(Not that I really was deluded into thinking it was going to be any longer than a moment, but still ...)
"Good post!"
For those unfamiliar with online course delivery, this little nugget gets tossed around discussion forums like beads at Marti Gras.
Now, discussion forums are supposed to take the place of real time in-class discussions.
When was the last time you heard someone say, "Good point" during a class? Repeatedly?
But online, everyone seems to feel a compulsion to cheer lead for each other's grading.
"Good post!"'s twin on steroids, the answer that begins: "Comatose Carl, I really liked how you covered all the points [that were required ] and explained their importance to wombat care and feeding [except he didn't]."
Seriously, Skippy? Do you somehow think this sort of lame grade grubbing advocacy is going to result in a reverse back-spin lob into your grade point average? Frankly, you and Carl are having difficulty stringing together coherent sentences, never mind actually making legitimate contributions to the discussion. So, you damning with feigned praise only undermines your own credibility. But, please, do try to blind me with your saccharine and thinly veiled message that I should be wowed by CC's mediocrity.
Didn't work ... just pissed me off!
YEEEEESSS! They do that in my class because they think it gets the credit for "responding" to at least two other comments, which is required.
ReplyDeleteThe worst is when they say some completely dumb, totally wrong shit, and a bunch of students read it before I notice it and can correct it. A few semesters ago, some genius posted that Islam was a pagan religion with no relation to Christianity, and that Muslims were moon-worshippers. Before I even had a chance to read it, six or seven people had already thanked the moron for posting such "interesting" information and wondered why the textbook had left that scintillating information out of its coverage of the early history of the Islamic world.
And of course correcting the moron at this point was like poking a pile of (really stupid) snakes, because of course I was bound to "offend" someone with my "rudeness."
This is one of the reasons I avoid free-form "discussions" in online forums, despite the fact that I'm told they build class cohesion and allow the students to get to know each other and me and various other good things -- because I can't monitor them constantly and redirect them quickly for the duration, as I would an in-class discussion (or at least weigh in quickly on whatever consensus the students arrive at, as I do with in-class group work). It's easier for me to avoid this, since I teach a skills (writing) rather than a content course, and so can set them to work looking for fairly specific things in each others' posts (does the idea for a paper topic meet the assignment requirements? Did they cite correctly?). But they still sometimes lead each other astray, and I need to intervene, and do so as quickly as possible, which leaves me constantly scanning the new posts for trouble.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, even when I provide them with quite specific questions and things to look for, I still get a fair proportion of "good post" comments and their longer equivalents. I occasionally communicate my lack of enthusiasm via grades ("good post" is an "incomplete" answer), but of course that results in howls of protest, especially from the Skippys, who did, after all, write several complete sentences. And Skippys are also immune to another otherwise-good recommendation: give them a word-count target (they'll just get more specific in paraphrasing my directions, which is a good exercise in some ways, but not quite what I had in mind).
Actually, my online students are behaving pretty well right now. I think maybe I scared them with an introductory email about how fast-paced and tough the class would be (another approach to building camaraderie, I suppose). Or maybe I'm just having a moment.
Good post!
ReplyDeleteSorry, I couldn't resist.
Oh, Bison, I wanted to say that. Then again, judging by the above content, I probably could. How frustrating.
DeleteMy syllabus explicitly says that any form of me-tooism does not count as contributing to online discussion. Mine keep having massive fights in the online threads. Which, awesome.
ReplyDeleteActually, so do I Ladder.
DeleteThe "work around" has been to APPEND "Good post" to a couple of vapid lines of "response."
I don't award points for "good point, me too". In order to get points for the response to a post, the student has to say why s/he agrees (or doesn't, as the case may be). Otherwise, no points.
DeleteI reply to every good point post with a line about how no one would ever raise their hand to say good post in a classroom and that it kills conversation. It's a harsh line, but by week 3 there is nary a "good post" to be found.
ReplyDeleteIt's only partially true, though: they're modeling their online behavior on our classroom behavior, in which we respond to their blatherings with "Good point...." as a kind of placeholder while we formulate our ego-preserving rebuttal.
DeleteYeah, I pretty much don't do that, or say "Good question" to every question.
DeleteLove it, AdMonk!
ReplyDeleteI'll have to see if replacing my current "Please no 'Good posts'" with your "classroom killer" line is more effective!
ANYthing to make them stop!
I admit to making a few Skippy posts when I was an undergrad. I wasn't trying to help anyone else's grade. I was trying to 1) show that I actually had read the post; 2) comment on the good; and 3) not make enemies by pointing out the weak. (I would very politely discuss what I thought might be wrong but often the wrong posts were so difficult to decipher I just avoided them.) I always thought 'Good post!' meant "I didn't read or think about anything but look, I'm participating! Give me participation points and/or effort points because now I have an atrophied leg to stand on when I complain above your head."
ReplyDeleteI require that students elaborate... It's a good point BECAUSE... And yes I have to remind them over and over, but I don't accept the statement "it's a good point" unless specifics are explained.
ReplyDelete