This week I attended the Virtual Symposium as part of LRNT 521 in the MALAT program. I found the speakers to be articulate and well-informed. In this blog post I will discuss my thoughts regarding two of the videos I watched.
Einarson (2022) discussed his experience in the learning and technology field. I was surprised to learn the definitions of pedagogy and andragogy because often pedagogy is used to refer to adults as well. I have heard it used this way by professionals in the field, specifically when I was interviewing for job positions. In the future I will be sure to specifically refer to andragogy, since I work in adult education. He also talked about building community. This concept struck me as very important, especially in our MALAT program. The bonds we, the students, have started to build has already been extremely helpful in forming a sense of community and even in completing our assignments. Finally, he discussed bringing your full self to whatever you are doing. I think this is an intriguing idea, but also something that I personally struggle with for reasons that I will not delve into.
Childs and Davis (2021) discussed critical reading and writing. I found everything they discussed to be helpful preparation for the work we will be doing. In particular, I agreed with the idea that the reader should first “skim” the article, then “scan,” then do “first sentence reading” and “survey reading” (Childs & Davis, 2021). This breaks down the article into more manageable pieces and promotes understanding. By skimming first, the reader gets a good overall idea of the article. Then, by scanning, the reader can pick out important pieces of information. A first sentence reading allows the reader to go deeper and consume the parts of the article that are relevant to them. By writing a short summary of the article, the reader can get a good idea of what the article is about, and if they combine those summaries with summaries that others have written, the reader can piece together a richer picture of the articles they have to review. “Strukelj and Niehorster (2018) found that skimming resulted in lower comprehension scores than regular or thorough reading. It is important to keep in mind that any specific behavior has the potential to be helpful or harmful depending on the situation and the way in which it is implemented” (Sutherland & Incera, 2021). Therefore, it is important to follow through and do all the steps and not just skimming.
Another point of interest that was discussed was the idea that writing is a creative act (Childs & Davis, 2021). I resonated with this idea and felt empowered by it because I enjoy creating things. By looking at my assignments as creations, and thinking about creation as a process, I can find a greater sense of meaning while reducing negative feelings that often come along with completing assignments.
I look forward to watching more of these webinars as time allows.
References
Childs, E., & Davis, L. (2021, April 14). Critical Reading and Writing at the Graduate Level [Webinar]. University of British Columbia. https://bit.ly/DavisChilds2021VSAcademicwriting
Einarson, E. (2022, April 12). Designing from a place of Indigenous knowledge systems. [Webinar]. Zoom. https://bit.ly/EEMALATVS2022
Strukelj, A., & Niehorster, D. C. (2018). One page of text: Eye movements during regular and thorough reading, skimming, and spell checking. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 11(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.11.1.1
Sutherland, A., & Incera, S. (2021). Critical Reading: What Do Faculty Think Students Should Do? Journal of College Reading and Learning, 51(4), 267–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2021.1887777
