Link #1: From Task 2
May 27, in response to Lucy’s Post: Does Language Shape the Way we Think?
Hi Lucy,
The quote you chose from Dr. Boroditsky, “When you teach people to talk a new way, you teach them to think a new way as well…language has a causal power. You can change how people think by changing how they talk.” [18:26], resonated with me too. As a vice principal/classroom teacher, I see firsthand the impact of fostering a growth mindset in students. Dr. Boroditsky’s insight underscores the transformative power of language, which aligns perfectly with our educational goals.
When we encourage students to use positive and constructive language, we help them develop resilience and a love for learning. Dr. Boroditsky’s emphasis on the causal power of language highlights the crucial role educators play in guiding students to view challenges as opportunities for growth. By teaching them to speak in a way that reflects optimism and perseverance, we equip them with the tools to think more positively and approach their education with confidence.
You’ve articulated this connection beautifully, reinforcing how vital it is for educators to model and teach positive communication in the classroom. This approach not only enhances their academic performance but also fosters a lifelong growth mindset.
How do you think we can further implement Dr. Boroditsky’s ideas in our daily interactions with students to reinforce a growth mindset even more effectively?
Reflection
From Lucy’s reflection, I have learned the profound connection between language and personal identity, as well as the intricate ways in which language shapes our perceptions and interactions within different cultural contexts. Her insights into the philosophical and psychological aspects of language have broadened my understanding of the individual experiences of multilingual speakers. This has deepened my appreciation for the diversity of perspectives within our school community and underscored the importance of fostering an environment that values and respects these varied linguistic backgrounds. Lucy’s perspective has inspired me to consider more deeply how language can influence not just communication, but also empathy and cultural sensitivity in our educational practices.
Link #2: Task 3
June 10, in response to April’s post, Voice to Text
Hi April,
Thanks for sharing your story and reflection. I have read through of our classmates stories and reflection and seeing similar responses regarding punctuation; having to say ‘period’ , ‘comma’, doesn’t make sense when sharing an oral story. Did you start with that in your story, as I see that there are commas and periods?
I like how you point our that listening to an oral story takes much longer than reading a written one – something that I hadn’t considered before. This may have to do with the story teller, reading the audience, pausing for effect, etc. What is your thought on this?
April’s reply on July 5, have me further reflect on the week’s readings in a July 8th response:
Hi April,
Your thoughts on using the voice-to-text feature and listening to audio stories remind me of what Walter J. Ong talks about in his book Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. In Chapter 1, Ong dives into the differences between oral and written communication, and how each shapes our understanding and interaction with language.
He mentions that oral communication relies a lot on patterns, rhythm, and repetition, making it more about the performance and the communal experience. This fits with what you said about the pauses, different tempos, and variations in audio recordings. These elements add to the storytelling but can make listening take longer than reading.
Your preference for reading over listening might be because, as Ong notes, writing allows for more introspection and focus. Reading can be a more controlled and deliberate way to consume information, which could be why you find it better for concentration and productivity.
I get where you’re coming from with audiobooks and podcasts. I believe they can be great for multitasking and are often engaging, depending on the narrator. But I also find myself losing focus if I’m not fully tuned in. For more educational purposes (like this course) watching and listening to YouTube video’s, I like the feature of being able to increase the playback speed (I find 1.25 a good fit), however I will admit to using the closed caption feature so that I can also read the text. When using audio component, be it audiobook, podcast or YouTube, I find it trickier if I am going to quote or make notes on any of the work, as it takes more time to document it. That said, for casual or leisurely listening, they can be a nice change from traditional reading.
Reflection
The exchange between myself and April has deepened my understanding of the complexities and nuances involved in oral versus written communication. April’s reflections, supported by Ong’s theoretical framework, provide a comprehensive perspective that enriches our collective exploration of this topic. This conversation underscores the importance of adaptability and mindfulness in choosing the most effective mode of communication for different contexts and purposes.
Reference:
Ong, W.J. (2002). Chapter 1: The orality of language.Links to an external site. In Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word (pp. 5-16). Routledge. (Original work published 1982).
Link #3: Task 4
June 9, in response to Shannon’s post, Manual Scripts and Potato Printing
Hi Shannon,
Your comment about your students often writing in-person, paper-based exams and shaking out their hands in discomfort made me think. I understand that many of them might not be used to writing by hand, yet they have to do so during exams, forcing them to use unfamiliar muscles. I wonder how this affects their exam performance. Would their outcomes differ if they were allowed to use a computer? Not just because of the physical discomfort, but if typing is their preferred and more efficient method, could taking the exam on a device lead to better results than handwriting?
