Teaching and Learning as Textual Acts: Blogs, Dialogism, and the Practice of Writing

One of my favorite quotations comes from Wallace Stevens’ “Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird” (1917), and it gets at the heart of not only what drives and defines me as a teacher, but also what drives and defines what I think the practice of teaching and learning in higher education should be.

I do not know which to prefer,
The beauty of inflections
Or the beauty of innuendoes,
The blackbird whistling
Or just after. (ll. 13-17)

The “beauty of inflections,” that which we get directly from the content of the text, speech, or experience itself, is important, but the “beauty of innuendoes,” that moment of reflection and interpretation that occurs “just after” the experience, is equally, if not more, important. An instructor’s statement, in whatever media, is ultimately fleeting. It doesn’t live on as a matter of its own existence or making, nor in the consciousness of its receiver, but rather in how it is appropriated by that consciousness, in how it resonates in that consciousness. It is this resonance that I believe constitutes the “writerly” and the “dialogic,” and which I believe should not only be the aim of all of our teaching practice, but also the primary measure we use to determine what constitutes “quality” in teaching.

From the time online learning first hit the mainstream in higher education almost two decades ago, interaction has been considered by most authorities to be one of the chief indices of quality in online learning, and interaction as an activity, even as an abstract entity, has received a considerable amount of attention in the literature. However, most of this attention has been at a fairly superficial level. If we are to ever take full advantage of the educative benefits provided by interaction, we need to develop a richer understanding of interaction that goes beyond simplistic adaptations of communication theory, untested decade-old assumptions, and even mathematical analysis. We need to develop a more sophisticated understanding of interaction, as well as of what interaction can be. We need to move beyond mere interaction to what might be called critical interaction.

Perhaps the most important (and overlooked) aspect of understanding interaction is that it must be understood as a two-way phenomenon. Very early in the interaction literature, Herring (1987) defines interaction as “reciprocal events that require at least two objects and two actions, and…occur when these objects and events mutually influence one another” (quoted in Wagner, 1994, p. 13). This fundamental, seemingly clear statement is at the heart of what is potentially valuable about interaction, but it also subtly reveals what most of the literature on the subject often fails to consider. It is the “mutual influence” that defines interaction, where the learner influences the educational experience reciprocally, where the dialogics of learning are strived for and achieved, and are not simply a subtly hegemonic gesture.

This failure to recognize the impact of the student on the outcome (even the direction) of the educational process underscores the current shortcomings of the scholarship on interaction. While the vast majority of this literature is thoughtful, creative, and full of sound advice, most of it simply addresses how to use certain tools for learner-instructor and learner-learner interactions. These discussions, while certainly valuable, move the intellectual focus of the inquiry more toward what is generally referred to as “interactivity,” rather than “interaction.” This distinction between interactivity and interaction is important. Interactivity is a technological possibility where the tools of distance learning provide the potential, or the means, for interaction, whereas interaction is an actual social or intellectual relationship or activity. The problem with most of the literature is that it treats interaction as mere interactivity by taking a complex social relationship and reducing it to a kind of transaction, like a verbal pinging.

Dwight and Garrison (2003) point out that traditional pedagogy, “more often than not, is construed as a monologue, a centralized mode of communication with a closed, hierarchical semiotic” (p. 702). In most courses, traditional or online, the tendency—if not the perceived responsibility—of the instructor is to deliver content monologically, in a single statement from a single voice of authority. Perhaps the biggest problem with monologic education is that it, almost by definition, is reduced to didacticism (McKnight, 2004). Didacticism, then, reduces language to “a means to transfer what is already defined and coded as official knowledge” (p. 289). Language is no longer a “shared relation” in this context but rather a function of authority that ultimately serves to determine, to control, to limit possibilities of thought, understanding, and insight. Such didacticism attempts

to shear away an individual’s historicity in favor of a structure of ahistorical, self-evident meanings that are non-negotiable and therefore not open to dialogue and revision. One’s lived experience and its interpretation have little or no value within this pedagogical and curricular context. (McKnight, 2004, p. 289)

But what would it mean to deliver content dialogically or novelistically? For Bakhtin dialogism means “double-voicedness” (Vice, 1997, p. 45), not “relating to dialogue,” as one might assume. It concerns the interplay of voices, of perspectives, in an utterance. It can certainly be present in dialogue, where two people are discussing something, but it can also be present in written texts, or rather, in the reading of written texts, where there is conversation between the text and reader, where meaning is negotiated, translated, and appropriated. It can be present in online courses where the instructor provides some content and then asks questions or makes demands of the reader to fill in the gaps or finish the lesson. It can also be present in the incorporation of multiple perspectives in that content delivery, in the form of guest speakers or intertextual connections.

