The last time I revisited my Teaching Statement was back in 2008 which, although it doesn't feel that long ago, was actually six years back! I also realized that it didn't include any direct references to scholars. I'm not sure how my professor (who assigned this for an MA class) let me get away with that! This new version will definitely show marked improvement.
I took some time to review Dr. Rice's statement and realized that our first few sentences were actually very similar. I promise I didn't just copy yours, Dr. Rice. ;) However, I really loved his three bulleted statements that serve as the foundation of his philosophy, so that I am borrowing. At this point, these are my four foundational tenets:
* I believe in the power of student agency in class activities and assessment practices.
* I believe in equipping students to think critically.
* I believe in using technology to enhance learning.
* I believe in making visible biases and differences, such as those created through race, culture, literacy, socioeconomic standing, religion, gender, and age.
The one that will most directly link to this course's content is, of course, the second one: equipping students to think critically. So I think what I'd like to do here is start connecting the dots between my goals and scholars from this class and others I've taken since 2008. Then, I will integrate these into my document. I'm sure some will be direct inclusions while others will be footnotes. I also understand that what I've posted here is a bit of a mess. I won't necessarily transfer all of this into my teaching philosophy; however, including it in one place is helping me to see connections and figure out what to include later. So, here is my mess of a prewriting assignment based off of these four foundational statements:
The power of student agency in class activities and assessment practices: Guiding students through these processes helps them to take ownership and really embody the steps we often take for granted. This reflects the post-process theory where the process is as important as the product that results from it. Class generated content can also aid in the invention process. Putting students in the forefront also allows for more genuine conversation, which aids in invention and I believe also relates to topoi, but I still struggle knowing how to integrate that term/concept in my thinking and my syntax. I strive to reflect the Constructionist theory:
Constructivist theorists claim that
learners interpret information and the world according to their personal
reality, and that they learn by observation, processing, and interpretation,
and then personalize the information into personal knowledge. Learners learn
best when they can contextualize what they learn for immediate application and
to acquire personal meaning. (Ally, 2004, p. 4 of 23)
I seek to apply Jones’ (2013) guidelines in my overall
rubric creation. He writes:
I have found the following four
strategies helpful for my purposes. First, make students aware of the rubrics
used in the course before using them to assess their work… Second, avoid using
too many different rubrics… Third, make the rubrics fair… Fourth, make sure
each rubric accurately reflects the objectives of the assignment. (Jones, 2013,
p. 248)
I prioritize using collectively created rubrics that reflect Horton's Absorb, Do, and Practice activities, which allow students to be invested in the process and see how the five cannons are assessed, especially arrangement and style, in written form.
Equipping students to think critically: I believe I am most aligned with Isocrates because, unlike Plato, I don't believe that rhetoric is connected to a higher power or the Truth. Isocrates believed in the ability to teach rhetoric, even if some students are naturally more inclined than others, and that it is a practical tool. I try to instill this in my students all of the time. However, I do follow Plato's thinking that dialogue can help us determine truth and that rhetoric can be used for corruption, which is why I believe it is so important for students to learn what rhetoric is, how it is created, and how to identify fallacies within it.
Young - crossing barriers and uncovering biases/cultural differences/etc. (Public Rhetorics course)
Paulo Friere - use student's current knowledge while adding to it and challenging it.
Using technology to enhance learning: This can allow students to play with different ways of manifesting delivery and style from the cannons of ways we develop knowledge Technology can also aid in the invention stage through research, blogs, and other collaborative processes (i.e. GoogleDocs, virtual whiteboard tools through Blackboard etc., NoodleTools, etc.). I try to use discussion boards as true sites for discussion, not just busy work: As Warnock (2009) suggests, “You can create this same dynamic on message boards by having small breakout groups… focus on a particular aspect of a topic before having a general conversation with the whole group” (p. 150).
Warnock (2009) suggest that “Socratic
conversations can be built into your message boards: pose simple, direct
questions to students initially, and then during the week, work toward a more
complex learning goal” (pp. 31-2).
They write of their growing awareness of how
long each video takes to both create and view, and how they realized the need
to “script [their] oral presentations, compose them, and then spend further
time editing before posting to [their] courses” (Cason & Jenkins, 2013, p.
232).
I believe all of these things contribute to invention and creating a dialectic, and the two really go hand-in-hand.
Making visible biases and differences, such as those created through race, culture, literacy, socioeconomic standing, religion, gender, and age: Faiola and Matei (2006) discovered that task associated performance times shortened when Chinese and American participants used sites created by designers from their own culture. Factors such as layout, navigation, color, and content ratios have been shown to vary based on culture (Shneiderman & Hochheiser, 2001; Kincl & Štrach, 2011).
Jame Gee's discussion of discourse and discourse communities.
Implied/textual note: Borcher's discussion of rhetorics in other cultures. Emphasize the need to recognize differences and honor them, even if that simply leads to greater awareness of how to help students acquire (White) academic discourse.
References
I believe all of these things contribute to invention and creating a dialectic, and the two really go hand-in-hand.
Making visible biases and differences, such as those created through race, culture, literacy, socioeconomic standing, religion, gender, and age: Faiola and Matei (2006) discovered that task associated performance times shortened when Chinese and American participants used sites created by designers from their own culture. Factors such as layout, navigation, color, and content ratios have been shown to vary based on culture (Shneiderman & Hochheiser, 2001; Kincl & Štrach, 2011).
Jame Gee's discussion of discourse and discourse communities.
Implied/textual note: Borcher's discussion of rhetorics in other cultures. Emphasize the need to recognize differences and honor them, even if that simply leads to greater awareness of how to help students acquire (White) academic discourse.
References
Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for
online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.),
Theory
and practice of online learning. (np) Athabasca: Athabasca University.
Cason, J. & Jenkins, P. (2013). Adapting instructional
documents to an online course
environment. In Online education 2.0: Evolving, adapting,
and reinventing online technical communication. Cargile Cook, K. &
Grant-Dvie, K. (Eds). (pp. 213-236). New York: Baywood Publishing, Inc.
Faiola, A. & Matei, S. A. (2006). Cultural cognitive
style and web design: Beyond a behavioral
inquiry into computer-mediated
communication. Journal of
computer-mediated communication, 11, 375-394. doi:
10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00018.x
Horton, W. (2012). E-learning
by design 2nd ed. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Jones, D. (2013). Expanding the scaffolding of the online
undergraduate technical
communication course. In Online education 2.0: Evolving, adapting,
and reinventing online technical communication. Cargile Cook, K. &
Grant-Dvie, K. (Eds). (pp. 237-256). New York: Baywood Publishing, Inc.
Kincl, T. & Štrach, P. (2011,
Feb.) Measuring website quality: Asymmetric effect of user
satisfaction.
Behavior & information technology, 31
(7), 647-657. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2010.526150
Shneiderman, B. & Hochheiser, H. (2001). Universal
usability as a stimulus to advanced
interface design. Behaviour & information technology, 20 (5),
367-376. doi: 10.1080/0144929011008360 2
