One of the most important commonalities amongst those interviewed was a seemingly fundemental humaneness in their various reflections. I don't know that I agree with everything said but everything said was steeped in what can help us overcome any of real or imagined shortcomings in the classroom. Namely, a general sense of compassion for our students and interest in their development.
In my experience, the most rewarding moments are not with those who love writing, who sign on wholesale to the goals of our course. Rather, it's when persistance and commitment on my part whittles down a student's indifference or active hostility toward the class. For me, that usually came with the returning of their first drafts. Because of a near-tragic flaw in my small motor skills, I do not write very clearly. It's more like this: "ths gdafdfad fdsafadf. Expand?" So, when Take 20's professors were talking about commenting on student work, I noted that the importance of good commentary tailored toward the student and the goal of the draft should be seen as a natural extension of the classroom time. So, my chicken stratch actually works in my favor; if students know or suspect that I took time and care with their work, they'll want to know what I wrote. Which means this: office hours. It was here, with their work tattooed in my ink, that I could interpret the scrawl while expanding my commentary. And I was sometimes surprised by which students were concerned with more than the grade.
Take 20 also reminded me that Raider Writer is not the only way to teach comp. While I respect the relative merits of an attempt to provide a more standardized experience, I think this comes at a high price. I do not know my students names. I do not know their writing. I do know what matters to them. So, while much of the video speaks to the potential for a genuine foundation in liberal arts education, one that goes a touch beyond grammatical concerns and correctness, this opportunity is made more difficult by our current system. Surely, a comp course should not focus on haiku, to use an example given in class, but I will not accept that, with an honest, earnest instructor at the helm, the students would leave that class with nothing of value to show for it.
Thus have I heard, Ananda begs alms in many ways. Such that, with the general humane and compassionate views spanning Take 20, we can, whatever we're covering, whatever our course goals, take a nick out of forgivable ignorance and indifference.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
"...Namely, a general sense of compassion for our students and interest in their development."
This is a fundamental message from Take 20, I agree. It would be true for any educational experience where the student is the most important element, his or her progress being the main goal. The only situations where it might not apply is in training where the outcome on behalf of others, an organization, for instance, is the primary pursuit. For example, the military would not try to ensure that every trainee can become a fighter pilot; there the goal is to get the best to serve the system. Less than the best would be weeded out. That's as it should be, assuming you agree that fighter pilots are necessary to support our way of life.
Writing is different from being a fighter pilot, however, because it is a skill that everyone needs to succeed. Presumably we all don't need fighter pilot skills, nor would we all be able to use them in our world. So the two different goals are acceptable for their situations.
Post a Comment