After reading Dr. Burns's article Four dimensions of significance: Tradition, method, theory, originality" I am left wishing I had his insight before writing my midterm! I also wish we had more time in class for him to discuss his achievements, because he clearly accomplished tons throughout his career. In his article he explores the importance of research in four categories: tradition, method, theory, and originality. I have to agree with him on all his points, he makes a lot of sense (if I'm understanding him right... hopefully I am). He is mixing research, technology, and teaching, in a timeless way that is beneficial to all scholars.
He talks a lot about the importance of research, not in looking toward the past, but constant findings of new information to apply to current technology. He states, "The more I worked with computers, the more I realized how much more could be programmed for them to do. The potential seemed endless to me, and it changed the kind of teacher and scholar I was. The research enterprise must never stop, for research can never be finished; the methods of inquiry and of curiosity are constantly at work" (4). Do you know what this means? It means that technology also must never stop. As long as people like him are working toward the next big thing (research) we (teachers) must continue to try to keep up in our classroom so our students do not fall behind. This is not the problem. The problem is how do we keep up with this never ending technology? Well, Burns has some thoughts on this too.
"I wanted to let composition teachers know that help was on the way to support the traditions we valued in teaching writing. I wanted composition teachers to know that the advancements in microprocessing and the achievements in speed, in storage, and in interface design were being conceived and implemented quickly... Our research had to hurry on the one hand and yet be patient on the other" (3). This help will not be in the form of a book, however, because they are easily dated. Instead he states "As Kate Kiefer and Cindy Selfe were dreaming about a journal for the computers and writing community, they invited me to write a note about how artificial intelligence would one day help compositions teachers" (3). An interesting concept. On page four he goes on to say: "the first rule of AI is if it works, if it run, it's not artificial intelligence anymore" (4). So, my question is, how does this work!!??
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
I Am Woman Hear Me Roar... Because I'm Mad
It was incredible to see how sexist these "great" men were. OK, yes, they were great, but how could they have such innovative and highly regarded thoughts and ideas, but still not include women as their equals. I know we discussed this issue a little bit and concluded that we have to remember that these people were "men of their time," but I can't. It is still eye-opening that they did not even consider white women worthy of conversation.
For example, we talked about John Locke's famous saying: "All men are created equal," and the fact that at that time white people did not consider slaves or servants as men. But, where do women fit into this equation? They don't. The point was made that as we evolved, so too did the phrase to include everyone. But I disagree. Today, the statement has transformed to actually include all men, but women are still missing. As a woman today (and everyday) I still see it as an old saying that now includes all men, but has yet to include women, because equality has still yet to be reached. Of course, this speaks to sexism and the status of women versus men. Clearly progress has been made sense Locke's time. Still, I am not a man and the word men does not apply to me.
Hume was arguably more blatantly sexist in his discussion of women. The funny thing is he was actually making an attempt to bring women into the men's society by educating them in history. I was with him on the first page of David Norton's "The Cambridge Companion to Hume," when discussing history and the importance of learning it. I even thought it was great that he was willing to educate middle-class female. Then the comment: "Only a woman who was acquainted with the history of her own country, and with those of Greece and Rome, could engage in conversation which 'can afford any entertainment to men of sense and reflection'" (282). Really? On one hand I want to cheer that some one thinks that women even have a chance to be on the same status as men. Still, I had to underline the sentences that made me think "wow, is he serious??"
Dr. Souder mentioned that one day people will probably look back at us and criticize our beliefs in equality; I wonder what they will say. Will it be something like our conversations today? Should we be doing something so completely and obviously different that just hasn't occurred to us yet?
For example, we talked about John Locke's famous saying: "All men are created equal," and the fact that at that time white people did not consider slaves or servants as men. But, where do women fit into this equation? They don't. The point was made that as we evolved, so too did the phrase to include everyone. But I disagree. Today, the statement has transformed to actually include all men, but women are still missing. As a woman today (and everyday) I still see it as an old saying that now includes all men, but has yet to include women, because equality has still yet to be reached. Of course, this speaks to sexism and the status of women versus men. Clearly progress has been made sense Locke's time. Still, I am not a man and the word men does not apply to me.
Hume was arguably more blatantly sexist in his discussion of women. The funny thing is he was actually making an attempt to bring women into the men's society by educating them in history. I was with him on the first page of David Norton's "The Cambridge Companion to Hume," when discussing history and the importance of learning it. I even thought it was great that he was willing to educate middle-class female. Then the comment: "Only a woman who was acquainted with the history of her own country, and with those of Greece and Rome, could engage in conversation which 'can afford any entertainment to men of sense and reflection'" (282). Really? On one hand I want to cheer that some one thinks that women even have a chance to be on the same status as men. Still, I had to underline the sentences that made me think "wow, is he serious??"
Dr. Souder mentioned that one day people will probably look back at us and criticize our beliefs in equality; I wonder what they will say. Will it be something like our conversations today? Should we be doing something so completely and obviously different that just hasn't occurred to us yet?
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Interpretation or the Original
For a couple of classes, both in English 600 and 501 (they so go together) we have been discussing the issue of interpretation vs. what the author was thinking when they wrote this. Richard Leo Enos in "Recovering the Lost Art of Researching the History of Rhetoric" states his opinion on this issue: "I am not against criticism; I am not opposed to advancing warranted interpretation; I am not opposed to self-reflection on our methods. I feel that these enterprises are valuable and deserve their place in our field. What I am concerned about is these enterprises operating independently from basic research and existing as ends in themselves. Our first and necessary obligation is to provide new information, new material evidence, new data" (12). Here he is saying that we should not put or emphasis on previous research and interpretation, but come up with our own thoughts and ways of thinking based on the "basic research" or original ideas. He is not devaluing the use of secondary research, but encouraging scholars to dig deeper into the topic to uncover the original. In class we also discussed the use of interpretation versus the primary source of information, and also came up with arguments for both. Of course it is not always easy to come up with a basic source, and almost always have to come up with an interpretation. Also, when doing research it is easier to find second or third party sources that will lead to a more reliable primary source of information. There's also another reason to rely on secondary sources that Jean Dietz Moss explains.
In "Rhetoric and Praxis"Moss talks about interviews in which contemporary fiction authors talk around the question of how they come up with their work, but never really answer the question. He states: "One suspects that novelists are reluctant to give out the secrets of their craft lest other writers appropriate those secrets and become serious rivals. The truth of the matter is more likely to be that most of them have never been introspective enough about the process of their craft to discover how they go about doing what they can do superlatively well" (44). I talked about this in the 600 class. Maybe the authors want people to think that they are smarter than they really are. We analyse every little bit of an author's work, who may or may not be brilliant. Perhaps the reader will get more out of the work if nothing is said about it than if we know exactly what the author was thinking. And why can this not be true for academic authors and scholars as well. For all we know they probably just sat down one drunken night and started ranting about something that has been on their mind, and now we treasure their words as Truth and history.
In "Rhetoric and Praxis"Moss talks about interviews in which contemporary fiction authors talk around the question of how they come up with their work, but never really answer the question. He states: "One suspects that novelists are reluctant to give out the secrets of their craft lest other writers appropriate those secrets and become serious rivals. The truth of the matter is more likely to be that most of them have never been introspective enough about the process of their craft to discover how they go about doing what they can do superlatively well" (44). I talked about this in the 600 class. Maybe the authors want people to think that they are smarter than they really are. We analyse every little bit of an author's work, who may or may not be brilliant. Perhaps the reader will get more out of the work if nothing is said about it than if we know exactly what the author was thinking. And why can this not be true for academic authors and scholars as well. For all we know they probably just sat down one drunken night and started ranting about something that has been on their mind, and now we treasure their words as Truth and history.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Page 216: from Pre-Writing: The Construction and Application of Models for Concept Formation in Writing
"It is just possible that much writing instruction fails because it is conceived within what Bruner calls the 'expository mode,' and the student-writer, as a result, never is given the chance to participate in the essentials of the process which he is being called upon to master" (217).
I understand that there needs to be order and classroom management when dealing with students, who may or may not be interested in learning. But, I believe that students need to take an active role in their learning. Gordon Rohman and Albert Wlecke use Jerome Bruner in his essay "The Art of Discovery" to emphasis this point in the quote above. They continue on to say that the student sacrifices their own creativity and abilities in order to please the teacher. Where in this process are they able to show what they are capable of when they are correcting their work and honing their skills based on what the teacher thinks is important?
When rethinking my pedagogy statement the most important aspect I intend to include is the voice of the student. In my classroom I would like the students to lead (I know what your thinking... clearly, I have never taught before). But what I hope is that we as a class can work toward them leading and discovering knowledge for themselves, with my role being the facilitator and making sure we stay on some sort of task. The image I have is similar to that of a graduate classroom. I know, I know, the struggle is to motivate the students to get to this point, but I have some time to work out strategies.
On a side note, I think the students have to know the basics before they can truly play with their form and freely write what they want to. Grammar is essential for all writers and will definitely be a priority in my classroom.
"It is just possible that much writing instruction fails because it is conceived within what Bruner calls the 'expository mode,' and the student-writer, as a result, never is given the chance to participate in the essentials of the process which he is being called upon to master" (217).
I understand that there needs to be order and classroom management when dealing with students, who may or may not be interested in learning. But, I believe that students need to take an active role in their learning. Gordon Rohman and Albert Wlecke use Jerome Bruner in his essay "The Art of Discovery" to emphasis this point in the quote above. They continue on to say that the student sacrifices their own creativity and abilities in order to please the teacher. Where in this process are they able to show what they are capable of when they are correcting their work and honing their skills based on what the teacher thinks is important?
When rethinking my pedagogy statement the most important aspect I intend to include is the voice of the student. In my classroom I would like the students to lead (I know what your thinking... clearly, I have never taught before). But what I hope is that we as a class can work toward them leading and discovering knowledge for themselves, with my role being the facilitator and making sure we stay on some sort of task. The image I have is similar to that of a graduate classroom. I know, I know, the struggle is to motivate the students to get to this point, but I have some time to work out strategies.
On a side note, I think the students have to know the basics before they can truly play with their form and freely write what they want to. Grammar is essential for all writers and will definitely be a priority in my classroom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)