Disqus - Latest Comments for charlesnelson

Re: Don’t Teach Grit. Embed It. ~ Stephen Downes

Charles — Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:36:07 -0000

I see your point on clarity, which should trump convention "rules." Even so, quite a few grammarians would say that a pronoun needs an antecedent, and so this group of people prefers "In Paul Tough's new book, he writes...."

Re: Recognizing personal learning styles and using learning strategies while learning english in an electronic environment ~ Stephen Downes

Charles — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 21:01:58 -0000

Although I don't think it will pan out, I'd certainly read any research that had empirical data. However, just looking at the quotation at the end, doing activities frequently aren't tied to learning styles. Heck, if you do anything frequently, you'll get better at it (up to a point). And who would argue against self-motivation and self-discipline? They'll need to tease apart the contributions of preferred learning style from frequency of activity, self-motivation, and self-discipline.

Re: Pay what you want for a lifetime of online security and VPN access [Deals]

Charles — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 13:21:24 -0000

Why do you need a separate 1-year subscription if you're getting a lifetime subscription with anonvpn?

Re: World Englishes and Second Language Writing

Charles — Sat, 10 May 2014 06:36:42 -0000

I haven't read the articles, but how can someone teach what they don't know?

Re: The Incompleteness of Connectivism

Charles — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:06:13 -0000

I hadn't read "the literature" on connectivism in quite a while, so, thanks to Stephen, I went back and re-read some seminal articles. Stephen in his Introduction to Connectivism is much clearer about different levels of networks and learning. What troubled me at one time and still does is George's "A Learning Theory for the Digital Age." Although it's mentioned that there are different levels of networks and learning, the focus seemed to be on the individual but the description of the learning was social. In the conclusion he writes,

"The pipe is more important than the content within the pipe. Our ability to learn what we need for tomorrow is more important than what we know today. A real challenge for any learning theory is to actuate known knowledge at the point of application. When knowledge, however, is needed, but not known, the ability to plug into sources to meet the requirements becomes a vital skill. As knowledge continues to grow and evolve, access to what is needed is more important than what the learner currently possesses."

The "pipe" is a connector between individuals and thus allows learning at the social level. Yet this paragraph seems to be talking about what the individual needs to do to learn. Of course, the more pipes, or connections, the more experiences and patterns an "individual" can perceive. But that perception is grounded inside the individual. And it's statements (paragraphs) like these that lead me to say that the systems are being conflated.

And it's not just that one paragraph. Even so, after reviewing a few of Stephen's articles, I can see that he doesn't conflate the systems.

Re: The Incompleteness of Connectivism

Charles — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 17:30:12 -0000

I like connectivism, too. The main problem I've had with it as a theory is that they seem to look at the learning of an individual as forming connections with other individuals. However, learning is based on the system in which nodes are connected, so, what they're really talking about is the learning of a network of individuals while the learning of a single individual is the connecting of brain "nodes." Connectivists seem to conflate these two different systems.

Re: Should Male Student Be Allowed to Avoid Group Work With Women?

Charles — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:30:19 -0000

Actually, depending on the religion, women might not work with male students. It's not a case of one being unclean, but a case of segregation by sex to prevent temptation on both sides. Is this discrimination? Yes. Is such discrimination protected by the Constitution? In the US, in certain cases, yes. In Canada, I have no idea.

I'd be interested in knowing if the online course made it clear at the beginning whether meeting in person would be a requirement. If not, then, it's not unreasonable to grant this student's petition. If yes, then, I might say, tough luck, unless it really wouldn't impact on the other students.

Re: big data and pedagogy

Charles — Wed, 20 Nov 2013 09:02:42 -0000

Do you have any suggestions for changing writing systems within classes?

Re: writing and acceleration

Charles — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 11:48:58 -0000

I don't quite see how you compare the process of writing to the biomechanical training. For me the process of writing is more like dribbling or passing. The underlying skill would be some sort of bio-cognitive skill. What form would such a training take?

Re: MOOCs and aesthetic experience

Charles — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:27:57 -0000

I like the recognition that our evaluation of online teaching is affected by our ability to "feel that they are learning."

Re: Listening is hard

Charles — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:58:16 -0000

We take shortcuts in everything. I got all 6 because I knew that people do not read every letter or word while reading. They read what they expect to be there. My background knowledge allowed me to slow down and count each "F". But imagine what would happen if I did that for every text I read. Shortcuts save time, a lot of time. But, yes, they can interfere with listening and understanding. So, I'm wondering how do we develop the ability to listen without wasting too much time. Is it only when we disagree? Or is it just as important to listen when we agree? Are we making assumptions we shouldn't when we agree?

On a side note, the difficulty in listening reminds me of this article "Democrats and Republicans both adept at ignoring facts, study finds," (http://www.livescience.com/... which shows that people "get quite a rush from ignoring information that's contracy to their point of view."

Re: frustrations in composition pedagogy design

Charles — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 22:55:16 -0000

Have you looked at Instructure Canvas, an LMS that integrates social media (Pete mentions it in his comment)? There have been two posts on it in Inside Higher Ed, one by Audrey Watters and the other by Joshua Kim.

Re: incorporeality and expression in object-oriented rhetoric, politics and ethics

Charles — Wed, 30 May 2012 12:24:48 -0000

"Perhaps there isn't panpsychism, but we cannot assert that every object except for us operates by some brute mechanics."