Dialogism, thus, addresses different aspects of the concept of multiple voices in a single textual (contextual or intertextual) environment. It is this kind of interaction—between the “voices” within a course, as well as between its participants—that will lead to more robust or writerly learning. We must begin to think of interaction as a many-layered phenomenon where multiple types of interaction (learner-content, learner-learner, and learner-instructor) happen simultaneously and interconnectedly. And if we are to move meaningfully beyond our traditional concepts of interaction, we must also pay more attention to the contextual and discursive factors that mediate the learning/interpretive process.

Furthermore, dialogism is more present in dialogue than we are normally aware. As Morson (1981) points out, “Speech is interlocution…. The interaction among speaker, listener, and context constitutes a ‘field of answerability,’ which is the meaning of the utterance” (p. 6). Any instruction should take into account its intended audience, which would, at least superficially, achieve dialogism, since that would entail a shaping of the utterance by the listener. But dialogism is, and should be, much more than this. When a thought is translated into an expression, it must be edited, reshaped, added to, translated from the fog of mental abstraction to the concreteness of language. As Morson points out, “The thought becomes different from what it was, which means expressing may be a form of learning” (1981, p. 18).

What is most important to remember in the delivery of course content, however, is that even in a largely, and unavoidably, monologic situation, there should always be some accommodation to the dialogic. As Sidorkin (1999) points out,

The teacher’s and textbooks’ monological texts should have some elements of self-destruction, self-doubt, self-irony, or should I add, self-deconstruction…. Any monological texts should include hints and glimpses of possible dialogues. (p. 106)

Such a surrender of power from the instructor to the student is not only a large step toward the democratization of education (Dwight & Garrison, 2003), but also the enabling of the student as a co-writer of the meanings of their learning. It is a move away from mere “training” toward true “education,” from the teaching of methods to the learning of methodologies, from the memorization of bulleted lists to the generation of concepts and understanding, from the epicness of monologic pedagogy to the novelness of a dialogic curriculum. It is a move that opens the texts of the classroom and creates a more active and writerly learning environment.

More importantly, we must understand the shift from monologism to dialogism (i.e., from the readerly to the writerly) is not as difficult, or even as mystical, as it may seem. Almost all teaching, regardless of the approach, is going to have some elements of the monologic; however, as long as we can find ways to make “some accommodation” to the dialogic, some “hints and glimpses of possible dialogues,” we will make tremendous strides in how our students encounter the texts that constitute our teaching.


Comments

53 responses to “Teaching and Learning as Textual Acts: Blogs, Dialogism, and the Practice of Writing”

  1. Robert Gray Avatar
    Robert Gray

    This is an example of a comment at the paragraph level. You will note that the paragraph in question is highlighted in red and that this comment is at the first level of the marginal conversation.  The next person to come along can also make a comment on that first level (i.e., speak directly to the paragraph) or reply to this comment.

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      This is a reply to the first comment, which creates a new conversation thread.  This is where the conversation becomes a dialogue between readers.

      1. Robert Gray Avatar
        Robert Gray

        This is a reply to the reply.  You can see how this can become quite sophisticated.

        1. Robert Gray Avatar
          Robert Gray

          And this can keep going…

          1. Robert Gray Avatar
            Robert Gray

            and going…

    2. Patricia Harris Avatar
      Patricia Harris

      I love this ability to comment within the text and not just at the end of the post.

  2. Robert Gray Avatar
    Robert Gray

    This is a second comment on the paragraph at the “first level.”

  3. Robert Gray Avatar
    Robert Gray

    The terms “writerly” and “dialogic” could use some explanation here.  French theorist, Roland Barthes, contended that the best measure of the quality of a literary work is its writerliness.  He said there are two kinds of texts, readerly texts and writerly texts, that readerly texts are those which have a limited number of possible interpretations and that writerly texts, the rarest and best texts, are those which make the process of reading a process of re- or co-writing of the text.

    Russian theorist, Mikhail Bakhtin, defined the concept of dialogism as the quality of a text where multiple voices interplay with each other, where the text cannot be identified as having one clear voice or point of view.

    Later in the essay, I mention “novelness.” This is another of Bakhtin’s concepts.  He differentiated between novel and epic texts in a way that somewhat parallels Barthes’s writerly and readerly texts, where epic texts have a clear voice or meaning but novels (and by this he is speaking about 20th-century novels) have a multitude of voices and possible interpretations.

  4. Robert Gray Avatar
    Robert Gray

    It is also worth pointing out here that the comment box has a rich-text editor that allows you to use bold, italics, and underlining (although you should never use underlining if the text is not a link).  You can also add links like this one.

    You can even embed videos..

    https://youtu.be/5b032W9mbTY

  5. Steve Schuler Avatar
    Steve Schuler

    I’m going to go one step further and say that what lives on is what gets into a student’s practice–what is actually lived out in the day-to-day world.  Who was it who said that great literature rearranges the furniture of our minds?  Well, our minds direct our actions and interactions with the outside world.  The ultimate measure of the staying power of a text or a lesson is whether it alters (even a little) the way we actually live.

    1. Melissa Ferrell Avatar
      Melissa Ferrell

      I agree with you, Steve. The learning experiences that I’ve had in that past that have led to a shift in my thinking or way of doing something  are the experiences I remember the most.

  6. Pamela Buchanan Miller Avatar
    Pamela Buchanan Miller

    That magical moment of transformational interaction–can it really be quantified, or nailed down–would/should you dissect the blackbird? We have certainly tried, but not with very good results so far. As an instructional designer, I realize the value of determining what promotes quality interaction with the goal of fostering it though, and agree we need a better language and structure for talking about productive interaction–must read on!

  7. Pamela Buchanan Miller Avatar
    Pamela Buchanan Miller

    It’s hard to fault those who would pound interaction flat into interactivity in order to study it though–a little like cartographers who have to warp our world a little to represent it on paper. Unfortunately what probably IS lost in the pounding out IS the impact of the student’s role in interaction.

  8. This is one of my favorite passages in poetry.  I have just heard the blackbird this morning–and I tried to whistle too. I thought there might be a response, but it has been ten minutes or more — and the air is filled with silence–like a classroom when no one says a thing.

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      Sue, I miss you so…

  9. Melissa Ferrell Avatar
    Melissa Ferrell

    I think in order for students to fully grasp the material, they need to have interaction with the material, other students, and with the instructor. By interacting with the material in different ways, students gain different perspectives and may encounter different ways to think about the material that they didn’t previously. It helps them feel engaged and a true part of the learning process.

  10. What if “innuendoes” are not beautiful? What then might a teacher do?

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      If the innuendoes are all beautiful, then are the students really learning anything?  And does “the beauty of innuendoes” actually suggest that the innuendo itself must be beautiful? Might it be referring to innuendo-ness, both in itself and in its agency?

      1. Rini Hughes Avatar
        Rini Hughes

        If the poem is looking to the beauty remaining in the consciousness of the person who is being affected, as it seems to me, perhaps all innuendoes have in them the beauty of the interactions that created them. This is not to say that the innuendoes might bring up un-beautiful things. For example, a discussion of world trade may, indirectly, bring up concerns about human slavery and/or trafficking. That does not take away from the interaction, but expands it.

      2. Pete Cassidy Avatar
        Pete Cassidy

        I love that idea of “innuendo-ness,” and by default I’d say it’s more likely laden with negative connotations than positive. I’d image that, out of the box, innuendos are not beautiful, but rather references to deeper spots that, more often than not, can cause discomfort in the recipients (readers).

  11. What if there is no language? What is the listener isn’t listening — for how would the teacher know?  I see the master’s mouth moving.  I see his hand point to a word — but I am somewhere better than a classroom.  I am in New Orleans on an early September morning and beignets. The taste of sugar lingers on my tongue. This is an unteachable moment, n’est pas?

  12. Can you say this as a poem? If so, I’ll listen.

  13. Fly away blackbird, fly, fly away.  You know wind-thrusts, the color of the sky, shades of the rainbow. Where are the children? Teach them the lift of wings.

  14. i have discovered the “after” — Wendell Berry’s The Way of Ignorance.  It is the way of the shovel — the spade.

  15. Åge Diseth Avatar
    Åge Diseth

    Learned two new english words: inflections and innuendoes. Beautiful part of a poem, anyway.

