10.23

NOTE: assignments are now significantly different from what is listed on the calendar. DO NOT use the calendar as a reference for what to do next class.  Use the Read/Blog assignments listed at the end of Blog posts as directions for how to prepare for class.

Using Gee's language in our own example.  During the first part of class, we started an analysis of a community of practice (school classroom= students and teachers  in general with some attention to the way we do things in our research methods class ) in terms of the kinds of saying, doing, and being that takes place within that community.  This was an effort to "play the game" (as in the Yu Gi Oh example from your book) as a way to get a more clear understanding of the terms Gee has introduced.  We made a list on the board of the kinds of things we do in the classroom, the kinds of communications we engage in, and the ways we are => in terms of being students and a teachers.  We included information about what we all knew was expected of us in order to be accepted in the classroom (eg the teacher stands at the front of the class and can move about, students will not circulate around the class, during class discussioins students address their comments to the teacher,  etc).  Within this example, this list of what it is OK to say/do/be is the set of practices defined by (or expected) in our classroom (a community of practice).  These ways of saying, doing and being are also important features of  the  Discourses associated  with this community of practice = Discourses for being a student, and Discourses for being a teacher.

After we noted the ways of saying, doing, and being associated with our community of practice, we raised questions about the kinds of building activities language (and meaning making activities associated with language) were associated with what we said, did, and were.
:
1.  what kinds of meanings (significance) were created through what particular kinds of activities & language;

2   what kinds of practices were both created through our talk = and  assumed as normal or important to the functioning of our classroom;

3.  how our physical location in the room, and how the kinds of things we said and didn't say created particular identities (eg. teacher, student)

4. how our use of language, the physical structure of the room, and our agreed upon practices created certain kinds of relationships (where the teacher "gives" up some power in group work - but continues "surveillance" by circulating through the groups)

5.  what kinds of politics are created? the relationships from #4 often are related to the distribution of power or control over social goods (grades, the right to speak, prestige), and we looked at how the "social goods"  created through teacher/student interactions influenced what we would and would not say => as when you observed that students often do not ask about material they don't understand because the social goods of "respect" and "being thought of as a good student=> able to understand the material on your own, may feel more immediately valuable that what might be gained through asking a "stupid" question.

6. We also looked at how the (often unconsciously) agreed upon practices within our classroom created certain kinds of connections between identities (being a good student) and practices (coming to class prepared, answering the teacher's questions, staying on topic, demonstrating knowledge of the teacher's preferred topic) and that sometimes "being a good student" could be an obstacle to student's learning needs (asking questions, going back over material from a previous lesson, going off topic to connect to something the student can use to understand the material on the teacher's agenda).

7. Finally, we might have mentioned the different systems for communicating  (the blog, emails, teacher comments, spoken communications) favored students or the teacher.  We might also have considered how the different modes of communication favored different assumptions, values and beliefs about what needed to be communicated regarding our class activities - and how it needed to be communicated.

The purpose of this exercise was to use Gee's language in terms of an experience you are part of.  The reason for identifying & practicing the use of his terms for the "building tasks" is because you can used an examination of what is created in your data (both for your short analysis, and the research project)= as a way to explore what is happening.  Asking about which building tasks are most important, what they are doing, and how they work in your data can help you identify codes and categories for what your subjects are "saying, doing and being" = and you can use those codes and categories to build your theory.

Form-function correlations, situated meanings, and figured worlds.   After we finished analyzing the classroom in terms of how we talked in class, the way writing was assigned and assessed, and the physical space, we talked through a transcript from an interview with a Kean student who was very experienced with computers and gaming.  The focus of the interview was on defining literacies and gaming practices - and whether there were any points of overlap in these definitions.   We noticed in the talk between Ch and B that Ch very much wanted to identify the kinds of learning, problem solving, and social interaction associated with gaming with academic literacies, and that B was - if not reluctant to do that - then at least he was not initially seeing the connections.  We noted the persuasive moves Ch made and the ways B received those moves.  We also noted B's comments with respect to gaming (fooling around, for leisure & recreation, not as important as work - but at the same time it was his passion) and noted that taken together these two conflicting sets of orientations towards gaming seemed to include assumptions, values, and beliefs about video games that might come from two different figured worlds/cultural stories = one for the mainstream or standard story about of video games as a waste of time or "fooling around,"  and another where they are part of an identity (Discourse) for a group of people who are very good at a set of interactive practices, who see themselves as "outsiders" in some ways (at least outsiders with respect to the mainstream - maybe including school)..  Ch's comments seemed directed toward linking the learning strategies in video games with literacies where literacies are ways to make meanings through practices associated with reading + writing  ("that's literacy. . ." "so you know a lot of software?" etc).  Her assumptions, values and beliefs about games (and literacy) seem to come from a different cultural story => one common among composition teachers and researchers who study learning and new communication technologies.  So in some ways - Ch and B were using the same words = but with different assumptions, values and beliefs attached to them, so they were not really understanding each other.  B would need to re-arrange the way he thought about "gamer Discourse" - in some ways - to receive what Ch was saying about gaming and literacy, and Ch needed to think about the difference B was pointing out in more detail.

At the end of class, we took a minute to do some writing/thinking about the nature of what was at stake for B to remain in his story, and for Ch to get him to change, and vice versa.  Keep thinking about that one - as it brings together the three points in chapter 5 about form-function correlations (how meanings are made with "rules"), situated meanings (how the ways certain uses in particular times & places make meanings) and figured worlds - how the assumptions, values & beleifs attached to certain language and use ALSO make meanings.   


Permission forms and debriefing. We ended class discussion of the permission forms & conferences.  I handed out signed copies of the permission form you need to provide to your research participants.  I role-played (thank you, Tshandi) the kind of talk you need to go through with your research participant to present the permission form, and pointed out the different places on the form that you need to sign and provide contact information.

I have posted electronic copies of the forms to the right.  If you lose the signed copy - you will need to print another copy (from the link to the right) and ask me to sign it.

You will need to give one signed copy to each participant, and one collect one signed copy to give to me.  You should provide me with the signed copies either before or when you begin collecting your data.

We also looked at the de-briefing form.  Be sure to fill in your name, email, and phone information so that your participants can be in touch if they want to.

For next class:
We will be working on interviewing - so come to class with some notes, ideas for the kinds of questions you want to ask your interview subject.

We will also continue to review + apply the material from Gee.  

I will collect signed informed consent forms as soon as you have them ready.  That way - as soon as we finish your interview/research tools = you can begin collecting data. 

Read: Gee 6-8.  Focus on the new terms.  Make notes about concepts you want to spend time going over.  

Blog 15:  Post your best version of your research question for your final research project.  Write a description of what kind of information you want to gather from your research participants, and begin a list of the kinds of questions you want to ask to gather your information.

Blog 16: Post your plan for finishing/revising your draft short analysis.  You should also post any questions/confusions you have about what you need to do to finish the project.  You are welcome to be in touch with me (schedule a conference) as part of your work on this blog.  The final short analysis project will be due.Nov. 6.