Main

July 20, 2009

Poor Professor Higgins Indeed

(A few thoughts on assessment inspired by Henry Higgins)

In its best formulation, "assessment" represents a genre of communication. It communicates the effects of pedagogic practice to interested parties. In the most common scenario, assessment is a channel of communication between instructor and student, informing the student of how they are "living up to" the expectations of the instructor. But assessment also communicates in other, very interesting ways. For instance, instructors often rely on technologies of assessment to understand themselves as educators, using data generated by assessment (whether it be numbers, narratives, grades, or even moods and emotions) to construct an identity or notion of self (for example, an effective instructor, a challenging instructor, or perhaps even, a bad instructor.)

Continue reading "Poor Professor Higgins Indeed" »

May 20, 2008

Teaching Composition as Fun with Real Audio

One of the animated segments on Saturday Night Live that I always enjoyed was the "Fun with Real Audio" segment in which they would take the audio track of something, usually an interview, and then animate something else while the audio went on. The effect was to de-contextualize the audio and to turn it into something else. It was always comedic because the words, depending on the animation going on, took on drastically different meanings. Of course, on SNL, the goal was comedy, as many animations quickly evolved in to hilarious juxtapositions of serious interviews and bizarre and surreal animations. But there's an important process going on here that I was reminded of today. During our first year writing instruction symposium I was reminded several times that similar things could be brought upon our own teaching practices. For instance, for those who don't know, the current description of our FYC (first year composition) class reads as follows:

WRIT 1301 fulfills the first-year writing requirement. It involves critical reading, writing, and thinking as students practice some of the types of writing they may expect in their college career such as summaries, essays, academic arguments, bibliographies, and papers built on research. The course helps students develop, at a minimum, an approach to writing that relies on clear statement of a thesis and support of that thesis with appropriate sources and documentation. Time is spent discussing rhetorical elements of writing such as audience, purpose, and argumentative structure. Students also practice steps in the writing process such as invention, research, organization of ideas, paper drafting, revision, and editing. Students report, synthesize, and draw conclusions regarding the significance of what they read. Students become more aware of the rhetorical choices available to them and learn to make appropriate choices. Some sections may be taught in computer classroom. Some sections are offered online. Some sections may include a service-learning component.

As I see it, there are 5 key "terms" that the whole endeavor is built on. These are the 5 "Rs:" Reading, Research, Revision, Rhetoric, and Writing. I've highlighted them in the description. But returning to the idea of "Fun With Real Audio," one thing that struck me as I was listening to my colleagues at a FYW (first year writing) symposium today was that when we use these terms, we all assume we know that we all agree on what the terms mean, but in actuality we don't. For instance, during a panel discussion on teaching with "research," in my notes I had the question "what IS research" and "what is the function of research" written down several times. I also noted that with research, we all "know how to do it" but don't really know what "it" is when we teach it. The question of "well, what IS research anyway" seems so simple that we just neglect to ask it, let alone attempt to answer it. But returning to these terms themselves is fruitful and important if we're concerned with not just replicating the errors we've made in the past. So, this got me thinking: what happens to the writing class (real audio) when we change the definition of these terms that we use to describe it (the animation)? That is, what happens when we de-familiarize the familiar when we approach designing a writing class? As such, I offer "alternative" definitions to the 5 "Rs" (and yes, I know "writing" isn't an R word, but it sounds like one, so just play along, ok?).
t_10446.jpg

Continue reading "Teaching Composition as Fun with Real Audio" »