  16. Rick Laub Avatar
    Rick Laub

    It seems to me that the central challenges of having a shared learning experience – whether by using online tools or just by classroom participation – are ego and trust.  The monologic approach, especially as it may be central to the professor’s research area, can be tied very closely with the ego of the person doing the delivering.  The recipients may be very intelligent but less informed about the subject matter being delivered, but also less restricted in their thinking about that subject area.  Like any exchange of ideas, there may be a lot of chaff to wade through, but the pearls (to mix a metaphor) may be worth the wading.  It is tempting to shoot down ideas in a public forum, especially if they do not conform to the “accepted” political or academic norm in the setting they are delivered.  As an interested, committed, “intelligent” participant – do I trust that I will be able to be heard without judgement, or, if I am “forced” to participate by stint of a grade, will I purposely be reserved and circumspect – only contributing comments that I know are “safe”.

  17. I wonder about the use of the term “drive” here to describe the way our pedagogical activity.  The very term is mechanical, either in the sense of actual mechanics or the Freudian sense.  In either case, the foundationalist assumptions–that there is something in you that compels your pedagogical style seems to contradict the content of the poem that suggests the motion of teaching is one of being willingly seduced by the nuances of the dialogue that emerges in your class.  Not coming from within you, but from the intra-action with the student(s).

    1. Gurupreet Khalsa Avatar
      Gurupreet Khalsa

      What a beautiful expression: “willingly seduced by the nuances of the dialogue.” I think that defines the essence of a truly educated person – not just the teacher, but the student as well.

    2. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      Point taken, Jerry.

  18. Gurupreet Khalsa Avatar
    Gurupreet Khalsa

    And when those accommodations include opportunities for students to make connections from those texts to their own internal dialogical interactions as well as to other texts, to other circumstances, other perspectives, and the larger texts of society, they will develop skills and understandings that allow them to explore their worlds in a much expanded sense.

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      Some of them will do this regardless of what their instructors do, but most of them will only do this if we enable them, if we show them how, if we openly provide them the opportunity over and over again…

  19. Gurupreet Khalsa Avatar
    Gurupreet Khalsa

    Also impacted is the internal dialogue as a participant examines previously held views and, in conversation with new perspectives, opens himself or herself to shifting meaning.

  20. Gurupreet Khalsa Avatar
    Gurupreet Khalsa

    As Peter Elbow might put it, sometimes we don’t know what we are thinking until we commit it to paper. Solidifying thinking through language requires turning the fog into particles.

  21. This is a very important concept.

    Luckily, I intuitively grasped the concept as early as 2006, when I launched my first online lectures on nuclear medicine:

    http://radiowew.uib.no/undervisning/grunnkurs/nuk1/player.html

    The presentation is essentially linear, reciting what constitutes “conventional wisdom” in the field. However, on selected slides (e. g. slide 22) I added footnotes to the manuscript where I pointed out instances of over-simplification to the student including references for further reading.

  22. Gurupreet Khalsa Avatar
    Gurupreet Khalsa

    I’m not sure I agree that all discussions reduce students to pinging. I believe that there are many instructors who use exploratory/dialogic discussion, and researchers who try to access those subtle and complex features of interaction in order to determine what kinds of social expression/presence are manifest in online interactions – not just interactivity.

  23. Try to say that sentence fast many times: “from the epicness of monologic pedagogy to the novelness of a dialogic curriculum”! Absolutely supporting the idea though!

  24. Claudia Stanny Avatar
    Claudia Stanny

    We need to move beyond evaluating contributions to online discussions in terms of word counts and admonitions against “I agree” responses. What are the characteristics of a substantive, thoughtful, response? Suggestions: A response deepens the discussion (but we need to articulate what “depth” means). A response that extends the discussion to a new dimension or application, adding breadth without distracting from the main topic (i.e., the new dimension must be germane; it must not be a tangent).

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      I am thinking that Claudia and Pam need to begin a dialogue that leads to synthesis of your opposing ideas about the function and practice of measurement.

  25. Philip Carr Avatar
    Philip Carr

    A student always has been “a co-writer of the meanings of learning” but importantly, by entering a dialogue between student and teacher, EACH gains insight into what the teacher thought was being learned and what the student actually learned.  That is, the student’s prior experiences have always influenced their learning and even their memorization of bulleted lists.  I know that what I thought I was teaching was not always what the student knew they learned.  This is particularly evident when the topic is controversial such as the existence of biological races or human evolution.   Opening a dialogue on such topics is critical, and allowing students to be experts on what the “know” about the popular conceptions of these topics is always a learning experience for me.

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      One of the things I’ve come to realize about this writerly/dialogic angle that I’m proposing is that it’s not such a radical move in the end.  Students have been doing to this to some extent all along, and many professors have as well.  What I am calling for is a clearer intention and consciousness about what is going on and how, from both instructors and students.

