Author: blaynefink

Choose your Critical Pedagogy adventure

To begin, in order to understand this blog post, one must first understand how this blog post even came to fruition. Having said that, let’s first dive into what was Week 10 of our course, Contemporary Pedagogy.

The class was dedicated to the idea of critical pedagogy and ultimately, defining what critical pedagogy means to us. Prior to the class, we were tasked with completing a reading based on a number (1-6) that we were given in week 9. To start class we were grouped with others in the class who read the same number as we did. Here, we collaborated and compiled the key points of our assigned reading. Following this short activity, we were split up and put into a new group of students from the remaining five groups and here we shared our key points from each of our individual readings. In doing so, based on the numerous readings we shared with one another, our group created and collaborated to create a cohesive definition of what critical pedagogy means to us.

In order to better understand that definition, one must first grasp the main points of our readings, which are listed below:

READING #1: “Paulo Freire (1921-1997)” in The Critical Pedagogy Primer (2004) P. 69-75 by Joe L. Kinchloe

    • Our role as the educator is to cultivate “critical consciousness” in our students
    • What we teach has a ripple effect in society
    • It is imperative to meet our students where they are: to understand who they are and that includes knowing their learned experiences. This creates space for dialogue.
    • Education is inherently political; as educators, we must accept, acknowledge, and embrace this
    • Literacy enables freedom, empowering individuals to challenge dominant culture and oppression

READING #2: “Moving to Critical Complexity,” in The Critical Pedagogy Primer (2004), pp. 108-110 by Joe L. Kinchloe

    • Information pushing is dominant among practitioners
    • Those who implement complex critical pedagogy should study their students and where they come from and their backgrounds and cater their teaching to those needs
      • Standardized education does not recognize these complexities
        • However, to understand these complexities, you have to understand the limitations of mainstream schooling
          • People like Einstein would not stand out in today’s standards-driven schooling
    • In order for Einstein students to fit in, teachers need to understand complex critical pedagogy and teachers need to implement complex critical pedagogy

READING #3:  “The Banking Concept of Education,” in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Ch. 2, pp. 71-86 by Paulo Friere

    • Discusses power structure – a teacher is correct ie: History and biases
    • 2 approaches:  spoon-feeding
    • Should create an environment for students to explore
    • Use mindfulness in teaching
    • Allow students to ask questions: it is a 2-way process
    • Lack of equal opportunity, dynamics of the power structure
    • Knowledge is static and the students do not necessarily challenge the professor’s thoughts
    • Narrative style
    • Intentional and Unintentional processes that are involved
    • Opening up to students to challenge the style of working
    • Letting students ask questions such as why? And how?
    • More application based learning is required
    • Point of education is not teaching them to do a something but to help them explore how they can look at a problem and solve it on their own

READING #4: Pedagogy of Freedom, Ch. 2, pp. 29-37 by Paulo Friere

    • No teaching without learning
    • Brings up the banking system of education, where students’ minds are empty vessels to be filled by the professor
    • We need to galvanize the flame of adventure in our students, do not settle for the status quo!
    • Students should be more aware of how they have been taught and what is that system, there is some responsibility on the students to resist the current culture
    • Show students that there is a goal (what is being learned) that you are trying to reach, and show them how to reach it.
    • Be transparent with your students so they understand that you will change your methodology from time to time, and that they are active participants in the process rather than a passive experimental unit.
    • Must have an open mind, learn critically, have a world view, do not get bogged down in the details / one subject.
    • Teach students what they need to know, not just mindless information.
    • Research is an integral component of teaching, as you must continually ask questions, learn and grow.
    • Do not be afraid to learn from your students; if they have information you do not, why not examine it?
    • We must ask questions, even if they seem offensive
    • Be disruptive of teaching norms

READING #5: Critical Thinking by bell hooks

    • Education system beats the critical thinking out of students
    • Teachers need to acknowledge that they don’t know everything
    • Everyone has to be engaged in critical thinking – students and teachers

READING #6: Democratic Education by bell hooks

    • Equal access to education irrespective of gender, race, etc
    • We need to follow ‘Practice what we preach’ approach
    • Conservative dominating culture should be checked
    • Education is the primary place to understand democracy not only in theory but also in practice
    • Democracy was always meant to be adaptive, to change with the times

READING #7: Engaged Pedagogy by bell hooks

    • Learning the name of the students to make the class more engaging
    • Treating students as collaborators rather than students
    • Active engagement: is also listening
    • Not forcing everyone on the same scale/level

Keeping all of this in mind, what does critical pedagogy mean to us?

Describing critical pedagogy, tools to be used and outcomes of implementing it:

  • Creating a better society by awakening critical consciousness,
  • open-mindedness,
  • equality,
  • question and challenge the norms,
  • self-determination, and
  • respect towards each other.

Now its time to adventure!

Given the diverse nature of our group members, coupled with the differing fields for which they study and teach in, we have composed a number of examples to share with you. Based on the field for which you most associate, we recommend jumping to that specific person’s post on how critical pedagogy is applied to their field of work.

For Landscape Architecture read more from Sara Harrell

In landscape architecture, we teach with the mindset that we are leading our students through the process of design. We provide prompts on projects and then guide students toward resources (i.e.: data, criteria, policy, tools) that help them make decisions about their work. We don’t tell them what to do or how to do it, but we do point them in a direction, help them develop the lens through which to view the world based on their individual interests.

There are many dimensions to landscape that many may take for granted. Let’s start with the those that are more obvious: what one can see physically present in the place at a given time. This could be the hardscape (paths, structures, built objects) and softscape (plants). The creatures that inhabit the landscape are also pretty easy to identify: so people (and animals) who inhabit, use, travel to and through a space. Less obvious are the stories about a place and the culture that underpins the narrative. This could be the collective memory of the people–watershed moments where everyone can recall significant events or moments. And akin to mainstream history, the narratives about a place are written by the dominant culture (or winners of a given conflict). What is still even more difficult to appreciate are those counter narratives, those that are suppressed by the dominant culture, and the stories of the disenfranchised, the marginalized, the underrepresented, and the oppressed. It is our job as educators in landscape architecture to illuminate these stories and narratives and teach our students how to ask the right questions to do the same.

Because of this, critical pedagogy is extremely important to the discipline of landscape architecture. If we allowed our students to just take design (or understanding place) at face value, we would be committing an injustice to both our students and to society. Freire says that the duty of an educator is to cultivate critical consciousness in our students. To not would be to indoctrinate students into the dominant worldview and would be perpetuating oppression and landscapes that oppress.

We meet each student where they are. Landscape architecture studios are designed so that the instructor provides the same site and list of conditions/requirements/deliverables to each student, but then each individual receives critique and direction based on their focus. In this way, we teach them to be literate, help them develop the ability to step back from their projects, understand the bigger picture, and then how to act and make decisions that are equitable, just, and socially responsible.

For Communication read more from Blayne Fink

Communication is a field for which pedagogy and critical pedagogy are stuck in what some might consider limbo. For instance, while some courses involve the typical Western style of learning (aka pumping information in and then it being dumped out come test time), there are also courses for which students have the freedom to learn and create as they choose, with a little bit of guidance along the way. Given the structure of the Communication field at Virginia Tech, this balance allows students to learn the basics of the field and the core concepts that drive Communication studies, while also giving them the freedom to explore projects, case studies, and the like from their own special lenses.

When it comes to Public Speaking particularly, the same tends to apply. From the student perspective, students are given expectations and parameters for which they are expected to follow, however in terms of topic choices, there is an abundance of freedom for them to explore. This allows students a level of comfort when it comes to speaking, especially since they tend to have a better grasp on topics that they choose. From a teaching perspective, Klinchoe explains that critical pedagogy presses educators to learn their students and their style of learning in order to cater teaching to those students. As a TA, I have become very aware of my students and what works and what does not work and by getting to know my students, even through fun little in class activities, I can thus cater my teaching to best impact their learning.

For Engineering read more from Akshay Jain and
Khushboo Gupta

Engineering is one field which has been on the wrong side of the pedagogy for a long time. It has been known for the banking system and teachers throwing equations and concepts without helping much with the background. Students are expected to memorize and throw it on the exam papers. However, with the concepts learned in the critical pedagogy collectively, there are multiple areas of improvement. First of all, the students should be more involved in the course development. They should be given background information and there should be more discussion involved on the problems. For developing critical consciousness the students should be made aware of what they are learning and why they are learning and how they can proceed using the concepts learned.  