September 30, 2007

Story And Voice: Meditations on Community

Act I, Scene 1

The dingy yellow radiator occasionally clunks, a poster hangs precariously on its last thumbtack off of a overflowing cork board, and every where the air is filled with the dry powdery scent of chalk that has been collecting in the carpet, the wood trim, the areas above shelves that are skipped when dusting, and even in the clothes of children that hang in washrooms toward the back. No one really notices this, though…except one person. He sits in the back wearing a plaid shirt and tennis shoes that are only laced halfway up. The jeans he wears jeans are from WalMart and his sandy blonde hair is matted down on one side of his head. Most of the time he is quiet, silently observing everything else going on around him. He watches two girls get up to go talk to another girl. He catches a friend of his out of the corner of his eye go to sharpen a pencil at the grey crank sharpener bolted to the door frame. In front of him is a mess of paper; mostly torn from a green spiral notebook he keeps stashed inside his pop-up desk. His handwriting is awkward and nearly illegible, something his sixth grade teacher had reminded him about earlier in the year. In a bit he is going to go share what he has written on it with the teacher. For the moment, however, he is lost to his senses taking in the swirling hustle and bustle of a class humming with activity.

Act I, Scene II

It is early fall and the stuffiness left over from the hot afternoon has not yet left the building, despite every window in the cramped room being opened. Inside, eleven adults sit around four uneven tables pushed together to make one very large square. There are papers strewn all over the table, some in neat piles, others arranged as though they were playing cards being set down on a blackjack table. There is a seriousness that is accentuated by the amplified sound of papers being shuffled and thoughtful murmurs being exchanged. There is a young man sitting at the corner of the large square. He is wearing a black t-shirt, jeans, and sits in total silence as others pour over the typed manuscript in front of them. These are the rules of the workshop: the author may not speak. Next to him sits a teacher who dresses as though she were a thoughtful senator's wife. She has just flown back from giving a reading in New York. Later that week she will fly to Los Angeles to give another reading. Across from her sits a retired preacher who lives in a retirement community. Next to him sits a blonde, waife-like twenty something graduate student who is wearing a low cut t-shirt and metallic bracelets. The rest of the class is just as uniform. Before them is a fragmented piece about this particular young man's mentally disabled older sister. No one dares refer to her as "his" sister. Instead, any reference to this young man is replaced by the term "the author's." As the discussion goes on, the young man finds himself looking out the window into a courtyard as a chilly breeze pulls red leaves off a mushroom shaped Serviceberry tree.

Act II, Scene I

The reason I have written about the above scenes is that they are both about me. Not only are they both about writing, but also they are both about writing in a community. And while there are other similarities I'm sure (mostly revolving around my interaction in the community), the differences between the two scenes are the ones that I find most illuminating. Here we have a contrast between production and analysis, between children and adults, between the act of writing and the act of reading, and, most importantly, between the metaphors of voice and narrative. While notion of community is requisite for both scenes, how community is employed and for what purpose could not be any more different. The rest of this play is about how two different theorists, Donald Graves and Barbara Kamler, depict a writing community and the implications this has on a larger theoretical scale. I want to re-read the function of community through the lens of a larger democratic project and to ultimately argue that the loss of voice as a metaphor impoverishes notions of democracy.

Continue reading "Story And Voice: Meditations on Community" »

May 2, 2007

Reflections on "Reading as a Writer..."

It is early spring; the snow outside is beginning to melt into damp earth and just inside the basement window of my parent's modest house in Cedar Falls, Iowa I am about to have an experience that will forever change the direction of my life. A year earlier, plagued by wrist injuries and frustration, I had thrown in the towel on my career as a musician. I was lost. For twelve years I had done nothing but study music, play music, listen to music, write music, and live music. Now? I found myself starting all over again. I knew a lot about music, but not much else. I found myself sitting in classes with titles like "Eastern Humanities," "Phenomenology and Foucault," "Origins of Western Thought." I didn't know what I was looking for; I didn't really even know how to find it.

My window is slightly open and I can feel the chill of cold air sinking onto the rough blue carpet and moving through the room. The rich and earthy smell of decaying leaves left over from fall carried in off the outside breezes mixes with the stale air of a house closed up for the long Iowa winter. I am sitting on a wooden chair that creaks and moans when I shift my weight to prevent my leg from falling asleep. In front of me is the aggressive glare of a computer screen. Right here in this moment is where everything changed for me.

For reasons that have something to do with a woman with pale white freckled skin, nearly black curly hair, a waif-like figure, delicate pale lips, and the brightest green eyes I have ever seen, I am searching for "poetry" on the internet. The only thing I know of poetry is what little I remember from one literature class I took many years ago in high school. And somewhere, through the billions of miles of copper, fiber optical cables, and the unfathomable number of electrons moving from atom to atom in stops and starts, I find a link to a poem by Gary Snyder. Sitting there on the other side of a glowing phosphor-coated screen lit up by beams of electrons like a movie theater in reverse, I experience something familiar and yet, new; something I hadn't felt since my days as a performing musician. I begin to read "Riprap."

"Lay down these words / Before your mind like rocks. / Placed solid, by hands / in choice of place, set / Before the body of the mind / in space and time:" The feeling I get in my chest, in my gut, is like the feeling of a string on a cello as the bow is pulled slowly across it. It starts out weak, and as the cellist gently presses harder, pulls faster, the string begins to come alive, vibrating faster and wider as a sullen and somber note arises from the contact of horsehair, rosin, metal, wood, and skin.

"Solidity of bark, leaf, or wall / riprap of things: / Cobble of milky way, / straying planets, / These poems, people, / lost ponies with / Dragging saddles / and rocky sure-foot trails." I have forgotten why I have come to this poem, forgotten my reasons for searching. I am thinking of my own experiences, my own images of trails and rocks, boulders besides trees, granite next to grass.

"The worlds like an endless / four-dimensional / Game of Go. / ants and pebbles / In the thin loam, each rock a word / a creek-washed stone" There is an excitement in my reading, I'm sure my mouth is open. I read faster, wanting to get to the end, to take it all in as deeply as I can as though it were the smell of the first real rain of spring. I am greedy and gluttonous; I am impatient and indulging.

