Portfolio Home

Class Assignments

Web Contents

Sean Duffy
November 5, 2003

GRAD 697b

At first glance, an interaction between history and technology is an inherent oxymoron, the discovery of the past with the utilization of technology that is more emblematic of our future. Although the best teacher of classical history could easily suffice with a lectern and a chalkboard, the transfer of historical knowledge can only be improved with an adaptation of the electronic tools unimaginable to the pioneers of the profession. Although the field surely has its share of Luddites, the leap into 21st century teaching is need for a class full of 21st century students. This essay will discuss some applications of tools explored this semester in an effort to broaden the learning experiences.

Most probably, at least in comparison to other fields in the social sciences, the practitioners of history have neither a greater nor lesser phobia concerning technology. A prominent stumbling block for historians may also be their greatest tool for learning: the book or physical document. From the first classes employing the written text for pedagogical purposes (probably in China) to the present, the written word, on paper, has been critical for teaching history. As well, research predominately involved shuffling through letters, newspapers, reports, etc. This reliance on physical documentation is most apparent in the great diversity in citing these sources compared to the simplistic nature of claiming a web page as evidence. As greater number of students and information interact electronically, a challenge to historians will be to adapt to relentless drive towards a paper-less society, which will undoubtedly affect learning and teaching methods.

Historians are not afraid to use electronic mediums in the classroom. However, their use of technology is best described as a closed system, meaning that the students’ experience is not dynamic, outside of facilitating in-class discussion. For this purpose, programs such as PowerPoint that may show a picture of the Great Depression for analysis or a series of quotes for debate; although a practical use of technology, the same effect could be produced with handouts. PowerPoint is also used as an outline to facilitate the taking of notes in lecture. Again, this approach is closed (however useful). The technology communicates but only one way. Even handling issues of assessment, a quiz or a test is still a one –way system. How can the cutting edge of the electronic pedagogical experience produce more open methods of interactions?

The remainder of this essay will focus on answering this question. Three different applications will be explored moving from the less closed to the most open. First, the role of technology with assessment will be examined. Second, the use of electronic medium to build learning experiences within history will be investigated. Finally, the question of creating communities while uncovering the lessons of the past will be brought forth. With the successful adaptation of one or more of these suggestions, the history profession will remain an appealing field of academic excellence.

Some technological tools supply options in teaching in particular the student radio responder system. Before delving further into its role in assessment, a couple of key points must be made about this tool. With immediate results, the responders simultaneously save paper and time. No torn sheets of notebook paper to drag home; no pile of quizzes needing grading. More importantly for pedagogy is the limited but real sense of experience for students. Dependent on the application of the system, whether as a tool of assessment or method of interaction, each student’s voice, albeit electronic, would be equal, previous boundaries of in-class participatory dread are overcome. Also a significant yet difficult to measure tangent would be present, the ‘this is cool,’ factor could kept more students engaged with history and less cognizant of the egress.

No level of technology can abate the pain of test-based assessment even with a keypad. With the availability of clever cheating techniques, electronic quizzing must be monitored…just like bluebook essay exams. Although time consuming in preparation, the payoff comes in the immediate determination of grade into an accessible database. Less time spent on administrative functions frees up the teacher to improve the learning process.

Outside of the unpleasant testing experience, the responders offer at least three different types of assessments. First, the system allows the instructor to gauge how well students comprehend material, such as an assigned text. As such, this formative assessment can allow the teacher to estimate the difficulty level of information presented. Similarly, a responder (non-graded) quiz given at the end of a lecture can inform the degree to which the students have absorbed the material. In this fashion, the ability to assess both students and instructor is available; if critical information or analysis is being overlooked, future lessons can be modified to correct this oversight.

This ability to use the responder system to the retention and/or analytical skills of students can also be adapted to include a subset set of formative assessment. Even before the process of giving the students new information occurs, a pre-formative (in context to the class as a single-contained unit) analysis can take place. One particularly critical area to understand in advance is the students’ generally abysmal knowledge of geography. Without being able to visualize and/or put a nation in its proper physical context, the teaching of European history, for example, is made more difficult. A pre-formative non-graded geography quiz can offer a fun way to demonstrate and, hopefully, remedy the students’ lack of knowledge. For a historian, temporal sequence is important as well. Looking to move the pupils’ misconceptions of past events as ‘one damn thing after another,’ an instructor can determine to what degree students misunderstand chronology. This pre-formative use of the responders can also be used to ‘trick’ the students into learning of their own ignorance of the past, without grades, while having fun answering the questions; thus gently prodding them to study to rectify this deficiency.

As has been alluded to, the assessment function of the responder system is not a one-way street, not merely directed at the students. The instructor can use the system in the pre-formative sense, in regards to the knowledge that students bring to the class. In addition and especially for less experienced instructors, the responders, used without individualizing each keypad, can allow an anonymous mid-semester evaluation tool. With sample questions such as “Are the lectures useful in studying for the exam?” or “Of the articles you have read this semester, which is the most confusing?” essential feedback can assist in mapping out the trajectory for the class for the rest of the semester.

The experience Nathan Shedroff, in his “Unified Field Theory of Design,” advises to enhance student learning is not centered on testing. Rather, a learning experience is one in which the student places an interactive role and is thus an open method of using technology. The responder system can also be adapted for this purpose, at least during class hours, in particular with regards to simulations and role-playing. These latter two practices are already standards tools for history instructors. The concern here is the application of the responders to facilitate an in-class exercise.

