CritLit2010 Traversing or jumping
It is an interesting aspect of a connectivist course how the learner is able to connect a weekly topic to the main course topic. Since learning is associated with traversing the nodes in a network, it seems to be important that this traversing does not include too wide jumps. I missed too much of the previous weeks of the course, and so the step from critical literacies to syntax, for me, was a jump that was too far, and I failed it. Fortunately, in today’s wrap-up session, Stephen and Rita helped the small audience with this connection.
One Response to “CritLit2010 Traversing or jumping”
1 Sui Fai John Mak 29 June 2010 @ 2:03 am
These are interesting points in your post. I am not sure if I have fully understood your message here, relating to the wide jumps - I suppose you are referring to oftentimes different literacies and syntax (in and outside the course as proposed by different actors (learners & other networkers).
I appreciate your use of the words - traversing, jumps which match exactly what this course is all about. This reinforces the importance of syntax - the way in which words are arranged and form sentences and context - the words that come before and after a particular word or phrase and help to fix its meaning with the semantics (meaning). For me, I just integrate them in my connection (communication), and so I seldom look into it with such details. I suppose the juxtaposition of syntax, context, pragmatics, semantics, change, etc. would help when I draw them up in my mind as delineation. May be it is like driving a car (use of language), where one has to check the tyres, oil, lights, gear, accelerator and brakes(syntax - in sequence), and the traffic condition (context), in order to drive safely (meaningful). Have I jump started? Or may driving in the wrong lane? May be I am driving a virtual one different from yours, but surely we are cooperating, not competing.
I am not a linguistic specialist, and so I don’t think I could add “much” value to the conversation in the linguistic discourse.
John
Comments: