Chapter 2: Contemporary Rhetoric

Yes! Yes! Yes! Writing as thinking! This is a good strategy in the improvement of writing skills.

It is about teaching the craft of writing not about mimicking someone else’s writing style. Of course there are writers that students can learn their approach on how they deal with content, because content is imperative in writing. It’s about how the writer integrates, focus on content (themes), and orient the audience (rhetorical intent/effect) in their writing. Students need to learn how important the linking episodes formalize the unity. The structure is imperative; it creates the tension that is needed in books (novels) and so on. The central idea should reflect humanity where people battle internal and external demons (greed, corruption, and oppression), and the healthy conquest that people strive for (humility, self-discovery, overcoming corruption).

Apprenticeship is a good approach to getting students involve in their writing skills. Technology is the dominate tool that students are engaged in which lessens their interest in education. The problem with technology (television) is not the invention, but the programs that are shown. Basically, the negative content that is in programs contributes to the decline of students’ motivation in the school system. There is a fascination with all the images (violence, sex, various relationships, masculinity, and femininity) that children seek for a source of “self-identity” that Charles Dickens’ character Pip can’t delivered. Students want the quick emotional release and television satisfies that emotional and psychological need. Williams states that the “NAEP Report Card” illustrates, “report card has shown a steady decline in the writing abilities of our students, even though process pedagogy has been incorporated” (Williams 55). The media has a powerful affect on the minds of the students and as a result of the psychological control; teachers need to be taught new techniques that will alter the passive learning tool that television produces. So, how can teachers convince students to become more interested in the students own creativity, views of the world and innovators over their personal interests?

Williams starts the book (Preparing To Teach Writing) on The Foundation of Rhetoric. This topic must be the core issue that needs to be taught to students. Students will need rhetorical strategies in society (work environment). The role of persuasion is critical in most fields. Students need the ability to construct, transform, and shape people psychologically and socially through rhetorical speech (auditory) and written documents, literature, proposals, etc., and even visually (television). The book gives examples of a positive impact and a negative impact; it is how societies are formed.  Therefore, students are given a lesson of accountability when dealing with language because it can be and is a dangerous entity.

Reading and Writing

Reading and Writing.... Williams overall priority is to share the process of children's  reading and writing skills. Williams suggests that in the U.S  literacy instruction begins quite early, and because of this most children should be able to read and write before kindergarten.   By kindergarten children should already be able to pronounce words, write, and communicate with there parents pretty thoroughly. However, if the child is not motivated then reading and writing will not be easy to pick up. According to Frank Smith children learn don't learn to read from phonics they learn to read through context clues, and because of this teachers should teach phonics. Several elementary schools are practicing Franks style of teaching, instead of having children  sound words out, teachers are assigning 100 sight words a month and students are responsible for identifying the words. In my opinion this is a very effecting way to teach reading and writing, but of course this only works if child is motivated. Children who are properly taught reading and writing are likely to better in school. 

Jourdan Anderson

PH Anderson Requests Your Friendship

What is so extraordinary about this letter is the idea that  PH Anderson would actually have the nerve to send a letter like this in the first place. It is as if, PH had seen Jourdan’s picture under the “People You May  Know “ banner on facebook. Thought, huh, wonder if I could entice Jourdan back around?  Like most people that have been able to separate themselves from toxic relationships (I use this term loosely, as Mr. Jourdan Anderson was not afforded the choice to leave at will), the abuser doesn’t get that their actions were ever harmful. They live in the delusion that, Oh, good ol’ so-and-so, won’t they be happy to hear from me?”

Friendship requested.

In this case, and much to the chagrin, I am sure, of PH Anderson, Jourdan, was very polite, and certainly, if the time space continuum wasn’t an obstacle, I’d say that he had perfected Jackie Kennedy’s idea of the polite brush-off. Maybe she was taught this technique from someone else. Who knows? Point is, when we live and think as rhetors, the irrational and seemingly odd behaviors of others  are exposed for what they really are- which is to say that the motives that drive our interactions speak to who we are as people.  PH, no longer in  a power relationship with Jourdan, thinks that by approaching him as an equal, they can pick up where they left off.  PH apparently hasn’t been approved as one of Jourdan’s ‘friends’ on facebook, and therefore missed Jourdan’s status update: Jourdan Anderson’s “Ph” is fine without Mr. Anderson!

I jest, but in terms of communicative tools, and the means through which we express ourselves hasn’t changed all that much, although the way we go about doing it, has changed dramatically. PH serves as that sort of person in everyone’s life that challenges us, and hurts us and then tells us it’s for our own good. This letter, shows that when they ‘good’ has been achieved, and the challenges have produced a strength that surpasses anything the oppressor can dish out- the party is over, and the rejection of  association,  can begin.

 Request: denied!

Williams Chapter 5

“It is important to note that motivation to read and write in the majority of young children seldom is high.” And with this stunning piece of observational insight, Williams sums up one half of the reason for the literacy problems plaguing our schools. As James points out in his blog, reading improves writing. I am one of those that think you cannot have one without the other: Reading, and lots of it, is the best way to advance and improve a student or child’s writing ability. Motivation will always be a problem when attempting to get a child to read, but so what. Get off your ass and take your child to a library or book store and do it often. I just do not see any other way to get a child’s writing skills to develop or improve. I think comic books are a good way to motivate a child to read. Depending on the comic book, the vocabulary, themes and characterizations can be just as challenging and complex. Some of the distaste a child feels for the subject matter can be offset by the abbreviated length of the average graphic novel or comic book. In education, students, teachers and parents form the triad and if one of those links is weakened. The student’s abilities to read and write proficiently will be compromised. The bottom up approach Williams espouses seems like common sense to me. It would be difficult for me as a parent not to correct mispronunciations and syntactical errors and Williams seems to be on board with a corrective approach when teaching children to recognize the world around them. Failure to correct Williams notes, “would seriously affect a child’s ability to communicate with others.” It seems clear from the chapter that learning abilities and cognitive skills vary markedly from child to child. This just makes it all the more important for intensive involvement from the parents at early stages of the child’s development. The sooner a child is taught the basics of reading, the better. The fact that abilities between children vary is immaterial and approaches and expectations can be tailored to those abilities, but without the hours spent with their noses in books, all of the approaches whether they be bottom up or top down,  will be ineffective, and in the end, amount to little more than simple rhetoric. 

Chapter 5

Here are several points I found interesting in Chapter 5.  

-Williams discusses children’s ability to easily understand linguistic relations through experiencing things around them.  The naming of things is to give order to an otherwise chaotic world.  It is an existential reality- “I name, therefore it is”.   Writing also establishes the identity of things in a child’s world in a way that speech cannot.

-research has suggested that writing begins before the child starts writing his/her name.  Writing begins in the form of squiggles and drawings...(I remember that before I actually wrote out my own name in kindergarten,  I used to try to copy a my grandfather’s writing in letters which were written in cursive.  Of course, I couldn’t read it but for some reason I felt compelled to copy what was there and I only produced long horizontal strands of squiggles).

-Children may not learn by instruction but by example and by making sense of what are meaningful situations according to Frank Smith.   Children should not be taught in phonics but by individual words in contexts or sight vocabulary words. He provided an example in a supermarket when parents point as objects such as soup or shampoos for example)

-Smith argues that if a child cannot read read and write by the time he/she is in kindergarten than it’s the parents fault for not providing meaningful reading experiences

-however, this view doesn’t address the motivations of children

-motivations to read and write, even in bright children, is rarely high.  Children would rather play than read if given a choice between the two.             

