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~
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
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
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
