Appendix F: Interview

From WolfWikis

Interview with Dr. Chad Cross, assistant professor of in English Education and Middle Grades Education at a large R1 University, conducted by Toby Coley for his master’s thesis research project

How did you get started in wikis and what made you decide to use wikis in education?

The first time I heard of wikis was probably a couple of years ago being introduced to Wikipedia by a colleague, maybe two or three years ago. In terms of using it as a resource, I had the opportunity this year to use it in a class and I think that came about in really two ways. One was working with an associate and his seeing it as something we could use and two, the easy access and availability of having one that the university library system makes available.

What is the purpose of the course you used this last semester (fall 2006) in which you used the wiki?

In relation to the wiki itself or in general?

“In general and in relation to the class.”

I taught the class in conjunction with my associate’s social studies methods class and the purpose of both classes is, it’s kind of the capstone for students that are going to be certified to teach English and Social Studies in the middle grades and it’s a way for them to pull together what they have learned so far in the program and build on that with various specific methods and strategies for teaching English and social studies. The goal is to leave that class with a toolbox of strategies they can use in the field that includes technology and runs the spectrum of being able to plan well and being able to incorporate standards, national and state standards, create effective lesson plans and units for teaching. They also have a field-based component while they are taking the methods class. In terms of the wiki, I think that we were not real sure, initially, what maybe some of the goals were. I think a goal for me became a way for students to support the course objectives and work on specific activities. The way I feel it became most effective for my class was for them to be able to create content. One example I will give, actually I will give two. One dealt with the notion of journaling. How they could use journaling in the class, different ways to do that, and the wiki became a way to extend class conversation and for them to define looking at journals and journaling in different ways, referencing some of the reading we had done and also posting very specific ideas about using journaling effectively, either in their own experience or in the field with cooperating teachers. Then we did something similar to that with the reading and writing workshop, building on reading we had done in class discussion and creating a framework of defining it from our own perspective as well as referencing leaders in the field and their perceptions of it and what different facets of that would look like.

How has your perception of wikis changed since your initial encounter?

I think, I don’t feel any hesitancy. I didn’t really know what to expect going into it. It was interesting because we used the blog as well and the students’ perceptions of the two were different. They definitely felt one was more effective than the other. I think part of that was what we had them doing in those spaces, but I also think the wiki lends itself better to collaboration, and some of the things we used it for, like sharing, having the students posts drafts and have the students provide feedback to each other.

Have you used other software to accomplish your course goals and which did you like better, the wiki or the other tools?

When I was doing my doctorate, I developed a web-based electronic portfolio tool that was open-source and I used that at my graduate university and also at another R1 university. I had a colleague there I developed it with. I liked the fact that it is open-source and I think that in some ways it is similar to BlackBoard, but I have never felt really comfortable with using a university-wide tool. I think typically, they are not responsive to individual needs. I think that is one of the things I like about the wiki here. You can code, it was very simple, very few restrictions and still a pretty robust tool. That’s what I have used in the past and I have used that for course work, for students to post work and provide feedback to each other, to do field journals and respond to each other in that way. I have also used it to post multimedia presentations and that one is called the Q-folio. I miss not having that, and there was just no way I could really get it up and going at the beginning of the fall semester, but I am trying to use it this semester (and it is housed at my graduate school), but I don’t feel like there is a really good course support tool here at the university where I work. I do like the use of the blog and the wiki that I have used and I am using it now again in a course. One of the things I think that the course in the fall helped me with was to come up with better ways to define it and design ways to use it better.

===In retrospect, were there any particular goals that you can say were, or were not, appropriate for the wiki?

Like I said, we kind of jumped in, so I don’t think we had strong articulated goals at the outset. What I think it did better than I anticipated was that it was a great tool for creating content, for students to, not only process, but create ideas, and to do it collaboratively. And to make that knowledge that they create immediate and accessible to each other. When they have created this knowledge base, they can draw form it, adapt it, revise it, or change it. I think that two of the projects it was particularly helpful with were an inquiry-based, small research project. So they were able to post some of their ideas there, and some of the process that they did as well as the draft and then be able to get some feedback. And then they did that for a thematic unit, and get ideas for the unit, so they did that as well, and then actual unit plans. As a part of that feel, to be able to get feedback from their peers and also look at the revisions they were making. I think that is one of the neat things about wikis, they allow you to look at the changes that have been made through the process.

In terms of writing, how do you use writing in your course work and what is your pedagogy behind writing?

Writing is fundamental to the course. From creating ideas, doing guided freewrites in class, to using graphic organizers to build ideas, to doing research in which they were tracking their progress and process, to writing the research paper, writing lesson plans. I’d say it pretty much covers the spectrum.

Did you have any specific writing goals that you wanted accomplished and how did you do that with the wiki?

I think one of the things I try to do in a methods course is open them up to the idea of what English is and what studies are, that it is not just literature, it is not just about reading great works, but to try to incorporate the language arts; reading, writing, speaking, drama, listening, critical thinking. Writing is an integral part of that. A lot of the writing in an English class can be about the reading that is going on so building on what they probably do in their teaching writing course, really get them to see writing as a tool for thinking, for generating ideas, as a way to brainstorm and give feedback to each other. One aspect I think is really important that often gets left out is creative writing. So throughout the semester I do some poetry writing activities. I don’t initially identify them as that, but part of what they realize through the word play and some of the activities we do is that is gets students to look at the poems. Specifically, the wiki gave us a place to take ideas and progress we generated in class and firm them up and take them through the writing process. It allowed students to share ideas and get feedback from each other in a very efficient way, to get multiple perspectives on their writing.