One method to describe types of simulations is the level of student organization. Student simulations can be set up to allow them in four types: individual, small group, large group, and self-determining. In my field of diplomatic history, simulations can be used to help the students understand what is involved in decision-making on an international level. To this effect, the responder system can be set-up to simulate the United Nations or Security Council, each student representing a specific country. Students would be responsible to research some background on their appointed nation. Then, in class, they would use this information to formulate positions and then negotiate with their fellow ‘delegates.’ Thus, with an assigned topic of weapons of mass destruction, the students could debate the topic and then vote on their proposed resolutions. In this scenario, the responders are really only the icing on the cake, so to speak. The key is the students’ interactions with each other and hence a critical part of the goal of experience building.

Small and large group scenarios are also available for use with the responders. Again, for small groups, the United Nations or perhaps the U.S. executive branch (with two or three students representing a particular bureaucracy) can be applied. Here, perhaps, with the share-pair concept in force, students may feel a little less intimidated with one or two partners. Large groups, with a wish list of two instructors and two classrooms, can be intriguing for the students as well. One potential scenario would revolve around the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. In one room would be the U.S. administration, small student groups, again representing a particular position (CIA vs. Military vs. Attorney General etc); the whole body of students would determine the actions of the US in a large group vote. In another room would the U.S.S.R. with a similar group arrangement to the U.S: (small groups combining to make a large group). The instructors would adapt the scenario to include responses between the two adversaries with the addition of wildcard events such as the role of U.S. public opinion or the actions of Fidel Castro.

From a personal point of view, every experience in which role-playing has been used under my control have been a success, in part verifying the importance of experience as a pedagogical tool in this ever-interactive world. However, the previously offered scenarios are closed systems to a degree, at least within the context of the simulation. Fortunately, informational design offers alternatives to created more enriching learning environments using new technologies.

Shedroff describes four different types of informational transfer: data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. An adaptation with this model in a United Nations scenario (individual) would be as follows. After assigning through a random process, the nations to role-play, and each student would be responsible for gathering up data for their specific role. Supplying only general guidelines and research options, many students, in this stage, would be discovering new data under their own direction. The second stage, information, would require each student to present a general report about the nation and its position (For this scenario, the Cuban Missile Crisis or the present Iraq Conflict) on a class discussion log under either WebCt or D2lL. To assist them in the next stage, some possible issues or conflicts will be suggested to the students.

In this model experience occurs in the third stage, knowledge. Here the first level of the role-playing will be occurring. The responder systems will be utilized for voting procedures. With the properly wired room, each student with a laptop in a MOO chat room, the negotiations would be carried on-line in class (and out of class in monitored and unmonitored chat room). Using the different rooms available using MOO, nations would be separated among nations with similar interests: the non-aligned countries, the Soviet Bloc, etc. There would be one general chat room so all participating nations could communicate with each other. To preserve the person-to-person interactions, a period of verbal parlay will start off each session (of a 3-class scenario).

The fourth stage wisdom would include three essential elements. The first, overlapping with knowledge, allows the decision as to how the scenario will unfold. With a three class session (of 50 minutes apiece) and a script flexible to change, the choices the students make would determine the events of the second and third class periods. To thwart temptation for some students to do something completely out of character for the nation-state (such as Bermuda declaring war on Iceland), the calculation of the grade would be influenced as to the realistic expectations of actions. The second element involves a one-session wrap-up, preferably in a mandatory discussion thread, in which the students would offer their contemplation on why and how the scenario unfolded as it did. Why did this nation act like it did? Was this a realistic portrayal of that nation’s interests? The third and final element is evaluation and feedback for the students involved? Their own assessment of the simulation would in turn be used to fine-tune future applications.

The familiarity of computers in the home allows most students to easily adapt into short-lived on-line communities in the context of the class. In addition to the aforementioned scenario, history can gain as a profession by further using the ability to build on-line communities. Bulletin boards, discussion logs, small group chat rooms can all be used to provide convenience for the students. Previously a hassle for small to medium group collaborations, these tools allow students to meet, on-line, at their convenience. For the appropriate assignments, students could exchange files through the internal file-transfer functions. For some individuals who avoid in-class discussion, an on-line approach, which would count as equally on-line, increase the levels of voices heard.

Another possible attempt at building an online community, within a historical context, is through the use of MUDS. Depending on the focus of the class, a historical MUD can offer entertainment, community building, and experience for students. The approach could range from serious to comical to fantastic to allegoric. Some general ground rules, in particular to history, should be established. First, is the avoidance of a serious MUD revolving on current or near-current situations. Second, the MUD should be designed to disallow or punish intolerant behavior or sexual content. With these in mind, a variety of scenarios are possible: Roman Senators looking to plot to take the throne, famous inspectors from the past trying to solve a crime, Wild West outlaws, or a mythical United States where the South had won the Civil War and the West was a separate nation. Although the use of the MUD should not be part of the regular class activities, a small number of extra-credit points may be added for an added incentive to participate. Finally, it should be noted that the students would have anonymity in the MUD if they so wish.

Community building within the confines of a history class has the possibility of enriching the learning experience. Nevertheless, pitfalls abound without proper usage. The best class discussions involve potentially charged topics. In class, the instructor has greater control of the flow of discussion. On-line chat or logs are more prone to abuse without the physical presence of a monitor. With the proper establishment of a comfortable environment whereby each participant has equal opportunity to express opinions, on-line discussions can be a learning tool and bridge for those of opposite views to communicate.

With new technologies hitting the educational market at increasing speeds, the field of history must and will adapt. What the future of history will entail remains to be seen. The very essence of the historical practice, the physical text, may soon be transformed into electronic medium. An instructor, not to far in the future, will be able to tell her or his class to open up to web page 6…. now access the Emancipation Proclamation.” Holographic imaging along with mapping camera technology will allow the anthropology class to pass around a 3-D representation of pottery from the Anasazi.
For history, the future is now.