I keep reading your posts on OOO, but I can't quite grasp it. How does OOO take into consideration the difference between non-living objects that do not adapt to their environment and living objects that do?

Re: glitches are us

Charles — Tue, 22 May 2012 12:52:14 -0000

How do you see glitches as different (or similar to) contradictions in activity theory (as per Engström?

Re: the problem with “robot grading” isn’t the robot

Charles — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 10:48:14 -0000

Couldn't we say that about any subject that students take, such as math or chemistry? That is, "what would have to happen to make [math] into something students would consider worth learning to do well?" Is it realistic to expect that someone will consider every subject they take "worth learning to do well?"

Re: first-year composition: writing discovers its own purpose

Charles — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 12:33:16 -0000

Hi Alex,
I responded a little more in depth at http://bit.ly/qCBcoL

Re: first-year composition: writing discovers its own purpose

Charles — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 04:38:34 -0000

By no shortcut is meant that a certain amount of time is required to learn something as opposed to the total time spent (total time = effective time on task + time wasted). The point of feedback is to eliminate wasted time. There is no shortcut to effective time on task.

For myself, I remember the many times I spent 30 minutes or more trying to figure out some software instruction unsuccessfully and then understanding instantly when someone took less than one minute to show me the necessary actions.

From this perspective, what's the purpose or objective in having someone "figure out what to do on their own"? Is there an assumption that self-generated knowledge is better for learning than imitation of other-generated knowledge?

Re: first-year composition: writing discovers its own purpose

Charles — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:36:14 -0000

In Anderson's ACT-R theory, there are no shortcuts in learning. One can only eliminate wasted time/effort to "shorten" the time needed to learning anything. Letting students "figure out what went wrong" increases the time required for learning.

Of course, students will not always be students and so need to be prepared to write on their own. Perhaps it might be helpful for instructors to frame some of their help in terms of alternatives that can scaffold students to see different "likely outcomes."

Re: first-year composition: writing discovers its own purpose

Charles — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 04:11:16 -0000

What's your evidence for the claim that writers "mostly need to figure out how to work through their own problems"?

Re: rhetoric & composition, networks, and object-oriented politics

Charles — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:33:07 -0000

"the enterprise of speculative realism is ... to explore the real ontological conditions of our situation."

If one cannot directly observe reality, how does one deal with ontology? Aren't we limited to epistemology?

Re: concerns for assessment

Charles — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:26:44 -0000

An interesting article is "Assessing Learning in the 21st Century" at http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ne..., which uses a form of network analysis and "epistemic games" to assess learning:

"From this basic insight, Shaffer and his team have developed a new measurement technique: epistemic network analysis, or ENA. ENA looks at how game players use elements of the epistemic frame, and how these elements are “in conversation” with one another over time. The epistemic network of a player is quantified by adding the number of times each pair of frame elements is recorded in the same strip of activity during a game."

Re: concerns for assessment

Charles — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 10:52:35 -0000

Scattered thoughts:

The analogy with Nike shoes isn't a good one. People who wear Nike shoes aren't involved in their production. Students who compose texts are. A better analogy would be, Nike's quality commands an audience. Does students' writing appeal to their audiences?

It's difficult for me to follow why first-year comp wouldn't help students in the process of becoming better writers. Due to the practice nature of comp, I would compare it more to sports than courses like history. In that case, Doesn't being on a basketball team help someone become a better player?

One problem I have with assessment is that writing often doesn't make drastic leaps in improvement in one semester. So, what's often being assessed is the level of proficiency that a student enters a classroom with. What about assessing how much a student develops in a course? Whether or not I understand the processes operating in a student's networks, I can see changes in the outcomes of those processes over time. Along these lines, in sports, whether or not we understand an athlete's network, we see the results.

An ANT-assessment makes sense for assessing programs. But individual assessment is at a different level than program assessment. We shouldn't conflate the two. At the individual student level, when instructors provide feedback on a paper, they aren't assessing the students' networks, only a particular product. If individual assessment without referring to the network doesn't make sense, then why provide feedback?

Re: The production of passion in passion-based learning

Charles — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:24:51 -0000

I'm not sure what it means to teach or to learn without outcomes. Take sports, for example. Most athletes (and their coaches) have specific goals they set in improving their play. The same for video game players. Perhaps you could expand a little more on what that means.

Re: creativity, writing talent and the autonomy of objects

Charles — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:25:34 -0000

One other point on "everyone can write" and "natural talent." Although talent exists, the main factor in gaining mastery or competence in a field is simply effective time on task according to John Anderson of ACT-R Theory. And that falls in line with the research on expertise, too. And, for me, that's where intrinsic motivation needs to be considered more. If students can move away from the feeling that they can't write to an attitude of it's simply a matter of practice (which falls in line with Carol Dweck's work on motivation), they will develop writing competence/mastery, which in turn, motivates them to write more, and so on.

Re: Daniel Pink's Drive, composition pedagogy, and program management

Charles — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:41:27 -0000

I haven't read the book, but I think that self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan) offers a more interesting look at motivation. Similar to the three factors mentioned by Pink, they posit three factors of intrinsic motivation: autonomy, competence, and social relatedness. However, they put extrinsic motivation on a continuum that ranges from external regulation (carrots and sticks) to introjection to identification to integration. This final step of extrinsic motivation is one in which external regulations have been brought "into harmony or coherence with other aspects of [people's] values and identity."