Random thoughts at 2:30 AM
* I have always felt uneasy about teaching Dominant Discourse in the classroom. This unease stems from my own disillusionment with white, upper middle class values and norms and my desire to see a more inclusive and diverse society. Basically, I shy away from Dominant Discourse simply because I don't want to be a part in perpetuating that discourse. That being said, I am beginning to understand the need for me to return to actual "teaching" after taking a couple years off while I dabbled in radical and progressive teaching pedagogies. The only thing more radical and progressive than not shoving the ins and outs of Dominant Discourse down the throats of my students is to actually help students get a grip on how to manipulate Dominant Discourse for their own libratory needs. This can be summed up with the following statement: "School sucks, I should know. Now, let me show you how to beat the man at his own game."
* Everyone seems to be talking about "themes" in composition classrooms. I think I have decided on a "theme" as well. My theme will be something called "writing." Why shouldn't students engage in discussions about what writing is, what it does, how it is controlled, and particularly, how writing does and does not work in academic settings. I keep feeling like we, as composition instructors, are engaging in a classically oppressive theater operation. We put on a show for our students, knowing the scripts (comp theory) and knowing how to act (grades, evaluation, etc), all while the students are not allowed to "look behind the curtains." They are, in a very Boal-esque sense, oppressed audience members who have no control over what they see on the stage. I think it'd be interesting to invite them backstage...to see what really goes on after a paper is written and handed in.
* The most important line I think I will be straddling this next year will be the line between every student's "native" discourse (i.e., the discourse that exists between their own friends, family, community members, etc) and other discourses (mostly academic discourse). It will be tricky because I need to teach one (professional discourses) while not suggesting or implying that each student's "native discourse" is a "lesser" discourse. I think a lot of parody/satire/mockery will be used.
* It's never fair to ask someone something as a way to figure something else out. It is even worse to assign something as a means to grade students on something else. When we assign a paper, what are we really looking for? And, are students aware of these things? Students should always be aware what standards they are being judged against, and be involved in a discussion about those standards.
* I still can't figure out what book I am going to use this fall. I thought about using Tom Newkirk's "Misreading Masculinity," but I think this book might be a little too specialized for freshman (not that it would be over their head, but it uses a lot of theory that students will have no background in).
* Even though I'm doing new things this fall, there is one thing that will remain unchanged...my commitment to finding ways for students to engage in meaningful interaction with each other. In most classes, due to the politics of grading, when students talk to each other, they do not talk with each other. Instead, they talk at each other. The reason for this is that, in most current-traditional classrooms, student discussion is employed as a means to "check up" on students to make sure they are doing their work. What then occurs is each student must "perform" for an audience of one: the grader. Everything they do or say is geared towards proving that the student has done the work required of them. This is not student-student interaction. This is student-instructor interaction via feigned student-student "chatter." I want to avoid this and employ student discussion not as a means of evaluating students, but rather as a genuine means of acquiring new knowledge and insight.