Lombard and Ditton's
concept of presence is fascinating as it does not apply only to CMC but
basically anything that is mediated by technology and nowadays mostly
everything is. I found this reading long but rewarding as it allowed me to make
some connections with my previous reflections. I agree with Cecilia's
observation that my 'experience is with no doubts enhanced by the fact that [I
am] a confident user and an expert learner... This makes a real difference and...'
her invitation to 'perhaps [I] could consider the impact of DL learning for
people with a different background'. I would still argue though that as I said
in my entry when discussing Bax's approaches and myself, I firmly believe that
as mentioned in Kessler and Klapan's (2008:270) teacher attitude, whether
positive or negative - I am clearly a positivist - plays a central role not
only in 'our' confidence but also directly affects the integration process so
opportunities to identify and foster a positive attitude need to be included
for normalisation to be reached. I believe approahcing DL with a positive
attitude will benefit not only those with less experience of the medium but
also us as tutors in the long run as has been my own experience on the CertICT
with candidates coming onto the course with pre conceptions formed through
their negative prior experiences but realising that it is also possible to
enjoy DL learning. Heeter (1992 in Lombard and Ditton 1997:16) suggests that
'people want connection with people' and this connection is nowadays possible
and also richer and richer thanks to technological advancement. I believe that
DL today allows for a stronger presence as an invisible medium as described by
Lombard and Ditton (op.cit.) thanks to the fact that most VLEs can easily be
ticked against their checklist in terms of 'number and consistency of sensory
outputs, visual display characteristics, and interactivity' p14 while
orchestrated, I would hope, by a 'practically wise' tutor who through can
provide those less familiar with the medium enough experience to encourage a
sense of presence (Heeter 1992:263 in Lombard & Ditton 2007:18).
I found particularly
relevant and easily identifiable in my own context some but not all the psychological
effects of presence as invisible medium listed in the article, namely: enjoyment,
involvement, task performance, skills training, persuasion, memory and social
judgment. On the other hand, desensitisation and parasocial interaction and
relationships pose a problem in identification for me. Would not these two
effects relate more to other types of DL setting rather than the ones I am
accustomed to e.g. mainly language learning and language teacher education?
This may be explicable in Artbaugh et al.'s terms of hard and soft disciplines
being language learning soft or applied (in Swain and Ice, 2010:2) as my own
setting and experience requires high teaching presence and interaction with the
contents is still regulated and closely linked to the central role of both
tutor and learners. Or maybe I got it all wrong? I hope to be able to answer
this question after completing this week's readings.
Reference
Lombard M.
& Ditton T. 1997 At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence. Journal
of Computer Mediated Communication , 3, 2. [Available as eresource on UNLOC] Online
at http://moodle.nottingham.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=24802. [accessed: 13
November 2014].
Swain and Ice, K. and
P., 2010. The Community of Inquiry Framework Ten Years Later: Introduction to
the Special Issue. Internet and Higher Education, [Online]. 13, 1-4.
Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10967516/13/1-2 [Accessed 14 November 2014].
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.