1. As a team,
you need to prepare both pro and con arguments.
2. Meet with
group members online and develop, then present plan for team organization.
3. Research
and prepare argument.
4. Submit
brief summaries of three pro and three con points.
5. Captain of
first team presents first argument point.
6. Second team
rebuts.
7. Continue
presenting and rebuttals until all points are covered.
8. In the
journal, record dates, ideas, information, and times of debate as it unfolds.
9. Write
response to final exam topic.
The last assignment for the class turned away from the traditional
essay into the realm of debate. Students were required to divide into two groups, pro and
con, then they held an online debate about human cloning. Groups had five days to prepare
for the marathon debate. In a two-day session, each group presented three points of
argument and rebutted the opposing points. At the end of the second day, a neutral class
judge chose the winner, based on a set of posted criteria. Students were also supposed to
keep journals and logs recording their impressions of the process of the debate, as they
were told that the final timed essay would be about the process (not the topic).
Difficulties in Interpretation
of Assignments. Within a few hours of receiving the assignment, questions arose;
Melinda had the first question, "Could you please explain in more depth how this
debate is suppposed to go. And what are we suppose to write about for our final paper.
Will this be our own paper on pros and cons of cloning?" Cassandra inquired next,
"Do RD5 and FD5 only refer to the papers to be done on the examination day, May
12?" Sue added, "About the RD5 leaders for Team #1: Robert and myself. When are
the RD5's due?" Melinda thought of more questions to ask,
Who
will be giving the suggestions for the final paper? And will we need a Peer Comment Sheet?
I think I finally get what you want for our last paper. You want us to draw our own
conclusion about Human Cloning based on the debate.
The teacher responded to each of these, disabusing any errant
thought, "I'm more interested in what you learn from or about the debate process. I
can't give you any more information -- otherwise I'd take the "surprise" element
out of the final exam." When the final was posted, Rhonda then wrote, "I can not
get this whole group thing straight. I was happy to work with my group during the debate,
but what does my group have to do with my final??"
Reading and Understanding Online
Text. Monica continued to have problems in this area; she reported,
We have to pay have close
atttention what are we reading, if not, we have to get back and read the whole message
again. For me, I had to read the same message at least 2 times to undersatnd what the
other students meant.
"Etalk" Versus Rhetoric. Of the students who began the course, Robert,
Rhonda, and Steve, often used "etalk," that which is too informal for the
rhetorical situation of a classroom. By the end of the course, each of them had attained
the proper register for an academic course. One of Robert's final remarks showed this
change. In a response to a peer, he wrote,
The
main thing is just make sure you finish your RD5 by 10:00p.m.tonight and send it to your
group, me, and Professor. After, wait for people to comment on your RD5, then write out
your RD5 and hand it in before midnight. That's all I think.
This is markedly different from his first message to the class,
with it lack of punctuation, interspersed with colloquialisms. Steve and Rhonda displayed
the same attention to convention. Carl, on the other hand, felt free to break through when
he wrote, "You-know-what? Saturday better 'cause Sunday Muddah Day- Gn-be buzy,
eh?"
Problems of Unstructured Time and
the "Newness". While no direct comments were made by participants, an
indirect message by Monica, alludes to a missing student, one who had trouble in this
category throughout the semester. She wrote, "Steve never reply to any of the mails
from this debate. So that means, each group members have to work harder to fullfill his
place."
Method of Delivery: Technology. The
largest area of concern came from the "timed" assignments. Assignment Five
consisted of two major parts, both of which were time dependent. The first was the debate.
Both of these created problems for students due to access difficulties. Monica wrote,
"We suppose to do the final argument. I don't have chance to get on the computer on
that afternoon, because I am the Econimics Lab monitor every Wednesday." Carl had to
turn in his final summation of the debate late because
I
missed most of the day trying to get in the system-finally forced to have my wife drop me
off at CC so I could participate. Then at home, late at night, I stewed up more arguments
and sent them in based on the above info.
