[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
Oleo de José Tola
From: Donna D.
Date: 5/7/99
Time: 10:58:45 PM
Remote Name: 38.14.126.158
Hi everyone!
As I sat reading the articles for the final projects I thought about the collaborative work Assumpta and I did together for our mid-term. For a moment I greatly missed the "intellectual partner" with whom I shared my thoughts, exchanged my ideas, discussed important issues and, most of all, shared my frustrations. Thanks to Dr. Sotillos, and especially to Assumpta, my experience working collaboratively proved to be much more fruitful than it had been in the past. As I mentioned in class, past experiences in which I worked collaboratively were neither intellectually rewarding nor personally pleasant. In one specific course (a graduate course in educational psychology) the instructor placed us in groups at the onset of the semester. Hardly anyone in the class knew each other and, since it was a required course in graduate education, many students had different academic interests. Most of the students in the class were interested in school psychology and educational psychology. At the time my sole interest was foreign language teaching and was unfortunately assigned to a group in which no one else shared this same interest. We spent most of our study sessions deciding on a topic that would be academically challening and interesting to all of us. This turned out to be a very difficult task. The students interested in school psychology dominated most of the discussions and encouraged input on topics related to their field of interest. Myself and one other student in the group, who was pursuing a doctorate in educational psychology, found this experience so utterly frustrating that we both thought we would never work on a group project again (or at least we would avoid any attempt to work on such a project when we did not know the members of our group well enough). What was particularly unpleasant about this experience was that we were forced to work with students whose interest were completely different from ours. If we had had a better idea of each other's strengths and weakness, if we had some idea about each other's area of interest, perhaps this could have been a different experience. We completed the project, but we each wrote our own individual section of the paper. The relationship among the members of the group was far from balanced which, in turn, left little room for intersubjectivity. Prior and following this experience I always found that I am the most productive when I work alone. Although I greatly enjoy exchanging ideas with classmates and other educators, when it comes to writing I do not see myself sitting behind a laptop with several other people and writing about a specific topic. Working collaboratively with Assumpta, however, has greatly changed my view about collaborative work. As I mentioned, she was truly an intellectual partner. We engaged in meaningful discussions, explored ideas together, and raised important questions about the issues we were examining. I believe this experience was positive because we had so much in common. We both found the topic interesting and worked thoroughly analyze it. I only wish my former classmates in eduational psychology would have been mored interested in social constructivist theory, rather than I.Q. assessment; perhaps my initial experience in colloborative learning would have been more positive. I also believe it is very difficult for people to work collaboratively when they have different writing styles. You cannot simply ask group members to write different sections of a paper and then expect to piece it together in a few hours. The editing process requires a great deal of time. This factor must be taken into account when working collaboratively, since time constraints are always a problem when engaged in a research project.
As a result of this course I view collaborative work much more favorably than I have in the past. I also thank Dr. Sotillo for continually encouraging us to revise our papers and submit them for publication. For those of us who hope to pursue a doctorate one day, this support is greatly appreciated. Along with discovering the benefits of collaborative work, my mid-term project also introduced me to the wonderful world of "bodyless interaction" or "cyberspace communication." Thus, in this course I not only learned about SLA Theory, but about the fascinating field of computer-mediated communication. By examining different electronic discussions I learned a great deal about communities of practices and about the men and women who are engaged in such practices. Often, "bodyless interaction" is more revealing than face-to-face interaction.
One last reflective thought, of all the articles we read this semester I found Lantolf's to be the most insightful. As Lantolf argues, we must continue to "let all the flowers bloom" and reject attempts to monologize the field of SLA. To have a single, unified, absolute and monolithic SLA theory would be a gross injustice. Even as we engage in our own work we should always be open to new theories and a new metaphors that give new life to the stale ones. For as Lantolf concludes, if we understand the need for diversity and accept the relativity of truth and reality, we are essentially giving voice to all our different world views. For "you never know which ones will catch the eye to become tomorrow's realities."
Best of luck to all! Thank you again Dr. Sotillo for your guidance and wisdom......Donna D.