As a professor, I want to be perceived as a teacher who is respected and thought of
as intelligent. I also want to be seen as someone who sets up a positive,
comfortable, and fun learning environment. How exactly does one achieve this?
How do you walk the fine line between being too aggressive and strict and too
passive and nice? How do you preserve the formality of face-to-face learning in
an online setting, especially in a course about writing?
This week Warnock
discusses that even when teaching online, teachers have a distinct voice and
persona. In turn, how instructors choose to present themselves can affect the
behavior and work performance of his or her students. Warnock explains that
teachers develop a personality—how students perceive them—when they teach (2).
Depending on what that personality type is, it may have either a positive or
negative effect on the students and their learning experiences.
Personas to avoid
Warnock outlines a few of the personality types that instructors may want to avoid in an online learning setting:
- Unapproachable sage
- Apathetic drone
- Chum
- Fool
- Harsh Critic (4-6)
Warnock’s personas
are exactly what they sound like. The unapproachable sage stifles student
contribution because the students feel they have nothing worthy to add,
compared to the comments made by the instructor (4). Apathetic drone describes
a teacher who comes across uninterested in the course, content or students
themselves (5). The fool makes mistakes that may be viewed as unforgivable by
students, and the harsh critic strongly criticizes the students (5-6). And then
there’s the chum. This particular
persona intrigues me because I feel it relates back to our bigger question:
Where should we draw the line between formality and informality in an online
writing class?
The
Chum
As Warnock
explains, the chum is someone who allows excessive informalities into the
online discussions (5). When does informality cross the line and hinder the
students’ ability to learn and become better writers? With social media,
e-mail, texting, and yes, even blogging, new developments in our language and
how we communicate have emerged. For each of these technological writing
platforms, it’s very natural to use informalities, shortcuts, and creative
language. However, should they be deemed appropriate for an online class about
writing? From reading about Warnock’s description of the chum, I found myself
asking several questions regarding writing style in an online setting:- Are informal acronyms such as LOL appropriate?
- Does punctuation matter?
- Is it okay to use creative spellings such as u for you and thnx for thanks?
- Are emoticons appropriate?
- Is it okay to use some curse words?
The
Bottom Line
Now, the answer to
these questions may seem obvious in the context of an online class about
teaching writing. However, when considering the writing style used by most
people in electronic media, the answer may not be so simple. The NCTE advocates
that it is important for writing to be correct, but that it is also important
for writing to have a purpose and be suited for the intended audience. With this
in mind and taking Warnock into consideration, I think it’s important to teach
students that there’s a time and place for informal writing styles. Some may
disagree with me, but I think for the most part, an online writing class should
try to follow typical writing conventions: punctuation, grammar, spelling, and
mechanics. There seems to be a time and a place for overlooking punctuation and
creative spelling, like when texting, commenting on Facebook, or sending an
e-mail to a friend. Depending on how teachers present themselves in an online class, students may feel it's appropriate to disregard punctuation or even enage in cursing. I don't think emoticons or acronyms are bad. In fact, I myself use informalities on Facebook, in texts, when writing e-mails, and while tweeting on Twitter.
I think students should feel a sense of responsibility for what they write and how they write--This is why I agree with Warnock and want to avoid looking like a chum. The bottom line: students need to understand that these types of informalities probably will not be acceptable in academic, formal, and professional writing.
What do you think? Should these informalities be allowed in an online setting? Or, do they hinder students' abilities to write for a professional/formal audience?
Works Cited
National
Council of Teachers of English. NTCE Beliefs about the Teaching of Writing.
1998. Web. 30 January 2013.Warnock, Scott. Teaching Writing Online: How & Why. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English, 2009. Print.
Hunter,
ReplyDeleteI love this list of online personas; it's so true that we're constantly presenting some sort of ethos to our students...even online. As far as informality goes, I think we need to use some common sense. Online classes should not be less formal than a seated class. Especially when it comes to student work, i think the rules are largely the same. I can see some leeway in blog postings/comments/etc, but formal papers should be treated as such.
I wonder, though if you feel like the list of personas is missing something. I, personally, have been a part of online classes with very little instructor presence at all. It's almost as if the instructor set up the course to run itself and then walked away. I think it can be very demeaning as a student, especially when that instructor doesn't respond to questions in a timely manner or at all. I think this is the ethos we most want to avoid. Above all else, we need to be there for our students. In the case of an absent instructor, it would be even more difficult for students to be socialized into the new discourse community--thus, it would be even harder for them to understand the level of formality that is necessary in college writing. It's a two-fold problem.
Wow, Erik, It's great to hear from someone so soon. Yes, I agree with you. Online classes should resemble physical classrooms. I also think that leeway in blogs, postings, and comments seems reasonable, also as an outlet to explore the writing styles that are emerging as a result of electronic communication and social media. However, when it comes to formal papers and assignments, these writing styles should be foregone.
ReplyDeleteThe instructor you speak of sounds similar to the apathetic drone, but your example takes this to the extreme. I have also experienced this extreme type of instructor. It seems some teachers do, in fact, approach online teaching as if it's the computer's job to do the teaching. I really like what you said about how we need to be there for our students. I couldn't agree more. Teaching students about these informalities is a must! This will better acclimate students to their particular discourse community while also stressing the that there's a time and place for writing informalities.
Reading about the personalities that Warnock points out in his book got me to thinking about my first experience with an online class. I was guilty of all the things that Warnock points out. First, I took the class because I thought it would be easier than a f2f class. Second, my access to internet was less than sub-par and back-up technology? Psssh. Are you kidding me? This was before phones with internet access. Heaven forbid I would have to go to school to use a computer. No way. Last, I wasn’t the least bit motivated. In fact, I’m not sure how I was even motivated to sign up for the class in the first place. Figuring out all that the class entailed was overwhelming. And although I do take full responsibility for being a poor student, I will say that the persona of my instructor did not make me want to do any better. She fell into the “apathetic drone” category. She was barely present in discussion, non-inviting and did not clearly outline expectations.
ReplyDeleteThis got me to thinking about the benefits of having a good online persona. All the instructors in the online classes I have taken since then have been great. I got a good sense of their personality and because they had a good online persona, I wanted to do well to please them. I think this is a factor that is underestimated in the online setting. In fact, Warnock doesn’t even discuss it in his book. So, in summary, have a good persona, and students who otherwise have all the odds stacked up against them, might at least have that going for them to help with motivation.
I had a similar experience with an online instructor. The instructor's persona really does have an effect on the students and their work performance. I like what you said about wanting to do well to please the instructor. Students should not only do good work for themselves but also because they are motivated by their instructors. This factor does seem to be underestimated in online classrooms.
Delete