-There has been a debate between phonic based instruction and whole language based instruction. 

-phonics emphasized the use of standard english but opponents viewed this as discriminatory to black english (ask/ax or the use of the word house in terms of context)

-proponents for phonics asserts that whole language advocates are willing to adopt an anything goes attitude toward education.

-the issues in this debate are important in regards to writing because the writer is his/her own first reader.  Those who can’t read can’t write.

-Sanford and Garrod concluded that writing consists of supplying instructions that tell the reader how to make use of learned knowledge and how to modify depending on the discourse.  

-Reading speed is crucial to comprehension because it is related to the processing information (Williams pg 159)

-Many extremely well read people are poor writers such as university professors...

-I found this assertion to be intriguing.  I personally believe that reading can positively affect one's writing.   If reading improves writing and if university professors are considered to be very well-read, then why does Williams claim that they are poor writers?  

-What is "good writing" or who are good writers?  Many consider Joyce, Hemingway, Dickens, or even Cormac McCarthy to be great writers, but I've also heard from many (professors included) who dislike state that they are bad writers.  My co-worker and I were having a discussion about The Sun Also Rises by Hemingway and a professor interjected by saying "Uggh, Hemingway can't write...".  

Chapter 5 with many, many ellipsis

(FYI, i use ellipsis in my writing largely to convey the silence that exists when i'm thinking...as if we are actually having a dialogue and im pontificating to you where upon i take a moment to think of something before i move on...dig it?)
So...Chapter 5, "Reading and Writing." This chapter was fairly informative and more of a review of topics I had glossed over in the few Linguistics course I took....which often left me questioning the science of language acquisition rather than the proper pedagogical methods of teaching language to students. I'm not quite sure how to take the chapter as a whole...I like the recognition that there are pedagogical wars that go on that have little to nothing to do with what may actually be the better way to teach students...it reminds me of a short book i read titled The Violence of Literacy which took a look on how literacy is abused as a tool to oppress and is just a red herring for larger issues and problems. So the war goes on between the bottom-top and top-bottom approach. Meanwhile we take into account the questions of motivation and proper attention. Sometimes its the teachers fault. Sometimes its the parents. Sometimes its the students. Most of the time bottom-top seems to work when handled properly but the usefulness of top-bottom is also logically apparent. So yay....we've established that the topic is just as complicated as ever. So if I've understood it correctly, a more practical-worldly contextualized bottom-up phonics approach with teachers that use a mixture of examples that are both professional and peer-based teaching to a group of students that have been properly nurtured in adolescence by their parents and teachers is the most effective manner to teach!...right...so how do we get there? How?! How?!!!!
And to what age group does this apply to? It would be great to be able to create a set of pedagogical rules and techniques that apply across the board but it just doesn't work that way. I must admit, as I'm teaching my two little ones, age 6 and 4, how to read I come across these methods. But it changes for both as their cognitive skills are significantly different, especially since it appears that after evaluation my 4 year old is significantly advanced and my 6 year old has autism. So even among them, the techniques have to be different. I intend on teaching college-level remedial students by the end of my education so I question this pedagogy when it comes to older students.
On a side note, I am of the belief that reading improves writing significantly. Its not a cure-all but I think of it along the lines as what Williams says earlier on in the chapter that kids will adapt to the dialect that their peers speak. In much the same manner, I'm of the belief that students writing will begin to emulate the style of writing they read the most....the issue is the motivation...generally, having students read something they want to read. Or at the very least don't hate. Sure it would be great if they read and write like James, Hemingway, Keats...but realistically, they generally wont because they generally wont care. It would be largely unrealistic to have kids read Shakespeare or Of Mice and Men and expect them to be intellectually and emotionally invested in it....i actually prefer to give more  modern literature, adolescent literature or creative non-fiction as a gateway...sprinkled among the other required reading...

Are You Kidding Me Williams?

Chapter 3 is a bunch of b.s. on the part of Williams.  It starts off with his silly assertion that some people are trying to dislocate or get rid of all together composition courses.  We already talked about the first-half of this chapter so I won't go for into what we haven't discussed about this chapter.
Williams believes that writing should be meaningful.  He gives several ABSTRACT examples, the emphasis being abstract.  I'll never forget what my dad always told me about his lacklustre education: "I just wished my teachers would explain WHY it's [the subject] was important."  Although Williams quotes another person saying the teacher must present and BELIEVE that their subject is interesting, they don't say WHY it's practical because, in all reality, it's probably not.  Sometimes Oscar Wilde might've been right when he says: "all art is quite useless" for everything outside of the actual subject itself is an art.  A culinary ART, language ART, engineering COMPOSITION [art], biological research [art.]
Often times I have students at WLAC (West L.A. College) who come in dissatisfied with their primary subject works.  Whether it be Virginia Woolf, Fast Food Nation (ugh...), Lolita or Kozol.  These books first off are not what everyone reads nor do they really have application in regards to real-life.  Williams blames the teachers who assign letters for students to write as being impractical of real-life.  Yet I find it to be the opposite with the students who come into the office asking for helping in writing a letter.  They often have the most sophisticated language, good evidence, and proper structure.  Most students otherwise find writing about literature a pain in the ass.
I don't blame them either.  Reading Virginia Woolf takes forever, writing 4 papers on a book you don't even care about (especially if you eat fast food anyways) you just wanna blow your brains out!
There's a lot of other stuff about ESL students and minority students being taught at a lower-standard.  It sounds a lot like Williams is prejudiced in his writing though I'm sure he'd love to deny it.  I found myself saying why not encourage students to write in their original language and either do a translation THEN transcription or do it the Azandula way and write in Spanglish or Francolish or Indianlish or Ethopianlish or Mardarinlish.  For who's to say they can't use some terms and write in the margins what it means or nearly means?
While Williams brings up good points about the pen-pal system so on and so forth, I think the effective teacher is one who can change a perspective like my father's.  If a teacher can explain a practical reality to their text or even give a text worth reading like The Monk (a best-seller for a reason) or a short and cool novella like the Castle of Otranto where students can easily remember and read info instead of being taught these long-winded books with nothing of substance in them then I think they have every right to hate composition.
One last thing.  Williams talks about essentially having office hours for students.  You can't force a student to come to your office.  In fact, they never do!  It's sad but true.  They will go to the tutor before you at least that's the case with me.  It's hard to imagine a student going to a teacher first.  I suppose Williams has not taught or if he has then he has some amazingly uncommon students throughout the years.  All of his theories to me are not worth a dime and neither is the book.
I think the best teaching method to be an effective teacher is to be honest, teach subject matter that students can easily access and readily learn from, stop making a facade about the importance of literature and just say: "Hey, relax.  It's a good book.  It's 90 pgs and in the first pages there's a murder."  What's there not to love about that?
Good luck trying Williams' theories.  I think that trying too hard to convince students of the practicalness of writing will turn them off.  Students of all colors, ages, and sexes are smarter they than appear.  And yes, that goes to Williams and all others.

Chapter 5

Chapter 5 is very interesting in its focus on how children learn. Although I teach high school students, I have always been fascintaed with how children learn to talk and read. What I found controversial is his belief that children should not be taught by using phonics, but insted should be taught individual words with the 'sight vocabulary approach. (153) Also, that it is the parents' fault if the child doesn't know how to read my a certain age. This reminds me of the arguments that many high school teachers have about parent involvement. We often blame students failure on the parent. Some students don't know how to read by 9th grade, so who is to blame in those cases? Is it the parent? The school district? The special Ed teachers? So often I meet parents at parent/techer conferences, and it is easy to se why certain kids are performing poorly in school. Some students (as well as parents) have very low abilities, and obviously need additional services. I agree with some of what is said in chapter 5, but I think it depends on the individual circumstance.