"Granite: ingrained / with torment of fire and weight / Crystal and sediment linked hot / all change, in thoughts, / as well as things." It is here at the end, beyond the last period, the last fleeting taste on my palette that I realize something has changed inside of me. All I can think is, "I want to do that." I want to place words so carefully, so perfectly, so confidently. I want to place ants and the galaxy together on paper. I want create this. I want to know how to do this. And then, I read it again.

~~~~~

This was the first moment when I truly understood what it meant to read as a writer. The transition I made at the end of reading his poem was a transition from simply reading to reading as a way to think about producing. I knew Snyder's poetry had done something to me, and now I wanted to know why and how. I wanted to know this because I wanted to write poetry myself. I wanted to demystify the magic. I wanted to understand why this word and not that word, why this idea and not that idea.

While I feel there are differences between how I read as a writer and how Toni Morrison claims to read as a writer (I see her reading more as an academic using critical methods who also happens to be a writer), there is one very important thing I feel we both have in common, and something that may be useful when thinking about the teaching of writing. This connection is a conception of voice.

For me, and I believe for Morrison as well, there is an underlying understanding of how things are created that is acquired through creating itself. This is the simple understanding that when writing, there are choices or decisions that are made, consciously or unconsciously. Why does a writer choose to use this word over that word? Why does a plot go in this direction rather than that direction? In every instance, reading from the mindset of a writer means reading while understanding that what is written is deliberative in some sense. Or, to put it more plainly, what is written is the final assembly of an infinite amount of choices.

Of course, what Morrison is concerned with is what unconscious, social conditions help form these choices. But even here, she still recognizes that when a writer writes something, it could be something else. This choice of one thing over another is part of what helps define style or voice. I think reading in this manner, knowing that everything that is written is somehow deliberative, is important in reading student writing. When reading as a fellow writer, it is easy to move away from thinking that students make "mistakes" that must be corrected. Instead, when reading as a fellow writer, the instructor engages the student as another thinking, acting human. Helping students to understand why they have written this word over a different word, why they have included certain devices and not others, helps to not only situate themselves as individuals who are in control of how they write, but to also foster a general awareness of the larger social sphere they are knowingly or unknowingly a part of.

November 19, 2006

Student Resistance and Pedagogical reform

One thing that came up repeatedly while talking individually with my students this semester was that my composition class was run in a way they never expected. For most of them, when they signed up for composition, they envisioned an "english class" much like they had in HS where they were required to write rigidly defined research papers and were lectured to over grammar and mechanics. For those of you who know me, clearly this is not my style (I take, perhaps, a little too much pride in being in that radical faction of expressionistic compositionists)...but while I've had a pretty decent amount of success this semester in overcoming what could have been a potential breeding ground for nasty student revolt, this link over at tomorrow's professor blog is a very helpful and comforting reminder that student resistance almost always comes with the territory when you move outside of traditional instructional methods.

I particularly like the suggestions on minimizing it, and I'm already trying to formulate a game plan for next semester when I go back to teaching a class with mostly upper division students who, at least in my past experiences, have very rigid expectations on how a writing class should be taught. I firmly believe that a student's attitude and expectations heading into a class have a direct and profound effect on what they get out of the class. The problem with changing instructional methods is that you immediately create a situation where there is great potential for the student's attitudes and expectations to be put on the defensive.

Additionally, it seems as though this is always further compounded by the fact that in creative writing classes, there is a tendency sometimes for students to engage in 'idol-worshipping' of their instructors (which, I think, is wholly understandable when you realize that instructors sometimes craft themselves as validators of a student's personal "expression" in a class...how Foucault when I think of it...) which leads to a near-sense of personal betrayal and offense when you teach in a manner that a former instructor did not. This is further amplified when you teach a class that begins to question the very methods of instruction by former instructors. (this is why I would get so frustrated with some of the regular faculty who seemed to relish their abilities to erect quasi personality cults around their teaching...like that one kid who sprouted an MDB knock-off beard..ew.)

Even something as benign as adding blogs or a wiki to a class seeks to bring all this to the surface. I guess that's why teaching was never meant to be for the weak at heart, huh?

November 17, 2006

Writing for interpretation

(From my other blog)

Once the questions of "can writing be taught" and "should it be taught" are overcome, the general framework for creative writing classes seems to grow from a response to two problems. The first problem is a question concerning models. What "models" of "good writing" do we use? What ideological motivations are behind those selections? The second problem is a problem of application: once we select a model, what do we do with it?

The current-traditional mode of creative writing has answered these two questions in the same way since its inception. On the first hand, what counts as a "model" has always meant some form of canonical literature. This, in whatever form, is almost always some piece of published literature. Usually, it is a "major" work or one that has won several awards. This method always ignores the rather pertinent question of "what exactly constitutes 'good' writing?" The answer is bound with the response to the second problem...