  26. I’ve always felt that interaction in students’ blogging works best when each student has their own blog and they (and I, with my teacher’s blog) are all equal, as peers. Comment threads like these seem to maintain hierarchy more than individual blogs – the main text has authority, much as a lecturer standing behind a podium does. I wonder whether the feeling of dialogue can be fully achieved with this kind of commenting? Perhaps?

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      Excellent point, Jill!  And that is one of the reasons why I don’t typically use this tool with texts like these.  I will often provide things that I’ve written for my students in this system just for consistency sake, but I don’t usually ask them, or at least require them, to comment.  However, it does allow them the opportunity to ask questions or share insights or raise objections if they wish.  My most common use of this tool is to put the literary texts (most commonly poems) that we are studying here, allowing them to discuss the work (and think critically about the work) before coming to class.

      In fact, I seriously considered putting a poem here as well to give people an option of what to comment on, but I decided that would water down the comments.  Perhaps that was a bad decision…

    2. Patricia Harris Avatar
      Patricia Harris

      Jill, I love this way of thinking. I’ve struggled over time with ways to manage blogging and student control over, and engagement across, texts. The commenting this specific tool allows could be quite useful for asynchronous (or synchronous) group exploration of a common text. Any more thoughtful, probitive responses, or essay drafts that might emerge from this close engagement with the text, could become blog posts on a student’s individual blog. And then others could be invited to review and engage with that new text in the new space.

      I see it as a sort of flow between and among blogs, and this tool would help readers become engaged participants in moments in the text.

  27. Valarie Williams Avatar
    Valarie Williams

    I love this quote!

  28. Valarie Williams Avatar
    Valarie Williams

    Great article. I agree with both you and Gurupreet. I always loved the John Maxwell quote, “Connection not correction”. Miss y’all!

  29. Ryan Noble Avatar
    Ryan Noble

    That transition of power from instructor to student might be the most dialogic exercise of all. As an instructor, I am constantly and willfully offering (begging) my students to embrace that power, accept it as their own and allow the dialogue to happen. From an applied arts perspective, particularly, that transition is often met with fear; I guess akin to swimming in the deep end for the first time. The ability to turn “mere ‘training’ toward true ‘education’” is acute and I find myself pursuing all sorts of random “tricks” to help disguise this power shift. Because, ultimately, I agree with the sentiment of this paragraph and the ideals of a “dialogic curriculum.”

  30. Burke Johnson Avatar
    Burke Johnson

    Perhaps this is a false dichotomy. Why can’t some of both perspectives inform one’s thinking and interpretation?

    1. Robert Gray Avatar
      Robert Gray

      Can you have authoritarian discourse in “dialogue” or even coexistence with personal, interpretive discourse?

  31. Sarah Smith-Robbins Avatar
    Sarah Smith-Robbins

    This paragraph brings up an important element of dialogic teaching. The two-way interaction puts distinct responsibility on both parties to engage, and yet, I think that this isn’t behavior that most teachers and students are used to. In a lecture-based class, faculty need not worry about true interaction with students, nor do the students have to worry about anything more than looking like they’re paying attention. Though we may all agree that interactivity in the classroom is superior, that’s not to say that it’s something we’re all used to.

  32. Claudia Stanny Avatar
    Claudia Stanny

    As a cognitive psychologist, I enjoy figuring out how to measure the “unmeasurable.”

    So my question for Pam is: What are the hallmarks of a “transformational interaction?” I assume you recognize it when it happens, so what do you see?  What does it look like when it is happening? How do people who experience this type of interaction change? What do these people typically say about these experiences? What do observers say about these interactions?

    While doing this, we need to be careful not to focus on one or two superficial characteristics and treat these as the whole thing. But 4 or 5 independent indicators might triangulate on the underlying concept. The measure won’t be perfect, but it can capture the sense of what we mean by the concept if the measures are selected carefully.

     

  33. Rini Hughes Avatar
    Rini Hughes

    As to “writerly” vs “readerly” texts, it seems that we have to expect that students will approach any text, including classroom teaching, as a “writerly” experience. It is the continuing dialogic, then, between teacher and student and course materials that results in quality teaching, the kind that allows students to appropriate course content to their own purposes.

  34. Rob, I believe you asked the wrong Dr. Vanguri to help with this post.  I’ll contribute to the technology review!

  35. This is a great quote from Dwight and Garrison on the centralized mode of communication in the traditional classroom dynamic between the instructor and student.

Leave a Reply to Melissa Ferrell Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *