Wow, to me there's no question--totally with option B. It asks for active engagement as well as requiring a deeper level of comprehension required by creating a personal example of the concept. And, as a bonus, most students will enjoy developing a comic strip. I think you've come up with a real winner here Michael.
Joan Joan Warmbold Boggs jwarm...@oakton.edu > Since we occasionally discuss the idea of "dumbing down" here on tips: > Ive been playing around with a fun site called ToonDoo (www.toondoo.com) > which allows people like me who have zero drawing skills to make some > pretty cool comics. Of course, I had to see if the tool would enable a > kind of fun quiz or learning experience, so I made a cartoon quiz out of > 6 of the Freudian defense mechanisms. ToonDoo is still a new site and the > comics-maker is still a little buggy, but the comics didnt take too long > to make. Pretty intuitive. > > Curious about tipsters reactions. I have to admit that while making the > comics, the expression dumbing down was in the back (or front) of my > mind. Heres what I was saying to myself: > > A) This is silly and unnecessary. Students should be able to understand > the defense mechanisms without having to spend time creating childish > comics. This is time consuming and adds little value to the learning > experience. > > B) Creating a comic like this, which on one level appears kind of silly, > requires the student to really think through each defense mechanism and > come up with very concrete examples and actually put words into people's > mouths. Thus, itll help students get a deeper understanding of the > defense mechanisms. > > So, which way do you go? A or B? > > Heres the link to the cartoon comic: > > http://bit.ly/1kRto3 > > > Michael Britt > mich...@thepsychfiles.com > www.thepsychfiles.com > > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) > > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
