Sharon's Blog

The Challenge of the Multi Media Essay

2008-03-26T10:49:00.000-07:00

Where should technology be taught?
Lester Lewis compares the immersion of the World Wide Web into society to that of the telegraph, suggesting that the latter made greater change within society then did the Internet. According to Lester, “That the World Wide Web has expanded so rapidly suggests that it is not so new, because people immediately recognize its uses.” (181). He goes on to define the major changes that had occurred over time following the introduction of the telegraph. Personally, I see tremendous changes within our society since the access to the Web has become commonplace. Similar to the scene beginning the essay, I find people instant messaging their friends, whereas prior to the Internet, office workers walked to the next office and kids walked to their friend’s houses. Many more people work from home and shop from home. Research time has been reduced and distance to other nations has been shortened. On the down side, predators and exploitation has increased and privacy decreased.

At any rate, the point of Lewis’s essay is that composition classes will need to include the use of new technologies available so that students are prepared for the real world. Given that, as Lewis points out on page 179, “Employers, administrators, and even accrediting agencies want more technology intensive courses . . .”, technology will need to be utilized in most courses. However, while the author promotes the inclusion of “images” in composition, I wonder if time spent on technology such as web design would steal time from the study and implementation of writing. Should learning these skills be taking time away from academics or should they be taught as a separate class dedicated specifically for that purpose? Students could then supplement their assignments with the skills they have already mastered.

Response to "Distant Voices" by Chris M. Anson

2008-03-24T10:22:00.000-07:00

As this article was written a few years ago, some of the advancement in technology he predicated has already occurred, like the half inch notebook (Apple’s latest is probably thinner). Likewise, the use of technology in the classrooms of universities has increased. However, I hope the extent to which he promotes the use of technology does not occur in the near future. I feel that decreasing the face-to-face instruction in classrooms would cheat students out of a pertinent part of the learning experience. I remember reading of study that had found watching television burned fewer calories than doing nothing. Apparently, this means less brain activity. I can’t help think there is enough similarity between watching television and viewing historical lectures on a screen as to prove that the activity requires less brain activity and concentration than attending a traditional classroom. In addition, like storytelling, the delivery of information is part of the learning experience. Maybe I’m old fashioned. Does anyone else have similar thoughts? I do agree with the author that a motivator for distance learning is to cut costs and increase profits.

Response to Revision Strategies by Nancy Sommers

2008-03-05T12:37:00.000-08:00

Sommers makes an excellent point when she says that while “various aspects of the writer’s process have been studied extensively of late, research on revision has been notably absent” (Villanueva 43). Although revision is mentioned within these processes, the focus on this specific part of writing has been limited. I remember the professor from my freshman year writing class telling the class that we should expect to revise our papers at least three or four times. However, the methods of revising were quite similar to those revealed by the student writers in the study.

After reading Sommer’s comparison between student writers and adult writers, I can see a discrepancy between the way writing is taught and the way professional writers engage in the process of writing and revising. I have to admit the processes the student writers discussed as their method of revising are not foreign to me. While there were times that I changed my focus and discovered my thesis statement after writing my draft, the implementation of the thesis topic as the focus for the paper was more common. Students were expected to carefully choose and submit for approval, a formal thesis statement before writing their papers. This was the method implemented in most classrooms throughout my college years.

Response to Diving In: An Introduction to Basic Writing by, Mina P. Shaughnessy

This chapter of a few pages says a lot. Shaughnessy gives the impression that she proposes that teachers of “basic writing” totally start over with their teaching processes. Similarly to Sommer’s article, Shaughnessy concludes that the focus on word use and minor errors are given priority in writing, rather than the strength in the argument of the paper as a whole. I agree with this. However, if students are unable to put their ideas into words on paper do to a limited vocabulary, shouldn’t teachers be focusing on vocabulary prior to working with writing? This brings one to question why the students haven’t grasped or haven’t been taught more extensive vocabulary in earlier grades. If they haven’t learned this prior to the writing class, I believe it needs to be addressed first.
Even though students may be lacking in basic skills, teachers need to focus on the assets of the students, rather than what they lack, as their backgrounds may not have given them the opportunity to gain this knowledge. These students may have great talent and ideas to share. I like the author’s quote from Leo Strauss on page 317: “Always assume that there is one silent student in your class who is by far superior to you in head and in heart.”
I am confused by the author’s statement on the bottom of page 316 about how students are unable to determine what is relevant in their writing due to the “conditions under which he is writing have not allowed for a slow generation of an orienting conviction.” What are the conditions to which she is referring? Is this because he or she is accustomed to spoken language where dialogue with others directs his or her responses?

Response to Todd

2008-02-28T11:28:00.000-08:00

Todd, Isn't this idea a polar opposite of collaborative learning? Sure, individualism is a cherished American ideal, but we all need to learn to work and learn together. I do agree that individuals will need to be taught and encouraged in various ways. Even so, in a collaborative learning environment, each will have something to contribute.

The Dyadic Triangle vs. the Triadic Triangle

2008-02-28T10:54:00.000-08:00

In response to Melanie’s blog, the message in the dyadic triangle depicts the idea the the writer has written language as a representation of codes, rather than something that must be interpreted according to the writer’s meaning of the discourse. Ann Berthoff speaks extensively about the empiricist’s idea that language is a code. On page 331, she quotes I.A. Richards as saying of the empiricist: “He thinks of it as a code and has not yet learned that it is an organ-the supreme organ of the mind’s self-ordering growth.” She also states the following:
“Empiricists do not generally recognize that all method, including scientific method, entails interpretation; they do not generally recognize that there are no raw data; there are no self-sufficient facts; there is no context-free evaluation.”
Berthoff concludes that the dyadic triangle leaves out meaning (interpretation), purpose and intention, those elements which comprise of the writer’s use of thought and “imagination” which she equates with abstraction. I understood this to mean that writing is much more complex than the “signifier” and the “signified” such as in semiotics. (Ask Ray about this. It’s his specialty)

Expressionistic Rhetoric and American Values

2008-02-14T13:07:00.000-08:00

Upon reading Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class, I thought of Cognitive Rhetoric as a possible response to global competition based on the role assigned to it as that “engaging in scientific research designed to establish a body of knowledge that would rationalize all features of production.” It also reminds me of testing through the New Child Left Behind. Efficiency, profitability and manageability were named as skills which resulted from the method. I found it interesting then, those qualities of Expressionistic Rhetoric are revered by capitalism as follows: private initiative, individualism, confidence to take risks, and bucks against authority. These qualities seem most in line with American ideals.

Response to Writing as a Mode of Learning by Janet Emig

2008-02-12T13:40:00.000-08:00

I found this chapter to be interesting. I especially liked Michael Polanyi’s statement form Personal Knowledge.
into every act of knowing there enters a passionate contribution of the person knowing what is being known, . . . this coefficient is no mere imperfection but a vital component of his knowledge (12).
This is cool – all of this time I’ve been trying to remain objective in my writing – as I’ve been encouraged. However, this makes sense; otherwise, you may as well enter info into a computer. The different experiences that each one of us encounters contributes to the end result of all types of creative work such as writing, art, music, etc. It’s what makes us human.

Response to "Audience Addressed/

2008-02-06T11:40:00.000-08:00

Response to “Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked” by Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford

While reading the section entitled “Audience Addressed”, I was reminded of my daughter’s complaints during the years that she worked at Borders. She reported the store catered to the mentality of the majority or average reader and that this resulted in a narrow selection of written discourse for marginalized groups of readers. She also reported of irate customers having complained about written discourse that supported social and moral judgments in opposition to their own. Obviously, publishers are driven by the audience or “what sells” in order to make a profit. As the authors point out, writing adjusted to meet expectations of the audience without regard for the motives of the writer can lack truthfulness and “tends to undervalue the responsibility a writer has to a subject” (Ede, Lunsford, 82). However, Ong’s who emphasizes the creative role the writer plays in written discourse fails to take into account “the constraints place on the writer, in certain situations, by the audience (88). Having spent years in an academic environment, all of us can identify with this. I found the authors’ diagram on page 89, labeled figure 2, helps to sort out the complexity of the concept of “audience.”

Not Enough Freedom in Writing

2008-02-05T10:53:00.000-08:00

I agree with Donald M. Murray in “Teach Writing as a Process Not Product” that students should be allowed more freedom when writing papers (4). My son, a high school senior, is normally dictated how many pages his paper should be, in addition to the target audience, and the topic he chooses must be chosen from within a set of parameters. In the case of a Literature class, where a particular book is being studied or a history class in which students are learning about a specific event and location, I suppose these guidelines are necessary. However, there should be more opportunities to write within a broader spectrum. I have watched my son lose his enthusiasm for writing over the years as the parameters within which he has been given for his writing assignments have shrunken. If I teacher stands back and allows his or her students to learn the process of writing by choosing their own topics, language style, and methods of reaching their audience, most students will feel a sense of ownership and take pride in their work. However, should the final product be lacking, aren’t the results the same? What criteria should be used in grading the work at the end of the course or marking period, as Murray suggested, to prevent these students from becoming discouraged, which could in turn lead to a loss of excitement about writing?

2008-01-31T09:59:00.000-08:00

Louise Rosenblatt’s distinction between reading primarily for the experience one enjoys during the reading process which she calls aesthetic, and reading in order to take something away from text, (I assume learning facts or a method of performing a task such as “how to”) entitled efferent, certainly paints a clearer picture than the conclusion made by the Indiana University “that literary discourse is a noncasual discourse.” However, she points out that some works fall on “a continuum between poles” (153). While I think of an aesthetic book as one that I choose to read, whereas one that is assigned for a class, even if I find it aesthetically pleasing, as efferent, it seems to me that most discourse falls somewhere on the continuum, rather than at either extreme pole. Widdowson’s statement that “the language of a literary work should be fashioned into patterns over and above those required by the actual language system” negates a lot of discourse from the literary cannon, while including other less important works. (154). Then again, patterns could be pulled from any discourse. Does anyone else better understand this point?

Gossip as Literature

I found D.W. Harding’s comparison of gossip to literature quite fascinating. It makes sense considering the first form of communication was verbal, rather than written. Was it Aristotle that placed verbal communication above written? Britton states that it is “whenever we play the role of spectator of human affairs” that we are “in the position of literature” (154). In other words, we are listening to a story, whether fact or fiction, much as we would read a written story or piece of literature.

Getting on Board

2008-01-30T17:34:00.000-08:00

Hello Everyone!

I'm joining the party a little late. Looking forward to the great exchange of literary discourse. Seriously, everone's blogs look great!