Author Archive for Agnieszka

som thawtz on cmUnik8shn

Published
by
Agnieszka
on February 12, 2008
in Communication Intensive Courses (CICs), Fun, Higher Education and Technology
. 1 Comment

socrates-cartoon.gifEach semester, as I introduce myself and the Schwartz Institute to new students, I talk briefly about our philosophy and the importance of communication in all disciplines. I also think about how political and empowering it is to teach communication. Socrates believed that: “to become eloquent is to activate one’s humanity, to apply the imagination, and to solve the practical problems of human living.” We at the Institute stress the Holy Trinity of the written, oral and computer-mediated communication.

But Socrates believed (or maybe he just liked to postulate…) that the young should not learn how to read until they learn to prove, analyze and internalize knowledge (leading them ultimately to posses wisdom and virtue). Literacy would undercut that effort by allowing students to merely decode information, without the necessary skill of internalizing it.

Cognitive neuroscientist, Maryanne Wolf, thinks that Socrates’ concerns warrant a second look as we enter a historical transition in prevalent modes of communication.
She writes (“Socrates’ nightmare”, The Boston Globe, September 6, 2007) about “the plight of the reading brain as it encounters this technologically rich society.” She argues that literacy - as a “miracle” and a skill that transformed the neural circuitry of the brain and the intellectual development of the species - is threatened. This is supposedly “a consequence of the transition to a digital epoch that is affecting every aspect of our lives, including the intellectual development of each new reader.” From the neuroscience vintage point, there is apparently not enough research to answer the questions: Will the students become so accustomed to immediate access to escalating on-screen information that they will fail to probe beyond the information given to the deeper layers of insight, imagination and knowledge that have led us to this stage of human thought? Or, will the new demands of information technologies to multitask, integrate and prioritize vast amounts of information help to develop equally, if not more valuable, skills that will increase human intellectual capacities, quality of life and collective wisdom as a species?” Brain research shows that learning to read (a skill by no means natural to our species) may help us “to go beyond the decoded text to think new thoughts of our own.”

But, would Socrates argue that we should forbid the use of technology until the students learn to be critical thinkers? C’mon, don’t tell me that you are not just a tiny bit tempted by this idea, especially when you receive an email from one of your students, sent via a Blackberry and filled with symbols and emoticons.

Musings about social networking sites

Published
by
Agnieszka
on December 2, 2007
in Interpersonal Communication, Oral Communication, Pedagogy and Technology
. 0 Comments


This recent New York Times article provides an interesting perspective on the popularity of networking sites. Some academic researchers argue that the recent growth of online social networking and the popularity of sites like Friendster and Facebook are reminiscent of ancient patterns of oral communication in tribal societies. One of them argues that “the popularity of social networks stems from their appeal to deep-seated, prehistoric patterns of human communication” because “we evolved with speech, we didn’t evolve with writing.” The way we express ourselves online is more like talking and this “orality”, which is participatory, interactive, communal and focused on the present” is what “unites people in groups.” (Walter J. Ong, coined the term “secondary orality” in 1982 to describe “the tendency of electronic media to echo the cadences of earlier oral cultures.”)

An anthropologist studying a tribe in Papua New Guinea now applies the same ethnographic research methods to the rites and rituals of Facebook users. He sees parallels between how ones’ identity in tribal cultures is wrapped up in the question of how many people one knows, not unlike on Facebook, where you define yourself by the friends you have.

Obviously in virtual reality it matters much less who you know, because your real, and not virtual, survival does not depend on it. The biggest difference is the superficial nature of online “friendships” but it is this shallow bond and the elimination of the need for physical proximity which stimulates online intimacy. “That distance makes it safe for people to connect through weak ties where they can have the appearance of a connection because it’s safe.” So how does all this new way of relating to each other affect the way we… relate to each other? Some “worry that the rise of secondary orality may have a paradoxical consequence: It may be gobbling up what’s left of our real oral culture.”

I wonder about one more thing. Apart from their use as purely networking/fun/hobby spaces, these sites are used as pedagogical tools, for instance when we start a Facebook page to encourage semi-academic discussion among our students. And so, when we employ these methods to reach out to our students, who are obviously well versed in them, are we risking that we will make them less “cool”, thus subverting our own purpose and making students less likely to use them in learning/teaching processes? Or maybe a question like this is redundant. In the time I spell-check this message and click the “post” button, a brand new networking site will be up, starting as a small, “cool” outlet, and spreading through the virtual world, until us educators get a whiff of it and make it “lame.”