Current-traditional methods answer the "what do we do with it" question rather simply: we interpret it. This is a direct appropriation of literary studies methods. In particular, the methods of new criticism. The lingua franca of any class discussion over writing in a creative writing class is always the "close reading" in which students are asked to analyze through some quasi-scientific method of reading what is "going on" in a text. To further shove this into the "new criticism" mold, in most workshops the author cannot speak, just in case you thought that something might exist "outside of the text."

Interestingly, what counts as "good literature" in the literary canon are works that literary criticism can be done on. Consequently, the "good literature" we are asking students to read in a writing class are generally works that are "good literature" to do literary criticism on because they fit a specific mold. Ponder this: a student creates a piece of work that is so new and so original that no one knows what to say about it. In this scenario, the entire process would break down. The writing would have no 'academic value' to the class, and as such, would be considered worthless in the academic sense. But this is why the confusion of literary interpretation and literary production is so dangerous: this piece of work might be a great piece of art that is tossed in the trash bin because it doesn't look like literature ought.


Continue reading "Writing for interpretation" »

August 9, 2006

Manifesto concerning technology in the classroom.

(in the most random presentation possible!)

* Technology should never be used for the sake of using technology.

* There is a philosophy behind every piece of technology. Understand this and make sure it is identical to your preexisting teaching philosophy.

* You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. Similarly, you can build message boards, but you cannot make students participate. In both cases, you have to make them thirsty for the satisfaction of engaging in the activity.

* Never expect that students are digitally literate. It is a skill that must be acquired like anything else.

* Don't expect that students will get this training somewhere else.

* Being able to surf the web and correspond via email does not mean a student is digitally literate (even though even these small tasks are difficult for some faculty)

Continue reading "Manifesto concerning technology in the classroom." »

August 3, 2006

Technology and learning

While eating dinner with a good friend of mine, the discussion turned to RSS feeds and what not. And I got to thinking of how all this relates to the classroom...blogs, podcasts, etc etc etc.

I think right now, this whole blog thing has become the darling of the technoheads. The people that I have seen use these for classes have, more times than not, used them just for the sake of using technology. This is, obviously, a dead end road to some sort of sustainable research development in education.

Its too early (or late...does that make it earlate?) in the morning to really think about this. I had better thoughts earlier. Maybe more will follow on this later.

For now..questions in my mind:

* What relationship should there be between technology usage and teaching philosophy? How can this best be articulated?
* Are there seperate goals and objectives we should be considering when implementing technology in the classroom?
* If so, what are those goals and to what ends are they being met?
* How does all of this relate to the position Universities now occupy in contemporary culture?

More later, tomorrow I'm off to Denver!

July 28, 2006

Principles of Andragogy

1. There is a need to explain why specific things are being taught (e.g., certain commands, functions, operations, etc.)

2. Instruction should be task-oriented instead of memorization -- learning activities should be in the context of common tasks to be performed.

3. Instruction should take into account the wide range of different backgrounds of learners; learning materials and activities should allow for different levels/types of previous experience with computers.

4. Since adults are self-directed, instruction should allow learners to discover things for themselves, providing guidance and help when mistakes are made.

More thoughts...

1. Adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction.

2. Experience (including mistakes) provides the basis for learning activities.

3. Adults are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance to their job or personal life.

4. Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented.

From:TIP: Theories

Here's the million dollar question though...at what point are undergrads considered "adults?"

Continue reading "Principles of Andragogy" »

July 26, 2006

Notes on Dewey, Marx, and Professor Morgan

Quotes I have found to be poignant in Dewey's Democracy and Education.

p5.

"Individuals do not even compose a social group because they all work for a common end. The parts of a machine work with a maximum of cooperativeness for a common result, but they do not form a community. If, however, they were all cognizant of the common end and all interested in it so that they regulated their specific activity in view of it, then they would form a community."

p6 (cooperative learning vs collaborative)

"It may fairly be said, therefore, that any social arrangement that remains vitally social, or vitally shared, is educative to those who participate in it. Only when it becomes cast in a mold and runs in a routine way does it lose its educative power."

p6 (on the need for collaborative learning)

"In final account, then, not only does social life demand teaching and learning for its own permanence, but the very process of living together educates."

Thought…

Society is defined by education, and not vice versa…especially if education is taken to mean both formal and informal modes of education. However, the goal of formal education is to help inform informal education when and where it happens.

Marx…The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.


Me....The educators have only perpetuated the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.


I used to have a professor at UNI when I was there...David Morgan...what a swell guy. Anyway, he was a former member of the communist party, and offered the only marxism class in the philosophy department. I remember really vividly talking about Marx's theses on Freuebach...and David mentioning that whenever he got to the 11th one...chills would run down his spine.

I know what he means now.

The idea that teaching is not political, or is apolitical is naive and shameful. Everything is political. To not bring politics in it is as much as a political decision as to bring politics into it. Just like deciding to not decide is a decision as well.

So let's get on with it. Instead of a passive system of pedagogy, lets activate it.