Insert Catchy Title Here

I’m probably not the first person one would expect to complain about liberal bias in the classroom and I’m not that sure that’s what I’m planning to do here. Don’t believe me? Then by all means accept my invite to join a protest of Rudi Giuliani as the commence speaker at the University of Southern Mississippi May 15graduation in Hattiesburg.
What I do want to discus here in Scorczewski’s tone deafness to the politics of what she’s teaching. It strikes me that for all her talk of empowering the students and overthrowing the dominant culture (ok maybe not overthrowing, but you get my drift— AH! CLICHÉ! CLICHÉ! RUN FOR THE HILLLS) she stills seems on some level wedded to the receptacle model of education. I’ve got the good ideas and you students—when you’re smart enough to see what’s up—will get them. And I don’t just mean the language of the academy here. It’s political beliefs. Now, that said she does speak to this on p233. (She regained a bit of ethos for me here after she lost it utterly by referring to Jamaica Kincaid’s “Girl” as an essay. It’s not an essay. It’s an excerpt from the NOVEL Lucy.) “”My relief revealed my entrenchment in another ideology, an institutional ideology so prevalent I perceived it as common sense.”

While not about cliché per se: I remember in an early class you suggested that we look for where the writing breaks down in student papers. This is what they’re trying to say. I’m still doing this and the jury still feels out. My own instinct in teaching creative writing is to tell students to look for where the language soars. This is their best material. This is what they want to try to develop.

Multi-Modal, My Aunt Fanny

(or Why I Think This is the Worst Idea Since Sliced Poison)

While I spent a meaningful amount of time as a technology executive as well as executive editor for a trade publication covering technology in finance, I’m still a bit of a Luddite when it comes to writing pedagogy. Now, don’t get me wrong. I love having computers in every classroom and having access to classrooms where each student can use a computer. I even use the MS Word comment feature to grade papers. But when it comes to the work being generate by the students themselves. I’m OLD SKOOL! I want to see 12 Times New Roman on 8.5 by 11 with 1 inch margins and a running head. Unless the essay is about a photo, or a chart or graph are truly helpful to communicate, no thank you, please.

So maybe I’m not the audience Takayoshi and Selfe had in mind for Chapter One Of Thinking About Multimodiality. I am a resistant audience. I’m twisting the rhetorical triangle into a parallelogram waiting until page nine when they finally speak to my primary concern: When you add a focus on multimodiality to a composition class, what do you give up?

Yeah. See that’s the nagging question that kept me from engaging with their argument. And what do they have to say on this: “We believe that teaching students to make rhetorically-based use of video, still images….can actually help them better understand the affordances of written language.” Well, pardon me for calling BS, but I wasn’t aware the composition studies was so close to theology that an “I believe” statement could be employed in place of evidence. Where are their rigorous studies performed with various groups/types of students performed over long periods of time tracking how well students learned in a composition class?

I applauded when Larry Ellison banned PowerPoint from Oracle as a colossal time waster. ( I had done the same at the PR firm where I was managing director the same month.) The joint chiefs of staff also saw an issue with people using all their time and bandwidth fooling with bells and whistles instead of communicating facts.

Southern Miss (Noun Followed By Verb)

One of things that really pleases me about Kathleen Blake Yancey’s address/article “Made Not Only in Words: Composition in a New Key”—perhaps because it sets her apart from the great majority of rhetoric and composition studies material I’ve read— is her willingness to confront the material conditions, not only of our students and their writing process, but within our own departments and discipline. Yancey doesn’t eschew facts on the ground type analysis of the shift underway in today’s English departments in favor of esoteric and inside-baseball feeling conversations about this vs. that. She realizes the if none of us have jobs, this vs. that isn’t going to matter to any of us in our new careers as bricklayers.
Her discussion of the redistribution of funds from the University to the students themselves “in the form of scholarships called Lucky or Freedom” is interesting and something I’d be interested in learning more about. When I first came to Mississippi, I was impressed by the number of students attending my who had these kinds of scholarships. I’m embarrassed that I didn’t think “hey, where is this money coming from?” Perhaps, this is why the photo-copier in our department was used by 13th century Irish monks. Maybe this is why nearly all full time instructor/lecturer positions were eliminated. Perhaps this is the reason why graduate students were, with no warning or chance to protest, cut from 9 credits of tuition to 6 credits tuition in the summer. (The unfairness of this is mindblowing to me. We hold up our end of the bargain by teaching all year and THEN with two months left, they change the deal, reducing our compensation across the board. If this were a business, people would be Up In Arms).
The future of the university, not just English Departments, but the full on shooting match seems to be on a lot of folks mind as evidence by Jed Lapinski’s article in today’s Salon that I happened to be reading —(i.e.) alt./tabbing back forth— while writing this response. Enjoy…
http://www.salon.com/books/nonfiction/index.html?story=/books/feature/2010/03/28/anya_kamenetz_diyu_interview

The Only History of Literacy Paper That Could Ever Move Me

While Deb Brandt's "Accumulating Literacy" does a serviceable job of tracing the growth of literacy and the means by which it happened as well as what it meant during the 20th century, where she gets big points from me is for familiarizing me with Dorothy Smith's concept of DOCUMENTARY REALITY-- " so much of what passes for raw data has already been processed socially organized systems of recording and recording."

I agree with Smith and am interested in reading more about her ideas. The idea of filtered reality ascending to become so much the dominant reality that its very filtered-ness becomes unperceived is one of the concepts I'm interested in both in my fiction and in the classroom (In the first Argument and Research classes I taught I forced everyone to write on the cover of their notebooks "Facts all come with points of view"--Talking Heads.)

One of the exercises I used to help students understand this was to look at current event from four or five different points of view on the political spectrum. Today's health care bill passage would work. What's actually happening is largely up for debate. News aggregators like Drudge even work for the exercise-- what narrative is being pushed here.

As our media become fragmented the problem becomes more complex and potentially more insidious.

Graff-tastic!

I'm sympathetic to Graff throughout his essay, but he really wins me over at the bottom of p 72 "Hypothetical students who studied nothing but comics or texts like Vanna speaks would be very unlikely to produce intellectually valuable readings of such texts unless they had also read far more substantial works...(ones) that provided them with models of intellectual analysis."

Right on. I thoroughly agree with the idea of having students examine "lightweight texts" as I find the students are more easily engaged here and if the students are reading the assignments, it's hard to get a conversation going at all. That said we must give students tools to get them to think about this texts in interesting ways.

So here are my top three texts and my top three pieces of guidance:

1. Good Times http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070991/plotsummary
2. The Jeffersons http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072519/
3. The Cosby Show http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086687/

1. James Baldwin "Down At The Cross — Letter from a Region of My Mind."
2. Walter Benjamin The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"
3. Henry Louis Gates The Signifying Monkey http://www.amazon.com/Signifying-Monkey-African-American-Literary-Criticism/dp/019506075X

Everybody wants to Own the Future

First, I was glad to see the mention of David Russell's Writing in the Academic Disciplines 1870-1990 and Robert Connors Rhetoric-Composition. I think one of the real challenges in the US is getting folks to understand the way things are is not the way things have always been, i.e., this is not their natural state.This is one of the reason I really enjoyed reading James A. Berlin (even if some may say 'hell! no!). We need to trace the development of out institutions, to see the ideological and material forces that shaped them.

I'm also interested in getting 'beyond' (whatever that means) the traditional research paper. My own ideas regarding this have to do with connecting writing assignments to students lives and concerns while developing a further role in the larger political community as a "stakeholder."

The place where Davis and Shadle break down for me is that they can't seem to remember how quickly the present becomes the past. Written in 2000, I would anticipate their article would foresee the shift away from not only Literature based composition course, but the new normal of when it comes to students working with multi-media sources.

SEG-WAY!

So, in my last entry, I wrote about the strong mentoring support I received while teaching at Robert Morris University in Pennsylvania. Commenting on student writing was certainly an area in which I received some great instruction. Most specifically from Dr. A J. Grant in his Pedagogy of Composition course. He was particularly keen to help me out as we’d both done undergrad at a time when correcting mechanics and slapping a grade on an assignment were the standard way of doing things.
There are three things I like to keep in mind when writing comments on student papers--some of which come out of spending a healthy amount time as a profession writer/editor and some of which come out of working with Dr. Grant and my own teaching experience.
One—More than anything, as a teacher you’re dealing with individuals, not a class, not an assignment, but an actual person who has put words on a pages and is looking to you for helpful feedback. This is one reason why I like my first assignment to be some sort of personal essay and to have conferences about three or four weeks into the semester. That way one can get ‘on the side’ of a student, see what’s actually going on in their process. (I like the decompression exercises for this reason) talk about the progress they’re making and where they need to make adjustments

Two – Be rhetorical in your comments. This comes straight out of the business world. If you write a boring article or an ad campaign that doesn’t focus on what will drive your audience. No one, but no one, will give a damn if the mechanics are perfect. If, other hand, one hits all the right notes in a piece but the mechanics are sloppy….well, that’s why the good lord invented copy editors.

Three—Pat, Pat….SLAP. This is straight up PR 101. Working with C Level executives, you learn quickly they’re mostly (like the rest of us, but more so) only listen when people are saying good things about them. So, delivering criticism has to be done after two positive comments. In student writing, if a paper is really off-putting I write all the negative stuff on it first and then put in a pile. Then I go back over it and insert positive feedback.