For instance, infrastructure management is one of the civil engineering application, which involves a lot of collaboration and there is no single way to manage infrastructure as it depends a lot on the city/region, with respect to which the management  

For Entomology read more from Jackson Means

The majority of our classes in the Department of Entomology would most assuredly fall into the category of the “banking system” style of teaching. There are lots of insects, and lots of facts about insects for students to learn. But here’s the thing: most of these facts can be looked up online fairly easily, and the vast majority of students, both undergraduate and graduate, in entomology will not need to know about the wing venation of a muscid fly, or the trochanters of a sphecid wasp (man I sound smart). These details are specific, esoteric, and not subject to change, other than over evolutionary time. So why memorize them? We can look these things up, and most sources we would use would, most likely, not be outdated due to new research. There is something to be said for being exposed to a variety of entomological information, but knowing where a topic stops being interesting and starts being dull is extremely important for teaching in a mindful manner.

Therefore, I propose a structure and function class in the spirit of Paulo Freire, where rather than passively absorb information that will, in all likelihood, never impact their lives, students are encouraged to seek out what they find fascinating about the mechanics of insect flight, jumping or metamorphosis and present it to the class. A structure and function class where students are taught to be literate in the 21st century, not taught to read, but rather to find information online. There are many useful sources of entomological information on the web, but you need to know how to access that information, the (unfortunately) often necessary jargon and how to tell when a source is untrustworthy. Bugguide.net is a great example of an incredible resource that has a steep learning curve, though once you understand how it works it can help you identify insects, find esoteric resources and connect with experts in a variety of taxa. However, the comments sections are also full of people that think they are experts, when really they are just retired and like to look at lots of pretty bug pictures. Being able to tell an educated guess from a wild one is pretty important for any discipline, and as educators in the information age it is our job to facilitate that understanding. Entomology is as intricate and varied as its subjects, and we should translate the exciting, fascinating aspects of that variation to our students, not expect them to mindlessly memorize obscure structures in the hindguts of cockroaches.

For Soil Science/Ecology read more from Sarah Shawver

Science labs are an excellent platform to engage critical pedagogy. For most of my academic career science experiments followed the format of “Here is this experiment, here are the results you should see”. However the classes that I learned the most from were the ones where students had some say in the direction of their learning. In some labs the major project was a research experiment designed by the students. The level of engagement was far beyond anything seen in a typical “follow the instructions and you should get this result” model. Self-determination, even if it’s only for a small portion of the lab get students really thinking and applying knowledge to answer questions they care about. When I taught Introductory Soil Science, students brought in their own soil samples. Although the experiments were already decided by the instructor, there were no known answers. I didn’t know the percent of sand in the soil samples that were brought in, so I couldn’t tell the students if they were “right”. Rather, the students had to think and determine whether the results of their experiment made sense. Some of my students brought in a soil sample from their family farm and said “I want to know more about my soil so I can grow crops better.” By allowing the students to bring in samples from wherever they wanted, they found motivation to learn, think, and apply knowledge.

Critical pedagogy can also take place in science lectures as well. One example is having groups of students develop activities to teach a section of material to the rest of the class. This has worked well in the past and students have come up with very creative ways to explain complex topics. I have also found that students learn a topic much better when they create an activity or method to teach it to other students. This also successfully empowers students to be in charge of their education.

We hope you enjoyed the adventure! 

Critical pedagogy is hard to define and even harder to implement. However, with a better understanding of the benefits of its implementation and practice, as well as the drawbacks of continuing on in our current pedagogical landscape, our hope is that one day the ideas of Paulo Freire and bell hooks are no longer anomalies, but rather expectations in education!

POST 4: “Teaching is not all about the teacher..”

In reading Shelly Fowler’s piece on The Authentic Teaching Self and Communication Skills, I was presently surprised at the impact Fowler’s perspective had on me. Oftentimes, unless we are forced to stop and actually think about the authenticity that goes into teaching, we forget to actually do it. I am appreciative of this piece because of its ability to force that out of me, regardless of how elementary some of these points may have seemed (no offense to Fowler).

However, with all of that being said, the one thing that really resonated with me was the professor’s fourth point where they explain what exactly being the authentic teaching self means.

In said point, Fowler explains that, as my title suggests, “teaching is not all about the teacher; that is, teaching is not all about you.” Furthermore, the professor explains that as the teacher, you have to be present and aware of who you are in the classroom and what you are doing. However, what I think stood out most to me as a reader and teacher is the importance of taking a “step outside of yourself,” in order to be more,”attentive to the students and not make the classroom your stage with the students as a passive audience.”

As a Public Speaking TA who is in charge of roughly 80 students per semester, that final point has become by far the most important aspect of my role as the teacher.

Oftentimes I get so caught up in the ease of teaching and the relaxed nature that my role provides that I forget how difficult this course can be for people. For clarity, when I say difficult, I don’t mean long and strenuous equations that take hours to complete or full memorization of our upper respiratory system and it’s subsequent functions. What I mean by difficult is that this course is often very uncomfortable and stressful for students and even the most confident of public speakers find themselves uneasy come speech day.

Because of this, my ability to “step outside” of myself has become absolutely crucial to my students success. Furthermore, given the nature of the course and how hard it can be for students, being attentive to students has become a duty of mine, so to speak.

However, the thing about public speaking is that it lends itself to completing this fourth step. I have the flexibility to step outside of myself and be attentive to each and every student because I have to. As Fowler explains, you do have to take the specific course into consideration and I very much do that. My concern is that the completion of this step might not be the case in every course. Moreover, this might not be the case as I continue on in my career (teaching or otherwise) and that causes a bit of concern for me. Personally, I think it is imperative that we are able to disconnect from being the center of attention when it comes to teaching and I place high value on authenticity through attentiveness to every individual.

With that being said, my question is this: How am I to complete this step in the event that my career goes beyond that of teaching? If I hold this step high atop my list of “must haves” in terms of authentic teaching (or leadership), how can I ensure that I am able to properly incorporate it into every aspect of my career, or even life?

If you have gotten this far I appreciate you sticking around and very much look forward to hearing your responses!

POST 3: How do we avoid education’s “death valley” if we are already there?

In listening to Sir Ken Robinson‘s TEDTalk on how our current education system works in the United States and it’s limiting factors, I could not help but feel extremely motivated. Robinson’s mixture of humor and shear logic in explaining the way in which human beings operate makes it easy to feel compelled to go make changes in the world. It was as if Robinson took all of my (and I’m assuming many other people’s) thoughts on education, sifted through them, organized them, and then put them into a cohesive and well-thought out argument.

However, in the same breath, I also could not help but feel very overwhelmed and almost helpless at the same time. While the points he made were valid and as noted, logical, they also seemed far-fetched and unrealistic. In a way, it feels a bit too little too late.

When I think about our current education system, I am also pressed to think about how our education system mirrors many aspects of our daily lives. While I could go on and on about this, I will use the workplace as an example here. For instance, much like standardized testing, when it comes to the workplace, you must also complete certain tasks in order to move forward with the company. Students and employees are motivated by grade increases and raises or bonuses. In addition, there is an established hierarchy within the workplace that is also evident in the education systems. 

Keeping this in mind, the trouble I have with what Sir Ken Robinson proposes is not the idea itself, but more so the realistic-ness of it. If we are to reform schools, does this mean a complete reformation to other institutions, such as the workplace? And if so, how?

It is clear that change is needed, even if it is just one state at a time like Robinson explains. I also believe that it is this change that could be crucial to the overall success of our nation and the future lives of our children. By removing the pressure to pass standardized tests and creating an environment where students feel inspired, as opposed to forced, to learn, we can create that change.

However, while this is easy to envision and even easier to say, it is a tall task to actually accomplish. Beyond the fact that it is a timely and meticulous operation, it is my honest belief that it is hard to avoid the education “death valley” that Robinson speaks of because we are already there.

POST 2: It’s your tuition, it’s your choice…or is it mine?

In the spirit of my recent blog post on connectivity, as well as the additional classroom discussions from this week, I feel it is only right to continue the conversation of connection into another area of the classroom- particularly, our students and their connection with devices (phones, tablets, computers, etc).

After reading Anya Kamenetz‘s piece, Laptops and Phones In The Classroom: Yea, Nay Or A Third Way?, I could not help but ponder, and even dwell on, how I address technology usage in my own class. And perhaps more importantly, if I address it correctly or if there even is a “correct” way to address it.

Kamenetz does such a great job of offering a number of different opinions and viewpoints from professionals around the country, all of whom are far more credible than me, which I appreciate. However, in doing so, I was left more lost on the topic than when I started. In addition, I kind of felt like I fit into a number of views, as opposed to just one, which further complicated the matter.

To begin, I have always had the attitude that what students do during their time in my class is their choice, I should not, nor can I, control them. While I do not say this explicitly to them, as my title suggests, it’s their tuition, it’s their choice. My only rule is that as long as what they are doing does not distract those around them, they are free to use their phones and their computers as they please. What works best for their learning, works best for me.

My reasoning for this is pretty simple: 1. It is a 50 minute class and pretty much everything I cover will be important, so they really have no reason to be distracted by a computer or phone anyways- aka, I beat them to the punch, 2. Some students do better with taking notes on their computer/tablet/etc. so why deprive them of that freedom and advantage? and 3. Given the structure of the course, much of our time is spent interacting with one another anyways, so the need for them is limited.

However, as noted, in reading the piece I could not help but think twice about my approach. At times I got caught thinking that maybe technology is not necessary and I should ban it, except for in the case of an emergency. Yet in doing this I might deprive a student from their ability to learn to the best of their ability, which is not fair to them. I then thought, what if I involved technology as a tool for learning? Maybe that could work. Regardless of how I spun it, I was flip flopping between views and approaches and honestly even until now, I still do not know what is correct.

Perhaps their is no correct answer. Perhaps it is dependent on the instructor. Perhaps it is more dependent on the group of students that semester. Who even knows. What I do know, or at least what I think I know, is this: technology is only going to advance further and become more pervasive in the lives of our students. What might work now, may not work in 5 years. What works in 5 years, might not work now.

As future classroom leaders I think it is not only beneficial, but also imperative to think about the classroom environment that we plan to create for those students. Regardless of whether it involves cellphones and computers, it is our duty to foster a space where learning and connection can occur, because while it may be their tuition, perhaps we do have a little say in the whole thing.

Thanks for making it this far- I’d love to hear your thoughts, feedback, or other!

POST 1: Connection and how we get there…

In watching, and then re-watching, Dr. Michael Wesch‘s TED talk on “What Baby George Taught Me About Learning,” I was completely enamored by the level of care and dedication that Dr. Wesch showed to his students. Moreover, the emphasis that he places on continued relationships with alumni, as well as cultivating and sustaining relationships with current students, really got me thinking about my role as a GTA and my classmates’ role as future teachers. In a quick google search on networked learning, I discovered that this means using, “a relational approach that focuses on the connections between learners, learners and teacher and between learners and resources, which does not privilege any particular relationship, either between people or between people and resources, and is supported by a community of researcher-practitioners, who are aligned with evolving, postmodern approaches to teaching praxis.” When reading the above definition, the word that sticks out most to me is connections. More specifically, how these connections can foster successful and joyous learning- something Dr. Wesch does such an incredible job with. As noted, I began thinking about my own class that I teach and the role that connection has on my students and their overall learning. Fortunately, I teach Public Speaking, a class where interaction and connection is imperative to my students success. I have to be able to talk and communicate with them in different and unique ways, depending on the student, on a consistent basis. Now, to be clear, I’m not eating lunch with my students where we avoid small talk nor am I emailing students from the past to ask what they took from my course, like Dr. Wesch does. However, it is a course that provides for closer contact with my students and for more interaction- something most normal lecture classes do not provide or allow for. This leads me to question how those aforementioned normal lecture classes are to close the gap when it comes to networked learning. Michael Wesch has earned the US Professor of the Year Award from the Carnegie Foundation, so one can assume that perhaps he has a little more flexibility and control when it comes to his classroom. Because of this, it may be easier for him to build connections and relationships with 200+ students. However, this is probably not the case for all professors and instructors. With that being said, how are we to foster these environments where learning is actually enjoyable for students and it isn’t just about passing? How do we create environments where students aren’t always questioning whether or not they “need to know this?” How, especially in these large lectures, do we create connections. How do we make learning better? Perhaps most importantly, how do we make teaching an engaging like Dr. Michael Wesch the norm? I understand this post has a number of questions and I apologize for the rambling, but I would love to hear your feedback on both the original video and my thoughts!

Profanity in the Classroom- What do we think?

I stumbled across an article today published on Inside Higher Ed titled, Cursing in Class and in said article, the authors explain, in short, that a professor in New Jersey is under investigation for cursing at a student in response to something the student said. While this article addresses an entirely different issue than what I thought the title suggested, it pressed me to consider all aspects of cursing in the classroom- especially since I am not only a student, but also because I am a TA.

As a TA, I personally do not “allow” cursing in my class- this is in quotations because while I do not specifically address the use of foul language, when I hear it I am quick to ask students to watch their profanity. My reasons behind disallowing cursing in my classroom is simple; for what reason, in a public speaking course, would anyone need to curse? Perhaps more importantly, many of our speeches are centered around professional development, thus I attempt to steer clear of language that might come across as unprofessional. 

However, I have also been in both undergraduate and graduate courses where teachers and professors allow profanity and even encourage it as a form of expression. Although I often refrain from engaging in this form of expression (my mom would lose her mind if she knew I used profanity in a classroom), I can completely understand the benefits of cursing and the outlet that it can provide for students. 

As a TA, my views are pretty dead-set on avoiding profanity in the classroom, but as a student, I see the potential rewards of its usage. This begs the question, how do I handle disallowing it as a TA, but also being okay with it when I am the student in the class?

Perhaps it has to do with the fact that I am a graduate student now and classes are smaller and more close-knight or perhaps its because I am now in charge of 80 students and I intend to leave a good impression on them. Regardless, I am delighted to hear how you all feel about profanity in the classroom- as a TA do you have different rules and expectations than you do as a student? Does cursing in the classroom bother you either way?

Blog Post 5: Future of the University

I must admit, I don’t know an extreme amount of information when it comes to higher education- I’m not super familiar with all of the in’s and out’s and the hidden nuances that occur behind the scenes (or even on the main stage). I don’t tend to overthink or question how things operate or why things are the way that they are, I usually just go with the flow and do what I believe is necessary for me to succeed. With that in mind, this final blog post made it a bit tough for me to decide what I believe should change in higher education.

However, after a discussion in one of my other graduate courses last week, I think I might have a pretty good idea of one thing that may need changing. In said class, we discussed how a lot of the information we are being presented in class is very theory based and lacks practical application. I feel as though a lot of attention is paid to how said information can be used in later PhD environments, however not everyone is on the PhD track. With that being said, I want to learn how I can apply what I am being taught to the real world and how and why these theories matter in the grand scheme of things.

Now, this is not to say that other programs and departments don’t focus on application, this is just something I have felt personally. I oftentimes leave class more confused than when I entered, as I never really get a good grasp of how it is used in real life settings. While I am totally aware of why theory based discussions are important, so too are expanding those discussions to apply to other areas of student interest and potential future careers. If I am sitting through a two hour and forty five minute discussion, I believe I should leave knowing how I can take what I have learned and use it not only in my career, but also in life situations.

As noted, I may be the only one experiencing this, but I would still love to hear feedback regardless. I look forward to hearing all of your thoughts not only on this post, but in your own posts about the future of higher ed!

Should required classes be…required?

I must admit, my title might be a bit misleading, as it probably lacks a bit of context. However, I thought it fit this blog topic, as I am currently teaching a course that is required by a number of majors in order to graduate. More specifically, it is a course that is often found outside of their major and their typical course work- Public Speaking.

As a Public Speaking GTA I often hear the constant back and forth from my students (and others) about whether or not they should be required to take courses such as Public Speaking. Some students are aware of the practicality of it and others just suffer through it in order to earn their diploma.

