Freedom and self-imposed restraints

We are now nearing the end of the semester, which means that for me, this is the penultimate (second to last- thank Prof Arvan for the cool word) reflection that I will be “coerced” :) into writing. The overall nature of the blog has been that every w eek Prof Arvan gives us a suggested topic on which to write, though we were also told that we were able to choose our own topic. It is that that I want to discuss today, because, per our class discussion on Wednesday, some very interesting points of view arose.

Of particular interest was the disparity between Prof Arvan’s and our view of the blogs, particularly with respect to the prompt. I will try to summarize some of the interesting points of Wednesday’s discussion, which, quite frankly would have been more beneficial if we had had at the beginning semester.

Let me begin by laying out, as best I can, what I perceived to be the student’s and Prof Arvan’s viewpoint on the blog prompt, as they came to light on Wednesday.

From Prof. Arvan’s point of view, the blogs are a means for us to think critically about a subject, and then put our views out in the open in blog form so that other people can read and comment on our writing and thoughts, hence opening discussion which leads to learning. Additionally, to maintain a focus for the class, the blog was to be on some topic related to the class discussion that week. In order to aid those who struggling to think of a good topic, Prof Arvan also posted a prompt.

Even as I write this (assuming that I got it correct) I marvel that our interpretation of this was so different. Firstly, I believe that I/we would agree that the blogs were to be a way for us to get our ideas on the table. However, despite Prof Arvan telling us repeatedly that we didn’t have to stick to the prompt, most of us tenaciously held on to the prompt, even if it felt constraining, or didn’t interest us. There were probably several reasons for this.

The most important was our misconception of the purpose of the blogging. Given the type of “hard driving, dedicated students” that we are, we view the prompt as “the assignment, to be done whether we liked it or not”. I don’t think that I speak amiss when I say that a lot of us suffer from what I would call “grade perfectionism”. Any class is a thing to be conquered, and the surest way to get a good grade is to just do what the teacher wants. Whereas Prof Arvan wanted the blogs to be a freeing, learning experience, with the prompt being just that, we all viewed it as a mandate. Sure we were given the option to deviate, but to deviate is a dangerous thing- better to just stick with the safety of the prompt, even if we don’t like it.

Clearly, this is an important difference, and one which quite honestly I would have realized much earlier existed. Would my blogging experience have been different if I hadn’t conformed to my self-imposed restraints? Probably, as I would have gotten more of the benefit of the true intent of the blog.

So, while it is a bit late in the semester for this to have a huge effect (though apparently not too late, since the astute reader will realize that I have thrown this week’s prompt to the wind), how can this information be put to good use. Said another way, why was there such a difference in the class’s and Professor’s view on the blogs, and “whose fault was it”. I guess I don’t exactly know the answer, but would have to say that it was probably a shared responsibility. We as students need to get out of the “grade oriented” mindset and focus more on the “learning oriented mindset”. This would make it much easier to try something new, and not worry about failure. I suppose, if we had been paying attention, we could have learned firsthand from the fact that Prof Arvan really didn’t have a clear vision for the class, but still wasn’t afraid to try new things.

That being said, I feel that from the students perspective, the fear came from our lack of vision of where the class was going. Since we didn’t know what was going on, it was easiest to just take it week by week and do exactly as we were told. Finally, as a direct suggestion, even though it was clear in Prof. Arvan’s mind that the prompt was just a springboard, I think that given our preconceptions, he should have made it doubly clear, viz., “This week write about something we talked about in class. If you can’t think of anything, here is a suggestion…….”

Well, that is it. I wrote an entire reflection without the aid/crutch/restraint of a prompt. Thank you. Thank you.

Just kidding. In all seriousness, I wish I had been doing this all along, because I feel that what I have just written is an honest reflection of my thoughts on the subject, and much closer to the overall purpose of this blog. Which means it is now your turn- if you liked/ disliked/agreed with/etc anything I said, let it be known, so that the discussion can begin!

(Disclaimer- I use the collective “we” a lot in the blog to refer to the students in CHP 395/396. However, I realize that not all of the students in the class will agree with what I say, but using the word “we” felt more natural than “I”, especially given the fact that, for the most part, I feel that I am accurately speaking for the class. If that is not the case, I apologize, and please let your opinion be heard!)