can’t rely on others to help them get a passing grade. If the presentation is poor, it impacts on their overall mark for the assessment.

The second response is normally one of quiet excitement. I really don’t like prescribing students with a particular set of questions they have to answer and I’ve found that when students are left to their own devices, they can come up with some really fantastic projects that they’re enthusiastic and motivated about. Over the past few years, I’ve had presentations on the language of the Fukushima nuclear accident, on greeting structure in Starbucks, on banter and masculinity and a whole bunch of others, and because students are invested in the projects, they work more conscientiously on them.

It’s a whole bunch of work for the students and marking it is a bunch of work for me because I have to give feedback on the poster and the presentation element, read through the self-evaluation forms for each group member, and read through the blogs for each group member. One saving grace is that we record the presentations for our external examiner, so I can go through the tape and double check a statement a student made, give better feedback on their presentation skills and generally be more transparent about the marks that are awarded.

So that’s what I’ve been doing this week – feedback for eight groups in my 2nd year class and six groups in my 3rd year class. I’ve managed to finish the 2nd year work and I’ve set aside Monday for my 3rd years. Roll on the summer break…

What kind of non-standard assessment do others out there use?

The Social Linguist

Starting with a new class of students

January 28, 2012 2 comments

One of the things that I always get really stressed out about is starting teaching a new class. This semester, I’m teaching Varieties of English (3rd year), Language and Social Identity (2nd year) and Describing Language (1st year), and although these are modules I taught last year, my 2nd year class has a lot of students who haven’t taken a class with me before. It’s difficult to describe the feeling of a new batch of students staring at you intently, waiting for you to pass on sacred reams of knowledge into their brains. The biggest thing I feel is ‘I hope I don’t make an idiot of myself’, and thus far, I seem to have succeeded. But because education is dialogic, my main hope is that we all get on. Students seem to learn better when they’re enjoying themselves and feel relatively comfortable with the lecturer, and I try my best to facilitate this through various means (normally involving food as a bribe). I also want my students to know that they can come and speak with me about any problems they’re having with the material, and I especially discourage them from struggling through anything by themselves for too long. Students who have been with me for a while and have taken a few classes with me know this, but I’ve noticed that it can take some time for new students to get to the same place as my more established students.

All of this boils down to how you build a rapport with students. How do you go about it as a lecturer, or what worked when you were a student?

Categories: University life Tags: ,