When I enrolled in English 201, I envisioned that the course would go something like the following. On the first day, we would be introduced to the overall theme of the course, and we would briefly touch on the nature of each of the sub-themes. In the subsequent days, would we read various texts relating to sub-theme one and hold discussions on what was read, what we thought of the reading, etc. After a number of weeks of doing this, we would be assigned to compose a clear, concise thesis statement relating to the sub-topic. Most likely, said thesis would be introduced in the first paragraph of the written composition and would probably state some of the main ideas of the paper. In the following three paragraphs, the argument would be further developed using evidence, examples and counter examples. Paragraph five would sum up the gist of the paper and resolve and questions posed in the earlier paragraphs. The rough draft would be due on day X, a peer review might be held on day Y and on day Z the final draft would be turned in to the T.A. This process would repeat for each sub-theme of the course until arriving at the final paper that would encompass the entire scope of the course. Result? We become better writers. But in the real world, how far is writing that five paragraph essay to your T.A. really going to get you?
I believe that Daniel Anderson touched on this idea in his “Prosumer Approaches to New Media Composition: Production and Consumption in Continuum.” Although I believe he was trying to stress how being a consumer and a producer go hand-in-hand, the underlying theme of producing for an audience is one that ought to be stressed more in modern English courses. For one of his classes, Anderson gave his students the option of turning in a final paper or creating a movie that would address one of a number of prompts that he created (much like what is done in a ‘typical’ writing course.) One example was “A standardized curriculum that includes performance testing should be discouraged in Language Arts classes because…” I think that a student could convincingly create both a movie and a thesis paper showcasing this prompt, but here is where an important distinction should be made between the two genres. If I was to write a paper on the subject, I could do a lot of great research on the subject, look at statistics, interview teachers and students, and relay that information into a paper that would grasp the reader. The problem is, what reader? While I’m sure that my T.A. would be delighted to know why I think standardized testing should be discouraged, at the end of the day, after putting all of that effort into the paper, I would feel that I lost out on a potentially much larger audience. On the other hand, if I was to do the same research, the same interviews (on tape) and combine it into a digital media format, I could reach an audience of potentially millions. Not only this, but I think the feeling expressed through the two genres would be totally different. I would struggle to put into words the feelings expressed by a student struggling to pass a test or the anxiety that the teacher feels after devoting a large portion of her curriculum to teaching the students how to prepare for taking an exam.
For these reasons, I believe that modern day English classes should allow students to use new forms of media. In creating a thesis paper-turned movie, the structure would be conserved, and therefore I think it would still be important to teach how to create a good thesis, how to support it with evidence and how to cite the sources used. Plus I think that the typical format of a five paragraph thesis does have standing in creating a good speech or other work for public consumption.
In addition, I would argue that the traditional view of an English course is important to maintain in certain courses. Perhaps when reading and analyzing certain texts from the literary cannon it would be impractical to create a movie or share your feelings about it through a blog. Then again, maybe not. Only once we begin to shift our thoughts toward using new media will we then see the adaptability and potential that they posess.
Perhaps I’ve gone a bit off course of the scope of this blog, but I really wanted to get out what I felt after watching Anderson’s video. Let me know what you all thought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
i had a lot of the same expectations about what i thought this course would be and after the intial apprehension about all this technology i've never used before, i'm beginning to see the benefits and rewards of a course that incorporates this "new media." at the end of the course i beleive i will look back on my work and feel a sense of fulfillment and pride that i seriously doubt i would feel had this been the kind of course i expcected, where i would have written a few papers and forgotten everything within a few weeks, if that.
In part, I hear you echoing some of Rice's comments in his "What Should College English Be?" article. Namely, that "academic or college writing" too often presumes a single author writing to a single reader (the TA or professor in most cases). Obviously, this uni-directionality doesn't represent very well many of the writing situations we find ourselves in everyday. To put it differently, I can't tell you how many students papers and portfolios I have laying around my house--in many cases, representing weeks of research, writing, and revising. But, the point is, they aren't doing anything anymore. New media, perhaps, gives this important work new life and new meaning to broader and more distributed audiences.
Post a Comment