Linear and non-linear compositions, the subject of chapter 6 in Kress and vanLeeuwen got me thinking about some details from the first paper we had for this class. It was about literacies and learning. Specifically the details of how we are learning to search better - especially with our eyes and the details of building new cognitive pathways.
Students skim, skipread and use the index to prepare for exams - the text is “used” rather than read. (Press & van Leeuwen, p.205) This seems to be discouraged by some instructors. I say, “Pish tosh." I recall even recently that colleagues chastised their students for skipping around looking for easy answers. See, as programmers, there are many resources out there and students often use these resources as short cuts while others are genuinely looking for additional examples to help guide them. For example, stackoverflow.com is a great place to get solutions to coding problems - if you know how to ask the right question in your search, or join the forum and be a participant. I recommended that the colleague, instead of chastising, perhaps dedicate some of his lesson to teaching them how to use the many resources they have.
This is is also an issue when looking at other forms of assessment. I used to give mid-term and final exams without any form of help documents (I know, that was mean. No, really it was. Read on.) to help them in solving the problems on the page. Over time I realized I cared less about their style of coding and more about whether they were choosing the right tools. To assist in this, I encouraged the use of previous projects, notes, the textbook, basically anything. The undercurrent of it all is that if they really are familiar with the material, what they often need is a refresher on how to use the tools. If they are not sure what a hammer even looks like, they will likely achieve the same grade as if I gave them no support at all - they will spend all of the time floundering, frustrated and, in the end, will just give up.
It is fascinating how some people will still take the Linear path of selecting the first item in a Google search result list, realize it is not actually relevant, then move to the next. Whereas seasoned users of Internet searches and hopelessly non-linear people (like myself) scan the results mentally highlighting the text and determining the value of the article in question. If its relevance score is low, move on.
Choosing the right words is key as well. Google is pretty awesome at fixing misspellings and figuring out what you really meant, but sometimes it’s the wording of the search criteria that makes all of the difference. My students don’t always notice, but sometime they ask a question and I respond with a Google search. Once a student asked how to really choose the best password. And i say, “Google ‘xkcd password strength’”. They look at me for a moment and then do it (I teach in a computer lab). After I see the surprised expressions I bring up the same item on the screen. We talk about the details of this result and the search criteria used.
Often these little teaching moments really make the difference in the learning process. Students don’t want to be spoon fed pablum. They want to be inspired, encouraged, even wowed from time to time. So do it! Show them exactly how you’d find the answer. Put the search results on the screen and show them the pictures, the words, how you process the meaning and relevance, but don’t just click and say that the link seemed more relevant - tell them why. Was there a keyword or phrase that made the score lower or higher in your mind? Teach them to be more non-linear.
"It is relatively straightforward to see design in text-making; however design is also at work in text ‘reception’. Where more traditional texts such as books have strict order at various levels, and given entry-points, multimodal texts, with their organisation on visual principles, and their multiple entry- points offer and even expect the reader to construct the order of reading for her/himself." (Gillen & Barton, 2010) Using the Internet and digital textbooks can really help to encourage better reading in a non-linear way. With all of the technology and resources at our fingertips, we really need to be encouraging a non-liner approach.
Finally, when I introduce a new topic and I begin to write code on the screen for them to follow along I do this very simple thing - I talk out load. Everything that my mind tells me I say out load as I’m typing. Why? Because they probably do something similar in their own mind - either way I want to encourage it. If they don’t they are not going to be very good programmers. Here’s why. Some of the best programmers are non-linear by design. They need to allow their mind to wander around as they process the solution. One never starts a program at line one and then just vomits code into the editor producing a stellar product. Never.
It takes time and understanding of the big picture. Some say, “Dude,” (no, really they say that), “Dude, just write the code and put it on the screen. Explain it and move on.” I say, “Nay, nay!” Writing it in front of them, they see me bounce around in the code, new piece here, adjusting there, taking into account other variables, recognizing logic errors before they are too set in place. Students need to see the organic nature of programming as it happens. A real problem with a real path to a real solution.
The great mathematician, Paul Erdos, would arrive at someone’s home at 2 a.m., knock on the door, and when a bleary eyed colleague answered the door he’d have a big smile and say, “My brain is open!” Is this not how we should be expected to arrive at every class?
Gillen, J, Barton, D. (2010). DIgital Literacies. Retrieved from http://www.tlrp.org/docs/DigitalLiteracies.pdf
Kress, van Leeuwen, (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design.
No comments:
Post a Comment