This influenced his team's grade. By the
time he could post his summation, the judging had already been completed. Moreover, he
ended up having computer problems when the final was scheduled. "I had a bit of a
struggle getting in because my MAC TCP was apparently in the wrong "PORT." All I
know is my screen kept freezing, and I'd have to restart!" Since the final paper was
also timed, this was problematic. In addition, the system went down during the two hours
allotted to team 1. Sue, the group leader for the team, wrote, "The unix went down
this morning just as I was about to begin. I apologize for any inconveniences."
Monica responded, "i have hard time to get back in. The unix account went down quite
a few times at my home system too." Sue expressed her frustration,
I
don't know what to do at this point. I was planning to do Session #1. My screen froze and
the unix shut down. I also had the responsibility as one of the leaders. I do hope that
this situation doesn't affect their grade. Since it's too late to do Session #1, my other
option is to only do Session #2? Are there any other options? I suppose that if there
isn't, then I would have to go to UH. Please let me know.
The teacher responded with a revision of the schedule,
"Because of the system breakdown, we'll extend session #1 another three hours -- RD5
due at 1:00pm and FD5 due at 3:00pm. I hope this works out." Soon after Cassandra
checked in, "I have just managed to log-in after I was cut-off at 10a.m." The
other team did not encounter the same types of glitches.
Monica was the only student who made a direct comment about her
writing process, describing why she had trouble with the debate. She, in the reflexive
mode, stated, "when I sit in front of the computer and start to write, my mind just
totally blind." She did not attribute this to the computer. Rather, "I don't
know what I should write about, but I have all the ideas for my point. If I don't have any
ideas, I won't write them down," restating a point learned in the first lesson:
brainstorming is a must for writing.
As noted, the Assignment Five consisted of a debate and a final
essay. Of the 143 message, 58 of them contained argumentation about human cloning. For
every point mentioned, a counterpoint was produced. Most of the points consisted of seven
to thirteen sentences supporting their claims. Everyone participated, except Steve. He did
not respond to emails or calls from his team. Monica participated minimally; she wrote,
I
just can get online till 9:00 in the evening, so I just send some thing very briefly to
Jeen about the adventages of organ donor. That night, I decided to stay up the whole night
to read all the meesages and reply as much as I can. But I wouldn't do it, I only stayup
till 1:30 and wake up at 5:00 the following morning to see the next point we have to
rebute on.
Moreover, this is where her reading
skills interfered the most,
Druing the debate we have
to read at least 20 mails per day, we have to pay have close atttention what are we
reading, if not, we have to get back and read the whole message again.
Thus, in the debate interchange she
contributed only one message.
The second part of the assignment was the final exam. Students were
put into two groups. Each group was given one topic; each student had two hours to write
and submit an essay to the entire group for peer editing. Then they were given another two
hours to peer edit and rewrite their drafts. Immediately, as mentioned previously, the
first group had system trouble; thus, they were given additional time to complete their
essays.
Other issues were also on students' minds. On the day of the final
Monica asked, "By the way, when you will you post up our score for the other papers?
I did not heard from you since I turn in the last two papers." The teacher responded,
Scores
for papers 1, 2, and 3 have been sent to all of you who turned them in on time. You should
be receiving scores for paper #4 today, between noon and midnight. Paper #5 scores should
be completed by tomorrow. Scores for revised drafts should also be done by tomorrow.
The following day, Julie wrote, "Can we redo our rough draft
#4 and turn it in?" The teacher informed her,
I'm
assuming you mean Final Draft #4, the research paper. Yes, but only if (1) the second of
the two scores is lower than 174, e.g., 60+150 (the paper's an "A" if the 2nd
score is 174 or higher) and (2) you get the revision to me by noon today. I need to get
the grades in by this afternoon.