This article from The Independent finds that students are weary of allowing academics to intrude into their spaces, while teachers often find that their students’ Facebook pages provide insights into the students and offer an opportunity to connect. These sites are private, independent, and can decide on membership, content and the discussions that take place there are not sanctioned by the universities, even if often there is some learning going on and students may be building real connections, something a university will welcome. Some professors are weary of using such a private forum for knowledge sharing and argue that academic work on Facebook is inappropriate while there are plenty of new technologies that can be used in teaching, such as discussion groups, wikis, or Second Life, but social networking is not one of them, unless it’s restricted to an institution’s virtual-learning environment.

You Tube Democracy?

Published
by
Agnieszka
on August 19, 2007
in Politics, Resources, Technology and Web 2.0
. 4 Comments

A few weeks ago, the democrats debated each other in front of a live audience, as usual, but also on millions of computer screens via You Tube. The format of this event, co-sponsored by CNN, was a bit different than usual. The internet users were invited to submit their questions on video as well, and those were played on a large screen and then the responses of each candidate were also posted online.

Is this format really a revolutionary new approach? I am sure it was meant to attract young voters, and offer a “fresh” approach to an old, tired way of doing things. But was this a successful attempt or simply a rehash of “same old” with a new technology attached to it? Jon Stuart’s Daily Show had a rather harsh critique of the idea and its execution.

More recently, the LOGO, LGBT channel, hosted a democratic presidential debate as well.

This was a live debate, where a couple of moderators asked the candidates questions about issues that the LGBT community cares about. It is also an innovative way of doing things, and certainly this type of event would probably not be possible 10 years ago. But there were no technological gimmicks here, and yet I think I learned more about the candidates’ opinions about a few specific things. In this particular case the technology of the You Tube/CNN debate did not contribute to providing information or clarifying the issues.

Postcard from Berlin

Published
by
Agnieszka
on June 22, 2007
in Cross-Cultural Communication, Language and Politics
. 0 Comments

An Ampelmann on Bernauerstrasse (formerly East Berlin)

Ampelmann, or “street light man”, is a figure that appears on street lights in East Berlin, in green or red. He wears a wide brim hat and seems to be freeze-framed in the midst of a jaunty stride.

While the nostalgia for all things East German (Ostalgie) seems to have passed, Berliners vociferously opposed a project to homogenize all the street signs with the more boring looking West German design. The Ampelmann not only survived, but became an icon of the city and a popular tourist souvenir.

It seems that the street signs represent not only the right of way for pedestrians but also a way of life, a collective memory and a need to preserve a cultural heritage. Even though the street light man is a remnant of the old regime, he is also a part of the collective identity of East Berliners. People don’t necessarily associate the Ampelmann with the Stasi secret police or the DDR government but with their city and with their everyday lives.

Certainly Germany is in a very particular situation because the country had been split in two. After reunification, there was a trend to erase all remnants of the old regime and create a united national identity. Unlike the countries in the rest of the Soviet block, East Germany simply stopped existing. The people who lived there became Germans, but yet they are not simply Germans, not entirely. They had an entirely different history for the past fifty years and there was a feeling that a lot of the changes were imposed by the west. The Ampelmann is, in a sense, a way for East-Berliners to hold onto a part of their identity and resist the rush to erase the past as quickly as possible.

In Poland, the country found different ways of dealing with its past. Most of the Soviet era street names have been rapidly changed, and many monuments to the Soviet solders or prominent communists were destroyed. There is now some remorse for this rush to erase so many memories.

Pikelets, crumpets, dialects and accents

Published
by
Agnieszka
on April 13, 2007
in Language, Non-Standard English and Resources
. 2 Comments

soundsfambanner.jpg

I have just found Sounds Familiar?, a fantastic website and have spent much time playing with it. It reminds me of the George Mason University Speech Accent Archive.

The site contains numerous recordings from the British Library of regional accents and dialects from every corner of the UK–some recorded as far back as the 1950s and many recent recordings up until 1999. There is a section on phonological, grammatical, social, and lexical variation: this means you can pick a region on the map and hear and learn about how a given pattern of speech developed, or how it fits with the language spoken in the rest of the UK. You can submit to the database and analyze your own accent, if you are British. You can spend hours clicking on the map of the UK to hear how words are pronounced across the region and how dialects change over time and space. Apparently, there are more than 150 audio clips of Geordie – the dialect of Newcastle-upon-Tyne – arguably one of the most recognizable dialects in Britain. You may want to hear how ethic minorities pronounce British English (check out the sound files for Asian English Phonology), or practice your Received Pronunciation, if you are feeling proper.

