This chapter looks at the historical roots of ethnography in anthropology. This chapter begins with a discussion of anthropology and ethnography in England. The authors state that "Languages, political systems, religion, gender relations, and means of warfare figured centrally as topics of first concern in ethnographies" written in the past by these British Scholars.
The chapter then moves on to Anthropology in American history. This history begins when anthropologist began studying, observing and recording languages, history, culture, ways of life, etc. of disappearing indigenous populations in the U.S. These cultures were seen as resources of wisdom that could not be lost.
The U.S. also used anthropologist to study "alien enemies" in order to understand them. Anthropologist were also used to understand immigrants. And in the past, not only in America, anthropologist have been used to gain political, social, and economic power. Ethnographers "offer descriptions and analyses of languages, life ways, and patterns of belief. These could inform governments and their emissaries about the range of social, ideological, and cultural differences spread across the world" (115). Sometimes this information was used to oppress people, take advantage of them, etc. Other times this information has been used for positive social change. Some of these examples can be seen in the "Applied Anthropology" section.
Getting this insider information can be dangerous if released into the wrong hands, which is a problem because there is pressure to make ethnographical studies more public and widely available.
I think the authors' main point is that ethnographers need to be aware of the history of ethnography and anthropology so that they are aware of the power of the information that they are collecting and the responsibility they have as ethnographers not to let their study exploit the population they are studying.
On another note, the authors also point out that ethnographers need to remember that "We still [...] can only speak as mortals from various historical, culture bound standpoints. Our claims are inevitably limited and partial. But perhaps making these limits more apparent and by knowing well what constitutes ethnographic validity, we will make our narrative and analysis more, not less, believable. "
The chapter ends with a discussion on how to go about making a public ethnographic text. This can be found on pages 127-128.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
The Way Literacy Lives- Chapter 4
This is a chapter I wish I would have read LONG ago! It really made clear to me why we are doing what we are doing in our first-year-comp program. I never had a good grasp of it, but now I think I understand it a little better.
We all have access to different literacies. Sometimes we are limited by our language, sometimes our culture, sometimes by our financial status, and still other times by our interests and the sponsors available to us, but the bottom line is most of us are highly literate in something. For example, most of us would consider ourselves highly literate in reading and writing, at least compared to the general population. Eric, Dr. Carter's brother, is highly literate in gaming and computer literacies. My uncle is a highly literate electrician. But it seems in our educational system, schools typically focus on what students can't do instead of what they can. This was the case of Eric in the first grade when his teacher told him he couldn't write name, but in fact, he could. So often students are told they aren't literate when, in fact, they are. I believe that students aren't failing standardized tests; standardized tests are failing students. These tests are responsible for labeling students literate and illiterate and determining whether or not a student needs remedial English. What good are we doing slapping a label on these kids? We're stifling their growth and killing their confidence. We tell them they can't, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as it did in Eric's case. Students internalize this "I can't" mentality, and it cripples their growth. So what can we do?
Dr. Carter argues that we can figure out what sorts of thing our students are literate in. That way we are focusing on what they can do, and not what we can't. By doing so, students develop a deeper understanding of their own literacies, and then they can use that as a bridge to understanding new literacies, such as those involved with the academy. Dr. Carter calls them "Points of contact." There is a great example from Selfe and Hawsiher in Dr. Carter's book on pages 90-91:
"Playing games has taught me about writing because a lot of games are like problem solving... when you are making a computer game, you have to think about everything and what can go wrong, what you are forgetting. And this helped me in writing because it's the same thing when I am composing a paper for a teacher."'
Because a student deeply explored a literacy outside of school, he was able to find points of contact that helped him develop his literacy inside of school. By doing this, the teacher focuses on what the student can do, and not what he can't do. Our program also helps the student see how what he can do is useful in helping him learn what he can't (presently) do.
Dr. Carter also makes the point that literacy is context dependent and is constantly changing. Today, "non-traditional" literacies are in many ways just as important as traditional literacies. Where would be without our electricians, our computer programmers, our engineers? When schools focus only on traditional literacy, they ignore other valuable literacies that are necessary today's society and society's future.
This chapter really summarizes why we do what we do at TAMU-C, and I am glad that I read it. The purpose is much more clear to me now.
We all have access to different literacies. Sometimes we are limited by our language, sometimes our culture, sometimes by our financial status, and still other times by our interests and the sponsors available to us, but the bottom line is most of us are highly literate in something. For example, most of us would consider ourselves highly literate in reading and writing, at least compared to the general population. Eric, Dr. Carter's brother, is highly literate in gaming and computer literacies. My uncle is a highly literate electrician. But it seems in our educational system, schools typically focus on what students can't do instead of what they can. This was the case of Eric in the first grade when his teacher told him he couldn't write name, but in fact, he could. So often students are told they aren't literate when, in fact, they are. I believe that students aren't failing standardized tests; standardized tests are failing students. These tests are responsible for labeling students literate and illiterate and determining whether or not a student needs remedial English. What good are we doing slapping a label on these kids? We're stifling their growth and killing their confidence. We tell them they can't, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as it did in Eric's case. Students internalize this "I can't" mentality, and it cripples their growth. So what can we do?
Dr. Carter argues that we can figure out what sorts of thing our students are literate in. That way we are focusing on what they can do, and not what we can't. By doing so, students develop a deeper understanding of their own literacies, and then they can use that as a bridge to understanding new literacies, such as those involved with the academy. Dr. Carter calls them "Points of contact." There is a great example from Selfe and Hawsiher in Dr. Carter's book on pages 90-91:
"Playing games has taught me about writing because a lot of games are like problem solving... when you are making a computer game, you have to think about everything and what can go wrong, what you are forgetting. And this helped me in writing because it's the same thing when I am composing a paper for a teacher."'
Because a student deeply explored a literacy outside of school, he was able to find points of contact that helped him develop his literacy inside of school. By doing this, the teacher focuses on what the student can do, and not what he can't do. Our program also helps the student see how what he can do is useful in helping him learn what he can't (presently) do.
Dr. Carter also makes the point that literacy is context dependent and is constantly changing. Today, "non-traditional" literacies are in many ways just as important as traditional literacies. Where would be without our electricians, our computer programmers, our engineers? When schools focus only on traditional literacy, they ignore other valuable literacies that are necessary today's society and society's future.
This chapter really summarizes why we do what we do at TAMU-C, and I am glad that I read it. The purpose is much more clear to me now.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
On Ethnography Chapter 3
This chapter was a lot more useful to me, and I am finally able to start wrapping my head around exactly what an ethnography is. The basic point of this chapter, I think, is that ethnographers need to know as much as possible about the field of ethnography, and the population and place they are observing before they start their research, and they need to cause as little of disturbance as possible while doing their research.
One of the first steps of doing an ethnography is doing a literature review, or as the author calls them, "literature reviews" of the work that "bear some explicable relevance to work being planned" (49). This is useful because the ethnographer must look at the research done on their topic to determine "where holes and disagreement exist [...] and think about how the proposed work will supplement, resolve, and compliment theories currently available" (52). The idea is that the ethnographer should not say something that has already been said. The ethnographer needs to add to the ongoing conversation that already exist about their topic by either adding something new, thinking about their topic in a new way or in light of new research, changing or reworking older theories, or by creating a new theoretical framework. Heath and street that one's literature review should include the following:
One of the first steps of doing an ethnography is doing a literature review, or as the author calls them, "literature reviews" of the work that "bear some explicable relevance to work being planned" (49). This is useful because the ethnographer must look at the research done on their topic to determine "where holes and disagreement exist [...] and think about how the proposed work will supplement, resolve, and compliment theories currently available" (52). The idea is that the ethnographer should not say something that has already been said. The ethnographer needs to add to the ongoing conversation that already exist about their topic by either adding something new, thinking about their topic in a new way or in light of new research, changing or reworking older theories, or by creating a new theoretical framework. Heath and street that one's literature review should include the following:
- Conceptual framework for the research in terms of relevant bodies of theory and reviews of prior field studies
- Integrated coherent review of the major bodies of work selected.
- Buildup or lead in to the current study through delineations of how this proposed research differs from that of others and leads toward original contributions to theory. (53)
Ethnographers also have to know in advance how long they have to study their site, when they will be observing their site, and how they will be observing and collecting date (i.e. video-camera, interviews, etc.). Of course, ethnographers also have to get the consent of the people that they are observing.
Of course ethnography isn't a linear activity. It is recursive. Once ethnographers do their initial literature review, it doesn't mean that they are ready to put away the books and just focus on observing alone. Often what happens is that the ethnographer has an initial curiosity on a subject and is interested in doing an ethnography on said subject, then the ethnographer does a literature review to learn as much about his subject as they can and narrow down an area for research that will allow him to contribute something original and meaningful to the already ongoing conversation about their subject, then observe his site which will in turn cause him to ask more questions, and this will lead him into doing more research, which will in turn lead to more observations and questions, and the cycle continues. This cycle could probably go on forever. That is why it is important to set up time frame before beginning the research.