Not until recently, when a student proposed whether or not students should have to take public speaking as a speech topic, did I even consider a potential deeper meaning of required courses. As noted, because a number of majors at Virginia Tech require Public Speaking to graduate, I thought I might as well open up the can of worms that is required classes.

Let me be clear in stating that Public Speaking is the only course that I am personally aware of that is required for students in other majors to take. However, I think the discussion can apply to others similar. With that being said, my students speech topic really pressed me to question the deeper meaning of forcing people to take Public Speaking.

When I hear arguments supporting being required to take Public Speaking, they often include its practicality, it’s professional application, and it’s overall use as a life skill (and those select few who will just say it’s an easy A). On the flip side, those against the required Public Speaking credit will argue that they will never need it professionally, most people are already good when it comes to speaking publicly so it’s useless, and that it simply isn’t fair- especially for those with severe speech anxiety.

Obviously, I see day in and day out the benefits of Public Speaking, so I have my thoughts on the subject. However, I am open to and understand the arguments against it’s requirement. So, this begs the question, should students be required to take classes such as Public Speaking? Regardless of a student’s future endeavors, is taking a course such as this still applicable? I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

How does a University handle misconduct among athletes?

If you are familiar with or follow Deadspin, Sports Illustrated, TMZ or news sources similar, then you have probably stumbled across the video of the Virginia Tech lacrosse team singing racially insensitive lyrics on a players Snapchat. In the event that you are not familiar, a quick Google search will provide you with all the information needed.

Following a game over the weekend, a player posted a snapchat in which fellow players were singing the lyrics to Lil Dicky’s top-10 hit, “Freaky Friday.” Such lyrics, as noted, were racially insensitive. Being that it is very easy to find and has been shared on many news sources, I will refrain from posting it on this blog post, simply due to the possibility of it being removed.

Given our conversation in class a few weeks ago, I believe the topic at hand is mighty relevant and worthy of continued exploration. However, I am interested not only in an exploration from the side of the Athletic Department and coaching staff, but also from the university itself.

In a public statement, the coach apologized on behalf of the team, calling it a, “teachable moment,” and vowing to, “make it right.” However, when it comes to the university itself, there has been no official statements regarding the matter, only a tweet referencing the Virginia Tech lacrosse team statement.

With that being said, while the team and Athletic Department did issue a statement, in situations such as this, is it wise and perhaps, necessary, for the University to issue a statement as well? In addition, based on conversations we have had previously, how might you suggest the situation be handled?

Beyond statements of apology, what level of disciplinary action is necessary following an incident of this type? As the title notes, how should the University handle athlete misconduct- especially of this magnitude. While I have my own opinions on the matter, I am genuinely curious as to how my fellow classmates feel and what your opinions are? Please feel free to share.

Blog Post 4: Tech & Innovation In Higher Ed

I recently stumbled upon an article from Associate Professor of Communication Studies, Dr. Nick Bowman who works at West Virginia University. In said article, he discusses the role of social media in a 21st century classroom and more specifically, how he has used it in his own classroom. Given the positive interactions that I have had with social media in my own college courses, I found it rather enjoyable to read of his experiences with its implementation.

Dr. Bowman explains that many professors and teachers have gone so far as to ban computers and social media from the classroom, in an attempt to, “cut off access to what some consider to be weapons of mass distraction.” However, he sees no point in doing so. In fact, Bowman notes that he uses his students obsession with social media and their smart phones to his advantage. Given how large classrooms can be, using social media allows his students to connect to one another when they otherwise might not be able to.

He notes that he uses social media in a number of ways, such as being, “their problem-solver, sometimes as their opinion leader, and sometimes as their peer learner.” He continues on to say that some of his favorite moments with his students have come through social media, including when his classes Facebook page took their final exam discussion and “morphed” it into a tribute to the class and another, when a student took to social media to explain how his course and its materials helped her land a job.

Dr. Bowman urges his peers to consider using technology and social media in the classroom because, when used correctly and strategically, it can allow course concepts to become more real and more relative for students.

As noted, I have had extremely positive experiences with social media in the classroom. In reading this piece on how other professor’s and institutions are applying social media, I could not help but be confident in the future of social media and its applications in the classroom. Much like he says, if it is already such a prevalent part of students lives, why wouldn’t professors continue to use that to their advantage?

1 2