Tuesday, October 20, 2015

blog 5

Thoughts on "Response to Writing."

                                                                ______________

"problems that many beginning writers have difficulty articulating" perhaps it is difficult for students to articulate these problems because, by suggesting corrections, the teacher is projecting their own voice onto the student?

"receive feedback on only final drafts" that's something I hadn't thought of before. I feel I've always been made to turn in multiple drafts of a paper; at least one rough draft before the final...how often do teachers collect final (even though they really aren't final at all) papers without having given any previous help?

"open-ended questions on content, the college student..." this is a problem; we shouldn't be waiting until college to utilize this kind of feedback. It may make a certain kind of sense (I guess) to refrain from in-depth responses when children are younger, because (supposedly) they don't have all the skills yet. But by withholding those questions, we stunt the student's growth. There is no reason why we can't comment of the technical stuff and the contextual stuff. The best way to teach a child is through scaffolding, and this falls under scaffolding for sure. How can we possibly expect them to get better when we never meaningfully challenge them.

"self-assess their drafts" this is a good thing, and I agree with this. By self-assessing, the teacher is taken out of the picture and the student is left with only their own voice. And I think this is as easy (and possibly as complicated) as writing those open-ended questions and seeing how the student interprets and uses them.

"specific guidance" this sounds like a very nice way of saying they were told what to do. And this irritates me. They didn't get better because they learned, they got better because you made them do what you wanted them to do. The worst part is a teacher may think they're being helpful by doing this, when really they might even be making things worse. If a student begins to rely on "specific guidance" they'll only end up even less capable than they were before. Instead of being kind of confused, they will be utterly lost.

My overall impression of this piece is that it's n basically everything we've already mentioned before and also some of the information seems a obvious. Of course students prefer feedback that explains why something is good or bad. And it seems natural to me that self-editing would be more educational than just taking revision orders from a teacher.

Monday, October 19, 2015

blog 4

Thoughts on "Bi, Butch and Bar Dyke." Unfortunately, internet connectivity issues prevented me from finishing this article (WiFi at school is absolutely horrible today!), and this was all I was able to write. I'm sorry for this! I hope it will suffice for this week. 


                                                            _________________


Already, I'm excited to read this, because we talk a lot about what goes on within the English community, but gender influences and stereotypes  aren't normally a hot-button issue. I'm anxious to see what this article says.

"a stereotyped dream of success" i'm wondering, does this apply only to sexuality? or will it refer to the teaching profession as a whole? As teaching is often a profession that is looked down on (I feel, at least).

Bi:
"power in the academy...is associated with...unchanging set of personal characteristics" makes me think of the inflexibility in curriculum we've discussed in the past. Perhaps it is not the curriculum that is the issue. The curriculum can't change until the people in charge change. Does that mean it is the traditional (for lack of a better word) American ideals that prevent us from progressing?

"no limits placed on the child" kind of a strange thing to say right away in a story. Also not something I feel I would ask a child if we were grocery shopping. Waiting to see where this goes.

"there is no fixed identity" I tend to disagree with this; I think personalities are fairly permanent (not in a bad way).

I feel I'm not really getting the connection she's trying to make with the "hard pea/ cold porridge" thing.

Her stance on lesbian narrators (if I'm reading the passage correctly) is interesting in that she feels it is a limited channel of expression and representation. Maybe my perspective is skewed because I'm straight, but I think I disagree with the idea that a lesbian character (hero?) is limiting to the narrative. I will agree, however, that how something like that is received definitely depends on a bit of political-ness. (Not a word, I know.) "A self-empowerment that depends on binary oppositions" is a very powerful statement, and I am not going to comment on it. I would just like to point out that it is giving me a lot to think about (mostly it makes me evaluate my own perspective on the topic of queerness).

I think I am misunderstanding a bit. When she says "autobiographies," she means real lives? The narratives we live and tell ourselves as they happen?

"categorize individual subjects as different" yes, I can see that. Very true, unfortunately. Sad tot think that someone's orientation is perceived to (negatively) influence their professionalism.

"erase differences...between public and personal narratives" interesting thing to say about a movement in general-- that perhaps, a movement meant to do good is actually not representative of what the majority feels? (Thus the "real me" commentary that follows.)

Interesting that she refers to her bi-sexuality in terms of "straight" and "lesbian(ism)" since this is kind of an issue within the bi-community. The idea that a bi-person is "half-straight" or "half-gay" is often considered offensive, as straight, gay and bi are all seen as completely separate terms with absolutely no overlap whatsoever. Perhaps she uses these terms for ease of communication, but part of me believes if she herself found the accusation offensive, she would be inclined to not use the therm lesbian, or would have disclaim earlier in the piece. This seems to exemplify of the "whole" not representing the majority. The movement says "NOT half-gay. We are BI!" but the author says "straight" and "lesbian."

“made the mistake of becoming too comfortable with this class” sad to hear a teacher say something like this; especially when teacher-student relations are already as strained as they are. Also surprising to hear the class met the piece with such strong resistance. A good opportunity to discuss aggressive perceptions, the class’ responses were surprising to see and very disappointing. But the willingness to discuss “Theft” is indeed a small victory, and maybe something sensitive like that should be taught early on, kind of like shock therapy.

Butch:
“unearned privilege” interesting how this wording makes it sound like something the author is guilty of.

“center and margins of American society” very powerful and self-aware sentence. Also portrays a really interesting contrast—how one person could occupy both the highs and lows of societal standing at once, depending on what others know about you. As if one were enough to cancel out another. 

"butch or fem... not gay or straight" interesting how physicality contributes to what people think about us. Gender roles and norms and things of the like. Also interesting how she alludes to "butch" being the way a woman carried herself/acted (the soul of a man inside a woman's body).

"lesbian sex wars" is just the most ridiculous phrase I've ever seen in my life.

"butch gender performance" again with the way a woman carries herself.

"project a lesbian persona without formally coming out" she said it neither negatively or positively (very matter-of-factly) but I wonder if this trend makes her sad in some way. Does she get tired of the assumption that she is a lesbian simply because of the way she looks? Despite it being true, I'm sure it gets very tiresome.

"appropriating the power and influence" good in a way, as women often don't enjoy the level of power men do but also very sad that a woman needs t make herself  or be perceived as "manly" before being respected enough to even have power in the first place.


Monday, October 12, 2015

blog 3

Thoughts on "Grammar, Grammars, and the Teachings of Grammar" plus what I want to contribute to the group project.


                                                            _____________


“students will only learn what we teach/ only learn because we teach’ Very interesting intro. I like challenging the assumption that students don’t learn anywhere besides a classroom with guidelines, when it is generally the opposite.

“perverse beliefs” as if humanizing students, de-glorifying “tired and true” (antiquated) teaching styles, and suggesting teachers stand of the ground instead of pedestals (soapboxes) is so radical.
“nor on their ability to avoid error”

So many things wrong in one paragraph. I disagree with the proposed definition of grammar. Especially specifying the “native” nature of language. Grammar is supposed to be the rules that make language technically correct and structured. And suggesting a heavy focus on just grammar is appalling. It is the content of a message that matters, not its delivery. A sentence can violate every grammatical rule, but can still be understandable. And why would anyone suggest grammar-centric lessons when grammar doesn’t even teach people how to write? (Ironically.)

“seems designed to perpetuate…the issue” funny, since we’re all still arguing over grammar.
“improved neither writing quality nor control…” I kind of like to see results that prove grammar lessons fail. Then maybe we could stop acting like “correctness” is the absolute most important thing.
“does no harm” thinking that drilling grammar into students does no harm is laughable. Not only did grammar-based lessons not help students improve, but it also damaged their opinion of the subject. V frustrating.

“conclusion can be…ignored” seriously. I was wondering how so many people could read the same study and have such opinions (does no harm!) but clearly, ignoring the results that contradict what you believe is the only plausible explanation for such opinions.

Good questions she proposes, but questions 2 and 3 seem kind of boring/redundant/unnecessary. 1 and 4 are really interesting in that they aren’t as concrete and more abstract. I think answering questions that have no “correct” answer are more likely to lead to learning/ gaining insight. Looking forward to what she says about 1 and 4.

“rigidly sequential” again with the “formula” of writing a good paper.

Francis had some good points, despite having written them in 1954. Amazing how the conversation hasn’t changed much in 61 years.

“stylistic grammar” nice. I like the breaking down of grammars. It seems way more practical this way.

“the four young French girls” shows how grammar is innate, in a way, and knowing every grammar rule is not necessary to be able to use it. I disagree with calling it “autonomous”.

The discussion of proper plural endings displays the link between literacy and writing skills, which we discussed in our second week of class. It makes me think that knowing proper grammar is more of a modeling thing than a learning thing. (We recreate words based on how we’ve seen other words.) This is kind of reinforced by the opening paragraph of “College English.”

 Learning grammar before learning to write/ learning to use utensils before being allowed to eat is an interesting comparison.

I disagree that Seliger’s experiment complicated the issue further. I think it measures (subconscious?) retention of grammatical rules. (Especially for ESL speakers; just because they can recite the rule, doesn’t mean they choose to use it. They may be speaking English, but their linguistic roots are still in their first language, and they probably rely on those grammar rules more than their new English-based ones.)  I know people who are fiercely intelligent—smarter than me for sure—and yet they constantly violate grammatical rules. One friend often says “I seen” as in “I seen the craziest thing yesterday,” as opposed to “I saw.” (Side note, he’s not the only one I’ve heard do this). But he is still one of the smartest people I know. Similar to the violation of the “your/you’re” rule. Just because someone breaks it, doesn’t automatically make them less intelligent (no matter how much it aggravates the rest of us).   

“clear only if known” summarizes the English language as a whole perfectly. The thing we all love most is someone else’s worst nightmare.

“unconnected with anything remotely resembling literate adult behavior” amazing. It’s the theory of “here are the rules, and why you can break them” thing we discussed un class again.
“worship of formal grammar study” laughed harder than I should have at this.

“accessing knowledge…learners have already internalized” this sounds better than when I said “innate ability” earlier. This is what I was trying to say.

“there are not four errors” that was unnecessary. Grammar is hard enough without throwing in trick questions like that.

“spoken dialect are…irrelevant to mastering print literacy” I disagree with that.

“skills at two levels” yes this is good. It’s not to say that grammar isn’t important at all, because it does matter. But the extent to which education stresses grammar is out of control. This is a much better approach/suggestion— work on conveying the meaning and do so in a way that is technically correct. Good, happy medium. Also, “active involvement” is a much better way to learn something; the expression “experience is the best teacher” doesn’t exist for no reason!

“constrained to reinvent the wheel” that’s probably very apparent when you look at today’s curriculums.

“guide our teaching” not dictate.

Overall thoughts: good essay, interesting sources and studies, and kind of what formalized what I already thought about grammar (probably what we all think of grammar).


As far as what I’d like to contribute to the final project, all I can say, really, is that I want to contribute my absolute best. It’s hard for me to say what, exactly, I want to contribute, because we haven’t decided on what we’re doing yet. I felt a lot of people leaning towards Idea #2 at the end of Monday’s session, and it concerns me a bit. I’m not a teacher, so I’ve never created a lesson plan or a syllabus or anything like that before, and I feel a bit out of touch with the curriculum aspect altogether (we all know that Catholic schools vary greatly from public schools in this regard). And when it comes to executive decisions, I am not the girl to go to; the thought of having to (possibly?) create my own lesson plan is concerning, since I feel I’m not nearly as good at generating completely new ideas as I am at revising existing ideas. Also, I’m awful at pop culture. Whenever someone says “pop culture,” my mind just says: ????????? I’m sure whatever we decide, I will figure it out, but as of now, I don’t have much to share aside from my reservations. I’m sorry if this isn’t helpful/ didn’t answer the question. I’m looking forward to discussing this more on Monday with you guys though.

Monday, October 5, 2015

blog 2

Again, I went a little overboard and wrote a lot. These are my thoughts on "Responding to Student Writing." I wrote a lot about this primarily because this is a subject I'm very interested in as well as something I'm very concerned about.

                                                             ____________


"it takes...at least 20 to 40 minutes to comment..." Right away, I relate to this. I often edit papers for friends, and I can say each time I review something, it takes me an hour without fail. Most of this is because I am commenting on their paper. Not even correcting things, as most of the time the paper needs little-to-no correcting.

“most widely used method…it is the least understood” this reminds me of a paper I wrote on teacher comments on student papers, and this is, unfortunately, very accurate. Many times a teacher’s instructions are unclear because they are limited by physical space (on the paper itself) and time.
“helping our students become more effective writers” what I learned from researching this topic is that the most effective way to help a student is to make suggestions /pose questions, instead of throwing around corrections. The example I often reference is the differences between comments like “too vague” compared to comments like, “What do you mean by this?” For one, the question this (ironically) more direct and therefore more constructive; it guides the student towards rethinking the wording, and lets them know that the sentence doesn’t work, but allows them the freedom to fix it themselves. Whereas “too vague” itself is too vague to be helpful because students are often left wondering, “why is it too vague?” It also insinuates that the student has failed to be clear enough, or a poor writer. “What do you mean by this?” is not only less condescending, but also implies that the fault is not (completely) on the student, and gently/subtly encourages them to reconsider and revise their words.

“communicated our ideas” this is what writing is, a medium for us to communicate our ideas, not a mold to fit our ideas into.

“dramatize the presence of the reader” interesting, since I feel that students are sometimes overly aware of the audience—the audience being the teacher, that is.

“become that questioning reader themselves” interesting way to see the writer. It is true that, once we learn this predictive skill as writers, we kind of shift role from “writer” to “audience member”. It seems as if we writers become our own audience, and our writing becomes a description of what we, as audience members, would like to see. Possibly even from other writers, not just what we envision for our own writing.

“believe that it is necessary…to offer assistance” does this imply that assistance is not actually needed? The use of ‘believe’ is interesting, and almost implies that perhaps a teacher’s commenting stems from an egotistical root?

“in the process of composing a text” again about the process, not the final product.
“comments create the motive” interesting, since students are often discouraged by comments
“as the theory predicts they should?” they do not; the theory is flawed due to poor execution.
“hostility and mean-spiritedness” surprising to hear; I, personally, never came across a teacher whose comments were intentionally mean, or even seemingly so.

“their own purposes in writing…teacher’s purpose in commenting” interesting shift of attention.
“make the changes the teacher wants” writing now becomes about the product.
“tell me what you want me to do” shows how writing is also (or primarily) about the grade, not what the student wants to say. It also shows how students rely on comments to achieve the desired grade, not to improve the quality of their writing.

“still needs to develop the meaning” interesting how the text is already, according to the teacher, finalized but the meaning is not even close to done yet. A disturbing contrast on the teacher’s part. Although I can see how such a discontinuous message could occur, I believe it is the teacher’s job to make sure their instructions are clear and consistent. Reading the sample comments of the “super bowl” paper actually got me annoyed, and I disagreed with some of the corrections. “One explanation is that people” is not “awkward,” especially if the writer is as young as the text implies (grade school, in my estimation). Also “another what?” is an unnecessary correction; the previous sentence started with “one reason,” and was followed by “another”. The “reason” was implied, I think. I think the teacher not only undermines the student with this, but also undermines the reader a bit (although I am torn, because I feel the teachers in our class will say this teacher was trying to teach their student a lesson in specifics, which is important). However, this is where a suggestion would be preferable: “this sentence works as is, but maybe getting more specific would make it stronger?” Also, the “be specific—what reasons?” is kind of stupid (sorry), in my opinion, because it seems like the student is setting themselves up to explain some of the reasons in the following sentences.

“an inherent reason” making it about the product. Not only does it completely disregard the process, but it also undermines the purpose of the writing. If you’re not writing to communicate a message, why write at all (“trivial activity” indeed)?

“their texts are not improved substantially” this is true. I never noticed this before. Perhaps they are improved in only the most technical of senses.

“do not take the risk of changing anything that was not commented on” I’ve done this.

"trained to read...for literary...meaning" true, especially when you consider that "English (literature)" and "writing" are often seen as two separate fields, and have been for a while. So of course there might be some trouble transferring one skill set to another area. Dr. Zamora herself has admitted to something similar this in class (how she took the lit track, and this is her first writing kind of course).

"a way for teachers to satisfy themselves" DAMN. Sommers is calling teachers out on their
 nonsense. It is true, I think, that some teachers actually do get lazy and end up saying, "hey, I did my job, it's not my fault if you can't get a good grade. I already told you what to do." And many times, I think that mentality manifests itself through comments.

Final thoughts: I liked this article very much, although the sample comments made me SO ANGRY. I can only imagine how unhelpful these are to students, especially ones that are not very strong writers (yet) and are in need of serious guidance (guidance that the teachers are failing to provide). I also thought it was interesting how you could copy and paste (so to speak) teachers’ comments from one document to the next. While reading this, a consistent thought ran through my head: while editing the papers of others, have I commented this way? Am I guilty of this? I like to think no, but now I am evermore aware of how vital commenting can be. This article makes me excited to grade papers, so that I might be the helpful instructor that my students may not have come across yet.