I skipped class today.
My back pain through the night was so extreme I hardly slept; the soaking baths, yoga, Tiger-Balm and naproxen sodium regimen prescribed by my physician was simply not enough to bring relief, and by 6:45 a.m. I realized that I was too exhausted to make the drive in to Lancaster and direct a class.
So I called the Registrar and the Academic Dean and proposed a class session discussion topic: "Who is the third monster in Farmer Giles of Ham by Tolkien?" The first is the deaf and stupid giant, the second is the dragon Chrysophylax: who is the third?
This I "thought a dreadfully easy chestnut", to quote another Tolkien story (The Hobbit, ch. V). I guess to me the use "who" was a give-away, rather than "what".
The consistent answer, however, was not a "who" (a person) but a "what" (in this case an idea, feeling, or attitude):
"The third monster is greed," one student boldly asserted in beginning the narrative of the discussion. At the end of the narrative though, this writer also notes, "the discussion thing didn't work too well because no one really had a clue what the third monster was."
However, this writer hit on the crux of the matter: "Maybe it's the old king's greed." But the "maybe" is important here. "Surety you crave", to quote yet another Tolkien story (LotR, Bk V, ch. 10).
Another writer offers the possibility: "the treasure is the third monster. The treasure or gold or whatever it happens to be can make Giles or the king monsters in their lust for this treasure."
Right. This is definitely moving in the right direction.
"...another consideration we had was about the "monster" being Giles' greed."
Giles' greed?
Here we come to the learning portion of this exercise. On the one hand, I could just declare: "this is the third monster," and you might learn something about structural analysis, and you might learn nothing, and you might learn that I am simply an amazing bore. But none of that would have the joy of discovery that will come when you solve this riddle -- and I believe it has a single, definitive answer.
"The third monster is Greed and Pride," writes another student. Wait -- wouldn't that be two monsters? "This is because Farmer Giles is so caught up with himself and thinking how awesome he is, that he neglects his kingdom and his people." But when he is Farmer Giles, what is "his" kingdom and "his" people?
"The third monster is pride and greed, and he overcame them by siding with the dragon instead of the asshole king," opines a fourth writer. Now, we're getting somewhere. Let's consider deeply the degree of assholishness of Augustus Bonifacius Ambrosius Aurelianus Antoninus Pius et Magnificus, dux, rex, tyrannus, et basileus Mediterranearum Partium.
"The Story of Farmer Giles of ham [sic] has two obvious monsters, the Giant, and the Great Dragon Chrysphlax [sic] Dives. The third monster can be interpreted as Giles['] own Greed and pride. He even went so far as to tell the king to trade his crown for the sword Tailbiter," suggests a fifth. I'd like to see the specific evidence of Giles' pride and greed, and I'm particularly interested to be directed to the details of this supposed trade.
A sixth writer reports: "The story of Giles Ham clearly states two of the three monsters in the book. The two monsters are the Giant and the dragon hrysophylax [sic] Dives. The Third Monster in the story is vague. It is Farmer Giles['] pride and greed. He wents so far as to tell the king to trade his crown for the sword Tailbiter."
These two writers' reports are far too similar for comfort. Back in the day, we would call this cheating. Come to think of it, we still do. Consider, particularly, the last fifteen words of each writer's piece. Awfully close, don't you think? As in, identical.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Saturday, March 15, 2008
After Mid-term: Foundations of Ethics
One of my basic questions remains: how can we approach this course more systematically, given the course texts? Another is, how can you, the students, be more engaged in analysis -- how an that analysis be more fully modelled to you? Furthermore, how can we experience, in the time remaining in the course, a more in-depth presentation of a greater range of ethical systems?
On the one hand, the answer seems to me to lie in more talks by me. These have been fine, even entertaining for some of you, I guess, but I'm not convinced of your engagement as a class. Perhaps quizzes would give a kind of motivation to concentrate on the material. I'm not sure, though, that I want to take on the extra work, and I'm loathe to change the syllabus. But perhaps in the future I could incorporate quizzes.