It is an interactive site allowing you to investigate how the language changes and progresses over time, using learning modules suited to college or high school students. In fact, the entire site is nested in the website of the British Library, and if you venture into the rest of the site, you’ll find all kinds of treasures.

The Sounds Familiar site is fairly new, hence this Guardian story about it.

The article ends with this passage:

Language evolves for many reasons - even something as superficial as the hegemony of supermarkets, as any Midlander trying to buy a pikelet will tell you. In Sainsbury’s it’s a crumpet or nothing. But change is not something to be judged or mourned; it’s something to be observed and understood. The purpose of the website is to document the history of language - with schools and universities invited to become part of the process by sending in their own regional recordings. As Upton says, “We’re not in the business of preservation. The only language that doesn’t change at all is a dead one.”

I know that there are some for whom this is not a self evident truth and in fact this statement invites controversy. But for those of us who accept it, I think it has implications for how we teach, communicate, and think about pedagogy, especially in a universe as diverse as CUNY and Gotham. Doesn’t it?

And for dessert, and since we are talking about accents, check out this truly bizarre, yet funny, (?) clip:

“Personal Success Is No Accident!”

Published
by
Agnieszka
on October 27, 2006
in Oral Communication
. 1 Comment

Ellen Cahill came to the BLSCI last Thursday morning, Oct 26 to lead a workshop on oral presentations. She has a very impressive resume: for the past 21 years she worked with thousands of professionals in many kinds of businesses, made guest appearances on NBC Today and CNN-FN, where she talked about communications issues, published in several professional magazines. She graduated from Harvard Business School.

About 15 fellows attended her workshop. Even though she mainly works with corporate clients, she was able to gear her entire presentation towards our needs. Throughout the workshop, she addressed our work with Baruch students as well as some universal issues of making presentations in any fields, for any audience, in any discipline. It was a great, pointed, precise and useful presentation. I would certainly like to hear her speak again and possibly for a longer workshop.

She initially asked us in the audience to post questions and issues we would like to hear about and then she was able to build her presentation to fit our needs. Pretty impressive endeavor and all of this done right on the spot!

Obviously watching her do her job was an experience in itself. Now, that is how you do oral presentations! She was confident, knowledgeable, and certainly did not have any doubts about what to do with her hands…

There were a lot of tips that I personally took out of this workshop.

For example, did you know, that often the audience is only able to remember things in groups of three (3)? And so, if you can, build your data into sets of threes.

Power Point presentation needs to illustrate and explain what you cannot otherwise convey, and it should not serve as your cue card or a reading prompt.

Remember that your body language is important- for example, arm lock (arms close and tight to the body, as if protecting chest) says: “I am stressed and nervous”.

When you prepare a presentation, do not spend so much time on the middle part of it- the “meat “of it. Obviously that is the part you know best. So concentrate instead on presenting a pointed opening statement – Ellen called it a “headline.” And start with a strong opening point/thought/idea which addresses the most important issue in any presentation: WIIFM!

This stand for: What’s In It For Me. Apparently, the most serious indictment in the business world is people thinking that they are wasting their time. So make sure they know why they are here and what they can take out of it. This certainly goes for our students and any audience I can think of.

Ellen left us with a business card which contained a list of “Cahill’s Commandments”. Here they are:

  • Know what you want your audience to do, think or feel.
  • Decide what your listener NEEDS TO KNOW. Less is more!
  • DO NOT SPEAK unless you are looking at a pair of eyes.
  • The secret is energy. Use your voice and body to tell your story.
  • Use mind jogger notes. NOT TEXT.
  • Use “pictures” to help the listener remember the message.
  • Tell me what your visuals MEAN, not what they say.
  • Don’t touch the furniture!
  • Listen to the question. Then built a better one. Answer the better one.
  • Be yourself—have a conversation with the audience.
  • PRACTICE! PRACTICE! PRACTICE!

Can’t obey the Commandments? Call us!

(Copyright by Cahill Associates, Inc.)

Here is the front of the card:

“Personal Success Is No Accident!”

Cahill Associates, Inc.

The Business of Speaking

Email cahill@cahillassoc.com

I think many of us found her presentation very useful. Comments anyone?