Stories, according to Lowenthal, have four characteristics that make them worthwhile professional development tools and that also separate them from other types of explanatory discourse. First, stories deal with concrete examples (rather than vague abstractions).
My commentary: Stories deal with common (or even universal) issues and conflicts that people experience and that audiences relate to. Likewise, stories also involve specific characters, acting in specific settings, with specific plot events. Insomuch as stories address larger themes, those themes are manifest within concrete and detailed situations.
Second, stories provide frameworks and contexts that situate meaning (rather than meaning embedded in the message itself, independent of any context).
My commentary: The situatedness of a story shows us how the story's meaning is bound to that context and makes sense mainly within that context. Explanatory messages, on the other hand, are meant to convey ideas that exist and make sense separate from the situation and without much of a context.
Third, stories build personal experiences that facilitate meaning making and memory (rather than merely transfer information).
My commentary: The audience of any communication event will experience that communication event personally and socially. If that communication is explanatory, on the one hand, our experience of the discourse will be information-rich, literal, and we will feel disconnected from the sources of that information. If that communication event is a story, on the other hand, our experience of the discourse is more likely to be eventful, symbolic, we are more likely to feel like we're participating in the events themselves.
And fourth, stories are embedded with the social context in which meaning is created socially (rather than other forms of discourse which create meaning in the language of the message itself).
My commentary: Because stories reveal specific and concrete instances, and because stories are embedded within contexts and frameworks, and because stories build experiences, the social quality of storytelling means the relational aspects of the communication are as important (or more important) than the content aspects. Stories are understood through relationships and social interaction more than explanations (which are understood largely through clear and effective expression).
My commentary: Stories deal with common (or even universal) issues and conflicts that people experience and that audiences relate to. Likewise, stories also involve specific characters, acting in specific settings, with specific plot events. Insomuch as stories address larger themes, those themes are manifest within concrete and detailed situations.
Second, stories provide frameworks and contexts that situate meaning (rather than meaning embedded in the message itself, independent of any context).
My commentary: The situatedness of a story shows us how the story's meaning is bound to that context and makes sense mainly within that context. Explanatory messages, on the other hand, are meant to convey ideas that exist and make sense separate from the situation and without much of a context.
Third, stories build personal experiences that facilitate meaning making and memory (rather than merely transfer information).
My commentary: The audience of any communication event will experience that communication event personally and socially. If that communication is explanatory, on the one hand, our experience of the discourse will be information-rich, literal, and we will feel disconnected from the sources of that information. If that communication event is a story, on the other hand, our experience of the discourse is more likely to be eventful, symbolic, we are more likely to feel like we're participating in the events themselves.
And fourth, stories are embedded with the social context in which meaning is created socially (rather than other forms of discourse which create meaning in the language of the message itself).
My commentary: Because stories reveal specific and concrete instances, and because stories are embedded within contexts and frameworks, and because stories build experiences, the social quality of storytelling means the relational aspects of the communication are as important (or more important) than the content aspects. Stories are understood through relationships and social interaction more than explanations (which are understood largely through clear and effective expression).
Lowenthal makes one more point which I'm mostly glossing over here. He claims that moving professional development storytelling online means that digital storytelling applications become a viable option for professional development.
citation: Patrick R. Lowenthal. “Online Faculty Development and Storytelling: An Unlikely Solution to Improving Teacher Quality.” Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 4.3 (Sept. 2008): 349-356. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no3/lowenthal_0908.pdf
citation: Patrick R. Lowenthal. “Online Faculty Development and Storytelling: An Unlikely Solution to Improving Teacher Quality.” Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 4.3 (Sept. 2008): 349-356. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no3/lowenthal_0908.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment