John (and Maggie and others)

it's a gratifying feeling, if somewhat strange, to be getting such 
supportive messages. 

On your comment, John, that you "think this IS kind of thing that 
we at UoP in Learning Development, and that some colleagues in 
other Universities in similar roles, actually do when we work with 
students": 
For my part, I think that much of what I am arguing for fits very well 
with what 'Learning Development' practitioners actually do. I guess 
what I am doing further is suggest a way of reframing that 
(successful, effective) practice - away from a possessive-
instrumentalist conceptualisation of skill towards the relational 
perspective/ paradigm and the practices/ emergent identity 
approach. I doing so, hopefully, new insights may develop that 
wouldn't even come on the radar under the possessive-
instrumentalist approach. 

With regard to the 'we' - well I confess to the use of a rhetorical 
device. I am trying to appear inclusive, in the hope that this will 
create inclusion. I discuss with students how academic writers 
may sometimes use the term 'we' in just such a way -again, as a 
way of enabling them to become dis- enchanted by texts they 
encounter, to demystify, de-fetishise, etc.

But I do think that it would be more likely that a 'we' and 'they', 
'us'/'them'  divide would be broken down or dissolved by the 
approach for which I argue. The possessive-instrumentalist skills 
approach does tend to lead to the kind of reaction by teaching staff 
characterised by, eg
'they really should have these skills already'
'I haven't got time to teach skills as well as the syllabus'
'I'm teach XYZ - I can't bexpected to teach these skills'
'they get a class on skills during induction'

As you know, I'm not directly and formally engaged in 'Learning 
Development' - my attempts to take on such a role being 
unsuccessful in large part, I guess, because (at the time) my views 
were seen to be aberrant to those caught up in the dominant 
ideology. But I have found that other teaching staff have become 
supportive when they have listened to what I argue, and that does, I 
feel, give me some warrant to 'speak on their behalf'. At the very 
least, as you indicate, there is a 'problem' with regard to teaching 
staff who are not 'one of us', so why not try adopting the practices/ 
emergent identity approach?


You aks "isn't there also something good, legitimate, useful, 
important, necessary about the role (subject position) of 
'student'?". Well, yes - but remember that I am using a relational 
conceptualisation of 'emergent identity'. It's not just how the 
individual sees themself NOR how others view them, but the 
interaction between these, that is significant (ie consequential). 
That is why I have presented the diagrammatic form of the claim-
affirmation model of emergent identity with the central 'zone X', 
'under-determined identity'. This may be viewed as the zone in 
which rehearsal takes place, rehearsal of desired/ aspired-to 
identity **and** the practices, the effective performance of which 
may be deployed to warrant the claim on the desired/ aspired-to 
identity. 
A key point here is that this can be done partially (cf Lave and 
Wenger's use of 'peripheral' in their key concept) - isn't that how we 
might understand the 'patchwork text' approach? Relating this to 
the thread on modularisation, we might now understand how 
modularity creates conditions under which students' degrees of 
freedom to rehearse and practice in such a way is overtaken by the 
pressure to produce summatively assessed work within a very 
short time period.

OK. I'm done (for now).

regards


Len



On 8 May 2006, at 12:25, John Hilsdon wrote:

> Hi Len and All
> 
> I am very supportive of the ideas Len put forward in response to the
> message I sent last Friday.
> 
> (Len Holmes wrote:  ... if we stop asking students to write **as a
> student**, and **to** us as teachers, then we might start asking them
> to write **as** ....scholars? practitioners in a particular field?
> Let's stop asking students to write 'essays' (like wot they wrote at
> school, thereby evoking school-pupil identity and behaviour). Let's
> ask them to write **academic papers**, as writing an article for an
> academic journal - like researcher/ scholar would. That would begin to
> evoke some sense of the kind of identity to which they might aspire as
> a graduate.)
> 
> ... and yes, Len, I think this IS kind of thing that we at UoP in
> Learning Development, and that some colleagues in other Universities
> in similar roles, actually do when we work with students. But this
> kind of approach is still not particularly common. My response
> therefore is to question or problematise the 'we' in Len's posting.
> 
> Regarding the 'we' of learning developers and academics who agree - to
> the extent that this 'we' exists, I think we explore with students
> those aspects of writing which are largely social practices, and try
> to unpack them - and 'we' believe this is the best way to proceed in
> developing learning! We encourage students to examine, practise and
> question the roles of researcher, writer, reader, critic etc ... we
> attempt to demystify these roles and the associated conventional and
> 'good' practices.
> 
> BUT many of our colleagues - teachers, course, module, programme
> leaders, assessment designers etc - are NOT part of this 'we' - for a
> variety of reasons ... what can 'we' do about that?
> 
> AND, Len, although I broadly agree with you - isn't there also
> something good, legitimate, useful, important, necessary about the
> role (subject position) of 'student' - whilst still pursuing the line
> you promote, that students should see themselves as already
> practitioners in their field, not as existing in some parallel
> universe, as a 'mere' student ... some vague, context-free, 'pre'
> reality ....? 
> 
> John
> 
> John Hilsdon
> Co-ordinator, Learning Development 
> University of Plymouth 
> Drake Circus 
> Plymouth 
> PL4 8AA 
> 
> 01752 232276 
> 
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/learn
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leonard Holmes [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
> Sent: 05 May 2006 16:00
> To: John Hilsdon; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: just google it! NO, scholar.google it???
> 
> John and colleagues
> 
> back to the referencing issue?
> 
> you ask:
> > (How) Can this scramble to get assignments to fit academic 
> conventions
> > for reasons of form alone ("so it's all proper in your references")
> > or to get a tick in a box ("he said you have to be critical, didn't
> > he?") be converted somehow into creative work that serves more 
> serious
> > learning and study activities?
> 
> If we stop asking students to write **as a student**, and **to** us as
> teachers, then we might start asking them to write **as**
> ....scholars? practitioners in a particular field? Let's stop asking
> students to write 'essays' (like wot they wrote at school, thereby
> evoking school-pupil identity and behaviour). Let's ask them to write
> **academic papers**, as writing an article for an academic journal -
> like a researcher/ scholar would. That would begin to evoke some sense
> of the kind of identity to which they might aspire as a graduate. They
> then need to become familiar with the practices appropriate to such an
> identity, and familiar with what is involved in the production of text
> that meets the expectations of editors, reviewers and readers of
> academic journals. Those expectation include appropriate citation and
> referencing. 
> 
> As they do this, they would also become more familiarised with 
> academic literature, with the genres, style(s), conventions, flow and
> rhythmns, etc. Through this, the textual artefacts of academic
> knowledge production processes become demystified.
> 
> Of course, we may also want then to engage in the practices in 
> other arenas, eg of a particular occupational field. So we may want
> them to, eg, write a report - not just 'in report form' but **to** a
> particular audience, **from** a particular position. 
> 
> Above all, it's a question of rehearsal of identity through 
> engagement in appropriate practices (cf the Lave and Wenger view on
> situated learning **as** [not **through**] legitimate periheral
> participation. Allied to that is that assessment involves us
> (teachers/ assessors) deciding to what extent we would warrant the
> students (usually implicit) claim to be worthy of the qualification to
> which they aspire, and thus to the goods that are normally associated
> (good job, good career, entry to advanced study, respect). 
> 
> As for Google, we should encourage students to use Google 
> Scholar, and to follow up citations of particular texts, as well as
> other electronic facilities for searching scholarly literature.
> 
> On citation: students should cite **original** sources even when they
> have discovered there existence through other sources, whether
> textbooks or the web. It's the original author's ideas and argument
> that the student is citing, not the fact that another writer cites
> them.
> 
> nearly home time.
> 
> regards
> 
> Len
> 
> 
> 
> On 5 May 2006, at 15:33, John Hilsdon wrote:
> 
> > Dear All
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I'm working at our Exmouth campus today, where despite the gorgeous
> > weather, Education Studies students are frantically completing
> > assignments for imminent deadlines. Have just been for a coffee and
> > overheard parts of a conversation including the following:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -- -- -------------------------------------
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ...but I still need to find a criticism of x - he said you have to
> > be critical, didn't he?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > So just Google it - put in something like criticisms of x - I'll be
> > you'll get something if you put the book title in too
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yeah but I got told a Google reference was no good
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > You don't reference Google you ****** !
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yeah but it's still an internet reference - they don't like that, do
> > they
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > You don't say it's from the internet do you ... you just find out
> > the thing it was published in and copy that - so it's all proper in
> > your references  ... 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Take you about ten minutes, mate - honest!
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -- -- --------------------------
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Have a stack of urgent stuff but couldn't resist relaying this!  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Some of the things that went through my head - in no particular
> > order:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > So what? Should we worry?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Is it just a 'game' being played here - if so, is it being played
> > well?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Wouldn't I be doing things the same way if I were a student today
> > (especially with a deadline to meet)?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Whose 'fault' is it that students do things/see things this way at
> > university?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Does the growing awareness of the rules of the 'game' these students
> > display contribute/substitute in any way for good academic practice
> > in reading and referring to relevant sources? 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Is discouragement of the use of Google in such circumstances just
> > snobbery?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > (How) Can this scramble to get assignments to fit academic
> > conventions for reasons of form alone ("so it's all proper in your
> > references") or to get a tick in a box ("he said you have to be
> > critical, didn't he?") be converted somehow into creative work that
> > serves more serious learning and study activities?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Might the activity suggested in the conversation lead to some
> > genuine study reading/research if the topic is interesting enough
> > and the student decides to follow it up later?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Anyway ... back to the 'urgent' stuff!
> > 
> > John Hilsdon 
> > Co-ordinator, Learning Development 
> > Educational Development 
> > University of Plymouth 
> > Drake Circus 
> > Plymouth 
> > PL4 8AA 
> > 
> > 01752 232276 
> > [log in to unmask] 
> > www.plymouth.ac.uk/learn 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Dr Leonard Holmes
> Principal Lecturer in Human Resource Management
> Manager of Postgraduate Programmes in HRM
> Luton Business School, Putteridge Bury Campus,
> Hitchin Road, Luton LU2 8LE
> tel. 01582 743111 ext 5014
> email [log in to unmask]
> websites: http://www.re-skill.org.uk
>           http://www.odysseygroup.org.uk
> 
> email: [log in to unmask]
> 
> websites: www.re-skill.org.uk
>           www.odysseygroup.org.uk


Dr Leonard Holmes
Principal Lecturer in Human Resource Management
Manager of Postgraduate Programmes in HRM
Luton Business School, Putteridge Bury Campus,
Hitchin Road, Luton LU2 8LE
tel. 01582 743111 ext 5014
email [log in to unmask]
websites: http://www.re-skill.org.uk
          http://www.odysseygroup.org.uk

email: [log in to unmask]

websites: www.re-skill.org.uk
          www.odysseygroup.org.uk