Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Macbeth 1.0 v.s. 2.0





Initially I couldn’t conceive of using technology to enhance my Macbeth lesson plan because it, as with Shakespeare teaching in general, emphasizes the transformation of the page’s word into stage actions. So given that my lesson primarily asked students to perform their knowledge in class, I didn’t want technology to disrupt this part of my lesson because I could not think of a web tool to facilitate this learning. Can anyone think of a web 2.0 tool I could have used? Suggestions are welcome. Therefore if one compares my original and revised lesson plans, you will notice that second half the lesson remains unchanged.

However, for the first half I decided to use Today’s Meet platform to facilitate film viewings and review discussions. I liked it because the platform demands a very low threshold of expertise and time investment. Participants don’t need to watch tutorials and sign up is easy. If students are comfortable tweeting or texting, they will easily use this tool. Instant Gratification! Second, I liked that it because it mimicked the review conversation already planned in my lesson with some value added benefits. In my original lesson, the teacher asked the questions and drove the conversations whereas in the revised lesson, the platform explicitly demands that students participate in the conversation through the texting medium that they’re comfortable in. The platform, as with other Web 2.0 tools, makes the brainstorming, questioning and formative clarification process that happens in all classes more deliberate for teachers and students. Although this was a surprise to me, it shouldn’t have been given that one of the key features of Web 2.0 is its participatory and collaborative nature.

The web tool also allowed me to add a media studies component to my specific expectations (creating media texts 3.1, 3.2). Rather than merely teaching through the web tool, this curriculum strand asks students to think about how different tools suite different purposes, audiences and conventions (teaching about the web tool) in the same way this lesson redesign assignment asked us to find different web tools to suit our teaching needs. The platform’s use could also open up a class discussion to the limits and benefits of expressing oneself within 140 characters and other critical literacy questions about technology.

1 comment:

  1. Hi All,
    After yesterday's class, I would like to steal Danika's suggestion for students to adopt aliases/code name during the Today's Meet/ backchanneling exercise discussed in paragraph two. I agree that the brief anonymity would give reluctant speakers a chance to speak more freely.Of course they would still be accountable because they would give me/us their aliases at the end of the class, as Danika did with hers.

    ReplyDelete