[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
Oleo de José Tola
From: Ken Klein
Date: 5/12/99
Time: 5:01:26 AM
Remote Name: 216.164.190.231
Having read the posts after mine ("post-posts"), I realized that I misinterpreted "self-reflection" and strayed from the task of evaluating individual vs. paired work. So, here is my second attempt . . .
Overall, I have always had very positive experiences working with a partner or in a group. I believe that we can learn best from and with others. Such work gives one the opportunity to receive feedback on one's thinking, writings, etc. before submitting a piece for formal review. If I understand a particular topic, the concepts are only reinforced by explaining it to another (others). In the event that I don't understand something or have misinterpreted something (like this task, for example!), I am given the opprtunity to receive feedback from my peers. I also think that everyone has his or her own strenghts & weaknesses and this is ideal for paired work (Angel & me!). However, as previous classmates have mentioned, it is sometimes easier to work alone (in terms of scheduling, meeting deadlines, etc.).
In regard to articles that I liked best . . . I enjoyed the articles assigned for the final paper (Dornyei & Nyikos and Truscott). Previous articles I thought were particluarly helpful include Krashen's article on the input hypothesis, Smitherman's article on ebonics and Warschauer's article on CMC.
A suggestion for improving the class would be for students to arrange a time & day to informally meet & discuss the assigned readings (voluntary participation). I briefly mentioned this at the beginning of the semester and regret not selling the idea to others. This live communication would be another option besides the discussion forum set-up on this site. (I worked in a study group last semester in Dr. Nakayama's class and it was very helpful).
OK, that's all folks! Thanks and best of luck to everyone . . . . Ken