On Motivation (College Students)

Mcoffee's latest post, "Chapter Three," got me thinking about motivation and what it might take to motivate a classroom... My best "buy-in" moments have come in team sports. Those groups were bound by a common purpose and propelled to excellence on and off the court, I believe, because of an investment and trust that grew in succeeding and failing as a unit and as parts of that unit. The guys from those teams could say anything to each other because they battled together. But it was more than saying any thing; they could say the right thing. They knew how and when to enter one another's headspace, how to challenge, when to encourage and and when to make light. Sports and writing are quite different. Sports and school are different. Finding a roadmap for the classroom in my team experience would be simplistic and unjust, but tonight those experiences are the entry point for my reflection and questions. Because I have complete confidence that my best teams could have been productive in a workshop setting. My best teams could have written well if we had written together. The dedication was there and the necessary rhetorical strategies would have been made clear as we sought relevance individually and as a whole. So are we teaching writing in the wrong setting? Within the wrong groupings? Silly as it must sound, could writing benefit from a team sports component, a larger community project or an activity tie-in? In school, writing instruction often feels divorced from a streamlined purpose, or even an identifiable set of purposes, and from the natural ways in which we write and communicate with our colleagues. I thought Williams was right on in assessing Literature as an imperfect model for courses that emphasize writing development and odd as a focal point when students are asked to produce critical essays (Chapter 5)... How can we help create an atmosphere that makes the "buy-in" more natural, sensible, desirable?

But god this stuff is tough. Each year is different, each class, and both bring a unique set of challenges. I think there's a lot of pressure on teachers to be the life-changer, to make writing meaningful and enjoyable for all of their students. What an easy way to get discouraged. We've read some inspiring essays this semester, most of which have terrific ideas but ideas, we should not forget, that developed over years and years of experience and maybe even draw on the one big career event. Thinking back to June Jordan, there's something of a readymade community (general demographics, the geography of the Bay area, Berkeley dorms/housing), a context (the time period/Black English classroom), and an event (the death of Willie's brother) that precede the buy-in. It's a magical story, I loved it, and I don't mean to take anything away from it. Rather, I bring it up to point out that the scenario had winning elements that came together for something remarkable. June Jordan was ready when that time came. Will I be? I guess the struggle is helping to find and connect the dots that arrive with each new set of faces... My mind is in a thousand places.

"Chapter Three"

"Chapter 3" In chapter three Williams focuses on improving students motivation. Often in high school courses, and college courses students aren't motivated. I see the lack of motivation everyday when I'm tutoring students . If students aren't interested in the subject, then they are not motivated to do their work. Three years ago ,I took a history course that I absolutely hated, so when it was time for me to write the standard five paragraph essay on the California gold rush it was never wrecking.I also see this in composition courses students are just there because they have to be. They aren't there because they want write, they are just trying to take the required course do they can get through college. So when it's time to write the lack of motivation isn't there. This also happens in high school classes, teachers are teaching material that students are not interested in,or identify with.I understand that certain materials have to be taught, but something has to change, or else students are never going to be motivated to learn.

student

            How do classroom workshops improve student performance in writing? I think classroom workshop is an excellent strategy to improving students’ writing skills: the mechanics, the editorial procedure, and the opportunity to gain ideas for papers in a cultivating environment are crucial. The workshop strategy creates a “student centered” atmosphere, which is geared to develop students writing abilities.  The collaborative unit is an excellent source to get students to participate in the feedback of assignments, specifically “shy” students. Often a traditional classroom set up alienates students and students often are competitive in the traditional setting.

As a role of a teacher, I will want to eliminate the competitiveness of students and form groups that encourage “great writing skills” for each individual. I don’t know about this democratic perspective concerning workshops, but I do know that it creates good network, and bonding that needs to take place in the classroom. The goal should be to develop an “authentic voice” for all of the students and workshops are a good atmosphere for that development.

teacher

A response to chapter three, “Best Practices”! The essential interest of this chapter is centered on how to get students to become great writers. What I have found problematic in this chapter is that it lacked an extensive research on how cultural studies and social issues impact the students’ reading and writing. Another problematic issue is if the teachers are teaching topics that students can relate to instead of what makes them feel alienated. When I think of the education system, “diversity” comes to mind. I don’t know who Williams is writing about when he talks about the students in the school system. This is actually a complex issue because of the diversity in the school system.

Students need motivation in order to write superbly, topics that relate to them, and social issues and cultural studies are topics that affect students’ personal lives. Students need to have a sense of “belonging” in this society; it can either enhance their writing and reading skills or stymie it.  I don’t think that the mechanics is the major issue of students’ lack of good performance in composition, it is the alienation, but Williams doesn’t address how students from diverse backgrounds respond to mainstream literature. Williams claims that, “Applying rigid rules, studying grammar or composition topics or reading works of literature does not improve student writing” (Williams 101). Again, if I had some idea of who are the students that Williams is addressing, than I can have a clear understanding of how to respond to this chapter.

However, I will state that social issues and cultural studies should be a major part of topics in the writing process, and creative ways to discuss these topics: magazine projects, business proposals, journalism “news papers”, advertisement spreads, etc. These exercises can be warm up tools that can include “inventing, planning, drafting, pausing, reading, revising, editing, and publishing; it introduces and prepares students for careers outside of academia. The students need to feel as if they are a part of a major cause that will impact their communities and the world.

More on Williams and Group Work

When the term ‘group work” rears its Janus-faced head, I think in particular of two friends that have two differing opinions on the subject.

Renee hates group work. ‘I don’t like feeling like I’m having to do all of the work,” she’ll say, and that can be problematic given our relationship. We met during a campus co-hort and it is the nature of that work to collaborate and discuss items as a group. She becomes the eye-rolling dissident that digs in her heels when the facilitator starts counting us off into small group to brainstorm a solution to a campus problem. She feels like she’s always the someone that ‘takes the lead,” and the rest just sort of follow along. She becomes frustrated, and exasperatedly tells me that she’s ‘had it!” I try to offer her advice, and make sure that I am at least doing my share, because I know how much this pisses her off! I like Renee;  I’d like to think that we work well together, and I’d like to keep it that way!

Sharon on the other hand, loves group work. She assigns her classes into groups by the second or third week,  and those are the groups for the semester. She has the choice to redistribute or rearrange a group if it is not performing, but she says that group work keeps the students focused, on task, and engaged. She also loves that the students become so genuinely comfortable with one another that they are more likely to contribute in class and share their perspective without the fear of being “right.”

I guess I share this with you, because after reading Williams, it seems clear that group work can be highly beneficial, but it does have its drawbacks. For instance, is what Sharon does a good consequence for groups that are not working well together? Does this sort of action help students, who like Renee, feel pressure to perform, yet feel stifled by the group dynamic?  Is working in a group a good tool to utilize with students that are reluctant to talk otherwise? Perhaps I am being a little too much like Jekyll and Hyde here, but like Renee , I find group work to be a chat fest, of burgeoning thought.  I believe they make for a messy classroom environment . . . I’d like to sit in a quiet room and toil away, but like Sharon, I  ‘d have to say that ultimately though, it is in those ‘messy moments’  where some of the most fruitful teaching takes place.  