The frequent student answer to the kins of questions I pose is to have "discussion", but discussion should be informed dialogue, not sanctified b.s. So, how do we reach the point at which the information is sufficient to support a dialogue? My default is always to talk myself, and, hey, this is not in itself a Bad Thing. I, at any rate, generally know what I'm talking about and can make connections. Perhaps my modelling of that (by "modelling" I mean, doing it in front of you) is sufficient. I would like to have some discussion on this matter, particularly from those of you who may be feeling that you are receiving less from this course than you would like.
What do you think is missing from, or undeveloped in, the course? We have a little over a month to meet your expectations, and even though we may not be able to do everything you would like, as the Rolling Stones sang: "You can't always get what you want / but if you try sometimes / you just might find / you get what you need."
You should be thinking at this point of the careful and considerate appraisal you will give to the course in the course content surveys; you have a chance at this moment to increase the chances of a favorable review on your part, by suggesting any improvements you might wish now, rather than after the course is over.
Disclaimer:
Although I will carefully examine any and all suggestions, I must also weigh any suggestion against larger curricular and budgetary concerns. This is the double effect in asking for student input: the possibilities must be weighed against probabilities and limitations, and balanced with the judgment coming from experience. Please understand that not all suggestions can or should be actualized. But make suggestions, nonetheless.
On the one hand, the answer seems to me to lie in more talks by me. These have been fine, even entertaining for some of you, I guess, but I'm not convinced of your engagement as a class. Perhaps quizzes would give a kind of motivation to concentrate on the material. I'm not sure, though, that I want to take on the extra work, and I'm loathe to change the syllabus. But perhaps in the future I could incorporate quizzes.
The frequent student answer to the kins of questions I pose is to have "discussion", but discussion should be informed dialogue, not sanctified b.s. So, how do we reach the point at which the information is sufficient to support a dialogue? My default is always to talk myself, and, hey, this is not in itself a Bad Thing. I, at any rate, generally know what I'm talking about and can make connections. Perhaps my modelling of that (by "modelling" I mean, doing it in front of you) is sufficient. I would like to have some discussion on this matter, particularly from those of you who may be feeling that you are receiving less from this course than you would like.
What do you think is missing from, or undeveloped in, the course? We have a little over a month to meet your expectations, and even though we may not be able to do everything you would like, as the Rolling Stones sang: "You can't always get what you want / but if you try sometimes / you just might find / you get what you need."
You should be thinking at this point of the careful and considerate appraisal you will give to the course in the course content surveys; you have a chance at this moment to increase the chances of a favorable review on your part, by suggesting any improvements you might wish now, rather than after the course is over.
Disclaimer:
Although I will carefully examine any and all suggestions, I must also weigh any suggestion against larger curricular and budgetary concerns. This is the double effect in asking for student input: the possibilities must be weighed against probabilities and limitations, and balanced with the judgment coming from experience. Please understand that not all suggestions can or should be actualized. But make suggestions, nonetheless.
After Mid-term: Revolution & Constitution
I had an epiphany Wednesday after class, and I'm embarrassed to say that this had not occurred to me before, so I hope to amend matters quickly in the time remaining.
After my "Come-on-folks-do-more-detailed-research" speech last week, I could perhaps have seen the coming solution. But E.G. suggested that, since there are only seven people in the class, perhaps we could take a "field trip" to the library and walk through the stages of researching a topic. I really felt silly that I had not thought of this myself earlier.
Since one of the basic goals of the course is for you all to evidence some basic mastery of scholarly research method, the sink-or-swim approach I have been taking is probably not the best. Anticipate that we will be following through on E.G.'s suggestion in the remaining class sessions.
After my "Come-on-folks-do-more-detailed-research" speech last week, I could perhaps have seen the coming solution. But E.G. suggested that, since there are only seven people in the class, perhaps we could take a "field trip" to the library and walk through the stages of researching a topic. I really felt silly that I had not thought of this myself earlier.
Since one of the basic goals of the course is for you all to evidence some basic mastery of scholarly research method, the sink-or-swim approach I have been taking is probably not the best. Anticipate that we will be following through on E.G.'s suggestion in the remaining class sessions.
After Mid-term: Foundations of Verbal Communications
I am in the process of reading the informative essays for FVC-102.F3. The work is going steadily, but slowly.
