The following materials are excerpts from a presentation, Collaborative Computing Applications: Learning Tools for Your Class Lab, by Greg Kaminski and Michael Krauss, Lewis & Clark College, at the 1996 TRI-TESOL Conference (Oregon, Washington and BC TEAL), Seattle, Washington.
Computer conferencing is an excellent way for students to initially think through and generate enough material to get started on writing assignments. With the help of their classmates' comments, students ultimately develop their topic more fully or in a different way than they would had they written from beginning to end on their own.
This assignment took place in an upper level reading/writing course with "Diversity and Civil Rights in the U.S." as the content focus (16 weeks). The students read To Kill A Mockingbird. The students were asked to comment on Scout's words which were spoken after she was told by her first grade teacher that she had to stop reading with her father. "Until I feared I would lose it, I never loved to read. One does not love breathing." TKAM, p. 18. This activity is in preparation for a writing assignment which asks students to write about someone or something which they have feared losing or have lost in their life.
The final writing assignment (not included here) produced by Nak Min contains both a description of his experience being tear gassed in the military and a history of the political student movement in Korea. The combination of these two themes was a direct result of the input which Nak Min received in the collaborative computer activity reproduced below:
**********************************************************************************
Subject: Losing
From: Michael
Date: Friday, September 20, 1996, 3:02 pm
Assignment for today: Monday 9/23/96
*****************************************
Write a comment of at least 200 words by 10:30 AM tomorrow (Tue) about the following:
In TKAM, p. 18, Scout says, "Until I feared I would lose it, I never loved to read. One does not love breathing."
Have you lost (or almost lost--or feared losing) something or someone important in your life? Please explain. Does Scout's statement apply to your situation? Why?
*****************************************************
Assignment for Thursday: 9/26/96
*****************************************************
Please read your classmates' comments from Monday's assignment above. Then reply to one or two of them before 9:00 AM on Thursday, 9/29. (Write at least 150 words for each reply).
Subject: Re: Losing
From: NAKMIN
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 1996, 10:23 pm
"I needed fresh air"
When I was a uiversity student, all Korean male student had to go a military training camp for a week. It was our duty like paying tax. Hundreds of students were trained in a camp which was located far away home. We disciplined many military skills like a shooting, a raid, a individual fight, and so forth. Everything was very difficult because l had never experienced that kind of training before. One of hardest thing was a chemical, biological and radiological exercise. We, a squad, was supposed to enter a small room shutted tight with putting on a mask. Entering into the room, we couldn't see anything because there was a lot of tear gas smoke. We could put up with for a while and see inside room a little bit due to the mask. But a drillmaster suddenly ordered us to take off our mask, hitting with his big stick. We didn't have a choice to refuse his order because we already were trained to do anything he said. Can you imagine how we colud take a breath and endure it in the closed small room without our mask? Have you ever smelled tear gas before? If you have experienced it, you probably know what I'm saying right now. Moreover, he ordered us to sing a war song loudly. It might be past a few minutes but I felt like many hours past. The room was hell. We screamed,cried, and was crazy. My stomack was twisted. Tears streamed down my face. I run at the nose unceasingly .
Until I feared I would lose fresh air forever at that time, I never appreciated it. Fortunatly, the system was abolished a few years later and no longer exist the duty in Korea.
*********************************
Subject: Replay to Mr Nakmin
From: Morgan
Date: Monday, September 30, 1996, 12:43 pm
Oh dear Nakmin,
I can imagin your need for the fresh air, somtimes don't understand how the goverment of a country thinks when they decide a rule. Especialy in Korea. During the past years I have heard a lot about the student riots in your country. And I always wonder, whats wrong with that country, is it the regim, the system or to much demanding citizens. As a law student I have learned that to maitaine a harmonic socity you have to build up a society with a combination of all the conditions above. I mean you need basic laws wich guarantee the citizens their rights. And citizens massive protests which are asociated with some govermental action shows that a specific law doesn't work . Somtimes when Korean students are in action they show their extrem feelings for such smal thing.
I think that it's very good progress in the way of thinking when the goverment abolished the one-week-military-skill camp. It will be even better if they realize that you can not protect a country with ultra modern weaps, it's peoples unity their real patrotism who makes the country strong.
Nakmin, I am realy very glad that you got a planty of fresh air after that nightmare, and could be with us tody.
Yours truley,
Morgan A.
