Miller
Miller’s question of why people read blogs bears some scrutiny. She lists several reasons but didn’t mention the reasons I read blogs, and suspect some others do to. The first is for entertainment, and the second is to find people I feel I can connect with (even though I have no intention of ever contacting them). I definitely agree with the common interest reason though – I have noticed I read a lot more blogs since I had a child, and most of these are the “mommy” blogs or other humorous looks at parenting. As an added bonus they usually contain some pretty good tips (who knew sunscreen will take Sharpie marker off of human skin?).
Atkinson
I enjoyed reading Atkinson’s article, particularly the points on progressivism. The information from Kalantzis and Cope reminded me of the debates about the cultural bias of standardized tests. It does seem that progressivist pedagogy may have some issues if it does indeed favor those who are more “mainstream.” The closing quote really made me think, and I think framed the issue very rhetorically.
Durst
This article pointed out a lot of things that might affect a student’s writing. I hadn’t really considered how instructors might use community service in combination with writing to help them grow academically as well as empathetically, but it seems like a good idea. I would be interested in seeing some studies on this: whether it affects writing style, whether the students’ writing is affected based on whether they agree with the cause, etc. It seems like the sort of thing that might be polarizing, depending on the cause, and could possibly get quite a reaction from some people which could be seen in their writing, for good or bad.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Week 7
Winsor
Winsor’s article made a lot of sense to me. I have worked with engineers for years and have been surprised in the past that they think the writing they do is separate from design work, and that it is a linear process. In reality they were always taking notes, revising those notes, re-writing requirements based on something learned in research, etc. In some cases they even had to revise a design based on information that was going to go in the user manual that brought design problems to light. The writing and the design process were quite codependent in most cases.
It was interesting to me how the subjects of this study worked so cohesively together on their ideas. I wonder if this is true of most engineering students, i.e. they are taught to do this, or if these particular students enjoyed a special rapport.
Reynolds
What I found most interesting about the Reynolds article was not the article itself, but rather the information about bell hooks. Somehow I managed to read several paragraphs about her before I noticed that her name was not capitalized. At first I thought it was a typo, but then I decided, given the subject matter, it had to be a personal statement on being either a woman or a minority, or both. I had to look this up, and was actually surprised to see that it was to distinguish her name from her grandmother’s, and to emphasize that what she wrote was important, not who she was. I have to wonder though, if there is some background rhetoric at work here – a minority feminist author could certainly pack a lot of meaning into choosing to avoid capitalization in her name!
Haswell
This was an interesting piece that brought up a lot of good points. The task of finding an ideal way to grade student writing seems overwhelming to me, but Haswell seems to have a good start and explains a lot of methods very well. The one thing that bothered me was that although he seems to admit that his method of minimal marking is flawed because it may not actually reduce work if students do not find the correct errors, he then goes on to defend it by saying that if teachers do not recorrect the paper, they are lazy and perhaps cruel (p. 1281). This seems a bit unfair – if he’s trying to make a time-saving method, then it must actually be more efficient, and calling the teachers lazy does not really make it a better idea.
Winsor’s article made a lot of sense to me. I have worked with engineers for years and have been surprised in the past that they think the writing they do is separate from design work, and that it is a linear process. In reality they were always taking notes, revising those notes, re-writing requirements based on something learned in research, etc. In some cases they even had to revise a design based on information that was going to go in the user manual that brought design problems to light. The writing and the design process were quite codependent in most cases.
It was interesting to me how the subjects of this study worked so cohesively together on their ideas. I wonder if this is true of most engineering students, i.e. they are taught to do this, or if these particular students enjoyed a special rapport.
Reynolds
What I found most interesting about the Reynolds article was not the article itself, but rather the information about bell hooks. Somehow I managed to read several paragraphs about her before I noticed that her name was not capitalized. At first I thought it was a typo, but then I decided, given the subject matter, it had to be a personal statement on being either a woman or a minority, or both. I had to look this up, and was actually surprised to see that it was to distinguish her name from her grandmother’s, and to emphasize that what she wrote was important, not who she was. I have to wonder though, if there is some background rhetoric at work here – a minority feminist author could certainly pack a lot of meaning into choosing to avoid capitalization in her name!
Haswell
This was an interesting piece that brought up a lot of good points. The task of finding an ideal way to grade student writing seems overwhelming to me, but Haswell seems to have a good start and explains a lot of methods very well. The one thing that bothered me was that although he seems to admit that his method of minimal marking is flawed because it may not actually reduce work if students do not find the correct errors, he then goes on to defend it by saying that if teachers do not recorrect the paper, they are lazy and perhaps cruel (p. 1281). This seems a bit unfair – if he’s trying to make a time-saving method, then it must actually be more efficient, and calling the teachers lazy does not really make it a better idea.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Week 6 Readings
Brooke
I thought this was one of the most engaging articles we have been assigned so far. Brooke’s study really interested me. His interpretation of student activities that, on the surface, appear disruptive, was very eye-opening. It is very interesting that the students were so often engaged in something that was associated with the class, instead of ignoring it completely and engaging in some totally unrelated activity. It seems these students are interested in the subject, although they do not always buy the method or specific activity. If this is really the way students function, it seems that collaborative learning is indeed a good classroom solution, and that teachers should provide guidance but let students learn in the way that is best for them.
Trimbur
Tribur’s idea that using the consensus of collaborative learning to identify gaps and, in fact, foster dissensus was interesting. I’m not sure I think it would really work this way, particularly in light of Brooke’s study in which students were discussing what they could do to get by or give the teacher what he/she wanted to create less work for themselves. However, it does seem to be an idea that deserves more study. The last paragraph confused me some – it seems that Tribur does not think that collaborative learning will work as a long-term educational model – did I read that wrong? Since he seems to favor many aspects of collaborative learning, I found this an odd view to express.
Harris
I like Harris’s idea that students should be encouraged toward an awareness of the discourses they use, instead of trying to force everyone into one “correct” discourse. Awareness would probably go a long way toward helping people with “correct” English, in my view. Many people are unaware of their particular dialect, but if they are aware they are more likely to be able to adapt their language usage based on the situations in which they find themselves, and the people with whom they are interacting.
I thought this was one of the most engaging articles we have been assigned so far. Brooke’s study really interested me. His interpretation of student activities that, on the surface, appear disruptive, was very eye-opening. It is very interesting that the students were so often engaged in something that was associated with the class, instead of ignoring it completely and engaging in some totally unrelated activity. It seems these students are interested in the subject, although they do not always buy the method or specific activity. If this is really the way students function, it seems that collaborative learning is indeed a good classroom solution, and that teachers should provide guidance but let students learn in the way that is best for them.
Trimbur
Tribur’s idea that using the consensus of collaborative learning to identify gaps and, in fact, foster dissensus was interesting. I’m not sure I think it would really work this way, particularly in light of Brooke’s study in which students were discussing what they could do to get by or give the teacher what he/she wanted to create less work for themselves. However, it does seem to be an idea that deserves more study. The last paragraph confused me some – it seems that Tribur does not think that collaborative learning will work as a long-term educational model – did I read that wrong? Since he seems to favor many aspects of collaborative learning, I found this an odd view to express.
Harris
I like Harris’s idea that students should be encouraged toward an awareness of the discourses they use, instead of trying to force everyone into one “correct” discourse. Awareness would probably go a long way toward helping people with “correct” English, in my view. Many people are unaware of their particular dialect, but if they are aware they are more likely to be able to adapt their language usage based on the situations in which they find themselves, and the people with whom they are interacting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)