I have to be honest and say that I found most of the readings in this course to not be as useful as I had anticipated. I particuarly despised Gee and the nonsense he was talking about video games, I felt it was completley irrelevant. If I had to pick three texts that I found the most useful, however, I would have to say Bean's Engaing Ideas would be my first choice. I enjoyed reading it because of the structure and the relevance. I found his dividing and headings to be very uiseful if I ever want to refer back to it for my own Pedagogy. He had many ideas and stratergies that I tuly believe I will use in the future. For a second choice I would say Writing to Learn" Strategies for Assigning and Responding to Writing Across the Disciplines bu Sorcinelli and Elbow. I liked this book because it mostly talked about useful ways of comunicating writing in the discipline areas. Since I wil be teaching writing in English as my discourse, I found the text intresting. I particuarly liked finding balance in students writing. I learned not to correct everything a student may write, but to let them figure it out by themselves. This is just one useful tip I got from the reading. My third choice would be the online reading "The Joshua Tree" I found this to be very enjoyable! I liked the putting a name on something and the metaphor she gave us when it comes to teaching and learning.
When reflecting on the readings I would say that it was a rough road but I did find a handful of useful strategies when teaching myself. Bean's strategies will deffinetly be looked up by me for ideas and assignments in my own classroom, and when responding to literature I will look up Writing to learn. I may even hand out the Joshua tree and use it as an assignment for a class of my own. Although I would have 100% reduced many readings, I can say that not all of it was a waste. My biggest conclusion is never buy Gee or follow his work.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Blog #6
Hey Heller:
Sorry I had a delay on my blogging. It's hard to get a moment free. This weeks reading was a load, but I would have to say that Engaging Ideas was the nicest flowing read for me. I particularly liked pages 60 and 61. Bean says "...we should note that much of what constitutes "error" really involves stylistic choices- issues of rhetorical effectiveness and grace rather than right-or-wrong adherence rules. For purposes of definition, we might label as an error any unintentional violation of a stable convention of standard edited English, such as a wrong pronoun case, comma splice, or an awkwardly dangling participle. However, it is less helpful to think of wordiness or choppy sentences or excessive use of the passive voice errors in the same sense. Yet many teachers lump all violations of their own stylistic pet peeves into the "error" category." (Bean 61) I found this section on errors a bit funny. As teachers and writers, we tend to categorize what is an error in students writing, if we particularly don't happen to like their style. Although we may be a little vain and consider or way to be the best, we should keep an open mind as to what the student feels comfortable with. Do you know what I am saying? Of course error is involved with the necessities in writing, but we should not judge on the style and automatically call it an error, as I have seen cases like that.
In WACFNM (pg 167) it says "'writing to learn' doesn't go far enough, doesn't historicize our conceptions of language and knowing..." Do you agree with the explanation? How do you feel about this and what are your thoughts? I feel that's always going to be true- we can only keep trying to reach that goal to infinity.
See you in class! Don't be mad at me for posting late!
~Laura~
Sorry I had a delay on my blogging. It's hard to get a moment free. This weeks reading was a load, but I would have to say that Engaging Ideas was the nicest flowing read for me. I particularly liked pages 60 and 61. Bean says "...we should note that much of what constitutes "error" really involves stylistic choices- issues of rhetorical effectiveness and grace rather than right-or-wrong adherence rules. For purposes of definition, we might label as an error any unintentional violation of a stable convention of standard edited English, such as a wrong pronoun case, comma splice, or an awkwardly dangling participle. However, it is less helpful to think of wordiness or choppy sentences or excessive use of the passive voice errors in the same sense. Yet many teachers lump all violations of their own stylistic pet peeves into the "error" category." (Bean 61) I found this section on errors a bit funny. As teachers and writers, we tend to categorize what is an error in students writing, if we particularly don't happen to like their style. Although we may be a little vain and consider or way to be the best, we should keep an open mind as to what the student feels comfortable with. Do you know what I am saying? Of course error is involved with the necessities in writing, but we should not judge on the style and automatically call it an error, as I have seen cases like that.
In WACFNM (pg 167) it says "'writing to learn' doesn't go far enough, doesn't historicize our conceptions of language and knowing..." Do you agree with the explanation? How do you feel about this and what are your thoughts? I feel that's always going to be true- we can only keep trying to reach that goal to infinity.
See you in class! Don't be mad at me for posting late!
~Laura~
Thursday, October 15, 2009
...ReFlEctIoN...
"Reflection on Letter to Partner Writing"
Writing letters to my partner is by far more enjoyable than 2X journaling. The 2x journaling was interesting to know for knowledge in general, but I am a big believer in enjoying work and/or studies, which the letters helped a little. I feel it's a good opportunity to see what my partner is concerned with, interested in, and what kind of opinions she has on the readings. It's nice when I know someone out there agrees with me and it's challenging to not agree in some aspects, which keeps the topic more debatable, therefore passing time more quickly.
This seems to me to also be an interesting way to get to know my partner. On November 17, she and I will be presenting our theorist card and our letters is a good way to keep in touch. This also keeps stress a tad less.
In the future I would most try the lettering with my students. I don't think I would use the Internet as a source, as it doesn't seem completely fair to those who do not have access, but letters can be written the good old fashioned way...with a pen and paper! Just the way I like it.
Overall, I wouldn't mind continuing to write letters, or for future blogging, to keep adding a personal note, like I said before, it's more enjoyable.
Writing letters to my partner is by far more enjoyable than 2X journaling. The 2x journaling was interesting to know for knowledge in general, but I am a big believer in enjoying work and/or studies, which the letters helped a little. I feel it's a good opportunity to see what my partner is concerned with, interested in, and what kind of opinions she has on the readings. It's nice when I know someone out there agrees with me and it's challenging to not agree in some aspects, which keeps the topic more debatable, therefore passing time more quickly.
This seems to me to also be an interesting way to get to know my partner. On November 17, she and I will be presenting our theorist card and our letters is a good way to keep in touch. This also keeps stress a tad less.
In the future I would most try the lettering with my students. I don't think I would use the Internet as a source, as it doesn't seem completely fair to those who do not have access, but letters can be written the good old fashioned way...with a pen and paper! Just the way I like it.
Overall, I wouldn't mind continuing to write letters, or for future blogging, to keep adding a personal note, like I said before, it's more enjoyable.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Blog #5
Dear Heller:
You are so right in comparing Murray to Engaging Ideas, as I too remembered the "writing as a process" theme. Writing is more than just grammar- it's expressing ideas and learning to relay thought into comprehensible words. I believe that spectators can tell whether or not the writer is genuine, as they may be good in grammar, but not good in thought. Does that mean they can be called a "good" writer? No. The comparison with public speaking is very clever- as I think that in that case the spectators can surely tell if the speaker is just repeating words, or actually has thought and meaning behind those words.
As far as Bean and your opinion, I am not really sure if I agree. I think a good writer comes naturally after the "process" and may need a structured outline, although it is of course possible to have a good "product" after one focuses on that exact structure- but does that mean they are a "good" writer? Or are they a good direction follower? This is just my opinion, if I was to put into categories I would be able to tell the "good" writers from the "trained" writers if you will.
You ask a tough Question: Do I think it's right for students to be graded differently if they think differently. I am not sure how to answer this let alone how I feel about it. I would say that I will try to be honest even though I am not sure if it's proper, but yes I guess students should be graded differently, depending however on what is being written and how well I know their writing. Does that answer your question? I am not sure!
Sincerely,
Laura Psomas
You are so right in comparing Murray to Engaging Ideas, as I too remembered the "writing as a process" theme. Writing is more than just grammar- it's expressing ideas and learning to relay thought into comprehensible words. I believe that spectators can tell whether or not the writer is genuine, as they may be good in grammar, but not good in thought. Does that mean they can be called a "good" writer? No. The comparison with public speaking is very clever- as I think that in that case the spectators can surely tell if the speaker is just repeating words, or actually has thought and meaning behind those words.
As far as Bean and your opinion, I am not really sure if I agree. I think a good writer comes naturally after the "process" and may need a structured outline, although it is of course possible to have a good "product" after one focuses on that exact structure- but does that mean they are a "good" writer? Or are they a good direction follower? This is just my opinion, if I was to put into categories I would be able to tell the "good" writers from the "trained" writers if you will.
You ask a tough Question: Do I think it's right for students to be graded differently if they think differently. I am not sure how to answer this let alone how I feel about it. I would say that I will try to be honest even though I am not sure if it's proper, but yes I guess students should be graded differently, depending however on what is being written and how well I know their writing. Does that answer your question? I am not sure!
Sincerely,
Laura Psomas
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Blog #4
Psomas:
Dear Heller:
Hi How are you? How was the reading for you? After reading this weeks assignments, I have particularly grown to realize that WAC has become an issue in many areas. I see that this is indeed a new revolution amongst writing in general and the education system, don't you agree? I found it interesting in WACNM when ECAC is being discussed as an even newer WAC, negating the word "writing" and replacing it with Electronic Communication across the Curriculum (WACNM pg. 8) I do recall you even helping me when it came to the new version of Microsoft Word...Thanks by the way! Call me old fashioned but keeping up with this technology in my own studies has been a difficult task and I rather miss the "word processing era" twenty years ago, as the book mentioned. I do appreciate the higher learning and new ways to keep up with students, but like anybody with an already busy life it would seem just great to keep things just the way they are- but what would we be learning? So although more work is involved for us as teachers, it appears to have become a necessity in order to keep up with our young students lives.
Bean seemed to me to be the most I can relate to. Chapter one, entitled "Using Writing to Promote Thinking," was a very valuable reading. Bean suggests that "professors who successfully integrate writing and critical thinking tasks into their courses often report a satisfying increase in their teaching pleasure." (Bean PG.1) This to me is very important as students can tell a teachers attitude on the subject. Having pleasure with work is contagious and evedentaly motivates students, do you agree?
Bean also discusses a misconception (Bean pg 11), that teachers may feel they do not have the proper grammar to teach English to their students. This part gave me relief, as I wondered if I too would have my own problems teaching this skill. I like the breakdown that Bean answered a lot of my questions in an organizes fashion.
In my reading I found Bean to be most useful, and although the reading was a lot to intake, I did find many useful findings. What did you find the most useful to you?
Laura
Dear Heller:
Hi How are you? How was the reading for you? After reading this weeks assignments, I have particularly grown to realize that WAC has become an issue in many areas. I see that this is indeed a new revolution amongst writing in general and the education system, don't you agree? I found it interesting in WACNM when ECAC is being discussed as an even newer WAC, negating the word "writing" and replacing it with Electronic Communication across the Curriculum (WACNM pg. 8) I do recall you even helping me when it came to the new version of Microsoft Word...Thanks by the way! Call me old fashioned but keeping up with this technology in my own studies has been a difficult task and I rather miss the "word processing era" twenty years ago, as the book mentioned. I do appreciate the higher learning and new ways to keep up with students, but like anybody with an already busy life it would seem just great to keep things just the way they are- but what would we be learning? So although more work is involved for us as teachers, it appears to have become a necessity in order to keep up with our young students lives.
Bean seemed to me to be the most I can relate to. Chapter one, entitled "Using Writing to Promote Thinking," was a very valuable reading. Bean suggests that "professors who successfully integrate writing and critical thinking tasks into their courses often report a satisfying increase in their teaching pleasure." (Bean PG.1) This to me is very important as students can tell a teachers attitude on the subject. Having pleasure with work is contagious and evedentaly motivates students, do you agree?
Bean also discusses a misconception (Bean pg 11), that teachers may feel they do not have the proper grammar to teach English to their students. This part gave me relief, as I wondered if I too would have my own problems teaching this skill. I like the breakdown that Bean answered a lot of my questions in an organizes fashion.
In my reading I found Bean to be most useful, and although the reading was a lot to intake, I did find many useful findings. What did you find the most useful to you?
Laura
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Blog #3
Gee:
When Adrian, who is an excellent student, is asked how he likes school, he has this to say: "School is fine. I don't live and breath school, but it's fine." Adrian's remarks exemplify several themes we found with a number of players we have interviewed. First, play for him is inherently social, in several different ways. He plays in a team with others. His team is part of a much larger group to which he belongs...Second, the knowledge and skills Adrian has in regard to playing EverQuest is "distributed." It exists in his own head and body. But some of it exists in other people whom he can call for help...Third, Adrian's knowledge and skills are not only distributed across himself and other people; some actually reside in various tools and technologies, like the hex editors he can use to manipulate the code of a game. The knowledge built into the hex editor counts as Adrian's knowledge because he knows how to leverage this tool. The real thinking and acting unit becomes "Adrian plus tool." Fourth, Adrian's attitude toward games and the computer is itself game like and highly metrareflective." (Ch.7 pg.189)
Psomas:
As "Adrian" is part of a discourse community in playing video games. he is also in a discourse community in school as well. Gee tries to break down and compare the attitude and patterns in Adrian as a player and a student. He mentions that Adrian is and excellent student, and as we read earlier, he is also an excellent game player. Being social in school was first and as Gee continues to break down Adrian in terms of comparison, we see that he too looks for help and gives help to those in his discourse community, or affinity groups- being a group within a larger group. Pratt would say Contact zone within the community. The teacher would be be the main one with the knowledge to regurgitate to Adrian and members in his community (students). When talking about tools and manipulation in games, Adrian may use this also in school- for example the Internet is a useful way to retrieve information.
Gee reminds me of Pratt, when comparing literacy to Baseball cards, as Gee compares to video games.
Russell:
"Facility members and administrators have long agreed that every teacher should teach writing (a cliche' as old as mass education), but since the turn of the century, the American Education system has placed the responsibility for teaching writing outside the disciplines, including, to a large extent, the discipline of "English"...(pg.4)
Psomas:
If it always seems to be the majority of teachers and administrators agree that every teacher should teach writing, then why is the Cliche' still an issue? Students tend to excel in grammar and writing essays in English classes rather than in other class subjects. This puts a strain on many because other subject teachers are having difficulty grading and comprehending students works. If this has been a problem for this long, than maybe the majority should Finally win, and let writing be taught in all classes.
When Adrian, who is an excellent student, is asked how he likes school, he has this to say: "School is fine. I don't live and breath school, but it's fine." Adrian's remarks exemplify several themes we found with a number of players we have interviewed. First, play for him is inherently social, in several different ways. He plays in a team with others. His team is part of a much larger group to which he belongs...Second, the knowledge and skills Adrian has in regard to playing EverQuest is "distributed." It exists in his own head and body. But some of it exists in other people whom he can call for help...Third, Adrian's knowledge and skills are not only distributed across himself and other people; some actually reside in various tools and technologies, like the hex editors he can use to manipulate the code of a game. The knowledge built into the hex editor counts as Adrian's knowledge because he knows how to leverage this tool. The real thinking and acting unit becomes "Adrian plus tool." Fourth, Adrian's attitude toward games and the computer is itself game like and highly metrareflective." (Ch.7 pg.189)
Psomas:
As "Adrian" is part of a discourse community in playing video games. he is also in a discourse community in school as well. Gee tries to break down and compare the attitude and patterns in Adrian as a player and a student. He mentions that Adrian is and excellent student, and as we read earlier, he is also an excellent game player. Being social in school was first and as Gee continues to break down Adrian in terms of comparison, we see that he too looks for help and gives help to those in his discourse community, or affinity groups- being a group within a larger group. Pratt would say Contact zone within the community. The teacher would be be the main one with the knowledge to regurgitate to Adrian and members in his community (students). When talking about tools and manipulation in games, Adrian may use this also in school- for example the Internet is a useful way to retrieve information.
Gee reminds me of Pratt, when comparing literacy to Baseball cards, as Gee compares to video games.
Russell:
"Facility members and administrators have long agreed that every teacher should teach writing (a cliche' as old as mass education), but since the turn of the century, the American Education system has placed the responsibility for teaching writing outside the disciplines, including, to a large extent, the discipline of "English"...(pg.4)
Psomas:
If it always seems to be the majority of teachers and administrators agree that every teacher should teach writing, then why is the Cliche' still an issue? Students tend to excel in grammar and writing essays in English classes rather than in other class subjects. This puts a strain on many because other subject teachers are having difficulty grading and comprehending students works. If this has been a problem for this long, than maybe the majority should Finally win, and let writing be taught in all classes.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Blog #2
Gee:
"...I, on the other hand, utter the code word and experience a delicious moment of wonderfully embodied and situated meaning (much as I did when I first realized that fractal equations lead to marvelous patterns when you feed them into a computer or actually graph them on a a piece of paper, rather than just learn to repeat them and verbally list their numerical properties)." (Ch.4 pg82-83)
Psomas:
Gee is referring to the video game Deus Ex, where he encountered an enemy but is able to have her self-destruct because he has found a code in the computer. He goes on to compare this situation to the satisfaction of putting meaning into, for example, fractal equations. At first the code numbers mean nothing, but once you put it into use, I see what it was good for. By "embodied" he means in the body as well as in the mind (on how he is storing information). I agree with this notation, as it reminds me of teaching and learning. We, as teachers, students, and humans, have come to realize that putting meaning into our work, rather that memorization and repetition has more of an affect and satisfaction. Kind of like what Williams said when she talked about being able to "name" something in "The Joshua Tree Epiphany".
When it comes to teaching, if we are able to put meaning behind our teachings, and truly understand what is being taught, then hopefully we can regenerate that meaning to our students and have them view the learning as "embodied."
Gee:
"To make sense of them [words] you must fit them into the emerging plot and virtual world you are discovering and helping to build. And, you must do this actively, since you have choices about where to go and what to do. Every potentially meaningful sign in a game like Deus Ex-whether word, deed,artifact, or action- is a particularly sort of invitation to embodied action (action actually carried out in the game world or simulated in your mind). And the nature of that invitation changes as you experience new situations and engage in new actions in the virtual world of the game. "(Ch.4 pg 83)
Psomas:
I believe this analogy to be very true when it comes to words. Gee compares words with video games and the tools needed to experience the "virtualness." This right away makes me think about, not only teaching literature, but reading I have done myself. The words, deeds, artifacts, and actions used in video games is the same way we use key events, point out plots, draw conclusions, and analyze characters in a story. As the video game proceeds, or we continue to read, we are "accepting the invitation of embodied action." When Gee talks about the nature of the invitation changing as you experience new situations, you can instantly think back to when you have read and then reread a book. Did you think differently about it? Did you notice something different? Is it because the book changed or you changed? As our experience in life changes, we do indeed change and our views are altered from our previous views. Students will too feel that. Maybe they already feel that when they replay a video game, and as they get older they most likely feel that with literature they have read in the past. As Murray states in ND, we have to be patient and wait and wait and wait. It is a process rather than a product. That goes the same for embodied action, as teachers wee have to let time take it's course and let the students experience their inner reward for themselves.
"...I, on the other hand, utter the code word and experience a delicious moment of wonderfully embodied and situated meaning (much as I did when I first realized that fractal equations lead to marvelous patterns when you feed them into a computer or actually graph them on a a piece of paper, rather than just learn to repeat them and verbally list their numerical properties)." (Ch.4 pg82-83)
Psomas:
Gee is referring to the video game Deus Ex, where he encountered an enemy but is able to have her self-destruct because he has found a code in the computer. He goes on to compare this situation to the satisfaction of putting meaning into, for example, fractal equations. At first the code numbers mean nothing, but once you put it into use, I see what it was good for. By "embodied" he means in the body as well as in the mind (on how he is storing information). I agree with this notation, as it reminds me of teaching and learning. We, as teachers, students, and humans, have come to realize that putting meaning into our work, rather that memorization and repetition has more of an affect and satisfaction. Kind of like what Williams said when she talked about being able to "name" something in "The Joshua Tree Epiphany".
When it comes to teaching, if we are able to put meaning behind our teachings, and truly understand what is being taught, then hopefully we can regenerate that meaning to our students and have them view the learning as "embodied."
Gee:
"To make sense of them [words] you must fit them into the emerging plot and virtual world you are discovering and helping to build. And, you must do this actively, since you have choices about where to go and what to do. Every potentially meaningful sign in a game like Deus Ex-whether word, deed,artifact, or action- is a particularly sort of invitation to embodied action (action actually carried out in the game world or simulated in your mind). And the nature of that invitation changes as you experience new situations and engage in new actions in the virtual world of the game. "(Ch.4 pg 83)
Psomas:
I believe this analogy to be very true when it comes to words. Gee compares words with video games and the tools needed to experience the "virtualness." This right away makes me think about, not only teaching literature, but reading I have done myself. The words, deeds, artifacts, and actions used in video games is the same way we use key events, point out plots, draw conclusions, and analyze characters in a story. As the video game proceeds, or we continue to read, we are "accepting the invitation of embodied action." When Gee talks about the nature of the invitation changing as you experience new situations, you can instantly think back to when you have read and then reread a book. Did you think differently about it? Did you notice something different? Is it because the book changed or you changed? As our experience in life changes, we do indeed change and our views are altered from our previous views. Students will too feel that. Maybe they already feel that when they replay a video game, and as they get older they most likely feel that with literature they have read in the past. As Murray states in ND, we have to be patient and wait and wait and wait. It is a process rather than a product. That goes the same for embodied action, as teachers wee have to let time take it's course and let the students experience their inner reward for themselves.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Blog #1
Williams:
"Now, the Joshua tree is a weird-looking tree and I looked at that picture and said to myself, 'Oh, we don't have that kind of tree in Northern California. That is a weird looking tree and I would know if I saw that tree, and I never seen one before.'... I took a walk around the block, and there must have been a a sale at the nursery when everyone was landscaping their new homes- at least 80 percent of the homes had Joshua trees in the front yards. And I had never seen one before!" (p.11)
Psomas:
I found the analogy of Williams' experience with the naming of the Joshua tree to the naming of design principles to be a remarkable one. It is so very true that you may be unaware of something for so long and thus take for granted what has been in front of your nose the whole time. Williams goes on to share his "epiphany" with the recognition of the Joshua tree and being able to "name" it. Williams states that by naming something we are now in control, just like when it comes to learning the design principles. The lay out of the chapters is very explainable and focused, therefore giving me an idea of what to expect and how to absorb what I will be reading. The analogy seems to me to also be an interesting way to look at life as well.
Murray:
"We have to be patient and wait, and wait, and wait. The suspense in the beginning of a writing course is agonizing for the teacher, but if we break first, if we do the prewriting for our students they will not learn the the largest part of the writing process...You are not teaching a product, you are teaching a process." (p.5-6)
Psomas:
I absolutely agree with Murray's Implications of teaching a writing course as a process instead of a product. Exploratory writing and discovery amongst students is critical and important. I am pleased to hear someone else speak of the teaching as being agonizing when it comes to being "quiet" and letting the students prewrite over and over again (Murray States prewriting takes about 85% of the time p.4) when all you want to do is share your knowledge on what to do. But the truth is students indeed need to discover the writing process on their own, with us a guide. If we can learn to teach writing as a process, rather than as a product like Murray states, then we have done our job in the course.
"Now, the Joshua tree is a weird-looking tree and I looked at that picture and said to myself, 'Oh, we don't have that kind of tree in Northern California. That is a weird looking tree and I would know if I saw that tree, and I never seen one before.'... I took a walk around the block, and there must have been a a sale at the nursery when everyone was landscaping their new homes- at least 80 percent of the homes had Joshua trees in the front yards. And I had never seen one before!" (p.11)
Psomas:
I found the analogy of Williams' experience with the naming of the Joshua tree to the naming of design principles to be a remarkable one. It is so very true that you may be unaware of something for so long and thus take for granted what has been in front of your nose the whole time. Williams goes on to share his "epiphany" with the recognition of the Joshua tree and being able to "name" it. Williams states that by naming something we are now in control, just like when it comes to learning the design principles. The lay out of the chapters is very explainable and focused, therefore giving me an idea of what to expect and how to absorb what I will be reading. The analogy seems to me to also be an interesting way to look at life as well.
Murray:
"We have to be patient and wait, and wait, and wait. The suspense in the beginning of a writing course is agonizing for the teacher, but if we break first, if we do the prewriting for our students they will not learn the the largest part of the writing process...You are not teaching a product, you are teaching a process." (p.5-6)
Psomas:
I absolutely agree with Murray's Implications of teaching a writing course as a process instead of a product. Exploratory writing and discovery amongst students is critical and important. I am pleased to hear someone else speak of the teaching as being agonizing when it comes to being "quiet" and letting the students prewrite over and over again (Murray States prewriting takes about 85% of the time p.4) when all you want to do is share your knowledge on what to do. But the truth is students indeed need to discover the writing process on their own, with us a guide. If we can learn to teach writing as a process, rather than as a product like Murray states, then we have done our job in the course.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