During the final assignment, much communication took place,
primarily around three different threads. First, students wanted to have a face-to-face
meeting. Melinda initiated the discussion. Others responded. Steve who was no longer an
active participant in the workings of the class, wrote, "Melinda, Would love pizza,
but can you set the time to be earlier, just a bit. I work soon afterwards." Sue
pushed for more specifics, "Hey kids!! I know that there are no definite plans as to
where and what we are planning to do." And finally as the decision was made,
Cassandra remarked, "I'll be there. 12.30pm K. Pizza Hut on Saturday SEE YOU
TO-MORROW 12 NOON. "
The second thread consisted of comments about the debate. Carl went
so far as to say it was fun,
I'm
sure the process of the debate hasn't been harmed by my feeble arguments, and in seeing
the fairness, your Honor will "Grandfather" the Ammendment subsequent to the
latest Directive from Chairman Jon. Having fun on this end. It was WAY FUN.
Others offered congratulations, "Applause, applause, applause
from Cassandra. Thank you very much for the analysis." Melinda stated, "I
forgive everybody. (even the con team for winning.) It must still be euphoria that this is
done. Applause, Appluase, clap, clap, rah, rah, rah, sis kum ba."
Class closure was the topic of the third thread. Monica wrote,
"If I have a chance I will love to enjoy this great expereicne once again," and
"Mr. S, you did a superb job with this internet course." Sue, not wanting to let
go it seems, added, "Hey kids!! Julie emailed me a few days ago, and said that she
will be in H. on 5/16. We're planning to go clubbing, and maybe do some other stuff. If
any one of you people's wanna come, email Julie or page me." Julie in her last
message wrote,
Hi
everyone! Just wanted to say "THANKS" for everything! I had so much fun with you
all in this first time ever english internet course. It was very interesting doing this!
As much as I can say, I made great friends through this and I hope to keep in touch with
you all!
Feedback
Because of the nature of the tasks in Assignment Five, students had
little opportunity to offer feedback during the debate, and the turn around time for
writing their final essay, allowed for only a minimal amount. Thus, many comments were of
a more social nature. After the announcement of the winner of the debate, Carl wrote,
"The process is far more important than the results, and I congratulate the CON team
for attempting to make such a difficult argument in a country based on so many liberties
and freedoms." In response to group message, he wrote, "Great message, Sue! Nice
and EXPLICIT! Thanks." However, some students did attempt to help others with their
final drafts. Robert offered,
I think you should expand
and explain more on the statement 'A person without an opinion is like a plant or piece of
machinery.' Your thesis is very clear and concise, again it goes more on the technical
side of the value of debating. You might want to add real life situations or events that
have affected you. So far your essay looks good. Try to finish it up in your FD5 before
midnight. Also, don't forget to write your name, class, date, and heading okay.
Carl tried to help Melinda with some
problem areas,
You
can use descriptive experiences from earlier in the class- not just the debate- as well as
some from your life to support your thesis. In fact, it my help contrast the point by
using in-person experiences as apposed to the on-line teamwork we had here.
Cassandra's comments were more
succinct, "To narrow down you thesis, please consider just one of them cooperation or
planning." Despite time limitations, the students who offered feedback used revision
comments, not corrective comments that they had began the class with.
Only one comment surfaced in this category during the final
assignment. After Carl apologized for sending his late debate summation through, Julie
commented,
Don't
feel bad about sending the final closing before any of us could read it. Just things
happen so fast, sometimes you don't now! Don't put yourself down, at least you did it and
it was pretty good, as a matter of fact!
In the final flurry of trying to set up a time to meet, all kinds of information were
shared. Class members offered addresses, phone and pager numbers. Other tidbits also were
shared. Sue disclosed, "On Friday afternoon I have to get my wisdom tooth pulled out.
And on Sunday I'm doing the H3 run. So, I need to get home quite early." Carl revealed, "my Mother was Deputy Attorney
General for 20 yrs. The stuff rubs off . . . (Not) Oh-and I watched a lot of Perry
Mason."