Do you think wikis have the ability to change students’ views on the nature of writing?

I think not only of writing, but also of thinking. Part of it is the idea of collaboration and immediate feedback you can get. Even going in when your contributing to ideas like journaling and the reading and writing workshop and going in with your ideas of what you are going to contribute and as your doing that, seeing what’s their and that maybe influencing your ideas and shaping that so your contribution is affected as your about to do it. That is a little different mind-set that occurs, or a way of thinking that is going on.

Do you see any limitations to this technology?

I think a challenge would be if the library system did not provide it. Since I have been here , some of the messages coming from the university are that any of the work going one on-line should be through a university-sponsored web site; rather than going out to a commercial site, and I think there is controversy associated with that everywhere, with you tube, my space, or whatever. I think that is a challenge that academia faces and it is a question to ponder. Social networking tools were not created for academia and do we need them? I don’t know. In some ways that probably plays into why the blog was less effective than the wiki, for us. I think it is an interesting question and it will be interesting to see how this nature to avoid commercial tools and sites will play out. In terms of the wiki as a tool in and of itself, I don’t see many limitations, I see a lot of possibilities and that is something I am excited about, including in classes from here on out.

You mentioned that that wikis were more affective than the blogs, how so?

Participation was part of it, but I think in part it was what they were doing there. I don’t think John and I really had a good sense of what to do with the blog and John did something very specific with the blog that the student’s didn’t like that much. It was related to the state-wide election and they were doing a little responding to the current event. I think part of it was our fault in terms of what we were structuring them to do. I think the nature was different from the wiki. It was really not about creating content so much as commenting on something. Part of that was that there was not as much interaction as with the wiki. Whereas the wiki provided opportunities, not only to respond, but to create and then not just to respond on the surface level, but in meaningful ways. The wiki was able to provide specific feedback that would change content that was posted there. It was more purposeful.

Have you found any rhetorical concerns the wiki brought up for you or your students?

Some things in terms of audience that I haven’t explored are how long the wiki will last? How long will they keep it up? It will be interesting for future students to be able to access an archived version of this wiki. So that’s one thing I think interests me. In terms of audience I see that it helps make an audience more immediate and more accessible. The interactivity and interaction between class members and the ability to create content is much more efficient. Another thing that interests me is being able to post final products that will be accessible to class members, but also to teachers in the field possibly. One of the interesting things that came up over the course was that someone from outside the class responded to a student’s work. This was an adjunct faculty member in chemistry that provided feedback for a student’s unit on the holocaust. It makes me wonder who is looking and what they are thinking. It threw the student. The comments were not inappropriate in any way, but the perception was that the wiki was our thing. But it does not have to be. It would be easy to involve some of the teachers in the field, because that is an explicit and implicit connection that we already have. Part of the class is cooperating with teachers, so there might be a way to involve them in the knowledge there.

How do you define multimodality and how crucial is that for these future teachers?

That’s a big issue in English education right now. One, the idea of multimodal literacies and I don’t think it is being defined very well. To me that really means giving students the skills and literacies to be able to express themselves in many different ways; traditional ways such as reading, writing, speaking, but also in less traditional ways like drama, dance, performance, and also with technology and emerging technologies. Part of it is that they are developing the critical mindset that they can learn to adapt and engage these litearcies. We must give them opportunities to do this because the nature of the literacy is changing so fast with the emerging technologies that are out there. More important than the idea that they learn this software or this tool, is that they get the experience and skill set that they are open to approaching new tools with an open mind and the critical thinking needed to determine how affective it is and for what purposes. What will it get me and in what situation is it best to use it and how to use it?

Do you think the wiki contributed to that understanding of multimodal literacy?

Definitely. It helped make our thinking more visible to each other, which I think is really important. I think it is a way they can take that experience and think about ways that they can make their students thinking more visible to each other, not only as the teacher, but the students as resources for each other and an efficient way to do that. Also in terms of thinking about how knowledge is created. Not all the knowledge has to come from a textbook, or a book, or the teacher, that it is something that can be generated and dwelt upon as a class and the wiki is a tool for helping facilitate that, extending it, and making it public.

What are some of the questions you would be interested in seeing explored in the future of wiki research?

I am interested in seeing what teachers are doing with it and teachers’ perceptions of what they are using it for and how effective they see it in accomplishing what they are trying to do and also students’ perceptions. My colleague and I collected a little data from students in terms of there perceptions of the wiki and blog and it was great to have in terms of seeing my intuitions reaffirmed by their feedback and to know that when you are taking a risk with something new, that some of it is going well. Also, what are the obstacles to doing this? I feel like it was a real gift to have the university library providing the infrastructure to let it happen and I don’t imagine that this is true everywhere. If teachers do want to do this, what are the obstacles and how can they get beyond those? I would like to know what teachers are using them for in their class in terms of their pedagogy with their students, to teach their content and getting students to interact with the content.

Page Links