Hi all,
Toss this into the "for what it's worth" file...
When I'm standing in front of my classes, I can say things I don't
believe, for the purpose of being provocative. I'm trying to get my
students to use their new-found knowledge to analyze popular ideas. And
my students, most of the time, know what I'm doing. My facial
expressions or tone of voice clues them into it. If it's a *hot* topic,
though, some will miss it and assume I'm arguing from my point of view.
It's the old "playing devil's advocate".
What I've noticed is that when I do it in class, it (usually) works.
When a student in class has tried it, it has always flopped badly.
Students always seem to assume that whatever view expressed by a fellow
student is *really* that student's view. When the student explains that
they were trying to get people to think, the rest of the class raises
their eyebrows.
Students don't mind when their instructor tries to teach them a lesson.
When a peer tries to teach them a lesson, the person is ostracized. In
short, the peer is viewed as trying to put themselves on the same level
on the instructor -- it's seen a power play.
Which brings me to how I view Michael (and Louis, for that matter)...
Both are trying to teach us lessons. Their techniques, for me, seem
like power plays. If I were taking a class from them, they would be in
a position to teach me all the lessons they'd like, and I'd probably be
perfectly okay with their respective methodologies. In this forum,
though, they are my peers. And like my students, my tendency is to
ostracize... I delete their posts without reading them.
--
Sue Frantz, Asst Prof of Psych [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Faculty Office Bldg, 2400 Scenic Drive Office: (505)439-3752
New Mexico State Univ. - Alamogordo Fax: (505)439-3802
Alamogordo, NM 88310 USA http://web.nmsu.edu/~sfrantz
