If we can summarize the first decade of the 21st century with a single term it would be: hybridity. It is impossible to go even a day without hearing about some kind of hybrid invention: hybrid cars, hybrid identities, hybrid foods, hybrid research projects, and hybrid courses. In almost every case the notion of hybridity evokes a positive response. The 21st century hybrid brings together two objects, ideas, or concepts that are merely satisfactory and creates a superior synthesis that preserves the character of the original components (in some way) but eliminates some of the negative attributes. We can all think: less pollution, less fat, less disciplinary isolation. And most positively: better efficiency, better nutrition, better collaboration. The positive character of the hybrid has even appeared in scholarship in which scholars tout the hybrid identities of groups in the past as presaging the dynamic identities of the modern age and superior to groups that have remained isolated, pure, or simply defined.
While there is indeed much to celebrate in terms of the hybrid in today's culture, it is worth remembering, however, that hybrid identities are also threatening, unstable, and, frankly, confusing. In a post-colonial context, Homi Bhabha is clear: hybrid individuals threaten and destablized the clearly defined world with its boundaries between the authority of the colonizer and the identity of the colonized. We should not be overly romanced by the power of the hybrid to bring out only the positive aspects of the combination and realize that hybrids are, in many cases, inherently unsettling. They are ambivalent, shape shifters that defy easy categorization and disrupt established interpretative regimes and assumptions.
This semester I introduced an overtly hybrid element in my Western Civilization I class. I divided the course material into 4 parts some of which happen in class and some of which happen online. Lectures are podcasts, primary source readings are online, there is a basic book (P. Crone's Pre-Industrial Societies), and discussions rooted in the podcasts, primary source readings, and the Crone book occur both online and in class. By moving lectures from their tradition space during class to the internet and by spreading discussion between the classroom and online, I intended to create a much more flexible classroom environment where the class could review online lecture material, discuss the basic primary and secondary sources, and spend time explicitly developing certain skills (historical argumentation, academic writing, study management) that are often squeezed or marginalized during a crowded survey class.
As the instructor, I have thoroughly enjoyed the flexibility that this approach has given to the classroom. I can target specific problems of understanding, allow discussions to meander through the student's interests, and, at the same time, be less anxious about "getting through the material" since some of the basic structure of information dissemination is now presented online.
On the other hand, the students are struggling. I have received multiple emails from students who simply "don't get the class". This is after I stopped and talked with them at least twice about how each component of the class (podcasts, discussion, Crone, primary source reading) fits together. I've worked to explain how the environment in which content is disseminated is as crucial to learning as the material itself. To do this, I have tried to use a series of overlapping metaphors for the relationship between the classroom and online environments. The online environment with its wiki and threaded discussion is "student led", voluntary (in a sense), and not bounded by strict time limits; the classroom environment, that is in the lecture bowl where the class meets once a week, is "instructor led" (no matter how far they stray on a particular discussion or point, I can ultimately gather them up and refocus them), required (inasmuch as they know that I can tell if they don't come to class), and bounded by the limitations of the space and time. Or more playfully: the online podcasts are "recorded in the studio" where as my lectures in the classroom are a "live show", and just because you have a CD of your favorite band, doesn't mean that you don't want to go and hear them live. In fact, you'd expect the live experience to be different; you can feed upon the energy from the audience, have a more intimate relationship with the musicians, and . While this isn't a perfect metaphor, it does challenge them to consider the environment where learning takes place and how the same material in different contexts (online or inclass, collaborative (on a wiki) or solitary (on a test)) makes a difference.
Despite these efforts to explain the benefits of a hybrid environment, the class remains ill at ease. At first, I criticized my own ability to make my pedagogy clear. But now, I have begun to realize that the hybridity of the form is partially to blame. The course defies student expectations in that the dissemination of material is not predicated on efficiency, specifically tailored to a single tool or environment, and compartmentalized neatly for easy digestion. The hybrid nature of the course is clearly part of the issue. The expectations that students have for online course (relative anonymity, ability to move at one's own pace, complete access to material in an online venue) are defied since they know that they need to attend class. On the other hand, their expectations of a classroom environment, particularly for a lecture bowl type class that meets once a week, are not being met either: they can't be passive and are expected to contribute to the direction of the class time and engage the material in a public way. Moreover, dissemination of information is not limited by the classroom time or environment. There is material that I expect them to know and at least try to use that will not be "covered" in class but emerge exclusively through their engagement with the online environment.
As the Hybrid Decade of the 21st century continues on, I suspect that the unease experienced by my students will manifest itself as we are confronted by increasing numbers of hybrid experiences. With the promise of progress through hybrid approaches to pressing problems comes the instability and ambivalence of hybrid experiences.
For more Teaching Thursdays see:
Teaching Thursday: History of Domestic Architecture
Teaching Thursday: Teaching Demonstrations (K. Kourelis)
Teaching Thursday: Revised Classes for Spring
Teaching Thursday: Architecture 1400-Present (K. Kourelis)
Teaching Tuesday: Trends in Grades in a Western Civilization Course
Teaching Thursday: Interviews (K. Kourelis)
Teaching Thursday: Rethinking Lectures, Content, and the Classroom Vibe
Teaching Thursday: Teaching by Templates
Teaching Thursday: A Historical Perspective on Teaching Research Methods with Kate Turabian
Teaching Thursday: Teaching Time
Teaching Thursday: Classroom Modernism (K. Kourelis)
Teaching Thursday: Teaching the Election
Teaching Thursday: Making Room for Experiments
Teaching Thursday: More on Writing
Teaching Thursday: Making the Test
Teaching Thursday: Red pens, Reading, and Assessment
Teaching Thursday: The Structure of Seminar
Teaching Thursday: Jennifer Ball's Teaching Thursday (K. Kourelis and J. Ball)
Teaching Thursday: The Changing Meaning of the Large Lecture
Teaching Thursday: The Modern Graduate Student
Teaching Thursday: Reading the Digital Palimpsest for Traces of an Analog World
Teaching Thursday: Who Are My Students? (K. Kourelis)
Teaching Thursday: Another View on High Tech Teaching
Teaching Thursday: Transmedia Teaching
Teaching Thursday (K. Kourelis)
Teaching Thursday
Recent Comments