This chapter also focuses a lot on tools of the ethnographer and the ethnographer as a tool. The authors state that "necessary qualities of the best ethnographers [...] include visual acuity, keen listening skills, tolerance for detail, and capacity to integrate innumerable part into shifting holes [... and to] remain silent and communicate only as appropriate by local norms"( 57). Ethnographers also have many other tools available to them, if appropriate, such as technology, and what they authors call "spatial mapping," and "network analysis."
Basically, the bottom line is that the ethnographer needs to be as informed as possible about the field of ethnographer and the research done on her site and population before going to observe.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Chapter 1 "Language, Culture, and Learning: Ethnographic Approaches" in On Ethnography
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this whole ethnography thing, so bare with me. I don't think I have a good grasp of it yet, which means there will be a lot of quoting, but I will do my best to discuss it.
The chapter begins by defining a few important terms in the field of ethnography:
Language is "any symbol system which grammar provide phonological, morphological, syntactical, and lexical structures and rules" (4). I found it a bit odd, then, that ASL wouldn't be considered a language based on this definition because it doesn't have phonology.
Litercay, in this book, only refers to the "written representations of oral (or gestural) language" (4)
Multimodal Literacies are "systems of presentation that include written forms that are combined with oral, visual, or gestural modes" (4).
Ethnographers look at how language and literacies function within the individual and within the organization, institution or culture. Ethnographers have to be aware of the cultural context of the languages and literacies they are studying. "Added to the multiples of languages and literacies that ethnographers encounter in any single setting is the challenge of recording how these work hand in hand with cultural patterns. From pronouncing vowels to shaping stories, every speaker reflects habits, loyalties, and ideologies of language forged from cultural patterns that existed before they were born" (6).
The authors argue that "Talking, gesturing, and waving artifacts about in locally acceptable patterns make up the glue for conversation" (6). The difficulty is that these patterns change across time, space, demographics, etc. These exchanges, however, are very important because often they determine the membership status of individuals and a group.
Heath and Street argue that the ethnographers greatest challenge is to "try to understand how cultural patterns support, deny, and change structures and uses of language an multimodal literacies," and the effects that that has on the individual, groups, and institutions.
The authors then move on to talk about the importance of understanding culture in ethnogrpahy. They argue that culture shouldn't be regarded as something fixed but something alive, growing, changing, adapting, etc. So often culture is thought of as "prescriptive norms," but it is the ethnographer's job to report on culture in descriptive terms (9).
People typically think of culture as being fixed and language as a "model and vehicle of cultural processes that surround learning" but the authors argue that "As a model, language is taken as our primary representation of cultural knowledge. As a vehicle, language is considered the means by which we transmit what we know and think. Neither conveys the integrative complexities of language and interplay with culture, and most especially, with our ways of knowing and learning" (10). We learn in many ways that don't necessarily involve what we think as traditional language, and when we do use language, we have to remember that it doesn't exist in a vacuum. It is dependent on culture, context, etc. The ethnographer has to be aware of this when studying different situations.
This chapter focuses on three "situations of learning that ethnographers studying language and literacy enter:" (3)
1) "Individuals stiving to become and expert in something" [Think someone learning to play the guitar] Basically the ethonographer is looking at how the "uses of verbal language and other modalities related to how [the individual] learned his skill and sense of identity" (13).
2) "Groups in identity-making." "Members see themselves as 'belonging' to a group of definable characteristics they refer to as 'our culture.' Members sustain themselves through learning to be and to work together, knowing that their representation to the outside world depends on how effectively they create and maintain their identity" (14). There are many challenges facing ethnographers in this field because often times groups change without realizing that they have changed, groups portray one image of themselves to the public or to outsiders that is very different than how they really are.
3) Institutions of formal education" The important thing for ethnographers to know in this category is to not take things for face value. It is the ethnographer's job to see how the historical, political, and economical environments influence the language and norms of institutions.
The authors then move on to describe multimodalities. They state that "A primary job of ethnographers is to track, describe, and enumerate multimodaliteis as semiotic resources for their combinations-linguistic, gestural, kinestheic and visual" (21). Ethnographers basically look at how language is "embedded in other modes" (22). The way we communicate, the way we transmit information isn't only through written and verbal language; it is through our actions, our behaviors, and how we present ourselves to the world, and all of this, of course, is influenced by the historical, social, political, and economic environments in which we live.
The chapter begins by defining a few important terms in the field of ethnography:
Language is "any symbol system which grammar provide phonological, morphological, syntactical, and lexical structures and rules" (4). I found it a bit odd, then, that ASL wouldn't be considered a language based on this definition because it doesn't have phonology.
Litercay, in this book, only refers to the "written representations of oral (or gestural) language" (4)
Multimodal Literacies are "systems of presentation that include written forms that are combined with oral, visual, or gestural modes" (4).
Ethnographers look at how language and literacies function within the individual and within the organization, institution or culture. Ethnographers have to be aware of the cultural context of the languages and literacies they are studying. "Added to the multiples of languages and literacies that ethnographers encounter in any single setting is the challenge of recording how these work hand in hand with cultural patterns. From pronouncing vowels to shaping stories, every speaker reflects habits, loyalties, and ideologies of language forged from cultural patterns that existed before they were born" (6).
The authors argue that "Talking, gesturing, and waving artifacts about in locally acceptable patterns make up the glue for conversation" (6). The difficulty is that these patterns change across time, space, demographics, etc. These exchanges, however, are very important because often they determine the membership status of individuals and a group.
Heath and Street argue that the ethnographers greatest challenge is to "try to understand how cultural patterns support, deny, and change structures and uses of language an multimodal literacies," and the effects that that has on the individual, groups, and institutions.
The authors then move on to talk about the importance of understanding culture in ethnogrpahy. They argue that culture shouldn't be regarded as something fixed but something alive, growing, changing, adapting, etc. So often culture is thought of as "prescriptive norms," but it is the ethnographer's job to report on culture in descriptive terms (9).
People typically think of culture as being fixed and language as a "model and vehicle of cultural processes that surround learning" but the authors argue that "As a model, language is taken as our primary representation of cultural knowledge. As a vehicle, language is considered the means by which we transmit what we know and think. Neither conveys the integrative complexities of language and interplay with culture, and most especially, with our ways of knowing and learning" (10). We learn in many ways that don't necessarily involve what we think as traditional language, and when we do use language, we have to remember that it doesn't exist in a vacuum. It is dependent on culture, context, etc. The ethnographer has to be aware of this when studying different situations.
This chapter focuses on three "situations of learning that ethnographers studying language and literacy enter:" (3)
1) "Individuals stiving to become and expert in something" [Think someone learning to play the guitar] Basically the ethonographer is looking at how the "uses of verbal language and other modalities related to how [the individual] learned his skill and sense of identity" (13).
2) "Groups in identity-making." "Members see themselves as 'belonging' to a group of definable characteristics they refer to as 'our culture.' Members sustain themselves through learning to be and to work together, knowing that their representation to the outside world depends on how effectively they create and maintain their identity" (14). There are many challenges facing ethnographers in this field because often times groups change without realizing that they have changed, groups portray one image of themselves to the public or to outsiders that is very different than how they really are.
3) Institutions of formal education" The important thing for ethnographers to know in this category is to not take things for face value. It is the ethnographer's job to see how the historical, political, and economical environments influence the language and norms of institutions.
The authors then move on to describe multimodalities. They state that "A primary job of ethnographers is to track, describe, and enumerate multimodaliteis as semiotic resources for their combinations-linguistic, gestural, kinestheic and visual" (21). Ethnographers basically look at how language is "embedded in other modes" (22). The way we communicate, the way we transmit information isn't only through written and verbal language; it is through our actions, our behaviors, and how we present ourselves to the world, and all of this, of course, is influenced by the historical, social, political, and economic environments in which we live.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Chapter 14 in Bean: Writing Comments on Students' Papers
Bean begins his discussion by talking about how teachers often forget the "personal dimension" of grading students' papers (239). So often we got lost in a sea of run-on sentences, underdeveloped ideas, weak arguments, awkward sentences, missed punctuations, and lazy conclusions that we forget we are grading actual human beings' papers. We need to be aware of this as teachers so our comments aren't overly short or snarky. Our comments should encourage revision not dropping out of college.
Bean listed a sampling of comments left on students' paper and the reactions the students had to the comments. Here are some of my favorites:
Comment: Be more specific.
Student response: You be more specific (241).
Love it. So often "be specific" doesn't mean anything to a student. I know what when I have gotten that comment, I wondered "about what? I thought I was being specific."
Comment: You haven't really thought this through.
Response: How do you know what I thought? (241)
Comment: Try harder.
Response: I feel like kicking the teacher (241).
As you can see, all of these comments discouraged students from writing and revising when they should be encouraging students to do these things.
Shortly after Bean states that our purpose "is not to point out everything wrong with a paper but to facilitate improvement" (241). While I do agree with this to some extent, I do feel the responsibility to the writer to point out everything that I see as the reader, at least all of the higher-order concerns. I feel like when a student comes to me for help, or I am giving a student back his paper revise, he is trusting me to point out all the places that I see where he could revise his paper. I feel obligated to do so. As a student, I know I would be very frustrated if I revised my paper and re-submitted it and had cleared up all the issues that my teacher had pointed out, but I still got a B on the essay because the teacher didn't point out everything, so I didn't know that it needed more work. In fact, I would pissed.
I know it can be overwhelming for students to see all of those comments, but at least I feel like I am equipping them with everything they need to get an "A" and improve their essay. I feel like that is my job as a tutor or instructor. Plus, I don't think these comments are too overwhelming if handled appropriately. Instead of saying, "Be more specific," ask a question in the margin that the student can answer that will make his essay more specific. Psychologically this is better anyway. The student doesn't think, "Oh, I did this wrong," but "Oh, the teacher wants to know more.
I did, however, totally agree with Bean when he said that teachers' comments should prompt revision and deal primarily with higher-order concerns. He defines higher-order concerns as "ideas, organization, development, and overall clarity" (243). He then offers a list of questions to help guide revision:
-Does the draft follow the assignment?
-Does the writer have a thesis that addresses an appropriate problem or question?
-If the draft has a thesis, what is the quality of the argument?
-Is the draft effectively organized at the macro and micro level?
Again, Bean says the teacher should only comment on 2-3 areas, but as I stated before, I disagree.
I also disagree with how he suggests we handle lower order concerns. While I agree that we shouldn't line edit, he does suggest putting an "X" in the margin next to sentences that have grammatical errors. For a student who misplaced a comma, or forgot to put one in, this would be confusing as hell. A student wouldn't know if he was missing a comma, had improper punctuation, a problem with subject-verb agreement, or something totally different. I can see putting an "X" where there are misspellings or typos, but I think we should still circle other grammatical errors if we think the student does not know the rule. I think we should look for patterns of error, then explain the rule to the student. From what I hear, students are most frustrated with comments because they don't know how to go about fixing them. An "X" would just frustrate students, in my opinion.
Bean then goes on to discuss endnotes. He suggests that endnotes should" sum up the strengths of drat [...] identify main problems, [...] and make a few specific suggestions" (251). I think this is an effective model.
Basically what I gather is that we should use revision-based comments to respond to places where a student could improve his essay, praise him when he does it right, and have individual conferences with our students to make sure that they understand our comments and have a plan for revision.
Bean listed a sampling of comments left on students' paper and the reactions the students had to the comments. Here are some of my favorites:
Comment: Be more specific.
Student response: You be more specific (241).
Love it. So often "be specific" doesn't mean anything to a student. I know what when I have gotten that comment, I wondered "about what? I thought I was being specific."
Comment: You haven't really thought this through.
Response: How do you know what I thought? (241)
Comment: Try harder.
Response: I feel like kicking the teacher (241).
As you can see, all of these comments discouraged students from writing and revising when they should be encouraging students to do these things.
Shortly after Bean states that our purpose "is not to point out everything wrong with a paper but to facilitate improvement" (241). While I do agree with this to some extent, I do feel the responsibility to the writer to point out everything that I see as the reader, at least all of the higher-order concerns. I feel like when a student comes to me for help, or I am giving a student back his paper revise, he is trusting me to point out all the places that I see where he could revise his paper. I feel obligated to do so. As a student, I know I would be very frustrated if I revised my paper and re-submitted it and had cleared up all the issues that my teacher had pointed out, but I still got a B on the essay because the teacher didn't point out everything, so I didn't know that it needed more work. In fact, I would pissed.
I know it can be overwhelming for students to see all of those comments, but at least I feel like I am equipping them with everything they need to get an "A" and improve their essay. I feel like that is my job as a tutor or instructor. Plus, I don't think these comments are too overwhelming if handled appropriately. Instead of saying, "Be more specific," ask a question in the margin that the student can answer that will make his essay more specific. Psychologically this is better anyway. The student doesn't think, "Oh, I did this wrong," but "Oh, the teacher wants to know more.
I did, however, totally agree with Bean when he said that teachers' comments should prompt revision and deal primarily with higher-order concerns. He defines higher-order concerns as "ideas, organization, development, and overall clarity" (243). He then offers a list of questions to help guide revision:
-Does the draft follow the assignment?
-Does the writer have a thesis that addresses an appropriate problem or question?
-If the draft has a thesis, what is the quality of the argument?
-Is the draft effectively organized at the macro and micro level?
Again, Bean says the teacher should only comment on 2-3 areas, but as I stated before, I disagree.
I also disagree with how he suggests we handle lower order concerns. While I agree that we shouldn't line edit, he does suggest putting an "X" in the margin next to sentences that have grammatical errors. For a student who misplaced a comma, or forgot to put one in, this would be confusing as hell. A student wouldn't know if he was missing a comma, had improper punctuation, a problem with subject-verb agreement, or something totally different. I can see putting an "X" where there are misspellings or typos, but I think we should still circle other grammatical errors if we think the student does not know the rule. I think we should look for patterns of error, then explain the rule to the student. From what I hear, students are most frustrated with comments because they don't know how to go about fixing them. An "X" would just frustrate students, in my opinion.
Bean then goes on to discuss endnotes. He suggests that endnotes should" sum up the strengths of drat [...] identify main problems, [...] and make a few specific suggestions" (251). I think this is an effective model.
Basically what I gather is that we should use revision-based comments to respond to places where a student could improve his essay, praise him when he does it right, and have individual conferences with our students to make sure that they understand our comments and have a plan for revision.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Review of the Halls of Poetry
The Halls of Poetry creative works reading took place in the Hall of Languages, room 203, on Monday, October 19th, at 4:30 PM. Students from Dr. Jacob's undergraduate poetry class and Dr. Reid's graduate creative writing class too the stage to share their poetry, prose, and song.
The event was a success. Lots of people showed up, including folds outside of the creative writing classes. Dr. Jacobs required her students to read, so there were a lot of fresh faces at the podium. I overheard many folks say that they enjoyed being able to hear the new voices and see the new faces. I think this was a great way to introduce new students into Commerce's writing community. It also served as a way for more experienced readers to find a new audience for their works and learn new techniques from writers that they had never heard before.
I also took the opportunity to get many of these people involved with The Mayo Review, so that was good.
Hopefully this is an event we can do every year.
The event was a success. Lots of people showed up, including folds outside of the creative writing classes. Dr. Jacobs required her students to read, so there were a lot of fresh faces at the podium. I overheard many folks say that they enjoyed being able to hear the new voices and see the new faces. I think this was a great way to introduce new students into Commerce's writing community. It also served as a way for more experienced readers to find a new audience for their works and learn new techniques from writers that they had never heard before.
I also took the opportunity to get many of these people involved with The Mayo Review, so that was good.
Hopefully this is an event we can do every year.
Friday, October 23, 2009
The Mayo Review Open Mic Night Interview
This is my semi-formal interview. I talked a little bit with Brandon, the Editor of The Mayo Review, about the Open Mic Night, and I am also going to use some of my own knowledge as the Assistant Editor to talk about the the event.
We planned the Open Mic Night for Thursday, October 22, 2009. We were planning on having an open mic night sometime in October before we even knew about the Commerce Week on Writing, but we decided to move the event to the actual Week on Writing so we could join in on the festivities. Our Submissions deadline is also coming up, November 2nd, so we figured it would be great opportunity to really get the word out one last time.
We decided to host it at the Cowhill Express since we held our first open mic at The Spot. The Cowhill Express seems to draw in just as large of a crowd as The Spot, and it is just the perfect atmosphere for an open mic night.
I think this open mic got a lot of extra publicity because of the Commerce Week on Writing. I know several teachers, myself included, gave students extra credit for attending the event. We also did our usual advertising by placing flyers up in the Hall of Languages and advertising the event of Facebook.
I did not get to attend the event because I got a sinus infection and was having some problems with my blood pressure, but I did speak with Brandon briefly about the event's success. He said:
"Things went really great. LOTS of new faces and a nice long list of readers/singers. A few people said from the mic how they thought Open Mic was great and that they planned on coming back. One of the guys who read also turned out to be someone from the East Texan who later spoke to me and Toni, so it looks like we'll get a little more publicity."
I think it is great that there were a lot of new faces and that people said they had never been to open mic nights before and planned on coming back. I was also happy to hear that we are going to get a little more publicity in the East Texan. That's what the Commerce Week on Writing is about, right, getting new people to think about, talk about, and enjoy writing. I would say mission accomplished.
