Sirc in the Box?
I want to begin by saying that I love this piece. While Sirc’s ideas are nothing less than idealistic, he nonetheless gives us a focused goal. Sirc argues that we need to create/offer an environment/way for students to find ways of composing that challenge the norms. He bases his whole argument on composers like DuChamp who found a way of composing that still expressed meaning but challenged the traditional viewer. I don’t think he just asks us to emulate these types of compositions. I think he is asking us to look at composition differently, approach it from a different angle, not completely disregard traditional modes of composition.
The problem with approaching composition differently is not having the means to do it. Working in the traditional public school classroom teachers never have the funding they need to provide ideal materials for students. Not only that, but when do they have the time? This frustrating cycle makes me want to scream and I’m don’t have my own classroom yet.
So where does this leave us? Should we try to find a way to work with Sirc’s ideas? There are ways. Shipka provides living proof of this. But how do we incorporate it into a classroom with little or no room for idea play?. There are elective courses that could be made but that still isn’t the be all end all solution. So, what do we do?
How Schools Suppress Creativity
I've encountered this text before in another one of Shipka's classes. It brought some interesting questions to the table. It asks if the five paragraph essay suppresses creativity in students. I do think Lauren made her point, but I also think that she defeated her own purpose. The formula could be applied in different ways, as she demonstrates. Therefore suggesting the formula is adaptable and changable.
I approached these texts like I would my own writing, I read the comments made my the "teacher" first. The first text was not nearly as shocking as the second. The comments of the second text seemed so personal, attacking any and every choice the writer made. On the other hand, the first had comments that I received and have given in the past. The comments were formulaic. A machine could have graded that paper. But maybe that's the point the student was trying to make. Do teachers really help students by grading their papers using a formula. I chose to become an English major because Math happens to be my greatest fear, and now I have to learn formulas? At the same time, the second method is so harsh. I would want to never write again and possibly plot revenge against the teacher that wrote the comments.
The question, does this formula suppress creativity? I definitely think it can. If the teacher does not ask more of the student, then yes, creativity could be suppressed. But, if the teacher finds a way to challenge the student then creativity does not have to be suppressed. Maybe more interesting prompts or even just holding students accountable for the choices they make. The five paragraph essay does provide constraints, but it doesn't limit the student if the teacher doesn't allow that to happen. It also provides a compacted assessment of students.
This does not mean that I like the five paragraph essay, but I do think there is still a place for it in schools. I just think teachers need to push students to do more with it. Lauren's piece is a perfect example creativity working within the constraints of the formula. We just need to find a way to get more of this out of students.
I approached these texts like I would my own writing, I read the comments made my the "teacher" first. The first text was not nearly as shocking as the second. The comments of the second text seemed so personal, attacking any and every choice the writer made. On the other hand, the first had comments that I received and have given in the past. The comments were formulaic. A machine could have graded that paper. But maybe that's the point the student was trying to make. Do teachers really help students by grading their papers using a formula. I chose to become an English major because Math happens to be my greatest fear, and now I have to learn formulas? At the same time, the second method is so harsh. I would want to never write again and possibly plot revenge against the teacher that wrote the comments.
The question, does this formula suppress creativity? I definitely think it can. If the teacher does not ask more of the student, then yes, creativity could be suppressed. But, if the teacher finds a way to challenge the student then creativity does not have to be suppressed. Maybe more interesting prompts or even just holding students accountable for the choices they make. The five paragraph essay does provide constraints, but it doesn't limit the student if the teacher doesn't allow that to happen. It also provides a compacted assessment of students.
This does not mean that I like the five paragraph essay, but I do think there is still a place for it in schools. I just think teachers need to push students to do more with it. Lauren's piece is a perfect example creativity working within the constraints of the formula. We just need to find a way to get more of this out of students.
On Discourse and Diversity and Pomo Blues
First I would like to address something Erika said in her blog. She asks "how practical is it to teach students to deviate from the standard?" I don't think we should just focus on the practicality of teaching students to deviate from the standard. The fact of the matter is that if no one in history deviated from the standard, we could still be without the wheel. I think we all recognize that a change needs to be made not in just teaching composition, but the whole academic institution needs change. Honestly, we cannot change the system on our own. We need the help of our students. We need them to understand that deviation from the standard is the only way to start this change. Maybe it is time for people to realize that Standard American English isn't the be all end all dialect of academic writing. The academy is so rigid, maybe it is time for other aspects of American language and culture to be given a chance to find footing in the the academic world. In order to do this, we need to start the change by introducing these ideas to the students. Ask more of them then just five paragraph essays and mimicked sonnets. Challenge them to reach farther. Ask them to scare us, the teacher. Don't let them rest in the familiar. And don't let ourselves rest in the familiar.
On Pomo Blues
I do agree that meaning can be and often is socially constructed. Therefore, personal narratives often have ties to social definitions. But I still think that there is hope for the personal narrative because not all people experience events, ideas, readings in the same way. It becomes personal when we internalize the events and make sense of them with societal definitions. Where it becomes tricky is when you encounter a student who is not ready to analyze these things deeply. Not only that, but it is easier to assign the generic topic and go with convention, because then you, the teacher, don't have to think. That is the problem.
On Pomo Blues
I do agree that meaning can be and often is socially constructed. Therefore, personal narratives often have ties to social definitions. But I still think that there is hope for the personal narrative because not all people experience events, ideas, readings in the same way. It becomes personal when we internalize the events and make sense of them with societal definitions. Where it becomes tricky is when you encounter a student who is not ready to analyze these things deeply. Not only that, but it is easier to assign the generic topic and go with convention, because then you, the teacher, don't have to think. That is the problem.
On Personal Writing assignments
The description Connors gives of the shift from academic writing as impacted by the Greek oratory tradition to the student centered personal writing is not just uncomfortable for the teacher. As a student who doesn't ever like getting those assignments, I honestly don't think I'm the only one. The plus to writing in the academic tradition is that you don't have to bare yourself to a person who doesn't really know you. Your experience could be misconstrued, especially if you aren't a very good writer. But there are also advantages to focusing on personal writing. Inputting one's experience could help the reader relate and become more involved in the text. So where does that leave us? Absolutely nowhere.
Again, we face the question of academic versus personal writing and which is best for teaching composition. And once again, I don't think there is a clear answer. Academic writing has its pros and cons as does personal writing. I think separating the two remains impossible. There needs to be a combination of both. As much as I do not like inserting personal stories into my academic writing, the ability to write clearly about one's experiences is an important skill to have and can be incorporated into academic writing if need be. Even if this makes the teacher uncomfortable, in the grand scheme of life the ability to articulate ones experiences and synthesize them with academia could only help because it can add impassion the writing if done correctly.
Again, we face the question of academic versus personal writing and which is best for teaching composition. And once again, I don't think there is a clear answer. Academic writing has its pros and cons as does personal writing. I think separating the two remains impossible. There needs to be a combination of both. As much as I do not like inserting personal stories into my academic writing, the ability to write clearly about one's experiences is an important skill to have and can be incorporated into academic writing if need be. Even if this makes the teacher uncomfortable, in the grand scheme of life the ability to articulate ones experiences and synthesize them with academia could only help because it can add impassion the writing if done correctly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