Begin thinking, please, about two things: first, the development of your persuasive essay thesis, which should be developed using the dialectic (more on that soon). Second, looking ahead to the end of the semester, be considering carefully and systematically your assessment of the year in FVC.
Consider your own challenges as a listener, a speaker, a reader, and a writer. We have about six weeks left in the semester to address those challenges. I hope you will be bold enough to identify both strengths and weaknesses in your work, and use the talents around you -- including mine -- to support your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.
Consider, too, the next generation of students. Were you to start again as a foundation student, knowing what you know now, what would you like to see change, and what should stay the same, in the FVC curriculum. This is not necessarily about what was fun, or what you liked, but what was useful to you as a listener, speaker, reader, and writer.
Consider the "logos" of the class: which of the readings were most valuable, and why? I basically dropped the reading component from the course, concentrating instead on writing and oral presentation: do you feel in any way cheated by that? Do you have any thoughts on developing the oral presentations and listening exercises, again, not so much so that they will be more fun (although I would welcome such suggestions, too), but more useful?
Finally, despite the fact that I do most of the talking in the class, I feel that I have not asserted myself very much, that I have not been imposing on you very much, as in, for example, asking you to read and then comment on some one work that we all encounter, and then holding you to be able to interpret that work closely. This may suit some of you very well, but my own sense is that this is a deficiency -- that I should be challenging you to closer and fuller analysis, whereas my perception is that the class is open and loose, lacking in structure. I am comfortable with the way individual class sessions happen, but I fear the looseness is not serving some people well.
Please let me know what you think about these matters. The sooner you share with me, the sooner improvements can be made based on the sharing.
Disclaimer:
Please understand that while I will give any and all suggestions a full listen, I must also weigh suggestions against larger curricular, and perhaps budgetary, concerns. So, yes, it might be a Lovely Thing to have a breakfast buffet waiting for us every morning, and I might even justify this as a meritted expense, the practical exigencies of such a notion are such that, well, it's not likely to happen this semester.
Begin thinking, please, about two things: first, the development of your persuasive essay thesis, which should be developed using the dialectic (more on that soon). Second, looking ahead to the end of the semester, be considering carefully and systematically your assessment of the year in FVC.
Consider your own challenges as a listener, a speaker, a reader, and a writer. We have about six weeks left in the semester to address those challenges. I hope you will be bold enough to identify both strengths and weaknesses in your work, and use the talents around you -- including mine -- to support your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.
Consider, too, the next generation of students. Were you to start again as a foundation student, knowing what you know now, what would you like to see change, and what should stay the same, in the FVC curriculum. This is not necessarily about what was fun, or what you liked, but what was useful to you as a listener, speaker, reader, and writer.
Consider the "logos" of the class: which of the readings were most valuable, and why? I basically dropped the reading component from the course, concentrating instead on writing and oral presentation: do you feel in any way cheated by that? Do you have any thoughts on developing the oral presentations and listening exercises, again, not so much so that they will be more fun (although I would welcome such suggestions, too), but more useful?
Finally, despite the fact that I do most of the talking in the class, I feel that I have not asserted myself very much, that I have not been imposing on you very much, as in, for example, asking you to read and then comment on some one work that we all encounter, and then holding you to be able to interpret that work closely. This may suit some of you very well, but my own sense is that this is a deficiency -- that I should be challenging you to closer and fuller analysis, whereas my perception is that the class is open and loose, lacking in structure. I am comfortable with the way individual class sessions happen, but I fear the looseness is not serving some people well.
Please let me know what you think about these matters. The sooner you share with me, the sooner improvements can be made based on the sharing.
Disclaimer:
Please understand that while I will give any and all suggestions a full listen, I must also weigh suggestions against larger curricular, and perhaps budgetary, concerns. So, yes, it might be a Lovely Thing to have a breakfast buffet waiting for us every morning, and I might even justify this as a meritted expense, the practical exigencies of such a notion are such that, well, it's not likely to happen this semester.
Monday, March 3, 2008
3.iii.08 A link to further discussion of poetry
I found that my considerations of poetry started to overwhelm this blog, so I created a new blog dedicated to poetry. At the moment, I am mostly considering the basic problem, "What is poetry?" and looking particularly at the relationship between poetry as a whole and the special class of lyrics as poetry.
My reflections on poetry are not entirely systematic, and in part are grounded in some earlier essays on poetic form. One of the basic premises of my non-scholarly writing (say, short stories, novels, and poetry) over the past twenty years or so has been to avoid "technical" or "jargon" language; this is a premise which has proved hard to maintain. Some of the tension of everyday language (in which, for example, "scaffold" or "telephone" might be perfectly acceptable) and the artificially-patrolled language of poetry (aiming to be "more natural than nature" or at any rate "more English than English") is illustrated in the posts on this blog.
So, if you are interested in some of the ways that poetry can come about and are not afraid of sometimes obscure discussion of language, follow this link: http:/words-are-the-matter.blogspot.com.
My reflections on poetry are not entirely systematic, and in part are grounded in some earlier essays on poetic form. One of the basic premises of my non-scholarly writing (say, short stories, novels, and poetry) over the past twenty years or so has been to avoid "technical" or "jargon" language; this is a premise which has proved hard to maintain. Some of the tension of everyday language (in which, for example, "scaffold" or "telephone" might be perfectly acceptable) and the artificially-patrolled language of poetry (aiming to be "more natural than nature" or at any rate "more English than English") is illustrated in the posts on this blog.
So, if you are interested in some of the ways that poetry can come about and are not afraid of sometimes obscure discussion of language, follow this link: http:/words-are-the-matter.blogspot.com.
3.iii.08 Foundations of Verbal Communications
Phew! So, I finally prepped those packets for the poetry project. Each one should include:
1. My review of your presentation headed "Oral Presentation Rubric" (see comment below)
2. Your presentation sheet headed "Oral Presentations of Poetry"
3. The full text of the poem you memorized and presented
4. One or more than one "Listening to Oral Presentations of Poetry" evaluation forms, completed by one or more of your classmates, responding to your presentation
5. My review of your listening exercise (see 6), headed "Listening exercise evaluation"
6. One or more than one "Listening to Oral Presentations of Poetry" evaluation forms completed by you, responding to other students' presentations
Comment on "Oral Presentation Rubric": I was recently informed that this is not, properly speaking, a rubric, but an evaluation form. I will strive to use the proper terminology in future: "evaluation form".
***
Now that we are moving into the presentations of the informative essays, I can reflect more fully on the poetry project.
I've generally shied away from poetry in FVC101/102 or its predecessor courses, LA101/102, but based on this class's experience I am inclined to make with poetry practically the first project.
In poetry, for example, we have
a great memorization tool
a focus for analysis
a means by which to reflect upon the self and personality
concise and meaningful material for oral presentation
an introduction to the artistry of language
In preparing their presentations on poetry, I called upon students to research the backgrounds of their chosen poems and the poets who composed the poems: this can lead directly to an examination of bibliographic format. In presenting the analysis, students can be challenged to properly quote, paraphrase, summarize, and refer to their sources.
In brief, a poetry unit can tie into technical research training and technical format training as well as technical training in rhetorical analysis. A poem illustrates the rhetorical triangle of author/audience/material as boldly and baldly as any form.
***
The oral presentations of poetry in FVC102.F3 this semester may have seemed at times slow, but from my perspective we covered an awful lot of ground. Although I probably could have been more demanding of strict postural correctness, careful enunciation, and so on, I notice that the students are making these sorts of suggestions in the comments to the informational presentations. The main thing is that we all be aware of better versus worse posture, and strive to improve our own posture, that we be aware of better versus worse enunciation, and strive to improve our own enunciation, and so on. Scholarship -- being part of a school and studying -- is about improvement, after all, steady, ongoing improvement, not instant perfection. Although, instant perfection would be nice.
Yes, I probably could be more concise in my comments. On the other hand, I do strive to be thorough. I personally find the atmosphere of the class with presentations that turn into conversations more attractive than an entire class of me talking. Not that I don't like to talk.
I would be happy if I sensed less need for me to talk. More thorough preparation before the presentations would ease my burden of correction. At a certain point, we must move on to the next project; I have to play my desire to be fair by giving everyone a chance to present and to hear suggestions surrounding the work and the need to fit all the assignments into the semester.
One comment made at a recent informal faculty meeting was that, astonishingly, students do not make notes of the comments given during critique.
I know that I have a lot of trouble remembering things if I do not write down some notes. When discussing something as significant as one's foundational technical training in the arts, it would seem to me that any artist would want to make careful notes. I know that you may not think of yourself as being in the same league as daVinci, but Leonardo took extensive notes throughout his life. I'll say this: taking notes in and of itself won't make you the next daVinci, but not taking notes will lower your chances of reaching that goal.
It's true, I will sometimes make light jokes in class, but generally I strive to say weighty and valuable things, and I certainly hope that my comments on your work are useful. Making notes of them could save you -- and me -- a lot of trouble in the future.
1. My review of your presentation headed "Oral Presentation Rubric" (see comment below)
2. Your presentation sheet headed "Oral Presentations of Poetry"
3. The full text of the poem you memorized and presented
4. One or more than one "Listening to Oral Presentations of Poetry" evaluation forms, completed by one or more of your classmates, responding to your presentation
5. My review of your listening exercise (see 6), headed "Listening exercise evaluation"
6. One or more than one "Listening to Oral Presentations of Poetry" evaluation forms completed by you, responding to other students' presentations
Comment on "Oral Presentation Rubric": I was recently informed that this is not, properly speaking, a rubric, but an evaluation form. I will strive to use the proper terminology in future: "evaluation form".
***
Now that we are moving into the presentations of the informative essays, I can reflect more fully on the poetry project.
I've generally shied away from poetry in FVC101/102 or its predecessor courses, LA101/102, but based on this class's experience I am inclined to make with poetry practically the first project.
In poetry, for example, we have
a great memorization tool
a focus for analysis
a means by which to reflect upon the self and personality
concise and meaningful material for oral presentation
an introduction to the artistry of language
In preparing their presentations on poetry, I called upon students to research the backgrounds of their chosen poems and the poets who composed the poems: this can lead directly to an examination of bibliographic format. In presenting the analysis, students can be challenged to properly quote, paraphrase, summarize, and refer to their sources.
In brief, a poetry unit can tie into technical research training and technical format training as well as technical training in rhetorical analysis. A poem illustrates the rhetorical triangle of author/audience/material as boldly and baldly as any form.
***
The oral presentations of poetry in FVC102.F3 this semester may have seemed at times slow, but from my perspective we covered an awful lot of ground. Although I probably could have been more demanding of strict postural correctness, careful enunciation, and so on, I notice that the students are making these sorts of suggestions in the comments to the informational presentations. The main thing is that we all be aware of better versus worse posture, and strive to improve our own posture, that we be aware of better versus worse enunciation, and strive to improve our own enunciation, and so on. Scholarship -- being part of a school and studying -- is about improvement, after all, steady, ongoing improvement, not instant perfection. Although, instant perfection would be nice.
Yes, I probably could be more concise in my comments. On the other hand, I do strive to be thorough. I personally find the atmosphere of the class with presentations that turn into conversations more attractive than an entire class of me talking. Not that I don't like to talk.
I would be happy if I sensed less need for me to talk. More thorough preparation before the presentations would ease my burden of correction. At a certain point, we must move on to the next project; I have to play my desire to be fair by giving everyone a chance to present and to hear suggestions surrounding the work and the need to fit all the assignments into the semester.
One comment made at a recent informal faculty meeting was that, astonishingly, students do not make notes of the comments given during critique.
I know that I have a lot of trouble remembering things if I do not write down some notes. When discussing something as significant as one's foundational technical training in the arts, it would seem to me that any artist would want to make careful notes. I know that you may not think of yourself as being in the same league as daVinci, but Leonardo took extensive notes throughout his life. I'll say this: taking notes in and of itself won't make you the next daVinci, but not taking notes will lower your chances of reaching that goal.
It's true, I will sometimes make light jokes in class, but generally I strive to say weighty and valuable things, and I certainly hope that my comments on your work are useful. Making notes of them could save you -- and me -- a lot of trouble in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)