We planned the Open Mic Night for Thursday, October 22, 2009. We were planning on having an open mic night sometime in October before we even knew about the Commerce Week on Writing, but we decided to move the event to the actual Week on Writing so we could join in on the festivities. Our Submissions deadline is also coming up, November 2nd, so we figured it would be great opportunity to really get the word out one last time.
We decided to host it at the Cowhill Express since we held our first open mic at The Spot. The Cowhill Express seems to draw in just as large of a crowd as The Spot, and it is just the perfect atmosphere for an open mic night.
I think this open mic got a lot of extra publicity because of the Commerce Week on Writing. I know several teachers, myself included, gave students extra credit for attending the event. We also did our usual advertising by placing flyers up in the Hall of Languages and advertising the event of Facebook.
I did not get to attend the event because I got a sinus infection and was having some problems with my blood pressure, but I did speak with Brandon briefly about the event's success. He said:
"Things went really great. LOTS of new faces and a nice long list of readers/singers. A few people said from the mic how they thought Open Mic was great and that they planned on coming back. One of the guys who read also turned out to be someone from the East Texan who later spoke to me and Toni, so it looks like we'll get a little more publicity."
I think it is great that there were a lot of new faces and that people said they had never been to open mic nights before and planned on coming back. I was also happy to hear that we are going to get a little more publicity in the East Texan. That's what the Commerce Week on Writing is about, right, getting new people to think about, talk about, and enjoy writing. I would say mission accomplished.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Commerce Week on Writing
Well, I realize that I posted the wrong posts to the wrong blogs, so if you read my last blog, you were probably really confused because that post was meant for my pregnancy blog. Sorry!
Here is the right post:
For the Commerce Week On Writing I am attending and helping out at the following events:
-Halls of Poetry
-NCOW Theatre
-Open House and Memoir Workshop
-Open Mic Night for Kids
-The Mayo Review Open Mic Night
-The Story Slam
I'll be videotaping whatever events need to be video taped. I already hung up flyers for the Mayo Review, and I created a flyer for the Open house. I am also working on a board for the Open House.
I created a facebook event for the Commerce Week on Writing and invited several people.
Here is the right post:
For the Commerce Week On Writing I am attending and helping out at the following events:
-Halls of Poetry
-NCOW Theatre
-Open House and Memoir Workshop
-Open Mic Night for Kids
-The Mayo Review Open Mic Night
-The Story Slam
I'll be videotaping whatever events need to be video taped. I already hung up flyers for the Mayo Review, and I created a flyer for the Open house. I am also working on a board for the Open House.
I created a facebook event for the Commerce Week on Writing and invited several people.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Open Mic Night
The Mayo Review is hosting its second Open Mic Night of the year on October 22, 2009, at the Cowhill Experss in downtown Commerce. The event kicks off at 7:30. Come and listen, or come and share your poetry, prose, drama, or music with Commerce's growing writing community, and learn more about The Mayo Review, and how you can get involved.
Hope to see you there!
Hope to see you there!
Writing Center Open House and Memoir Workshop
On Tuesday, October 20, 2009, the Texas A&M University-Commerce Writing Center (HL 103) will be hosting a series of events:
From 2:00-3:00, the Writing Center will be open to the public for a series of Creative Writing Workshops. Bring your poetry, drama, and/or prose, and have a one-on-one session with an experienced tutor.
From 5:00-7:00, there will be an Open House. This is your opportunity to get an insider's look at the services provided by TAMU-C's Writing Center, have a Meet and Greet with some of the tutors, and enjoy some refreshments.
Also from 5:00-7:00 in the Writing Center, Dr. Fred Tarpley and the Silver Leos will be holding a Memoir Workshop.
Hope to see you there!
From 2:00-3:00, the Writing Center will be open to the public for a series of Creative Writing Workshops. Bring your poetry, drama, and/or prose, and have a one-on-one session with an experienced tutor.
From 5:00-7:00, there will be an Open House. This is your opportunity to get an insider's look at the services provided by TAMU-C's Writing Center, have a Meet and Greet with some of the tutors, and enjoy some refreshments.
Also from 5:00-7:00 in the Writing Center, Dr. Fred Tarpley and the Silver Leos will be holding a Memoir Workshop.
Hope to see you there!
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Summary and Thoughts on "Designing Tasks for Active Thinking and Learning" from Bean's Engaging Ideas (No, I couldn't come up with an original title.)
I actually wanted to do my post on chapter 6, but I was too slow to raise my hand, and I wound up with chapter 7. Glad I did. This has been the most helpful chapter to me thus far. It sparked a whole bunch of ideas that I am going to use in my lab class. I'll talk about those in a bit. First, a summary of chapter seven:
The goal of this chapter is to help teachers design activities and assignments for their classroom that encourage critical thinking. Classrooms are then "problem-centered" rather than "lecture-centered," and students are "active" in their learning instead of "passive" (121). How much do you really learn by just having knowledge "dumped" in your head via lecture and notes? I know I learn more, and understand what I have learned more when I discover the knowledge through my own discussions, writings, and explorations that require me to use my own problem -solving skills.
In a classroom that encourages active thinking and learning, the teacher is not an all-powerful authority figure. Instead the teacher acts as a "coach" and a "guide" (121). "In adopting this role, the teacher presents students with critical problems, gives students supervised practice at solving them, and coaches their performance through encouragement, modeling, helpful intervention and advice, and critiquing their performance" (121). So teachers no longer consume their time planning out their lecture; they instead spend their time planning critical thinking activities for their class.
Bean states that, "the goal in designing critical thinking problems is to convert students from passive to active learners who use course concepts to confront problems, gather and analyze data, prepare hypotheses, and formulate arguments" (122). Bean offers "ten strategies for designing critical Thinking Tasks:"
1) Develop tasks or assignments in which students have to link course concepts with personal experience. That way, students apply the knowledge that they learned in class instead of just trying to commit it to their memory.
2) Develop assignments/activities in which a student has to explain course concepts to someone who does not understand them. This could be useful in helping students who don't understand difficult concepts while also helping the students who do. Every time you teach something to someone, you understand it a little better yourself. That is why I love tutoring!
3) Give students a thesis that they either have to defend or attack. This will help students see that there is more than one side to an issue.
4) Give students a problem that they then have to find the solution for.
5) Give students supporting evidence and make them write the thesis/hypothesis/ or argument that this data supports.
6) Make frame sentences for paragraphs and have the students "flesh" them out by adding in the specifics. This also helps with organization.
7) Design activities centered around "what if's" and allow students to role-play. That way they can look at problems from different points of view.
8) Have students write summaries/abstracts or articles and/or lectures.
9) Have students write a dialogue between two people with two different points of views on a controversial topic.
10) Develop case studies.
Bean 121-132.
I think these are excellent activities because it makes students responsible for their learning. This way they won't be able to get away with, "My teacher's lectures are just so boring," etc. I also think students learn better from "hands on" activities.
ENG 100L
I am going to do the frame paragraphs with my students and maybe even a frame thesis for their critical reflections paper. A lot of them are struggling with what exactly a thesis statement is and how to write them, and they are even more confused about keeping one idea in a paragraph and having that idea support the thesis. I think this could help clarify things for them. I've tried lecturing, but I don't think that works as well. Thank you, Bean. I also changed up their dialogue journals after reading this chapter. Here's the plan:
Dialogue Journals: English 100 10L
These assignments will be the rest of your dialogue journal entries. You may type these assignments, though you are not required to; however, it may be easier to do a word count. In these assignments you don’t have to worry so much about grammar, organization, or structure. I do, however, want you to write in complete, coherent sentences. You will be graded on whether you meet the word count or not, and the quality of your thinking, not your writing. These assignments will help you greatly when it comes to writing your critical reflections paper. If you spend the time on these assignments, writing your critical reflections paper should be a breeze. These assignments will make up a significant portion of your grade, and I will not accept late work. NO EXCEPTIONS. If you’re not in class the day that it is due, find a way to get it to me before 8 a.m. that day.
Class Summaries: Each week you will write a 250 word summary of your lectures/activities in your ENG 100 lecture class. Make sure to include in your summary the most valuable thing you learned that week. Your week ends on Thursday, so you must turn the summary into me the following Tuesday. Your summaries will begin with Week 5.
Writing Center Visit Reflection: After every writing center visit, write a 250 word report answering the following questions:
- In this visit, what was most helpful to you?
- In this visit, what was least helpful to you?
- Did you agree with your tutor’s advice or disagree?
- After the session, what is your plan for revision? In other words, how will you make use of the tutor’s advice?
These reflections will be due the same day as your writing center visit. You will begin this assignment with your 3rd writing center visit.
Writing Experience: Write a 250 word account of your experience writing every writing assignment. Touch on the following issues:
- What was the easiest part of writing this assignment?
- What did you struggle with most writing this assignment?
- What advice do you hope to get from your teacher, peer reviewer, or writing center tutor?
- You can also talk about your experiences peer reviewing.
This will be due one week after you turn in your writing assignment to your instructor.
Instructor Feedback: After you get an essay back from your instructor, write a 250 word report summarizing the following:
- Your expectations. Did you expect to do better on this paper, or were you pleasantly surprised?
- What did you make of your teacher’s comments? Did you agree with them? Were any of them hard to understand?
- After reading your instructor’s comments, what is your plan for revision?
You will begin this starting with WA 2. These won’t have specific due dates, but I will be making sure you are getting them done.
It might sound like a lot, but they need guidance. If I just give them a prompt in class, they don't take it seriously. That is why I put a word count down. Also, the book hasn't been at the bookstore, so they haven't been having to do any reading or homework for this class thus far. I've been lecturing (off the book), and we've been working on peer review. They also aren't doing their WC visits, so if there is a little paper/reflection involved as well, it might motivate them to go. I got these ideas from reading this chapter.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
"I Hate Writing"-No, really, I don't, but it's the name of this week's clip
Our very own Sylwester made this wonderful video. Didn't he do an excellent job? I will first summarize a little bit about what the film and its participants said, and then I will talk about how we could use this film as a resource for our students who are writing WA 3. Note: I will almost be directly quoting some of the participants from the film.
The film starts out asking different people why they think students hate writing. Here are some of the responses:
-Students see writing as a set of rules
-Students have in their mind that they can't write
-They are not interested in the assignments
-Time-consuming without a definite outcome
-Not used to it
-Can't be mastered- even the best writers can get better
-Sometimes it requires talent
-Assignments bleed with ink, and no one shows them how to "fix it"
What I gather from this is that students have in their minds that they can't write because of bad academic experiences with writing. They get their papers back, and they are bleeding red, and often times teachers don't explain to them how to improve their papers. This gives students the impression that writing is a set of rules that can't be mastered, and just requires talent. I mean, if they aren't being taught how to "fix" their "errors," then other students must not be taught it either, so it must just be talent. I also loved when Melinda said that you can spend all this time writing a paper, put in all this effort, and you still don't know what the outcome will be. This is true, and I think that frustrates students. In math, you get the right answer, you get the right the answer. Not so in writing. You never know how good or bad your stuff is until you give it to your audience, and often times, it is subjective. I also think students really hate writing because it is so time consuming. Every paper is a draft. There is no such thing as a finished product. For perfectionists, especially, this is frustrating.
The participants are then asked, "When do you hate writing?"
Here are some of the responses:
-They hate writing when they are forced
-When they have to write about something they have no interest in
-When subjects don't matter to them
-When they don't understand the assignment
-When they have other things to do
Students/people in general often hate the "haftas" in life. "You hafta write this paper." "You hafta do the laundry, etc." Writing is often a "hafta," and students hate that. They also hate when they are forced to write about something they have no interest in. I personally love to write, but even I hate writing when I am forced to write about subjects I don't care about. Also, a lot of times writing assignments are ambiguous. I found that with WA2. I really thought I could justify that I wrote WA2, and I still think I did. We can all read an assignment and interepret it differently, and sometimes that gets students in trouble. Sadly, students often don't care about learning, especially when it isn't their core subject; they care about grades. So, naturally, writing causes a lot of stress.
Participants are then asked, "What stage do you hate the most and why?"
Here are some the responses:
-Editing, because once you spent a whole day writing, and you go back and read through it, it is painful
-Revising, you think you are finished, then you see all these glarring problems
-The middle, the place where you get stuck
Most of the participants answered revising or editing. It is frustrating when you spend a few days/weeks/whatever writing a paper, and you finally write that last sentence, and you read through it again and think, "Oh my gosh, this is crap!" I've done that a million times. For me, I have a love/hate relationship with revising. I hate doing it becuase it is so time consuming, but I love it because my finished drafts barely resemble my final product. For me, once I get down my first draft, I am only probably 10% done with the assignment, and it still takes me forever to get out that first draft.
Participants next answered the question, "How can we prevent students from hating writing?"
Their responses are as follows:
-Help them conquer their fears of writing
-Find what they are interested in writing about
I think it is important to also let students dabble in several different kinds of writing. I think all students should have the opportunity to write creatively. Okay, Tabetha, you convinced me, all writing is creative, so let me rephrase: all students should have the opportunity to write fiction. I think writing fiction can teach us a lot about writing non-fiction and vice-versa. It will also kind of break down that barrier between "academic" writing and "personal" writing.
There is also a small section on blogging that talks about the difference between public and private writing, and how some students prefer one or the other.
Sylwester also including some statistics from Guy Allen's survey of students who chose to take a writing course. Here they are:
85% dread school writing
95% negative view of their own writing ability
70% enroll in a writing course to reduce the number of mistakes they make GUY ALLEN students who choose to take a writing course
Wow, shocking numbers!
At the end of the film, Sylwester suggests that reading and going to a writing center are ways that students can improve their writing. Often it seems that improving one's writing is a hopeless endevour, but this video offers some hope.
So how do we use this video in the classroom, particularly for WA3?
Well, I think this video could be a resource for several different reasons:
1) Students who hate writing will know that they are not alone, and they will know that their class is a place where they can talk openly and honestly about not liking writing and why without being penalized for it.
2) This video is a great tool for brainstorming. I'm sure many students will watch it and go, "Yeah, that is why I hate writing." "Yeah, I do hate to revise." "Oh, I remember when I got back a bleeding paper, and no one showed me how to "fix" it." By the end of the film, they will probably have all the material they need to start drafting WA3.
3) Students will also see that their teachers are trying to understand why their students hate writing. It shows that we are concerned, and that we are trying to make a difference. That might be a real change for them from how they viewed academic writing in high school.
What other ways do you see this video being helpful?
The film starts out asking different people why they think students hate writing. Here are some of the responses:
-Students see writing as a set of rules
-Students have in their mind that they can't write
-They are not interested in the assignments
-Time-consuming without a definite outcome
-Not used to it
-Can't be mastered- even the best writers can get better
-Sometimes it requires talent
-Assignments bleed with ink, and no one shows them how to "fix it"
What I gather from this is that students have in their minds that they can't write because of bad academic experiences with writing. They get their papers back, and they are bleeding red, and often times teachers don't explain to them how to improve their papers. This gives students the impression that writing is a set of rules that can't be mastered, and just requires talent. I mean, if they aren't being taught how to "fix" their "errors," then other students must not be taught it either, so it must just be talent. I also loved when Melinda said that you can spend all this time writing a paper, put in all this effort, and you still don't know what the outcome will be. This is true, and I think that frustrates students. In math, you get the right answer, you get the right the answer. Not so in writing. You never know how good or bad your stuff is until you give it to your audience, and often times, it is subjective. I also think students really hate writing because it is so time consuming. Every paper is a draft. There is no such thing as a finished product. For perfectionists, especially, this is frustrating.
The participants are then asked, "When do you hate writing?"
Here are some of the responses:
-They hate writing when they are forced
-When they have to write about something they have no interest in
-When subjects don't matter to them
-When they don't understand the assignment
-When they have other things to do
Students/people in general often hate the "haftas" in life. "You hafta write this paper." "You hafta do the laundry, etc." Writing is often a "hafta," and students hate that. They also hate when they are forced to write about something they have no interest in. I personally love to write, but even I hate writing when I am forced to write about subjects I don't care about. Also, a lot of times writing assignments are ambiguous. I found that with WA2. I really thought I could justify that I wrote WA2, and I still think I did. We can all read an assignment and interepret it differently, and sometimes that gets students in trouble. Sadly, students often don't care about learning, especially when it isn't their core subject; they care about grades. So, naturally, writing causes a lot of stress.
Participants are then asked, "What stage do you hate the most and why?"
Here are some the responses:
-Editing, because once you spent a whole day writing, and you go back and read through it, it is painful
-Revising, you think you are finished, then you see all these glarring problems
-The middle, the place where you get stuck
Most of the participants answered revising or editing. It is frustrating when you spend a few days/weeks/whatever writing a paper, and you finally write that last sentence, and you read through it again and think, "Oh my gosh, this is crap!" I've done that a million times. For me, I have a love/hate relationship with revising. I hate doing it becuase it is so time consuming, but I love it because my finished drafts barely resemble my final product. For me, once I get down my first draft, I am only probably 10% done with the assignment, and it still takes me forever to get out that first draft.
Participants next answered the question, "How can we prevent students from hating writing?"
Their responses are as follows:
-Help them conquer their fears of writing
-Find what they are interested in writing about
I think it is important to also let students dabble in several different kinds of writing. I think all students should have the opportunity to write creatively. Okay, Tabetha, you convinced me, all writing is creative, so let me rephrase: all students should have the opportunity to write fiction. I think writing fiction can teach us a lot about writing non-fiction and vice-versa. It will also kind of break down that barrier between "academic" writing and "personal" writing.
There is also a small section on blogging that talks about the difference between public and private writing, and how some students prefer one or the other.
Sylwester also including some statistics from Guy Allen's survey of students who chose to take a writing course. Here they are:
85% dread school writing
95% negative view of their own writing ability
70% enroll in a writing course to reduce the number of mistakes they make GUY ALLEN students who choose to take a writing course
Wow, shocking numbers!
At the end of the film, Sylwester suggests that reading and going to a writing center are ways that students can improve their writing. Often it seems that improving one's writing is a hopeless endevour, but this video offers some hope.
So how do we use this video in the classroom, particularly for WA3?
Well, I think this video could be a resource for several different reasons:
1) Students who hate writing will know that they are not alone, and they will know that their class is a place where they can talk openly and honestly about not liking writing and why without being penalized for it.
2) This video is a great tool for brainstorming. I'm sure many students will watch it and go, "Yeah, that is why I hate writing." "Yeah, I do hate to revise." "Oh, I remember when I got back a bleeding paper, and no one showed me how to "fix" it." By the end of the film, they will probably have all the material they need to start drafting WA3.
3) Students will also see that their teachers are trying to understand why their students hate writing. It shows that we are concerned, and that we are trying to make a difference. That might be a real change for them from how they viewed academic writing in high school.
What other ways do you see this video being helpful?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
My Story
Mandy Deffendall
Dr. Carter and Dr. Adkins
English 697
September 16, 2009
Writing Assignment 2
Dr. Carter and Dr. Adkins
English 697
September 16, 2009
Writing Assignment 2
My Story
Stories are all around us waiting to be told. They’re in the trees, at the train station, in the class room, at the shopping mall, waiting to be discovered. Characters are sitting next to you, standing in line in front of you at the supermarket. New settings are being painted in the sky with each sunrise and sunset. Dialogues unfold at coffee shops, bars, dinner tables. My eyes see the world through a writer’s perspective, and I live my life searching out these stories.
I became fascinated with stories when I was a small child. I’d perch myself of mother’s lap, and she’d take me on adventures to the jungle, to the woods, rivers, mountains, cities, places I had never been. I’d meet people in those stories who I would have otherwise never met. The words she read painted pictures in my mind that I could get lost in for hours.
By age five, I was already writing my own adventures. I wanted to find the stories, and I wanted to tell them. I no longer only wanted to go on expeditions; I wanted to lead them. I wanted to paint with words.
In the first grade, I got my chance. I was recognized by my school as the “Young Author” of the year, and I got to read my story in front of my entire elementary school, and later to members of the community. My story made them smile; it made them laugh. I saw that my words had the power to elicit emotions; they had the power to impact. I fell in love with words.
I spent the rest of my elementary career searching out new ways to tell stories. I’d read book after book, looking at how different authors used words, looking at the different kinds of stories they told, figuring out what made the difference between books I liked and books I didn’t. By fourth grade, I started writing my first novel, a ghost story called Full Moon at Midnight, finishing it the same time I finished the sixth grade.
Then I started junior high school and suddenly I was surrounded by 1,000 new characters. I listened to their stories across the lunch table, at their lockers, on the basketball and volleyball courts. I found stories written on the bathroom walls and notes passed back and forth in math class. At night I wrote dialogues with my friends on AIM. I kept a journal, writing it all down.
In junior high I was also introduced to other kinds of writing: research papers, academic and argumentative essays, reports. I discovered that my words had even more power. They had power to change minds, to change the stories of history and society on things such as race, gender, class, and ecology, and to keep alive the stories of the Holocaust, slavery, inequalities.
I also began reading more non-fiction, not just for research and to gain facts and information, but also to look at how other authors formulated their essays. I looked at how they constructed their arguments, how they proved their points, how they reached their audiences. I read as a reader and also as a writer.
Non-fiction wasn’t the only new thing I was reading in junior high. After listening and falling in love with the Dave Matthews Band, I discovered that music was full of stories. I could read a song just like I could read a poem. Dave Matthews’s lyrics painted pictures in my mind much in the same way the stories my mother read to me as a child did, and drew out emotions deep within me that I didn’t even know I had. I started looking at art the same way, as a story. I read the colors, the brush stroke, the shapes. I read many other things, movies, people, situations. I was discovering more and more that I could find a story in anything.
My literacy practices continued through high school and even up through today. I still see the world in the same way I did as a child: as a writer. Every morning I wake up and go for a run. As I run, I constantly scan the trees, the houses, the people, the neighborhood for a story. I also use this time to think about whatever stories I am currently writing. I plan out the plots, develop my characters, think of places they could go and conversations they could have. This planning continues through my shower and my one hour drive to Commerce each morning. I do this so when I sit down to write, I already know where I’m going. Of course I still do many other kinds of writing. I write for class. I write essays, notes, blogs, etc., and I also still write for fun. I still read, a lot more since I started graduate school, but I still read for fun also. I read for knowledge. I read for fun. I read to write.
The biggest change in my literacy practices from a child until now, is that I now not only write, but I teach others to write as well. I teach an English 100 lab, and I am also a tutor at the writing center. So all morning I think about writing, and all day at work, I talk about writing, and I get to read what other people are writing. I also get to help people find an audience for their writing as the assistant editor of The Mayo Review, Texas A&M University-Commerce’s literary review.
Of course I read and write many other things as well; we all do: stop signs, shirt sizes, facebook pages, text messages, speedometers, directions, clocks, ingredients, nutrition information, backs of medicine bottles, labels at the grocery store, warning, notices, e-mails, newspapers, job postings, twitter, blogs, movies, T.V. shows, billboards, magazines, advertisements, Myspace, t-shirts, hats, pictures, people, transcripts, class schedules, subtitles, etc. The list goes on. But no matter what I am reading or writing, or why I am reading or writing it, be it to gain or pass on knowledge or information, or be it to communicate, I always read and write to tell a story. I don’t “do” literacy; I live it. It is my world. I see through a writer’s perspective. Each day, no matter what I do, I gather material for my next story, whatever that may be.
Thoughts on Writing Assignment 2
Here is my draft for writing assignment two. Note: THIS IS A DRAFT! That's what the assignment called for, right? I can't revise it until I get some feedback. :) I think I would maybe include some pictures in this essay, but I'm not really sure. I think it might disrupt the flow. I don't know. See what you think.
I had an interesting time writing this assignment. I must admit, I was nervous. I wasn't sure if I was staying on topic. I wanted to take a more creative approach and look at the assignment from kind of a different perspective instead of a report on literacy in my everyday life. I think it kind of became a blend of WA 1 and WA 2. Since I am not being graded on this as a 101 student, I took the chance, but I think I would have played it more safely if I were actually in 101. I'm one of those students who are terrified of grades. I want to do whatever I think will get me that "A," and I'll play it safe instead of taking chances. Of course that makes for boring, generic essays. There are so many questions in the writing prompt, that that "A" student in my head was saying, "make sure you clearly address all of these in a nice little essay," so it was a struggle for me to go out on a limb a little more, even though I am not getting graded on it.
I must admit that I was also worried about grammar. I have issues with commas, people. It's embarrassing. I'm in graduate school. I feel like I should always know where to put a comma and where not to, but I don't. I've read grammar book after grammar book, but when I write, I still find myself "hmm"ing. That's why I appreciate it when teachers correct my mistakes. It is the only way I am going to learn at this point. I was so nervous about my grammar that it inhibited my writing.
I did find it refreshing to write about myself. At least it is something I know about. It didn't take hours of research in the library, and it didn't require me to create totally new characters and fictional plot lines. That made writing it easier.
Let me know what you think. I will post it in the next blog.
I had an interesting time writing this assignment. I must admit, I was nervous. I wasn't sure if I was staying on topic. I wanted to take a more creative approach and look at the assignment from kind of a different perspective instead of a report on literacy in my everyday life. I think it kind of became a blend of WA 1 and WA 2. Since I am not being graded on this as a 101 student, I took the chance, but I think I would have played it more safely if I were actually in 101. I'm one of those students who are terrified of grades. I want to do whatever I think will get me that "A," and I'll play it safe instead of taking chances. Of course that makes for boring, generic essays. There are so many questions in the writing prompt, that that "A" student in my head was saying, "make sure you clearly address all of these in a nice little essay," so it was a struggle for me to go out on a limb a little more, even though I am not getting graded on it.
I must admit that I was also worried about grammar. I have issues with commas, people. It's embarrassing. I'm in graduate school. I feel like I should always know where to put a comma and where not to, but I don't. I've read grammar book after grammar book, but when I write, I still find myself "hmm"ing. That's why I appreciate it when teachers correct my mistakes. It is the only way I am going to learn at this point. I was so nervous about my grammar that it inhibited my writing.
I did find it refreshing to write about myself. At least it is something I know about. It didn't take hours of research in the library, and it didn't require me to create totally new characters and fictional plot lines. That made writing it easier.
Let me know what you think. I will post it in the next blog.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
The Great Debate: What the *&#% Do I Teach My Students?
We’ve all been in classrooms, as a teacher or a student, and heard:
“I hate this writing assignment.”
“What’s the point?”
“What’s a thesis? Oh, I can’t do that.”
“TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT, AND I WILL DO IT!”
“How do I get an “A”?”
“Can’t we write something else?”
Most students in first year composition classes hate writing, or at least think they do. So how do we engage students in their writing? How do we motivate them to write? How do we give them assignments that they don’t “hate” while teaching them what we think they need to know? John C. Bean, author of Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom, suggests in his book that we assign students a variety of different assignments that range from what he calls “personal” writing to “professional” writing.
Personal writing is often left out of FYC classes. It can range from journal entries and free-writes (what Britton calls “expressive writing”), to personal narratives and short stories. Often teachers don’t see the merit in this type of writing. Free writes and journal entries are often a chaotic form of writing. Teachers who are looking for structure, logical arguments, and organization often cringe at encouraging this type of writing in a classroom. These teachers would rather teach students professional writing, academic prose, writing that will get their students published in academic journals, and prepare them for grad school. The problem with academic prose is that it often hinders student writing with its limited word choice, rigid structure and organization, and rule-governed expectations. Their voices get lost in the jargon (48).
Which type of writing, then, personal or professional, is most beneficial to our students? Bean argues that both are important and serve different functions. Personal writing often helps students discover their voices, engage in their writing, and have a personal investment in their papers (52). These are things academic prose does not often offer; however, when writing academic prose, or “thesis-governed” texts, students work on focus, clarity, structure, and the formation of logical arguments in not only their writing, but also in their thinking (46). So how does a teacher decide which to teach? Bean suggests that the teachers ask themselves two questions: “(1) what kinds of assignments will most benefit my students, and (2) what kinds of assignments will best fit [my] own values, teaching style, and available time?” (38) To do this, the instructor must take an inventory of his students and of himself.
So how do we take inventory of our students? As Bean states, we have the most diverse classrooms in the history of education. We have different ages, races, culture, classes, levels of intelligence, personality type, etc. It is impossible to tailor every assignment to fit the needs of every student in every class, so as teachers, we must be aware of the differences in our students, and assign a variety of assignments to meet the different needs in the classroom. Bean uses an interesting example. He talks about how different personality types, according to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, tend to prefer different types of assignments. For example, I am an ENFP according to Myers-Briggs. According to Bean’s discussion on pages 39-41, because I am Extroverted, I would prefer assignments that allow me to work in small groups and talk about my writing in class discussion; because I am Intuitive, I would prefer to work on assignments that are open-ended rather that rigidly structured; because I am a Feeler, I would prefer assignments that allow me to use emotions, voice, and personal experience; and because I am a perceiver, I like to have time to play with many ideas when working on assignments. I found this to be an accurate description of the type of writing assignments that I prefer. I found it interesting, however, that most students are Sensors rather than feelers (unlike their professors), and would rather have structured assignments. So, as we see, what students want and what teachers want often times do not match up. This becomes a problem when we as teachers try to motivate our students. The best way that I see to motivate students and meet their diverse needs is to be aware of how different personality types respond to different assignments, different cultures respond to different assignments, etc. Since we can’t all give our students the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator test and learn everything about our students’s cultures, races, backgrounds, etc. we should just vary our assignments to accommodate the diversity. I think it would be better to have every student invested in at least one assignment throughout the semester rather than having a small group invested in every assignment throughout the semester. I think we would reach more students that way. Of course we have to figure out where we stand, and what we think is and is not important to teach our students because if we aren’t motivated to teach, students will not be motivated to learn.
Bean argues that we can get the “mixture of professional and personal writing” that we need in our classrooms by using “three different categories of assignments:
(1) Nongraded exploratory writing
(2) Thesis-governed academic writing
(3) Essays written in other styles ad forms that stand against conventional academic writing and create different ways of ‘seeing.’” (52)
In what percentages we do each is up to the teacher. A teacher must examine the class, the objectives and goals of the class, and his own personal goals to decide this. It’s all about balance.
“I hate this writing assignment.”
“What’s the point?”
“What’s a thesis? Oh, I can’t do that.”
“TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT, AND I WILL DO IT!”
“How do I get an “A”?”
“Can’t we write something else?”
Most students in first year composition classes hate writing, or at least think they do. So how do we engage students in their writing? How do we motivate them to write? How do we give them assignments that they don’t “hate” while teaching them what we think they need to know? John C. Bean, author of Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom, suggests in his book that we assign students a variety of different assignments that range from what he calls “personal” writing to “professional” writing.
Personal writing is often left out of FYC classes. It can range from journal entries and free-writes (what Britton calls “expressive writing”), to personal narratives and short stories. Often teachers don’t see the merit in this type of writing. Free writes and journal entries are often a chaotic form of writing. Teachers who are looking for structure, logical arguments, and organization often cringe at encouraging this type of writing in a classroom. These teachers would rather teach students professional writing, academic prose, writing that will get their students published in academic journals, and prepare them for grad school. The problem with academic prose is that it often hinders student writing with its limited word choice, rigid structure and organization, and rule-governed expectations. Their voices get lost in the jargon (48).
Which type of writing, then, personal or professional, is most beneficial to our students? Bean argues that both are important and serve different functions. Personal writing often helps students discover their voices, engage in their writing, and have a personal investment in their papers (52). These are things academic prose does not often offer; however, when writing academic prose, or “thesis-governed” texts, students work on focus, clarity, structure, and the formation of logical arguments in not only their writing, but also in their thinking (46). So how does a teacher decide which to teach? Bean suggests that the teachers ask themselves two questions: “(1) what kinds of assignments will most benefit my students, and (2) what kinds of assignments will best fit [my] own values, teaching style, and available time?” (38) To do this, the instructor must take an inventory of his students and of himself.
So how do we take inventory of our students? As Bean states, we have the most diverse classrooms in the history of education. We have different ages, races, culture, classes, levels of intelligence, personality type, etc. It is impossible to tailor every assignment to fit the needs of every student in every class, so as teachers, we must be aware of the differences in our students, and assign a variety of assignments to meet the different needs in the classroom. Bean uses an interesting example. He talks about how different personality types, according to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, tend to prefer different types of assignments. For example, I am an ENFP according to Myers-Briggs. According to Bean’s discussion on pages 39-41, because I am Extroverted, I would prefer assignments that allow me to work in small groups and talk about my writing in class discussion; because I am Intuitive, I would prefer to work on assignments that are open-ended rather that rigidly structured; because I am a Feeler, I would prefer assignments that allow me to use emotions, voice, and personal experience; and because I am a perceiver, I like to have time to play with many ideas when working on assignments. I found this to be an accurate description of the type of writing assignments that I prefer. I found it interesting, however, that most students are Sensors rather than feelers (unlike their professors), and would rather have structured assignments. So, as we see, what students want and what teachers want often times do not match up. This becomes a problem when we as teachers try to motivate our students. The best way that I see to motivate students and meet their diverse needs is to be aware of how different personality types respond to different assignments, different cultures respond to different assignments, etc. Since we can’t all give our students the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator test and learn everything about our students’s cultures, races, backgrounds, etc. we should just vary our assignments to accommodate the diversity. I think it would be better to have every student invested in at least one assignment throughout the semester rather than having a small group invested in every assignment throughout the semester. I think we would reach more students that way. Of course we have to figure out where we stand, and what we think is and is not important to teach our students because if we aren’t motivated to teach, students will not be motivated to learn.
Bean argues that we can get the “mixture of professional and personal writing” that we need in our classrooms by using “three different categories of assignments:
(1) Nongraded exploratory writing
(2) Thesis-governed academic writing
(3) Essays written in other styles ad forms that stand against conventional academic writing and create different ways of ‘seeing.’” (52)
In what percentages we do each is up to the teacher. A teacher must examine the class, the objectives and goals of the class, and his own personal goals to decide this. It’s all about balance.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Introduction to The Elements of Literacy by Julie Lindquist and David Seitz
The following is a summary and analysis of the introductory chapter of The Elements of Literacy. I will also be including my own examples into the summary, and I will discuss in further detail some of the implications of the material presented in this chapter.
This chapter opens explaining the United State's current fascination with standardized testing and the No Child Left Behind Act. The authors use standardized testing and NCLB as a running example throughout the chapter to show how society views and defines literacy today, and the limitations and complications of using that limited definition.
So what does standardized testing and the NCLB act show us about how we as a society view literacy? The authors claim that it shows us that society believes literacy has a "fixed and stable" definition, and it is easily defined. It also reveals society's belief that literacy is a cognitive skill that can be easily measured, and everyone has an equal opportunity to acquire this skill. As we know, this is not the case. Children, for example, who attend underprivileged schools do not have access to the same resources as children who grow up in more affluent communities. As we can see, the definition of literacy that society uses, the definition that drives our policies, is often an out-dated, incomplete definition, and does not define how literacy is currently being used in society.
The chapter proceeds to discuss the NCLB act in further detail:
NCLB is big on holding schools accountable for the success of their students on standardized testing, which, again, is an insufficient way to measure literacy in the first place because it ignores many aspects of literacy such as class, technology, race, culture, religion, etc. In a perfect world, this policy might make sense, but we all know this is not a perfect world. All schools are not created equally. Poorer schools cannot offer their students access to as many resources as more affluent schools. Poor schools often work with out-dated textbooks, if they have textbooks at all, less qualified teachers, etc. Forget about computers. Many students in poorer communities miss out on that literacy all together. The biggest problem, then, with accountability is that NCLB punishes schools who do not perform as well by withholding money from them, further limiting their ability to help out their students, and it financially rewards schools that meet performance expectations. The rich schools get richer, and the poor schools get poorer. The gap widens.
One of the other major problems that I see, is that the program funds teaching methods that have shown through scientific research, effective results. This assumes that literacy can be measured through scientific research. That, however, is not what I see as the most glaring issue. We all know research, especially the publishing of its findings, takes time. Something that might have worked in schools twenty years ago when the research was done, will probably not work as well today with all of our technological advances and the changing definitions of literacy. NCLB, then, does not allow for innovative methods of teaching. We're teaching 19th and 20th century literacy in a 21st century classroom. As the authors point out, when society defines literacy one way, though the term itself is abstract, it has very real and concrete implications in the real world.
The chapter moves on to talk about ways to define or think about literacy. The authors talk about how the term is hard to define, and I found it particularly interesting when they stated that it is an "abstract noun" with no verb form. Verb forms of words often clue us in to the actions surrounded the noun form, allowing us to have a better understanding of the term. We don't have that luxury with literacy.
So how is literacy defined in today's society? The authors point out three common definitions:
This chapter opens explaining the United State's current fascination with standardized testing and the No Child Left Behind Act. The authors use standardized testing and NCLB as a running example throughout the chapter to show how society views and defines literacy today, and the limitations and complications of using that limited definition.
So what does standardized testing and the NCLB act show us about how we as a society view literacy? The authors claim that it shows us that society believes literacy has a "fixed and stable" definition, and it is easily defined. It also reveals society's belief that literacy is a cognitive skill that can be easily measured, and everyone has an equal opportunity to acquire this skill. As we know, this is not the case. Children, for example, who attend underprivileged schools do not have access to the same resources as children who grow up in more affluent communities. As we can see, the definition of literacy that society uses, the definition that drives our policies, is often an out-dated, incomplete definition, and does not define how literacy is currently being used in society.
The chapter proceeds to discuss the NCLB act in further detail:
NCLB is big on holding schools accountable for the success of their students on standardized testing, which, again, is an insufficient way to measure literacy in the first place because it ignores many aspects of literacy such as class, technology, race, culture, religion, etc. In a perfect world, this policy might make sense, but we all know this is not a perfect world. All schools are not created equally. Poorer schools cannot offer their students access to as many resources as more affluent schools. Poor schools often work with out-dated textbooks, if they have textbooks at all, less qualified teachers, etc. Forget about computers. Many students in poorer communities miss out on that literacy all together. The biggest problem, then, with accountability is that NCLB punishes schools who do not perform as well by withholding money from them, further limiting their ability to help out their students, and it financially rewards schools that meet performance expectations. The rich schools get richer, and the poor schools get poorer. The gap widens.
One of the other major problems that I see, is that the program funds teaching methods that have shown through scientific research, effective results. This assumes that literacy can be measured through scientific research. That, however, is not what I see as the most glaring issue. We all know research, especially the publishing of its findings, takes time. Something that might have worked in schools twenty years ago when the research was done, will probably not work as well today with all of our technological advances and the changing definitions of literacy. NCLB, then, does not allow for innovative methods of teaching. We're teaching 19th and 20th century literacy in a 21st century classroom. As the authors point out, when society defines literacy one way, though the term itself is abstract, it has very real and concrete implications in the real world.
The chapter moves on to talk about ways to define or think about literacy. The authors talk about how the term is hard to define, and I found it particularly interesting when they stated that it is an "abstract noun" with no verb form. Verb forms of words often clue us in to the actions surrounded the noun form, allowing us to have a better understanding of the term. We don't have that luxury with literacy.
So how is literacy defined in today's society? The authors point out three common definitions:
- "Literacy is a quantifiable workplace skill"
- Literacy refers to practiced engagement with printed text"
- Literacy has to do with higher-order information processing and reasoning skills" (7).
These are all still pretty abstract definitions, and that is the problem. Literacy is a word a lot of people throw around, but they cannot actually define it. That complicates conversations on literacy because often one person's definition of literacy varies drastically from another person's. This makes room for a lot of confusion and misunderstanding.
To give their readers a better understanding of literacy, the authors quote Scribner's Three Metaphors for Literacy. They quote Scribner saying, "each of these three metaphors is rooted in certain assumptions about the social motivations for literacy in this country, the nature of existing literacy practices, and judgments about which practices are critical for individual and social enhancement" (9). The three metaphors are as follows:
- Literacy as adaption: This is the idea that in order to survive socially and economically in society, one needs literacy. Literacy is a way of "getting by." For example, people need literacy to read road signs, leases, file taxes, fill out job applications, buy groceries, etc. As we grow and mature, literacy is a way for us to adapt to our new roles in society.
- Literacy as power: This explores the the relationship between literacy and socioeconomic status. For example, literacy has often been used to oppress certain groups of people. For example, by not allowing African Americans to learn to read, they remained in a disadvantaged position in society. This concept, basically, stresses that the most literate have the most power, and literacy is what allows for social mobility.
- Literacy as a state of grace: The authors define this as the belief that "you're smarter, more civilized, more ethical, more humane" if you are literate (10). Literacy gives you an elite status culturally and allows for intellectual freedom.
As you can see, many of these metaphors overlap. If literacy is adaptation, a way of getting by, of course the most literate are going to have the most power because they are the most financially well-off, etc.
Though these definitions are a great way to think about literacy, literacy does not have a "fixed" or "stable" definition, as the authors make clear. The definitions of literacy are constantly changing. Literacy does not exist in a vacuum. Its definitions are products of the world: the political climate, the economic climate, history, current events, etc. The authors cite Deborah Brandt's research on the changing definitions of literacy, and they use her example of how literacy changed during WWII. Prior to WWII literacy "shifted from an emphasis on morality (Scribner's state of grace) to an emphasis on production" (11). Literacy became a way of getting by, and it became a necessity for the survival of a nation as demands on production increased. Similarly, literacy today is linked to our position as a dominant world power and the maintenance of that position. Basically literacy is defined by past and current events, and its definition is very much impacted by the real world just as its definition impacts the real world. It's a two way street.
I think the problem is that we are constantly re-defining literacy in the real world before we acknowledge the shift and incorporate in the definition we use in society to drive our policies. Basically our definitions of literacy lag behind its practical uses in the world. This is a problem. We're still using an "old" definition of literacy to drive our policies in the classroom, but in the real world, we are falling behind to countries like Japan that are focusing on how technological advances affect literacy. We're also focusing on measuring literacy in the classroom instead of trying to teach it. Schools are social institutions set in place to uphold social values. Schools aren't meant to be agents of change so much, so that is why it is necessary that we get the conversation on writing, reading, literacy in the 21st century going, so we can change social values and definitions and apply them to our classrooms before it is too late.
The last section of the chapter focuses on how the rest of the book is organized. It is organized in an attempt to give its readers a broader definition of the term and make that definition more concrete by applying it to the real world, or different "sites" where literacy is happening today. They are as follows:
- Mind-cognitive skill
- Culture-cultural practices and values
- Class-power
- Work Place- buying power
- Technology-advancments
The chapter ends with a number of activities to get people to think about literacy in their daily lives and study how the world views literacy. These activities are helpful because they force participants to take an abstract term and apply it to the real world, making that definition more understandable and concrete.
Overall, this chapter is focused on peeling back the different layers of literacy, its definitions, what influences it, and its power in society. It attempts to take an abstract word, one that is often misunderstood, and make it understood. Once we have a complete, working definition of the term, we can begin the much needed conversations on literacy and its place in the 21st century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
