[T]he teaching of analytic writing in college should be preceded (and accompanied) by the teaching of persuasion as an art and a way of life. Waiting until you’re in the thick of writing to talk about what makes a good argument, or how an argument flows convincingly from one point to the next, is too late.
There is a whole understory of small skills that are part of being a good college student that are even less often the explicit focus of instruction. I’ve talked about the skimming of reading assignments and searching skills before. Here’s another in the same vein: looking for something that is worth discussing in a reading assignment. [my emphasis]
What follows are six specific suggestions for what students should look for in a reading assignment--things to bring up in class discussions.
I think with a bit of editing, this could become a useful handout. I may even use it as a take-home assignment in conjunction with the readings. I am so tired of pulling teeth to get someone to SAY something, anything, in response to an assigned reading.
5 comments:
Okay, so where is the handout? *giggles*
While I totally agree with the post, I also believe that while they do not 'know' how to read or how to 'argue', the students are not taught to discuss issues. So what is being taught to them before they get to the college level? They are taught to regurgitate. And why are they taught to regurgitate? Because it is part of the huge plan: indentured servitude. Society 'does not' want individualist, nor intelligent, creative thinkers. What would we do with so many intelligent people? Could we solve world problems? Of course we would. Nonetheless is solving world issues part of the capitalist agenda? Again, of course not. Part of the capitalist agenda does not include education, health issues, the environment and so forth. Why? *smirk* You tell me. . . .
I wonder how "capitalist" it really is; which is not to say it isn't a part of capitalist society, but that this issue may be a part of every society. No? If ANY society truly supported creative thinking and education, well, I doubt we'd be having this discussion.
So, is it OUR responsibility to teach them to discuss issues, participate, engage?
it is our responsibility to teach them to engage. but let us dig a little deeper. who comes first, the teacher or the student (chicken or the egg?)?
I think that it may be unrealistice for me to think in terms of the system being "different." I do not think that it is unrealistic for me to change my participatory role. For me it is necessary to passionately challenge the students to think critically (and otherwise). Out of my passions come the sense of self and willingness to continue to go against the barricades placed in the way of critical thought. As Tennesse Williams said, "Don't let the 'no neck' monsters get you down" (or maybe it was John Kennedy's Father Joe who said "Don't let the SOB's get you down") In either case, I am unwilling to allow those who are unwilling or uninterested in learning and thinking to define and determine what is possible in "my" classes.>
as quoted by sal paradise:
I am unwilling to allow those who are unwilling or uninterested in learning and thinking to define and determine what is possible in "my" classes.
I LOVE THAT!!!! thank you sal. BUT while i agree that we need to control certain elements (i love that word allow) and not let the "no neck monsters" get us down, the current hegemony is overwhelming! each year there are more and more no neck monsters. it isn't that i "get down" but more i get upset. where are the sister teresas (nun who taught me)? i want to be brain lazy, i want to have an empty thought bubble but sister teresa didn't "allow" me to be either of those. i am grateful to her for that. i have to admit though, i love to learn. why don't today students want to learn?
Post a Comment