*********************************
Computer conferencing can be a very effective way for students to problem solve and, in the process, also learn the conventions of supporting, challenging, agreeing, disagreeing, etc. which take place during the group problem-solving process.
In an upper level reading/writing course, students were studying a content unit on psychology. One of the readings dealt with moral reasoning and suggested that all people pass through six stages of moral development: 1)reward and punishment 2) mutuality 3) public opinion 4) law and order 5) social contract 6) universal principles. Students were having some difficulty applying these concepts. They were assigned a case study, The Shipwrecked Sailors, which describes how three men marooned without food or water agree to draw lots, the loser to be eaten so that the remaining men might survive. The loser then changes his mind, but the two men kill and eat him anyway. Shortly thereafter, the two men are rescued.
The following computer conference excerpts illustrate that the students helped each other to understand the concepts being studied and also provided raw material which the students later could use in the follow-up writing assignment they completed related to The Shipwrecked Sailors.
************************************************************************************
I suggest you read these questions, think about them, then return
and post your ideas. Please post your comment BEFORE 8:30 AM ON
MONDAY.
These are difficult questions. There is not one "correct" answer.
Your REASONING is the most important part of your answer. If you have
strong reasoning, your grade will be high. If you can only answer
part of the question, that's OK. If each student offers thoughtful
ideas, the pieces will come together like a puzzle. GOOD LUCK.
QUESTIONS:
Was it morally wrong for Dudley and Stephens to kill Brooks? Should they be punished? if no, why not? if yes, what should their punishment be?
What stage or stages in Kohlberg's model of moral reasoning supports your answer? Explain.
**********************************************
Harumi (Japanese female)
I think they were morally wrong. This is because Brooks was alive, he refused to be killed although he suggested that the loser would be killed. He was killed by Dudley and Stephens; thus, they are definitely murderers. The idea suggested by Brooks is wrong, also killing people is legally and morally wrong. Any excuse which killing him was needed to survive is not approved even though they thought they would not be saved. They should have waited for his death, then they should have eaten him . . . They would belong to stage 5: social contract. They broke the social and moral law, then made their own law. . *************************
Yuko (Japanese female) responding to Harumi
Harumi writes:
>I think they were morally wrong. He was killed by Dudley and
Stephens; thus, they are definitely
>murderers. Any excuse which killing him was needed to survive is
not approved even though they
>thought they would not be saved. They should have waited for his
death, then they should have eaten
>him.
I am surprised at your idea because yours is very different from my idea. But, you mentioned that they lost the ability of judgment because they were abnormal (because of the terrible situation). This is what I want to emphasize the most. I think we should make much of this point. Do you think a certain law always can be applied in any case? I think it is not fair. Can you imagine what people do if they face death? Most of people would be selfish to get their life. There is no reason. There is no law any more. Wait for Brook's death? Admire their brave death? No way! Death is not such a easy thing if people really want lives. Of course what you are saying is right. I know what you mean. But it is very hard for me to say that they are murder even though their action is wrong.
*************************
Masako (Japanese female) responding to Hiro and Todd (Japanese males)
I partly agree with Hiro's statement that as this situation was really unusual and everybody was exhausted, killing was an ultimate choice.
However, I don't agree with his statement that they don't have the intention of malice as all agreed to draws a lot to choose a person being eaten by the others. Because there was the fact that Brook refused to be killed at the last moment. So this killing was against his will even though he lost the lot.
I found that I agree with interpretations of stage 5 in Todd's statement; as Brooks suggested to draw a lot and decide a person to be killed for the other's feeding, the law that prohibit killing was changed by the agreement of the three. Therefore this case will be applied to stage 5 that people can change the law with agreement of people who think it is best for the society, in this case among three people.
*************************
Il-Sung (Korean male) responding to Masako
I agree with most of your opinion because your opinion is almost same as me, but the part of your thoughts that you could reach the conclusion are little bit different.
When I read your written and think my comments, I am confused about why Dudley and Stephens were placed on trial for murder. I think they are not only defendants but also victims. I mean that they are placed for defendants of murder, but they are victims of the shipwreck. I think the shipwreck was quite an ordeal for them, so the first time usually people must be felt sorry for them. The people might think that it is possible Brooks could have already died before the other two tried to kill him, and it isn't a murder, is it?
I am worrying about this kind of accident could happen to all of us at any time in our life. I hope it'll never happen to me in rest of my life.
*************************
Return to Internet/Computer Writing Resources home page.
Created by: krauss@lclark.edu
Updated:11/24/00