Williams Ch. 2

The chapter reads like a eulogy for postmodern rhetoric. With more and more campuses questioning its relevancy and its supporters themselves the victims of academic politics, classical rhetoric does appear to be on the ropes if not down for the count in most high schools. Williams points out that contrary to Faigley’s claim, “the only dark side of consumerism for consumers is the prospect of diminished buying power and the inability to find anyone willing or able to fix our electronic gadgets when they break” I would say that at this point, getting someone to fix our gadgets barely even registers as a concern as most of the products are portrayed as obsolete within a year or less of purchase. Verizon makes it pretty easy and tempting to constantly upgrade that if there is even a small problem with it well fuck it, give me that next gen Android. We live and thrive in a disposable world with only an inkling of a need for sustainability. I feel like this idea of disposability is equally as influential as consumerism and if you are lucky enough to still have a local Barnes & noble, take a look at their best seller shelves and you will see what I mean. Williams is especially prescient on the current status of the middle class and some of his assertions echo the protests of the occupy movement. Ultimately he seems pessimistic about the teaching of rhetoric and its relationship to writing pedagogy and I would agree with him on that. Unless there are some paradigm shifts in the teaching of writing and composition I think there will continue to be a shift away from rhetoric. But with the whole “No child left behind’ nonsense so thoroughly   discredited, there is at least an opportunity for a discussion.

My voice

Something occurred to me as I push to do these tasks of free writing.  As I talk with my peers my reflective thoughts to my peers have value and they make sense.  Yet when I try to write with my voice about a subject or passion, it is reviewed with a harsh academic review.  How can my mind think and process the work of my peers and in my career, but yet academically I struggle.  How can I hear and assist others but yet for my own self-voice I beat the dead horse of confusion and verbal jargon.

One connector that is evident to me is my lack of value of my own self when writing.  I can write from point of another person struggle or legal issue, but my own passion I find no clarity.  I think of the term "ghost writer" .  I try to write and this exercise has given me a platform to explore me and what I have to write.

The Brodkey essay

This essay was one of the 1st that I found to be a bit confusing. Our group focused on several questions for our discussion. We tried to determine exactly what discursive subject and discursive resistance are. We also wondered why she used such academic terms toward the beginning of the essay, but then toned it down later in the essay. Based on my understainding, discourse is anything longer that a sentence, or, in lingustic terms, anything longer than a t-unit. A discourse community is a group of people that assemble through language, e.g. grad students, baseball fans, and the Republican Party. This clarification helped me to better understand these terms and the essay.

williams chapter two

 At some point it is good to shun the first person and embrace the clear mechanical voice of reason - the world less entangled with "me, myself and I" rhetoric I was able to break free from as an undergraduate.  After reading this chapter, I am more convinced that the English teacher has the responsibility of going to neither extreme with the structured mechanisms of traditional rhetoric or the self-inflated, emotional stuff of romantic/renegade/ radical rhetoric to cultivate confident voices on paper. Johnson and Yancey reasonably make this point that bringing both to the table is a step toward solving the postmodern dillemmas that Williams gives an overview of. Of the different teaching models, the social theoretic model was intriguing to me. I cannot see how this would work with high school students. It brought Area A of the CSU GE Breadth requiremets sheet to mind. At El Camino College students can a take philosophy, pyschology and commuication studies course instead of English 1C - the critical thinking course for English. It demonstrates how the social theoretic model is part of our state University transfer system already, where students are jumpstarting their way into academic discourse community unprepared. At work I advise students to take english 1C first. 

Reading chapter 2 just reminds of what I see and experience in education today.  I see so many grammar worksheets as part of the mandatory writing assignments students have at the junior high school I work for.  Yet, I haven’t really  seen students implement the grammatical skills they learn on those worksheets in their own writing.  Because grammar and writing seem to be taught as separate entities from each other, students get the idea that grammar and writing are two separate things.  Just this past winter, an english teacher assigned her students an “English Packet” which basically consisted of work sheets relating to Nouns, adjectives, verbs, prepositions, tense etc., and as well as an essay for winter break.  When the break was over, I looked at the essay of a student I was tutoring and found that his grammar in his essays wasn’t at all different than his grammar in his his previous essays.  I asked him if he learned anything at all from that monster of a packet he was assigned.  He replied with, “I guess I did..”.   Well, whatever he learned from that packed, he was NOT applying it in his actually writing.  Moreover, the twenty vocabulary words these students learn for the week, were NOT appearing into their writing.  

Williams also goes over how many English teachers today use a “cookbook”  approach to writing.  These approaches include the various rhetorical modes of writing essays such as the definition essay, comparison/contrast essay, or process  essay.  Students are taught to construct these essays using the five paragraph model, among other recipes, for essays.  I have no problem with these recipes of writing essays as I was taught to use them myself.   One particular method that has been beneficial for me through my undergrad career was a method I learned from one of my English professors in community college.  I was taught that a strong essay consisted a thesis of course and paragraphs which consisted of a topic sentence, context, quote and analysis.  I don’t particularly stick to this method but I often teach it to the college students I tutor when they have questions about developing an analytic paragraph.   However, a teacher has to be aware that these approaches do nothing to develop one’s writing other than to organize one’s writing.  So, I often emphasize to student that while organization is important, their understanding of what they read or their analysis is more crucial.   

However, one thing that concerns me is that if “a cookbook approach to writing and teaching writing is destined to fail”, then does how the hell did I make it this far in my college career and what does this mean in the future?

Is Classical Rhetoric a Reality Today?

in America, we are saying currently "we're the New Romans."  Ok.  What does that mean?  Does that mean Ciceronian Oratory writings are still used today?  Williams calls the work "On Oratory" irrelevant now.  So how are we the New Romans?  What does this imply about our teaching?  I think it's suffice to say that this is a false paradigm within the modern flaw of humanity where we want to set ourselves on a pedalstool, while at the same time looking backwards to see who was most like us.  It's kind of the same problem in that novel (grissly-thing) Middlemarch.  The conflict in that novel on one level is medical practices.  One of the younger docs comes in and doesn't want to prescribe medication to anyone.  Why?  It's all the same, just a different color.  Sound like something we do today?  You bet!
So what does this all have to do with Classical Rhetoric?  Plenty!  We still use the same methods of persuasion especially in courts.  (Ha-ha made me think of Valencourt.)  Valencourt is a fictional character within the novel of the Mysteries of Udolpho, who, like a classical genius, reads out loud to his love and does close readings and analyzes the poetry behind it.  He is a more relevant though still distanced from our time.  Yet in our courts, still to this day, we use Wilsonesque techniques, which are Wilsonian (and not Classical) for we use English as our medium of language over Greek.  We still use methods of persausion  that all other Classical men were taught.  The only difference now is the limitations of law and "court-side mannerisms" such as leaving out personal belief systems.
We are taught a similar way to this day especially in our writing courses.  Don't say your religious beliefs, don't discriminate, don't use foul language, don't do this, don't do that...&c &c.  Yet it's funny: I'm Catholic and I'm tutoring a guy who writes to write his term paper on the word FUCK.  Yes, looking at it can make people cringe and what not.  Yet Classical Rhetoric would stick someone in this kind of situation and make sure it is handled correctly.  So when Williams asks in his journal entry question, (which one anticipates) is there any connection between Classical Rhetoric and today?  Absolutely.  I think we now have more rules and limitations to work with and therefore the modes and reasons of persausion may seem different, but I think it's true that yes we are like New Romans though not in a militant sense as much as a Rhetoric-bent society.
What is Rhetoric anyways?  That's usually how books start and Williams' work is conventional.  But I think I'll end with my definition of what Rhetoric has become: a study of language and the methods we use to teach language and writing.  

Williams: Chapter 2

I am not a teacher and I recognize I have much to learn. I've been challenged to consider several new ideas this semester, most of which I've found extremely valuable in my pursuit of shape and form as a prospective educator, and many of the readings have equipped me with sensible exercises for the classroom. Chapter 2 was cool because it gave me an opportunity to reflect on my own attitudes toward writing and early malformed beliefs on how it should be taught. I notice a Romantic flair that developed, perhaps, as a reaction against the Bottom Up Methodology I encountered as a child. But it likely emerged from the mystery that clouded writing in my mind for years as well. I never fully understood where writing came from, what made it different from speaking, why my K-12 teachers seemed to think I was "good" at it -- writing had a magic element which I guessed sprung forth from a genius well, genetics, or some kind, floaty god. I only barely understood what worked for me at the time and wrongly projected that onto the rest of the world. Just talk, express yourself, let it flow, I'd think. Why is it so hard for some people? Write what you know. Then I'd hit mental blocks in my assignments and I'd curse the floaty god. I had limited tools to adjust and writing became stressful. I was always (un)lucky enough to get by without having to understand what I was doing. As an undergraduate, when I was at my most rebellious and subversive, my attitude was at turns Postmodern. Anything goes, The ways we learn to communicate are arbitrary, Communication is arbitrary, or There's a problem with society and academia from which we must be freed. My thoughts were those of a young boy isolated in school, study, ideology. It's fun and even a little embarrassing to think about where I've come from.

This chapter helped me understand the struggle between approaches, that none is entirely perfect in itself. I also better recognized the difference of attitudes between K-12 instructors and college professors and was able to empathize with the K-12 side more than ever.

Free Writing is not Free-ing

As I attempted to do the free writing segment in class my struggles grew to a level of over whelming anxiety.  My mind kept searching for the structure of the 5 part paragraph essay, how can I free write, when my mind has a brick wall of structure, that can not seem to break through.  I type babble, mis-spelled words, and even the learned way one should type is battled within me, if I cannot have the structure of the essay format can I at least look at the keys.

Now how do I tell you about an autobiography when there are blanks and brick walls of cemented biblical "holly grail" of information that I am struggling to break through.  Next week I shall have progress.

School Sucks

School Sucks

The rhymes that were spoken about in the T.R. Johnson article reveal something rather interesting about fear, power, and the politics of both in the school setting.  Having attended private schools until high school, I always thought of my elementary experience as a sheltered one. My rebellions weren’t  caused by not feeling heard, or valued, so much as it was about expressing, and  asserting my burgeoning sense of self. This meant smoking  in a convent storage room, at the age of twelve.  Not threatening others.  What my forty-something self knows, that my pre-teen self didn’t, is the idea that we all resist and push against the power structure. For some of us, that work is taking place inwardly, and for others the struggle takes a more sublime (in the Edmund Burke tradition) path. However, both are about trying to map out one’s  subjectivity.   Sadly, I really think that most people, not just kids, struggle with trying to figure out where they fit in, in the hierarchy of not only school but life. It is that fear that drives the kind of violence that these songs address. Ironically the violence is directed at the very people that can help them overcome this lack. Writing can help people not only find their voice, but to use it in a way that affirms life, rather than threatens it. 

A Reflection on Johnson

A lot of what Johnson said resonates with me. For example, when describing the energy his students exhibited while writing, he said 'he'd always assumed that it came from opening onto the raw flow of the composing process and from engaging the particulars of the immediate context.' I suppose that is where we got lost. The ancients had the ability to tap into the raw flow, and then somewhere along the way it got subverted. He likens the pain now associated with writing to a medieval rite of passage whereby boys became gentlemen through the memorization of rules and regular floggings. Composition instructors must be cognizant of this. We must follow the tradition of the renegade rhetoricians. We have allow our students to derive 'pleasure from an open-ended process'. School will suck forever if we don't relax strictures and let our students laugh as they create.

 I had a migraine after I read Johnson's essay.  

I do, however, agree with Johnson about the discomfort some classrooms can give students.  There were times in school where I really felt like I couldn’t keep up with the educational standards.  There were certain concepts I just couldn’t get right away, especially in math, and I felt like I was left behind.  I didn’t ask for help because I didn’t really want to look slow to my classmates or teacher.  It's my fault for not asking, but I was a kid trying to fit in....Anyway,  she always emphasized how fractions were important to master in the fifth grade, and that if you didn’t master it, you will be left behind in high school and that you’ll probably never get it.  I believed her and it became a self-fulfilling prophecy.  I didn't want to be a part of school anymore because I felt I couldn't keep up.  I had that “I don’t get it so why bother?” attitude  and so it wasn’t until college that I finally learned how to add/subtract fractions.  Sad.  It took me so long to get over that mindset.  So I can personally understand why most struggling students would say “school sucks” or sing those anti-school melodies according to Johnson.  I only started to really listen to those negative attitudes and songs about school when I began struggling as a student in Junior High School and it only began with those school melodies.   In Junior High School I picked up my first Insane Clown Posse CD.  At that time, I could relate to their songs, though I didn’t literally want to kill anyone.  Listening to bands or groups like them was just a way fitting in and rebelling against an institution that I felt I wasn’t good enough for.   On top of all that, I really didn't see how anything I learned in school was relevant in my life at that time so my negative attitude towards school was there to stay.  

“I believe that school makes complete fools of our young men, because they see and hear nothing of ordinary life there”- Gaius Petronious Arbiter

Oh Okay...I get It Now

Originally I had written about how bad Linda Brodkey's language was in her section about "changing the subject."  Then reading this next section, I realized a complete 360 change in her message and in her language.  W-o-w.  So she teaches graduate students to talk to other-like ESL adults like a pen-pal.  I have had a similar experience myself on facebook where I've met several Indonesian students from Nias island who are studying English.  They refer to me, like she says in the article, as someone like a teacher.  Whenever I say hello to one of them (her name is Forent Zega) she says "hello Sir, how are you?"  This formality shows the difference her and I have and me as the "pak-guru" as the Indonesians call it or instructor role.  However, I am not her teacher.  It's interesting that Brodkey makes this point because it has recently happened to me.  It's interesting that another male, however, does not call me "Sir" but "bro".  He does not like this differential term because he feels more empowered as an individual to be an equal rather than a subject to the regal teacher.  I think this shows not only a gender dynamic, but also a student dynamic.  This dialogue serves a lot with the other people as well who seemed connected.  Another one of the girls, for example, rather views me as someone like a relative who is teaching her to be a better person.  There is a familial distinction some of them make with me, while others see a professional yet personal relationship.  It's an interesting thought because in America we are usually one and not the other.  However, Forent clearly believes that I am both someone professional and personable, which is something many students in America seem to have a hard time with.  This is all done via facebook messages and statuses so it is really a non-formal way of communication and I noticed that a lot of times they seem to benefit from this conversation because they are being entertained by the language, but also learning to better engage in a topic.  The pen-pal method is one of the best techniques I've ever heard of and works better than a workshop because, as I've told Veronica in another post, my college experience with workshops is never a positive thing ... even in grad school.  

schools that suck make persuasive songs that cry laughing

Johnson connects the columbine massacre to fun, violent ryhmes from the playground that hated everything about school when he was young. He conjectures that bringing this rebellion and laughter into lesson plans will increase student participation and make rhetoric and composition a less painful experience for students cultivating their speech patterns and political opinions outside of the classroom wanting acceptance. Who here is familiar with the negative word = indoctrination=the idea your identity has been taken from you. transmogrified your integrity. the playground poems about the principle shaving genital warts off his face for sucking his wifes dick. robbed of his speakerphone or whistle. a bankrupt asshole self disciplined about sitting on the flag pole in the school yard. Pink floyd  =lynching the school master for mocking the rock star as a child. Making a bonfire of school desks,  The manufactured faces of children morphed of their distinction in mask, complacent in the school chair on the conveyer belt taking them to the meat grinder. Students hate the critical thinking skills that make them feel like retards - cant do anything!.  Rules and mechanics make rhetoric and composition an enemy, choices that sabotage us when we argue = uncarefully -.

Sounds ignorant because it is for a formal blog or classroom discussion. Its disorganized and there is ugly content, and I edited some of the "sonic" nonsense out of it, or in other words, removed some of its rawness. it is not the kind of renegade rhetoric that is useful  for a teacher in the classroom because it is likely to scare and offend people, but it finds a way past repeating what other writers, and peers say to find my own thoughts. The poem activities that Johnson and his colleague practiced do this without creating hostility, or abusive behavior that keeps students from learning composition, and developing appropriate skills for communicating their ideas. The paragraph above exemplifies something close to what gorgias ad cixous are recognized for, and presents how much careful consideration is needed in bringing rebellion, magic, pain, and laughter to the classroom.

Chapter 4; Workshops

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Workshops are such a brilliant idea in theory, but actually having them function as described in Chapter 4 is a rare occurrence. Collaborative groups work wondefully in the college setting because students are mature enough to stay on topic (and even then, the discussion may sway to current events or other topics). In a high school setting, unless perhaps an honors class or 12th grade level, I find group work to be a great challenge. Our school encouranges group work, in fact, prefers the desks to be in small circles, but when students are put into groups, even with incentives such as homework passes or edible treats, they cannot stay focused. Although at one time, 9th grade classes were supposed to be a ratio of 20 students per 1 teacher, I  have 40 ninth grade students in my class!! So having eight groups of five students gets a bit out of control. The groups stay focused if I am standing directly over them, monitoring them, but shortly after I move over to the next group, I hear discussion about "...that great shot that Kobe made last night" or who just broke up with whom. The work will eventually get done, but with the noise level of group work and the distractions, the students don't really give strong feedback to the work they are editing. Therefore, in theory, I support the idea of collaborative groups, but in reality, I find it a great challenge to actually implement in high school classrooms.

Johnson's Sucky Logic.

Johnson begins his essay by perpetuating the myth of the “trench coat mafia” at Columbine, a canard which author Dave Cullen exposes in his brilliant award winning book on the massacre. Neither Dylan Klebold nor Eric Harris was a member of this trench coated group. They did not in fact begin wearing trench coats at Columbine until long after doing so had lost its cachet at the school. There is no connection between school yard limericks and shooting up a school, not even a tenuous one. It’s like he is trying to assert causation into the mix without actually having the balls to back it up. This is because he lacks the evidence to make that connection. Soon after he asserts that Peter Elbow has an interest or belief in magic through incantation. Having not read the piece referred to I can only guess that Elbow uses the term figuratively. One of the central arguments of his essay is the Sophie’s Choice dilemma on academic vs. individual voice. His argument is of the either or type and so will not come to any sort of agreed to conclusion. Who the hell are these young Satanists he refers to and what exactly are the blood rituals they partake in? I think he pulled that one directly from his ass. I especially like where he decides to refrain from any over simplistic explanations when that is sort of what he has been doing throughout his essay. Trench coat mafia indeed.  His final assertion? It is a miracle that more of us do not become trench coat garbed assassins due to our adverse reaction to writing pedagogy. School can suck at times, but for the most part it is an intellectual adventure with hopefully a little fun on the journey. School doesn’t suck, but Johnson’s logic does. Oh, and Math. Math sucks too.

Williams: The Workshop

I've been in advanced, university creative writing workshops and never had instruction or an atmosphere like those Williams' blueprints in Chapter 4. My professors were published, some anthologized, but none were writers in the classroom. Following their lead, discussion of our work focused on punctuation, grammar, surface edits. "Remove this, I'd use the word '______' here, bring this down to the next line." There was never any prodding of our ideas, no discussing strategies, intentions, theories. The classrooms were stuffy because very few of the students bonded. We were nervous and we never stopped seeking approval for a story or poem well-done. We were always measuring ourselves against the next guy. No one emphasized writing as a process or even writing as something to be practiced. Being messy would have been humiliating. Not having it figured out seemed unacceptable. You had to have something good and you had to have it each week. Real revision couldn't happen because the professor collected "revisions" on the last day of the term, a busy assignment for a quick grade. Feedback? None. I'm not putting previous professors on blast to tear down the system. Teaching really is a tough job. But poor instruction still happens at the university level. And the notion that we teach the way we were taught scares me, so maybe I'm trying to exercise some of my demons. I want to be different. I found this chapter refreshing.

Shen and (I)deology

An interesting take on the problems faced by those who have to learn and think in English. The author must learn a whole new way of thinking about himself and his relation to reading and writing in English. I found the idea of suppressing the "we" in order to develop the "I" especially interesting and props to anyone who has to do that. The two modes of thought are polar opposites and it must be especially difficult to do. There are literally ingrained thought processes which must be re-ordered. The concept of yijing, or thinking pictorially, is appealing to the comic book geek inside me, but it would make writing essays troublesome. Screenwriting might be easier to do with this mode of thought. Very interesting that Ron has actually had to work this way with his students. I can see how experience becomes a central aspect of this form of writing. It seems to differ from a typical screenplay in that the language is opened up by experience and incorporates an almost poetic like thought process. You are not just thinking in pictures, but how these pictures, or sensory images, relate to your own experience. ESL presents students with cognitive problems which have never occurred to me.

Why "School Sucks" Sucked....

Howdy Howdy! My biggest gripe this time around has to be Johnson's "School Sucks" article. Johnson does a wonderful job exploring the discomfort that students feel in school and the various psychological that exists within the walls of school grounds and education. I can also see the connection between school violence and the inhospitable pedagogical approaches to teaching/testing students. Its not to say that bad pedagogy will directly lead to a school shooting but rather that it doesn't help. Its just one more reason that an adolescent loathes school and (since schooling takes up such a large portion of the adolescents time) subsequently their life. And so we go back to a standard pedagogical questions: how do we get students to enjoy learning so they can want to learn? How do we get students to understand that they are the Master's of their own creations and have the capacity to exceed our standards and their expectations of their selves?
Yeah....as soon as I figure that out, I'll just write a textbook, mark it up by 300% and retire. Until then, we fumble and throw every form of constructive and supportive assistance as we possibly can at the student. My main educational reaction to Johnson's article, beyond agreement, would be a reiteration/elaboration that feedback and proper encouragement are a must. In all scenarios. Better pedagogy insists that constructive feedback be given to each student regardless of how well their work is constructed. For the students who need a great deal of assistance, a proper manner of communicating their errors and "areas of opportunities" must be given readily while balancing some well mannered encouragement. Additionally, and this is where i think many educators fail, even the stronger students must be given exact feedback as to their "areas of opportunities" and what their strengths are and why. I think that educators that tell their students "good job" but don't tell them exactly why their work was "good" also do a considerable disservice to the students. Without telling a student what their exact habits are that are acceptable or exceptional, then you'll create a population of students who think they're good-writers without knowing exactly why (and will probably continue making tiny errors that were glossed over).
So, after all my rambling then why do I gripe with the Johnson article?! Because it was too detailed. Way too, too detailed. I was planning to write a larger portion of my Literary Autobiography on the uncomfortable and harsh environments created by teachers. And don't get me wrong; i did not expect such a topic to be unique to myself alone. BUT, Johnson just went over and over the various scenarios,  psychological backgrounds and anxiety that exists within students that eats away at their confidence that now I feel....like...like I would just be writing an offshoot of Johnson even if it wasn't intentional. So THANK YOU Johnson. Thank you for undermining my self-confidence and creating a realm of anxiety in trying to write a Literary Autobiography about literary anxiety....

Oh yeah, Chapter 4 rocked.

Blogger Respsonse: Johnson's "School Sucks"
Johnson explores students' hostility toward the educational system and how or if teachers contribute to the volatile behavior of students. This is a critical topic that needs investigation for the teaching institution. The massive proportion of student violence in various states indicates that the educational system may be a part of the deadly feud on the school campuses. It is important to diffuse the animosity that students have for teachers, but first it is important to examine the motivation behind the brewing hatred. Johnson reflects on his own childhood experiences of negative attitudes about teachers. What makes this worth investigation is that students exhibit the interest to want to learn and write, but what they create are rhymes or written literature that are venomous, specifically to academia. Johnson states, "Murder, arson, anarchy, and sadism: these are certainly no nursery rhymes. But their general logic follows directly out of the earlier pair. They all three give voice to a powerful rancor, a supremely negative reaction against the experience of being in school" (Johnson 623). What Johnson notices is that students' voices (rhymes) worsen by the day. What interest Johnson the most is that the students' rancor manifested in the action of writing; which is an indication that the students have a hidden desire to learn to write and have a fascination with words, but they rebel against the constructs of the educational system. This education system loses the student's attention to mainstream media (television and radio). Because of the large population of students who imitate rhymes and the production of written creativity from music and television, it is transparent that these two mediums are more influential to the students than the environment of the classroom. Characters like "Bart" and "Beavis" (Johnson 623) are models that students pattern themselves after states Johnson. Today students love to imitate rappers' demonic (vulgar) rhymes! A critical question emerges as I read this article, how can the educational system gain the interest of the students? As a person who is interested in teaching, how do I construct my teaching techniques to accommodate the academic needs of the students?

Johnson states Gorgias's theory, "Before a student can learn how to persuade an audience about anything, the student must first learn to enjoy composing, to generate a rigorous, positive excitement around the task of rhetorical action". This is a valuable angle, the therapeutic method. Johnson and other academics (Gorgias, Elbow, Entralgo) are addressing the reality that students are afraid of the educational institution which evokes fear and fight responses. The idea to obtain students trust through written assignments or methods that will bring them pleasure is a start to relinquish the students' animosity. Pleasurable writing activities will gain trust and probably can stimulate the student to become confident in the development of writing prose. This "pleasurable technique" challenges teachers to become creative with assignments using students' text. This is especially helpful for students who come from adverse situations, the "traumatized child".

Mike Rose's "I wanna be average" autobiographical essay

In "I just wannabe Average," by Mike Rose, the term average doesn’t apply to students like the young mike rose and friends (kids of a working class background) as much as the average teachers at “Our Lady of Mercy,” whom "give skeletal outlines of world history,’ and manage the classroom like its the "parkinglot at the shrine auditorium". They were working class teachers teaching kids who needed extra guindance, not “low end” guidance. Their lesson plans do not set the bar high enough, and bring the day to day repetitiveness of working class boredom to the classroom. Teachers who are unable to cultivate success because they are not fully cultivated, not Masters of their subject yet – concerned about their world and not the world their students face, not creating business men out of pimps and drug dealers, artists out of taggers and interpreters out of bilingual students. When I hear the word "vocational"  I think of day time commercials that offer you careers in medical billing or computer graphic design that lead to a “low end” / “dead end” job. Brother Dill, Mr. Mitropetros, Young Brother Slattery taught like they took a four to six week course at Phoenix College. Yes - they had a degree or credential that qualified them for the job, but they were not qualified enough to work yet. I share a lot in common with them. I look  up to Jack MacFarland’s ability to see the importance of “teaching your heart out,” and being of service to a classroom culture that needed more help and was close to home. I put More negative than postive notes regarding the rose essay, but it was not really this depressing. It made me aware of how I am selling my self and others short in my own learning/teaching journey. the kind telling of mike'steachers before MacFaland presents the apathy of a teacher and the apathy of the student reinforcing the average expectations of eachother. they were human even though they sucked, but they teach us what not to do, so our presence is not dragged across the floor and thrown out the  window, or sadly pressured to self-deport..  

Shen

I am writing hoping I am getting this blogging correct.  I read Shen's article and found the statement "learning the values of  Anglo-American Society" is how I reflect on what has been taught to me as an African American student.  Where you live in the American Society can determine how well you are taught a specific subject.  At this point in my life, I find I am missing valuable components of the "Anglo-American Society" value of writing.  I struggle with being myself as I write, I am more prone to write to please my teacher or professor.  The question I have for myself is what game am I going to learn that will help me write for my true self and express it to others.

I had title this blog the 5 parts to good writing I am referring to the 5 part paragraph essay that everyone has been taught at some point in there development of learning to write, but I struggle with this, it sort of like this blog you  have to do it or else so I make it happen to the best of my ability.  I am here to make the connection now at the graduate level.

test2

test

"Alogical Pattern"

        Shen’s essay is a very interesting read for me.  My interest is particularly drawn to the “Alogical Pattern” of the Chinese critical approach “yijing”, which is the practice of envisioning and creating a picture of the piece of literature that one is reading.  It is not a process of “logical” thinking according to Shen and most Chinese critics, but it is a very creative and critical process.   “Thinking is conducted largely in pictures and then ‘transcribed’ into words” (Shen 464).  I find this process of thinking, which is totally “non-western”, is actually called for in mostly narrative essays and is strikingly similar to what we call sensory images.  Every semester, incoming college freshmen that I tutor are usually given narrative essays for their first assignments.  The prompt would direct them to use sensory imagery to “make the reader feel like they are there”.   Most students,  most of the time, would have difficulty in  developing and using sensory details.   For example, if a student were to describe the weather on a particular day in a narrative, he/she would usually write along the lines of “It was hot that day”.  With sensory imagery, using words that would create that image of  “It was hot that day”, the sentence would probably turn to “I was caught in the great wavering swell of mid summer with the sun well in its zenith”, or something like that.  This style really does place more emphasis on experience and creativity than anything else.  It's showing, not telling which is just like yijing.  

I believe that most students have difficulty with sensory images because they are not brought up with this mode of thinking.  It’s usually just straight to the point.  However, I’ve tutored many Chinese ESL students and they too have had difficult with yijing or sensory imagery or pictorial images as well.  Shen does state that he was well educated in Chinese composition, so I guess that may explain it.  In any case, I really like the “yijing” approach from a creative standpoint.  

There’s already been some comments on how Shen touches on some of the issues of identity in terms of language and culture and I really do empathize ESL students as they try reconcile their native and American identities. I do think Shen’s essay is useful in helping teachers be aware of some of the cultural/idealogical differences in composition.  

Reflections on Shen

Wow! What a powerful reading! I enjoyed it immensely. First of all, Shen should be commended for the way he reconciled his Chinese identity with his English identity. He got right to the point and right off the bat.We know exactly what he's up to in the first sentence of the second paragraph. Moreover, not only does he have the formula correct, he very successfully put himself into the writing. Fromthe sound of it, he has come a long way from those first writing sassignments that caused him so much grief.

TheClassroomand the Wider Culture clarified a lot of things for me. I have had Chinese students in my classes, and I can finally say that I have a grasp on what they have to go through to write effectively according to our standard. Sure, we're all familiar with Kaplan's 'noodle' imagery that compares the spiral Chinese thought process with the straight-line Western approach, yet , as far as I am concerned, professors have only mentioned this as one thing to keep in mind. I have never had the 'spiral approach' explained to me in such depth.