Your comment, “I find writing by hand more relaxing. I feel more grounded and at peace when writing by hand, perhaps because it is slower so it feels calmer, or perhaps because I associate typing with work and school,” resonated with me. I couldn’t agree more. Handwriting fosters a more intimate connection with the text, making the writing process more personal and meaningful.
Playing devil’s advocate, while the ease of editing digital text is convenient, it can also lead to over-editing. The constant ability to revise can result in excessive time spent tweaking and adjusting, potentially leading to perfectionism and procrastination (in my case, procrastination). Handwriting, with its more permanent nature, encourages us to think carefully before committing words to paper, leading to more intentional and focused writing. For example, if I need to have a difficult conversation, I am more likely to handwrite a script beforehand rather than type it out. What about you?
Led to a reply by Shannon:
It’s interesting that you bring up the ‘permanent nature’ of writing and equate handwriting as the more permanent mode. I just commented on Lachelle’s blog (in response to this task – I’ll provide the link down below) and Lachelle brought up the fact that hand-written work on paper is less permanent than computer-written work as computer-written work can be easily reproduced and saved in many places. Hand-written work on the other hand, is often written in one place (e.g. on one piece of paper) and if that paper is destroyed, the work is lost. Does this change your perspective on the ‘permanency’ of handwriting vs. mechanized writing?
Reflection: I originally had forgotten about this comment until Week 8, when we were listening to Dr. Abby Smith Rumsey. I pondered the idea of permanency vs. authenticity vs. preservation and how it relates to handwriting and digitized writing. While it’s true that digitized texts offer advantages in terms of reproducibility and distributed storage, as Lachelle pointed out, Rumsey’s perspective highlights some crucial aspects of permanency that favour handwritten or physical texts.
Rumsey emphasizes that written texts on stable media like archival paper or stone can endure for centuries or even millennia without active intervention. This longevity contrasts with digitized texts, which face challenges of technological obsolescence and require ongoing maintenance to remain accessible. Handwritten texts provide a tangible record that is difficult to alter without detection. While digitized texts can employ security measures like encryption and blockchain, they may still be more vulnerable to undetected alterations. Physical texts often preserve contextual information through their material attributes, such as paper type and ink characteristics. This contextual information can be crucial for historical analysis and authentication. While digitized texts may lose some of this physical context, they can potentially capture and preserve more associated metadata.
Reflection
From Shannon’s and Lachelle’s posts, I’ve learned that the experience of writing, whether by hand or digitally, impacts both efficiency and personal connection. I recognize that handwritten exams can cause discomfort for students used to typing, suggesting that digital formats might improve performance by reducing physical strain. I also appreciate Shannon’s insight into how handwriting offers a more personal and grounding experience, which deepens my understanding of the emotional connection that handwritten texts can foster. On the other hand, Lachelle’s perspective on digital texts being more easily reproducible and stored challenges my view of handwriting as more permanent. I now see that while digital texts provide significant advantages in terms of accessibility and distribution, they face challenges with technological obsolescence. Dr. Abby Smith Rumsey’s point about the longevity and contextual richness of physical texts further underscores that handwritten documents can endure and preserve historical details in ways that digital texts might not fully capture. Overall, I understand that while digital texts are practical and versatile, handwritten texts offer unique value in personal engagement and historical preservation.
Link #4: Task 5
July 8, in response to Brie’s post, Twine Task
Hi Brie,
I really appreciated your twine for it’s humour and how you integrated the weekly readings into your work.
I notice in your reflection that you used a pen and paper to draft out your thinking and brainstorming which gives a great visual of the non-linear context of hypertexts. I was curious if you thought about using a digital format for mapping your ideas out, or if you automatically went to pen and paper.
What really resonated with me was your point, “Would the affordances of deep linking and parallel documents change how you collect, consume, and create information (Nelson, 1999)? Or is this concept an idealistic one that would crumble in the face of the chaos of emerging content of the scale of the internet in 2024?
It made me think of the proverbial ‘going down the rabbit hole’ of the internet, which could have two different outcomes: to getting deep into something, or ending up somewhere strange (or some strange combination of the two). Which is what I think Matt was getting at in his response to your your post; “This reflects a current conflict in pedagogy. One the one hand, as a teacher I want to provide opportunities for students to explore whatever paths they are interested in to further develop this skills and knowledge… On the other hand, I’m limited by time and curricular constraints, so if I want my students to learn how to balance chemical reactions, rather than a non-linear medium such as hypertext where students can “wander off the path.”
Matt asks, “Would you also say that there are some things that non-linear mediums are better for, but for other things linear text is the way to go? Or, is that an anachronistic way of thinking and that we should just fully embrace non-linear text?”
I believe the choice between linear and non-linear mediums should be guided by the context and the specific goals of the task at hand. I think embracing non-linear text doesn’t mean abandoning linear text; instead, I see it as recognizing when each medium is most effective and leveraging their unique advantages accordingly. In my view, this balanced approach can mitigate the potential chaos of the vast and emerging content on the internet, allowing us to harness the strengths of both mediums for optimal learning and information consumption.
Link #5: From Task 7
July 8, in response to Steph’s post: Mode Bending
Hi Steph,
I wanted to follow-up on a comment that you left on my page, but wasn’t sure if you get a notice that I responded. So thought here, might be a good option:
Thanks, Steph, for taking the time to watch my videos and leaving a response. This was probably my most favourite task in terms of creativity. I probably wouldn’t have thought of it, if it hadn’t been for my colleague recently using the the ChatterPix app with her class. I definitely think this is a great way to teach perspective but also engaging for the students.
After reading your post, I feel we had a similar approach, in that we tried to incorporate a different perspective. For example, your stated that you would:
~ “Ask my family to select an item they believe represents me and explain why.” Adding their perspective.
~ “Then reflect on their choices and consider what that reveals about me and the texts and/or literacies I value. ”
Perspective plays a crucial role in the development of multiliteracies, for example:
Enhancing Understanding: By considering multiple perspectives, learners can gain a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of texts and contexts. Dobson and Willinsky (2009) emphasize the necessity of digital literacy in navigating the complexities of contemporary information society, where different perspectives must be understood and synthesized.
Encouraging Critical Thinking: Perspective-taking encourages learners to think critically about the content they engage with. The New London Group (1996) highlights the role of multiliteracies in fostering critical awareness. By examining how different perspectives influence meaning, learners can develop critical thinking skills that are essential for interpreting and evaluating information.
Incorporating different perspectives is not just a method to engage students but a vital approach to nurturing essential skills in today’s digital age. By fostering an environment where students can explore and reflect on various viewpoints, we equip them with the ability to critically analyze and understand the complexities of the world around them.
Furthermore, after listening to your post, I really appreciated your perspective that you provided about looking at the room around you and seeing ‘a handwritten book of poetry from your daughter, drawings, schedules on calendars, and lists.’ This resonates deeply with the importance of non-digital literacies being grounded in ‘basics.’ These tangible items not only serve practical purposes but also foster personal connections and creativity in ways that digital media often cannot replicate. Handwriting, drawing, and physical scheduling engage different cognitive and motor skills, enriching our overall literacy and keeping us connected to foundational forms of expression and organization.
Thanks for sharing.
Link #6: Task 8:
July 9, in response to Tina’s post Golden Record Curation
Hi Tina,
Tina your comment “I like what Timothy Ferris said about how music is for the listener to find something rewarding and meaningful (as cited in Taylor, 2019). In this sense, it is a personal experience. I picked the following 10 songs to align with the project’s original message of peace and joy” really resonates with me.
I find your approach to the task both refreshing and insightful. Your emphasis on instrumental tracks highlights music’s universal appeal and its ability to connect people across different backgrounds, transcending language barriers. Your selections reflect values like inner peace and the celebration of life and add a deeply personal touch to your choices. You connect of your picks to personal memories or emotions, such as her violin-playing days and the nostalgia these pieces evoke. This personal connection fills your selections with a unique authenticity and emotional depth.
In contrast, my approach focused on providing a comprehensive snapshot of Earth’s musical diversity. I aimed to balance cultural representation with musical variety and historical significance, showcasing the breadth of human musical expression across different cultures, time periods, and styles. My criteria included global cultural representation, diversity of musical traditions, variety of vocal and instrumental styles, cultural significance, and uniqueness of sound.
While you gravitate towards tracks with positive and uplifting messages that align with the project’s original message of peace and joy, my approach was more analytical, ensuring a wide-ranging representation of musical traditions and historical contexts. Your comments reflect a deep appreciation for how music can represent complex human emotions and experiences, and its power to unite people across different cultures and backgrounds. I admire how you capture the emotional and personal resonance of each piece, providing a perspective that complements my more structured and comprehensive approach. Together, we shared only four musical selections, highlighting our different approaches. However, these differences create a rich and multifaceted exploration of music’s role in representing culture, humanity and its values.
Thanks for a refreshing post.