MOO vs. Skype in online classes about
writing, and how it relates to this business of dogs
I must say the MOO reminds me of my first
experiences in internet chat-rooms in high school in like 1998. While
poking around MOO I saw that it was founded on May 9, 2000, which seems
about right. It is amazing to me how far digital interactively has come in only
a decade. There are currently so many robust technologies to stay in touch with
friends, family and coworkers that provide an environment that rivals face-to-face
interaction.
Skype
and FaceTime have revolutionized remote interactions on personal and
professional levels, as have webinar technologies for remote presentations. Technologies
that integrate multiple sensory platforms are more likely to appeal to and
reach a wider audience of learners.
My
last TTU writing class employed audio skype and freescreensharing.com for
visuals. The combination of these
two free technologies is a very similar experience to Citrix Go to Webinar,
where all participants can speak and share their screens. This was my first
course at TTU and I was very pleased with the platform and how it facilitated
the learning environment. While the focus of this course and the last course is
composition, by in large I find verbal interaction most effective to improve
composition. I think it is widely acknowledged that misunderstand more often
occurs when communication is pared down, as in email. Composition is
communication and the more sensory modes that are integrated into the learning
process lead to a richer and more effective environment.
I
have also taken asynchronous writing courses at Austin Community College, where
there was no interaction with classmates or the instructor. These courses were
focused on grammar and editing and the asynchronous format was acceptable
because the materials were rules based rote learning, therefore a self-paced
non-collaborative class format fit the subject matter.
I
also have extensive experience with Citrix Go to Webinar as part of American
Medical Writers Association. I am president of the Southwest Chapter, which
encompasses Texas and the states that touch it. The large geographic area makes
it difficult to include all members at a meeting at any specific location.
Moving our meetings to dual in-person and webcast has greatly increased
participation in chapter events by allowing non-locals to attend meetings in
real time, as well as those who are busy with other obligations during the
event, but would like to view the event at a later time.
While
many of my classmates indicated that they like the MOO format, for various
reasons such as: not getting dressed, interruptions, I find it detached,
truncated and discursive. These feelings could also be partially due to
unfamiliarity with the subject matter and format – both of which may grow on me
with time. Or they could be due to a familiarity and expectation of other
richer more interactive formats available. Only time will tell.
How
this relates to anonymity and abnormal discourse…. Personally I dislike anonymity – don’t see the point of hiding yourself or your views in a country that supports and grows from free speech. Abnormal discourse is necessary because it allows the challenge of
authority and of knowledge or practices that may be unproductive.
My dogs only have one business and
that is sleeping.