I especially liked his discussing both his ideological and his logical identities. Too often, we emphasize the logic behind writing without considering a student's ideological mindset. Although it makes perfect sene now that I've read Shen's explanation, I never really thought about the difference between materialism and idealism when going through my Chinese students' papers.

I hope to share this article with my colleagues and wsh that I could find similar ones for other cultures. Having sensitivity to students of cultures other than one's own is essential for effective teaching.

Fan Shen and the inseparability of language and culture

Fan Shen's essay, "The Classroom and the Wider Culture" reminds us that culture and language are inseparable. Language contains in its fabric approaches to life and patterns of thought. It will simultaneously reflect culture, and be influenced and shaped by culture. Sensitivity to these relationships seems central to creating atmospheres for safety, discussion, nurture and success in our classrooms.

I feel sympathetic for students like Chen and the Spanish speakers in Veronica's class (her comment is below). While developing a command of Academic English, they may also experience a pronounced schism of selves, a schism that can sometimes go unnoticed by instructors, peers, parents. Language is more than structures and agreements; it can provide an entirely new way to see and understand the world. How incredibly exhausting, then, to wrestle and reconcile old and new values in a course loaded heavy with native-biased prompts and expectations of a (sometimes invisible) Western standard of "adequacy". I commend those students who hang on through the process and the teachers who recognize the challenges language can present and choose to adapt instruction, to listen and to discuss. Unfortunately many language learners are wrongly classified as less capable, lazy or even "stupid" by classmates and sometimes instructors. I am reminded that English is a way, Western values are a way, and not the only way.

I believe Shen shows exceptional aptitude in recognizing the issues involved in language, culture and identity, and in fighting to retain a Chinese self. That probably represents a best case scenario. But what happens to those less quick or less equipped (by age or other reason)? Does our teaching consume their identities and ideas, and replace each with a set presumed superior?

Thinking about ESL: Could it be that some of the assumptions at the basis of the Process learning method are inadequate in addressing the needs of language learners in the classroom? Perhaps, for some, deciding what to say is not as problematic as the challenge of saying it in English...

Thoughts on incorporating an fun/exploratory exercise on yijing in the Western-classroom? Written images to describe the feelings and experiences students have in relationship to a read text or passage.

Happy Birthday Rachat!

Fan Shen and the Ideology of Identity

I noticed that in this article (and the many responses) focused on the other languages, that is, the "Spanish" and "English," which constitute in my mind the definition of an OTHER.  Unlike most responses, I know several people personally who are CHinese, Korean, and Japanese.  In their language structures they usually do things syntactically different than we do.  For example, in Hangul (Korean) they structure the verb to end the sentence rather than be the middle that will determine what's going on in the sentence.  This is often why most Asian people who speak English may sound awkward.  Another thing I know about eastern languages in general is that they do not use (or rather they have a different set of articles and other defining methods so they often omit or do not use them in the English language.)  For example, many asian students may write: I went to movies and saw show.  The main issue is not so much the structure in this case, but the missing articles.
In other languages, like Shen's Chinese is that they have a similar structure, but an ideological difference.  This happened to be a point of a discussion the other between me and my Chinese friends where the Communist language often comes out to be about the "us" instead of "me."  Although Shen does not go this far, it is suggestive that their is no "individual voice" in a place where is no "individuality."  As a person who has taken Korean, had to write Chinese characters, play on their instruments, and compose in their style can tell you that it is NOT a very Western way at all.  As Shen calls it "yijing" which is very non-western because often times especially in the composition of Asian traditional is that music balance (i.e. piano part here and violin section there) does not exist.  Most of the time, they are unified under one sound.  This is not writing persay, but it does reflect I think a good deal of what Fan Shen is talking about.
Although this may not directly influence my writing it does impact my thoughts on teaching foreign students.  I am quite aware of Shen's thoughts and so I think that it mainly confirms what I already know about the language and culture.  It not only affects for me to teach them, but work on a personal basis to understand them.  When one can understand another culture, the better chance they have in succeeding with that group in educating them.  Shen's article really is a fantastic way to see what is little talked about these days: how to react to a Communist mind through writing about academic literature.

Thoughts on Shen's Article

First and foremost, I am going to take up the proposition of speaking in a more colloquial vernacular and syntax because I don't feel much like editing my speech pattern. Now, its at this time that I can speak to the interesting aspects of Shen's article, how i can relate to it and have some part of me shinning through but to be quite honest I just had a tiny little cynical voice questioning the actuality and the literal translation of the individual I had.
My first thoughts were that this conception only truly exists in higher forms of education; beyond basic community and college and beyond the remedial or even basic forms of English composition. I take a moment to agree and acknowledge Shen's point; That various cultural differences WILL effect writing and that a teacher/professor/educator must be aware of the differences in order to properly address and assist the student. I agree. Good point.
BUT to be cynical, how many teachers have I ever seen that truly emphasize individuality. Who truly want to hear what any student has to say. Its nice to have an Ayn Rand style of conception of Western Civilization (except for all the extreme aspects) in which the crux and beauty of our civilization exists upon the need for individuality and the production of an immediate point.
The point of proper voice within a paper; the ability to use an active voice are strong aspects of  standard English composition but something bothers me about the ideal concept that educators were truly pushing for an individual voice. Forgive my squirrely brain but to me, it seems like most of the education that I've seen and been taught has been to be able to produce a well formed composition that SOUNDS LIKE the thoughts, formations and presentation of the masses in a nice individualistic package with its own tiny, exotic details.
(The whole true individuality point has to be tackled. I've had a handful of previous educators on the other side of the fence - attempting to encourage a truly individual voice, form and structure while balancing standard rhetoric, composition and form. Not easy. But I see my friends and colleagues attempting to do the same and someday I hope my tiny voice of cynicism has no basis or validity at all.)
With that in mind, Shen's deconstruction of Western and (in her individual case) Eastern thinking in basic application of composition is concerned strikes as somewhat more useful to me than probably intended.
I can vaguely relate to Shen's initial writing process and structure. I wrote and still write very similarly from time to time. A great difference occurs though - in that my culture is largely a Western one. I grew up in Texas, taught only to speak in English and essentially read and write in a Western mindset. Yet, I acknowledge that I do not speak, write or think in any real form of Standard English and thereby am within a different mind frame and inclination. As such, I'd commend that Shen's article could apply to me or to any number of students in nearly any level of education in which Standard English thinking is a foreign language.
(Does anyone else find it amusing that a group of teachers/future educators are waiting to the last moment to complete an assignment. I believe I have decent reason to be more a bigger procrastinator than usual; 'tis my birthday today and I really wanted to just ignore this sucker until the last possible moment.)-James M.

Reflction on the Shen essay

After reading the essay “The Classroom and the Wider culture: Identity as a key to Learning English Composition,” I thought about the struggles of many of my Spanish speaking students. Often times, we as teachers get frustrated with the lack of writing abilities of our students. I know I tend to think that the problems stem from their lack of trying and disregard for the subject. After reading this essay, I realize that a big part of their challenges deal with the differences in their primary language (Spanish) and the new language, English. Not only are they being introduced to new vocabulary, but they are learning new writing ideals….English ideals, that have fundamental differences from the structure of Spanish composition. With this realization, I can design lessons focusing more on the comparison to key factors in their language and examine how it differs from English writing. Overall, I found the essay interesting and quite helpful.